 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / T-Mobile / April 2005850 MHz Coverage - T-Mobile
Is T-Mobile planning on adding the 850 MHz bandwidth to its coverage? I'm a Cingular customer, and I'm thinking about switching to T-Mobile. Here's why.. Cingular uses 850 MHz and 1900 MHz. That means that you have to buy a phone that supports the 850 MHz band, but there is a very small selection of phones that support this. With T-Mobile, you can use just about any GSM phone and it will work. I find this attractive. Im not talking about 850mhz roaming coverage, I just want to know if they're adding 850MHz to their regular coverage. Anybody have any ideas? > Is T-Mobile planning on adding the 850 MHz bandwidth to its coverage? > I'm a Cingular customer, and I'm thinking about switching to T-Mobile. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > they're adding 850MHz to their regular coverage. Anybody have any > ideas? From what i have read. T-Mobile will not add any native t-mobile 850 Mhz service. Sorry! p.s.: I know you diddn't mean roaming, but im going to post it just incase people who diddn't know. now know.. Roaming? That's different.. There have been reports of people w/850 enabled phones to actually roam onto a 850mhz carrier. Im not sure which one. I would post on this website if you want more information as it's a really good site for t-mobile: http://t-mobile.howardforums.com Sorry? If you ask me, not having 850MHz is a good thing! read my thread again. By the way, where did you read that they're not adding 850? was it a reliable source? I actually emailed t-mobile, and they told me they don't know whether they're adding 850 in the future. I sure hope they don't. > Sorry? If you ask me, not having 850MHz is a good thing! read my > thread again. By the way, where did you read that they're not adding > 850? was it a reliable source? I actually emailed t-mobile, and they > told me they don't know whether they're adding 850 in the future. I > sure hope they don't. Somewhere on howard forums. I diddn't think they could because they diddn't have 850 mhz licenses, just 1900 mhz licenses. Most phones from them have 850 mhz disabled or just don't support it. Im suprised you don't want 850 mhz. There are a few people who love it because they say it can go through building better than 1900 mhz.. I can care less though.. Anyway. Take care Feel free to post again if you have any more questions. Dan My girlfriend has t-mobile, and she NEVER has problems inside buildings. I understand that 850 also provides better coverage in rural areas, but who cares, when am I going to be in the middle of nowhere in Kansas? I'm always in a city. And besides, Cingular is a ripoff and they have VERY POOR customer support. > My girlfriend has t-mobile, and she NEVER has problems inside > buildings. I understand that 850 also provides better coverage in > rural areas, but who cares, when am I going to be in the middle of > nowhere in Kansas? I'm always in a city. And besides, Cingular is a > ripoff and they have VERY POOR customer support. >. Your lucky then. I lose complete signal usually at wal-mart (Darien, IL) , target (Woodridge, IL) , and walgreens. (Downers Grove, IL) among many other places. My Ogo has really good singal in all these places, while using the cingular signal.. > I understand that 850 also provides better coverage in > rural areas, but who cares, when am I going to be in the middle of > nowhere in Kansas? I'm always in a city. Well there you go. Since YOU don't leave the city rural coverage is not important. Must be nice to have the world revolve around you. I'm guessing the people who live in the middle of nowhere Kansas care (since you asked). Why do people feel their usage is the only one that matters? >I'm guessing the people who live in the middle of nowhere Kansas care (since >you asked). Why do people feel their usage is the only one that matters? Actually, my usage is the only thing that matters to me when chosing MY rate plan. It doesn't matter to me whether someone in the middle of nowhere can get reception on MY plan. If they want better reception, they can join Cingular, which has a 850 MHz band. I choose a cellular company based on their prices and whether they have coverage where I use the phone, not where Billy Bob uses his phone. > >I'm guessing the people who live in the middle of nowhere Kansas care > (since [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > company based on their prices and whether they have coverage where I > use the phone, not where Billy Bob uses his phone. Then why state it as if no one in rural Kansas would want service? You did ask who would care then implied that no one would. >Then why state it as if no one in rural Kansas would want service? You >did ask who would care then implied that no one would. Reply Ok, when I said "who cares, when am I going to be in the middle of nowhere in Kansas," I meant to say, "Why should I care." I thought that would be implied. By the way, Cingular does provide service in many places in the middle of Kansas, so don't worry, they do have service available to them. They just wont have service through TM because they do not have licenses for the 850MHz band, like we've been discussing. >> I understand that 850 also provides better coverage in >> rural areas, but who cares, when am I going to be in the middle of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > (since you asked). Why do people feel their usage is the only one that > matters? Because when you pay for wireless service, you don't care if someone in rural kansas has good phone service. You care if you have good phone service. Since that's what your paying for... I don't know many people who get wireless service and think.. "i wonder if people in rural alabama have good service with X carrier." Jeez... >> I understand that 850 also provides better coverage in >> rural areas, but who cares, when am I going to be in the middle of >> nowhere in Kansas? I'm always in a city. > >Well there you go. Since YOU don't leave the city rural coverage is not >important. Must be nice to have the world revolve around you. In all fairness, coverage maps are not secret and they are available for everyone to look at before they sign with T-Mobile. In reality, if you're in rural America, you better not sign with Sprint PCS or Nextel either. Rural customers basically have 2 options: Verizon Wireless and Cingular. >I'm guessing the people who live in the middle of nowhere Kansas care (since >you asked). Why do people feel their usage is the only one that matters? Because to them, it is. It's up to everybody to do business with the company that works for them. I would agree it's to the benefit of TM, or any other company, to try and find the most affordable way possible to serve the broadest number of people, but that doesn't mean they'll do it or at the speed everyone might prefer. And when I signed up, that coverage map showed coverage in the middle of rural nowhere. At the time, the company was named Powertel. And then, Voicestream bought Powertel and turned off analog roaming. Still haven't gotten most of those huge chunks of lost coverage back. >>> I understand that 850 also provides better coverage in >>> rural areas, but who cares, when am I going to be in the middle of [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > to serve the broadest number of people, but that doesn't mean they'll > do it or at the speed everyone might prefer.  