T-Moible should throw in the towel!

**Matt** · 11-26-2002, 1:00 PM

showed how fast an overlay can be done. It is certainly faster than doing a buildout from scratch. That said, AT&T icon

is about 1.5 years into their buildout, and it still is about 75% of today's T-Mo. They still have work to do - the comment about combo networks isn't valid for AT&T icon

GSM since except for a few exceptions if you go GSM only, you are on their network only. It will be at least a year IMO before AT&T total national GSM coverage will be competitive. T-M is covering the inter city highways now - something AT&T GSM hasn't done yet. We will see.

Regarding Cingular, they are basically over a year behind AT&T since they have said they will be building out througout 2003. Considering what AT&T's GSM network looks like today, I'd expect Cingular's to look similar a year from now. Pretty decent, but still not as large as T-Mobile.

So, I think T-Mobile holds the GSM coverage advantage into 2004. Will the AT&T or Cingular catch up then? We'll see. Maybe we'll be one big company by then!!! HA HA HA.

**photoeditor** · 11-26-2002, 5:37 PM

Matt -- like I said, "roaming does not have to mean merging." That's my whole point. And customers of any firm that currently provides reasonably good service are right to be VERY wary of mergers . . . they can quickly lead to trouble.

While I do think some of the T-Mobile cheerleaders go a little over the top, I agree entirely that it would be unfortunate if the Baby Bells in general, and Cingular in particular, came to dominate wireless without some serious changes in their corporate culture. Management is a big part of that. Management determines whether your employees merely go through the motion and draw a paycheck, or whether they're part of a team working proactively.

The other thing no one has discussed yet is licensing. The way things stand now, I think AT&T icon

is in trouble on its own. Even if they build out their entire current TDMA territory to GSM, they still do not equal TMobile's GSM footprint . . . they must still have their customers roam on someone else's TDMA even in some substantial markets. And their current TDMA/GSM network combined does not cover highway links nearly as well as TMobile's GSM, except in the South and southeast. [That's why TMobile is on my shopping list for cell phone service, and AT&T icon

isn't]

Looked at this way, there are four national players. Dividing them up by technology and cellular 800/PCS 1900 frequency, we have, in the CDMA corner, Verizon icon

(mostly CDMA cellular) and Sprint (CDMA PCS); and in the GSM corner, Cingular (about to be mostly GSM 800 cellular) and TMobile (GSM 1900 PCS). These are not necessarily the four largest firms in terms of subscribers, but they are the only companies that cover [almost] every major metro and connect most of them up on the ground without substantial roaming fees. Ultimately, it would make sense if some of the smaller guys would look for partners among these four; but mergers among these four will hurt competition.

**photoeditor** · 11-26-2002, 5:41 PM

One other thing, Matt -- I just wanted to say thanks again for pointing out the expansion in TMO icon

's Illinois coverage. I probably wouldn't have noticed it because I'm in the market for a national plan so I wasn't even looking at the local maps, which are clearly more up to date.

Guess I'll make up my mind over the holiday!

**Matt** · 11-26-2002, 7:41 PM

Photoeditor - Cingular is actually very spectrum poor. I think there are many states they have no licenses - they only have licenses for 81% of the population. AT&T icon

is in good shape for GPRS - 3G is another issue.....

Glad to be of assistance - I actually didn't find the local maps being updated - someone else did on another forum. Somewhere in this forum (maybe it is in this thread - not sure) I posted a link to an updated national map that someone scanned. They are in the stores. T-M is expanding so fast this is the 3rd version of maps since they launched the rebranding in July!

edit -that link is in this thread but is currently unavailable - the stores have the new maps now.

**Matt** · 11-26-2002, 9:26 PM

The national map is now updated on the T-M website.

**bobolito** · 11-26-2002, 9:41 PM

AT&T

on its own can't compete with T-Mo. It is when Cingular and the other TDMA smaller guys that are willing to move to GSM, join the network agreements that will make the difference. The same goes for Cingular. Even after AT&T icon

is %100 done overlaying GSM, they will still need Cingular to look decent and that won't happen until 2004, if everything goes as scheduled. Although, Cingular has overlayed several areas already. For their own sake, Cingular and AT&T icon

should hold hands in this conversion, or else they won't be competitive and their well integrated network will fragment very badly. What I mean is that what makes TDMA look big today is the team work between all the carriers that support it today. But with some of the smaller TDMA carriers choosing CDMA over GSM, it will leave gaps for AT&T and Cingular that only T-Mo agreements can fill. We'll see what happens....

