ABC 15 Investigators Cell phone coverage in Phoenix

[RH]

Found this tidbit for Phoenix area cell phone users done by ABC 15 News Investigators of cell phone coverage in the Phoenix area. It is very basic but maybe some interesting reading they do not tell you what phones they were using ie ATT GSM or TDMA etc.

http://www.abc15.com/news/investigat...x.asp?did=7423

RH

[azcellphonejunkie]

Interesting story. I think it is hard to tell really from this story who is the best. They claim that certain providers had more dropped calls than others, but what does this really mean?

Tested more than 20 intersections and stretches of roads in the Valley.
AT&T, Qwest, Sprint and Verizon -- 1 dropped call or area with no service during our test.
Alltel, Nextel and T-Mobile -- 3 dropped calls or areas with no service during our test.

Are you telling me that Nextel has the same coverage as Alltel? I know this is not the case coverage wise in the state, but they sure are coming close to implying this. While there are places all over the valley that have better service from one provider than another, this "study" doesn't provide the best depiction of this. Too bad they didn't make a statement like "The best service for most people is one that will work well at your home and office."

I didn't get a chance to see the video story, but I will try again tonight...

[Yankees368]

Good story, but i did not like the phones that they used.

An old LG for spring, T720 for Verizon, we all know that these are not very good phones reception wise.

[budney]

For some reason my RealPlayer won't play the video. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img] I agree with AZ that it is hard to tell who is the best in the Phoenix Valley from that article.

[Rasputin]

It does not help me out, should have used better phones, call quality, larger area, more calls.

[azcellphonejunkie]

Originally posted by: Rasputin
It does not help me out, should have used better phones, call quality, larger area, more calls.

Here here, I think that really sums up what should have happened...

[Andy]

Originally posted by: RH
Found this tidbit for Phoenix area cell phone users done by ABC 15 News Investigators of cell phone coverage in the Phoenix area. It is very basic but maybe some interesting reading they do not tell you what phones they were using ie ATT GSM or TDMA etc.

http://www.abc15.com/news/investigat...x.asp?did=7423

RH

Here's what I found interesting while reading the article:

"T-mobile
"We're the fastest-growing carrier serving 13 million customers who depend on our quality service."
www.t-mobile.com "

I don't know if something has changed Q1, 2004, but the last quarters, Verizon added more than T-Mobile.... anyone why they claim to be the fastest growing carrier?

[Matt]

The TM claim is on a percentage basis. Raw numbers, Verizon is first. TM grew by about 30% in 2003, Verizon grew by about 17% or so, even though they added more subs.

[ILUVSOCAL]

OT, that's kind of weird to see a network on channel 15, they are usually on 2-12.

[TNDan21]

I hate to be so criticial but that's the worst article I ever read. It's poorly written and doesn't really help anybody out when shopping for a wireless phone. I'm sure they could have done much better. That article you could tell was written quickly and with sloppy work.

[azcellphonejunkie]

Originally posted by: TNDan21
I hate to be so criticial but that's the worst article I ever read. It's poorly written and doesn't really help anybody out when shopping for a wireless phone. I'm sure they could have done much better. That article you could tell was written quickly and with sloppy work.

But it says in the article "The most comprehensive, real test of cell phone service in the Valley." :-)

[Andy]

Originally posted by: Matt
The TM claim is on a percentage basis. Raw numbers, Verizon is first. TM grew by about 30% in 2003, Verizon grew by about 17% or so, even though they added more subs.

Well, not to start an argument or anything and it really doesn't matter, but I think that's misinformation, because they are NOT the fastest growing carrier. Percentage wise, yes, because they (only) have 13 million customers, where other carriers like Verizon have nearly 40 million customers, so percentage wise, yes, they have a higher percentage, but if you think about it, they are not the fastest growing carrier, because that means customer wise, not percentage wise(to me at least)....Maybe I'm thinkin wrong, but let me know what you all think
[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
Andy

[Matt]

I see your point, but it's accepted within the industry. TM has doubled (almost) in two years. That is growing fast. Sprint used the same terminology a few years ago (late 90s) when they were the fastest growing.

[Andy]

Originally posted by: Matt
I see your point, but it's accepted within the industry. TM has doubled (almost) in two years. That is growing fast. Sprint used the same terminology a few years ago (late 90s) when they were the fastest growing.

I'd complain against that [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] especially if I'd be Verizon, but they probably don't care.
This is good for T-Mobile though if the industry accepts them calling themselves the fastest growing carrier because it makes people think T-Mobile is the best if they are fastest growing(I'm not trying to start a fight here [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img] you know what I mean...I hope)
Now to the part about T-Mobile doubling its customer base in two years: Deutsche Telekom has done a great job with the "broken" VoiceStream network. No doubt about that at all!!!!!!
They just paid a little too much for it. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

[zippyteen]

Originally posted by: ILUVSOCAL
OT, that's kind of weird to see a network on channel 15, they are usually on 2-12.

Back in the Mid 1990s, there was a MAJOR reshuffling withing the local TV stations in Phoenix. More info on this can be read here:


Affiliate Reshuffling Reflects TV Networks' New Strength:[All 07/28/94 Edition]
Christian Science Monitor (pre-1997 Fulltext). Boston, Mass.: Jul 28, 1994. pg. NOPGCIT
Copyright Christian Science Monitor Jul 28, 1994


BEGINNING this fall, an estimated 40 percent of United States television viewers may suddenly have trouble finding "Seinfeld," "NYPD Blue," "Northern Exposure," and other favorite network shows.