Signature******************************** David William Botsch dwb7@cornell.edu ******************************** >Well there you go. Since YOU don't leave the city rural coverage is not >important. Must be nice to have the world revolve around you. Perhaps you need to follow your own words. It's not important to *him.* If it's important to you well then bully for you. And while you're lecturing him about the whole world why don't you take that same advice and know that the whole world is not *you* either! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > I'm guessing the people who live in the middle of nowhere Kansas care (since > you asked). Why do people feel their usage is the only one that matters? It's a numbers game. If the people in the middle of nowhere want services that are associated with dense populations, then they can move toward dense populations. I lived on a farm for years, and took the absence of services for granted. Had to drive 20m for a *decent* supermarket (not a good one). The little hamlet finally got a traffic light a few years back. Signaturehttp://cbsrmt.mousetrap.net/RMTdb/ CBS Radio Mystery Theater database CBSRMT uploads each day in <news:alt.binaries.sounds.radio.cbsrmt> http://greyhound.mousetrap.net/altus/ our ex-racer greyhound http://www.mousetrap.net/~mouse/cs.html How to get good phone support >> Sorry? If you ask me, not having 850MHz is a good thing! read my >> thread again. By the way, where did you read that they're not adding [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I diddn't think they could because they diddn't have 850 mhz licenses, just >1900 mhz licenses. That's because their licensed as a PCS carrier, not cellular. >Most phones from them have 850 mhz disabled or just don't support it. That's not universally true. There are several that do, including the Nokia 3595, among others. >Im suprised you don't want 850 mhz. There are a few people who love it >because they say it can go through building better than 1900 mhz.. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Feel free to post again if you have any more questions. >Dan >>> Sorry? If you ask me, not having 850MHz is a good thing! read my >>> thread again. By the way, where did you read that they're not adding [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >>Feel free to post again if you have any more questions. >>Dan Online, they don't even sell the 3595 anymore. That's why i diddn't include it. The only one that i found on the website that may even remotely have 850 mhz is the nokia 6010 and with some modification (from what i hear) the motorola v600 and a630. >Im suprised you don't want 850 mhz. There are a few people who love it >because they say it can go through building better than 1900 mhz.. It can penetrate through 50 feet of lead! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >It can penetrate through 50 feet of lead! That's quite impressive! I got curious as to how many feet of lead an 850MHz GSM wave can penetrate.. Luckily I just got a degree in physics, so I cracked out my textbook and did some calculations. The depth which an electromagnetic wave can penetrate conductive materials is inversely proportional to the square root of its frequency. That means that an 850 wave can penetrate a slab of lead of a thickness that is 1.495 times the thickness that a 1900 wave can penetrate. Assuming that an 850 wave can penetrate 50 feet of lead, that means that a1900 wave can penetrate 33.44 feet of lead. That still isn't too bad! I meant to say 1900MHz in the first line above... > Sorry? If you ask me, not having 850MHz is a good thing! read my > thread again. By the way, where did you read that they're not adding > 850? was it a reliable source? I actually emailed t-mobile, and they > told me they don't know whether they're adding 850 in the future. I > sure hope they don't. It would have to be a roaming agreement. They do not have any 800 spectrum so can't add anything there! >> Is T-Mobile planning on adding the 850 MHz bandwidth to its coverage? >> I'm a Cingular customer, and I'm thinking about switching to T-Mobile. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >From what i have read. T-Mobile will not add any native t-mobile 850 Mhz >service. They won't because they're a PCS carrier, which restricts them to the 1900 mHz band. The only way you'll get any 850 mHz coverage is through a roaming agreement. >Sorry! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Roaming? That's different.. There have been reports of people w/850 enabled >phones to actually roam onto a 850mhz carrier. Im not sure which one. Cingular and I believe Western Wireless. >I would post on this website if you want more information as it's a really >good site for t-mobile: http://t-mobile.howardforums.com 850 Roaming also seems to work on Dobson in northern MN and WI. Mike Schumann >>> Is T-Mobile planning on adding the 850 MHz bandwidth to its coverage? >>> I'm a Cingular customer, and I'm thinking about switching to T-Mobile. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >>I would post on this website if you want more information as it's a really >>good site for t-mobile: http://t-mobile.howardforums.com >Is T-Mobile planning on adding the 850 MHz bandwidth to its coverage? >I'm a Cingular customer, and I'm thinking about switching to T-Mobile. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >they're adding 850MHz to their regular coverage. Anybody have any >ideas? T-Mobile will *never* have native 850 coverage. There are only two cellular (800/850) operators in each area. Odds are that's either cingular or Verizon in many places. The only thing available to T-Mobile and lots of others is PCS (1900.) Unless T-Mobile buys cingular (highly unlikely) or Verizon (extremely unlikely) T-Mobile will never have 850 at least on their native network. They may have some 850 roaming agreements in other areas but they will never have any native coverage. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nooop! T-Mobile doesn't have any 800MHz bandwidth. They are strictly 1900 PCS. > Is T-Mobile planning on adding the 850 MHz bandwidth to its coverage? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.