But between a PCS-only carrier and a dual-band carrier, I choose a dual-band carrier anytime. At least, I know where they work today and will work tomorrow. Let's hope that if T-Mo can impress me by 2004 (or whatever their name is by then [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img])

**Apoc** · 12-02-2002, 10:07 PM

Bottomline if anyone ever posts about T'Mo expect atleast 60 replies to the thread. Thanks everyone!

**DaveyJ** · 12-03-2002, 7:50 AM

Originally posted by: larry
My observation on this is that people seem to be more hesitant to slam T-Mobile icon

for lack of coverage than they do Sprint. But why? Sprint has at least the same amount of coverage and probably a lot more nationwide. Sprint also has an advantage with their analog roaming agreements while T-Mobile icon

has none as far as I know. But yet many people seem to be reluctant to critice T-Mobile icon

for this but have no problem criticizing Sprint.

OK, believe what you want... However, in MN and WI T-Mobile has far better coverage than Sprint. 2 of my roommates have Sprint phones, they both have to constantly recall people because they get dropped. As to analog roaming, yeah, ummm I'd rather not pay like $0.50 a minute to roam on an ANALOG (enter crap calls) network. Sprint doesn't have have any real "agreements" with using analog networks, their phones will work on them and they pay a cut rate per market and you get raped by them charging you 20x more than what they actually pay to the other carrier. Trust me this works exactly like your land line and the PSTN, I know, I work for a provider. Also, there are very FEW GSM/Analog phones out there. As the older TDMA towers get converted to GSM, you're going to see the GSM coverage cover the nation in a quick hurry. CDMA is going slower to market because it is harder to convert from TDMA towers (existing) to CDMA.

Granted, CDMA is superior in a few technical areas. Until the coverage is there I'll put my $$$ on the GSM networks. If you look at Sprint and T-Mobile's (VoiceStream then) 5 years ago, and then compare them today, you'll see that Sprint has done far less network expansion in regards to adding coverage... I am not brand loyal like many of you, I'm just going with what I think will be the next "TDMA" (for the US anyway) for coverage...

**bobolito** · 12-04-2002, 8:23 AM

DaveyJ, by deeply understanding the article you posted in a different thread (http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/10/GSM3G.shtml), you should realize that converting from TDMA to GSM is more difficult than converting from TDMA to CDMA.

**photoeditor** · 12-04-2002, 11:35 AM

Does anyone here know if Western Europe went through converting from TDMA to GSM, or if they just went directly from analog to GSM?

**DaveyJ** · 12-04-2002, 2:17 PM

Originally posted by: bobolito
DaveyJ, by deeply understanding the article you posted in a different thread (http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/10/GSM3G.shtml), you should realize that converting from TDMA to GSM is more difficult than converting from TDMA to CDMA.

Did you even read that site?

"CDMA and TDMA are fundamentally incompatible and there's no way to create a new system (which they're calling WCDMA) which can support existing TDMA handsets."

Hello?!?!? Did you read that line???

So, considering GSM is basically an enhanced version of TDMA, even though it is not backward compatible, it is still an easier path to go from TDMA to GSM vs. TDMA to CDMA...

TDMA & CDMA have NOTHING in common technically... They will not work together... That's why there are NO TDMA/CDMA phones out there in production... Maybe you should be the one "reading into things" more...

**DaveyJ** · 12-04-2002, 3:10 PM

And one more thing to add to that discussion...

UMTS/WCDMA successful in Texas on a live network!

**bobolito** · 12-04-2002, 7:49 PM

Photoeditor, Europe never deployed TDMA so they went directly to GSM.

DaveyJ, I did read the whole article and understood it better than you imagine. But I am not going to be rude about it and explain the following points. By studying the infrastructure differences between GSM, IS-136 (TDMA) and CDMA, you realize that there's more work involved in migrating from IS-136 to GSM, than going from IS-136 to CDMA. We know that these technologies are all incompatible. However, IS-136 and CDMA run on the same core network (ANSI-41) which is why both can live with analog in the same block of spectrum and makes analog roaming possible. GSM runs on a GSM MAP network which makes it even more incompatible with IS-136, therefore it is necessary to replace more equipment but I am not getting into details there. This is why GAIT is so complicated to implement because IS-136 and GSM are two totally different networks from the air interface to the core. Just because they both use a similar type of air interface (TDMA) doesn't mean it is easier to migrate from one to the other or that they are more "compatible". We're talking about the core of the network here, not what goes outside. I hope that part is understood. It is easier, however, to go from GSM to GPRS, to EDGE, etc once you are on the GSM bandwagon. But if you are on the IS-136 network, it is simpler to go the CDMA route.