A loosening of federal regulations and increased competition is spurring the biggest shake-up in television history, and ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox will switch affiliates in 15 cities this fall.

Observers say the affiliate shuffling reflects the renewed strength of networks and structural changes in the television industry that could make network television dramatically better, or dramatically worse, in the future.

"There are a lot of different directions it can go in," says Matthew McAllister, a communications professor at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg. "Personally, I don't see anything good coming out of it."

In a long-awaited April ruling, the Federal Communications Commission eased regulations that kept the networks from monopolizing the airwaves. Networks, which were barred from large-scale program production in the past, are now free to enter the lucrative fields of production and syndication.

The rules increase the likelihood that film studios, which produce most network programming, will merge with a network or launch their own networks. Ob-servers cite the failed CBS-QVC merger and rumors of a CBS-Walt Disney Co. or Turner Broadcasting merger as examples.

Networks are also being bolstered by a slowdown in the growth of cable television, a technology that observers once predicted would put the networks out of business. After steadily losing viewers to cable since the early 1980s, network ratings appear to have stabilized at roughly 60 percent of the TV audience in 1993.

Networks are the only way for advertisers to reach mass audiences, and network executives predict viewers will be attracted to familiar networks in a future 500-channel television universe.

New network ventures are rapidly being announced. Last October, Paramount, the maker of "Cheers," and Chris-Craft Broadcasting announced the launch of the Paramount Network in January 1995. Last November, Warner Brothers, the maker of "Murphy Brown," and Tribune Broadcasting announced that the WB network will premiere this fall.

"For somebody like Warner Brothers, they're already in the business of producing television shows," says Eric Rothenbuhler, a communications professor at the University of Iowa in Des Moines. "Now they can get into the business of delivering those goods and making money from that."

THE increasing number of networks has led to a bidding war for local affiliates and the current affiliate shake-up. Rupert Murdoch's Fox Broadcasting Company, established in 1987, stunned the traditional networks in May by announcing a new $500 million alliance with New World Communications and its 12 local VHF television stations. Fox picked up affiliates from CBS in Dallas; Detroit; Atlanta; Cleveland; Tampa, Fla.; Phoenix; Milwaukee; and Austin, Texas; from ABC in St. Louis; Greensboro, N.C.; and Birmingham, Ala.; and from NBC in Kansas City, Mo.

Higher-powered, lower-numbered (channels 2-13), VHF (very-high-frequency) stations can be received by more potential viewers than lower-powered, higher-numbered UHF (ultra-high-frequency) stations. FCC regulations allow only three VHF stations in many cities, meaning that one of the four major networks will lose out on a valuable VHF affiliate.

The Fox deal forced ABC, CBS, and NBC to find new affiliates. In June, ABC announced a 10-year deal with Scripps-Howard Broadcasting, bringing it NBC's VHF affiliate in Baltimore, former Fox UHF affiliates in Phoenix and Tampa, and locking up its Detroit and Cleveland affiliates.

Earlier this month, CBS announced a 10-year agreement with Group W Communications, bringing it five VHF affiliates. NBC will lose its Boston and Philadelphia affiliates; a former ABC affiliate in Baltimore was picked up; and CBS's San Francisco and Pittsburgh affiliates switched over.

Amid all the changes, some observers worry that large, corporate networks directly controlling nearly all aspects of television will stifle creativity and independent producers. But other observers say the changes will increase competition and improve quality.

The networks "are just looking for the best product" from any source, says David Waterman, a communications professor at the University of Indiana in Bloomington. "The overriding concern for them is getting programs they think can sell."

[ZaphodB]

It's like the Orange County Register's annual survey... entertaining but not even slightly scientific.

As for the VHF/UHF thing -- Mike, most cities actually have major networks elsewhere in the spectrum. I used to live in La Crosse, Wisconsin and ABC was channel 19, FOX was 25, and we had two NBCs... one on channel 13 and one on channel 67 (though it was really channel 10 out of Rochester, MN). Also, when I was in SW Minnesota, the Twin Cities channels were rebroadcasted -- so KSTP was on ch. 14, WCCO was on ch. 7, and KARE (channel 11) was on ch. 36. Also, the Weather Channel broadcasted over-the-air on channel 50.

It drove me nuts when I went to New Jersey and found that everything was the same except that channels 5 and 11 were flipped.

[roamer1]

Going off-topic...but Atlanta has gone through network swaps several times over the years, the most recent being Fox getting channel 5 and CBS moving to channel 46. In Chattanooga, all of ABC, NBC, and CBS are still on VHF...

Of course, with Digital TV coming around, most TV stations are moving to UHF anyway (VHF, especially the "low" band of channels 2-6, is rather ill suited for ATSC...)

-SC

[ZaphodB]

In this part of LA, most of the majors are still in the VHF range, but the DT band is way up in the 50s and 60s.

CBS - 2, ABC - 3, NBC - 4, WB - 5, ABC - 7, KCAL (ind) - 9, FOX - 11, UPN - 13. The only exception is there's another UPN on channel 63. PBS is all UHF, on 24, 28, 50, 56 and 58.

[Andy]

Originally posted by: ZaphodB
In this part of LA, most of the majors are still in the VHF range, but the DT band is way up in the 50s and 60s.

CBS - 2, ABC - 3, NBC - 4, WB - 5, ABC - 7, KCAL (ind) - 9, FOX - 11, UPN - 13. The only exception is there's another UPN on channel 63. PBS is all UHF, on 24, 28, 50, 56 and 58.

Aber du wolltest Shoresguy's und meinen Thread schliessen, lol [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]