There's one thing, however, that I don't quite agree with the article. The author seems to put down GSM in all aspects so I think the guy is a little biased. While I do agree that CDMA is superior to GSM, he added that WCDMA may miss the market window and that's something I don't agree with. WCDMA doesn't need to catch any window since there aren't any GSM carriers going to CDMA2k AFAIK. They are all going to WCDMA (UMTS) so there's no window to catch even if they are late so they will have more market share in the end. Even so, maybe arriving later to the market will give WCDMA the time it needs to become a better technology than CDMA2k, just like CDMA was developed later than GSM and became a better technology. I know many of you will burn me for saying this, but hey, it's only a thought. I am not trying to predict the future.

By the way, FYI, no matter how incompatible the technologies are, you can still develop phones that operate in both networks. As a technology professional, I can tell you that there is no such thing as "it can't be done". What happens is that there's not enough money sometimes or investors choose not to invest on certain technologies. If you think it is impossible to mix CDMA and TDMA based technologies into one phone check this out, then get back to me:

http://www.phonearena.com/htmls/phon...ils.php?id=167

**Apoc** · 12-05-2002, 10:57 PM

Davey, you have a really negitive output to this thread the posts are merely here to allow us to give are likes and dislikes, not to out right bash anyone person be constructive bud and have fun!

**Apoc** · 12-20-2002, 2:31 PM

To keep this the longest running thread I will make last ditch efforts come on folks lets make this happen. T-Moible coming into your homes with bad service!

**Tshaggy** · 12-21-2002, 9:48 AM

T-Mobile

is a waste of money....

**aiwapro** · 12-21-2002, 12:33 PM

You're a waste of money.

'Apoc' what are you talking about T-Mobile icon

bringing bad service into our homes, I have had almost 2 years and counting of excellent service from T-Mobile icon

.

**larry** · 12-21-2002, 12:40 PM

I'm surprised this one is still going. Time to lock it.

**sillybilly** · 12-21-2002, 12:43 PM

Thank you Larry, let's get rid of this one!!!

**bobolito** · 12-22-2002, 9:45 AM

It is Apoc's fault. He summoned this thread back from the dead [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] (joke)

**Apoc** · 12-24-2002, 4:45 PM

Bob you are the man/woman whichever applys I want this thread to be retired as the longest running thread! BTW nice logo BOB

**Apoc** · 12-26-2002, 3:04 PM

Hope you all had a Happy Holiday, and to note that T-Moible did not send me a phone per as I requested and they dont even offer insurance so that leaves me hanging on a limb. Oh my how the wind stinks in my town.

**Apoc** · 12-27-2002, 3:34 PM

I will make this the longest runing thread until its retired by the Webmaster! hehe

**Apoc** · 12-30-2002, 2:42 PM

I say the longest runing post until there is a worse carrier than T-Mobile icon

!

**bobolito** · 12-30-2002, 5:30 PM

Apoc please quit it....the longest thread is in the Motorola forum. If you don't have anything positive to add to the conversation it is preferable you do not contribute at all.

**eagle63** · 12-30-2002, 5:41 PM

I say the longest runing post until there is a worse carrier than T-Mobile icon

!

what are you, 4 years old?

**Apoc** · 12-30-2002, 7:00 PM

Alright, Alright this is not the longest running post but for the record I really am very upset about what T Mobile icon

did to me, but this my last comment about this ------> Goodnight Apoc!

And BTW Eagle I am 17 [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

**Whiteout** · 08-25-2006, 11:25 PM

Wow, its been a long time since I have been here. Yes, my Apoc login got banned. =( What an idiot I was being.

Anywho, T'Mo has made some very large advances as everyone would have it now. But, I'm sure you all knew that now.. Now with the building of the Old Ma' Bell (Cingular) the coverage is excellent. Great Job T-Mobile icon

!

Formerly: Apoc

-Whiteout

**Etorres777** · 08-26-2006, 10:34 AM

Way to bring this back from the dead LOL. Well, T-Mobile icon

has changed a lot! I know for a fact that there's a lot to come!

**jones** · 08-28-2006, 4:31 PM

Originally Posted by Apoc

Just face it even with a pretty face like Cathrine Zeta-Jones

Catherine Gained Some Weight Lately
So I Don't Know if it's Worth
Throwing in The Towel.

T-Moible should throw in the towel!