AT&T - Anybody have a triband phone in Bay Area, CA?

[Supertea]

So I just bought a triband phone (900/1800/1900 MHz) and I live in the Bay Area, CA. Anyone else that has a triband phone and lives around here, how is the coverage? Do you get 5 bars?

[Blue4Life]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.1; U; en-us) AppleWebKit/413 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/413 es70)

Getting a phone without the 850 MHz band will limit your coverage to 1900 MHz towers only.. As long as there is a 1900 MHz tower where you need to use the phone, you'll be fine. But, there is an excellent chance that you will have many more areas where you will not get a signal.

[Mobile Mike]

Originally Posted by Supertea

So I just bought a triband phone (900/1800/1900 MHz) and I live in the Bay Area, CA. Anyone else that has a triband phone and lives around here, how is the coverage? Do you get 5 bars?

You need a quad band phone in California, plain and simple. You will barely get a signal in most places without 850mhz on your new phone (as Blue4life said).

[Barciurek]

Euro triband phones are good for T-Mobile only generally speaking.. and not if you're planning on using your phone in roaming areas....
don't make a mistake I did; get a quad band or US triband

[dmapr]

I used a tri-band 900/1800/1900 MHz phone in Bay Area for a few months back in 2004 and it was bad even then (despite T-Mobile roaming). You really need the 850MHz in the Bay Area (unless you go with T-Mobile), because now the T-Mobile roaming is no longer an option for AT&T customers in most places.

[RJB]

yes you will for sure want 850 ATT has a 850 License there. To make the most of your phone that is.

[BillRadio]

This will get worse shortly. "Tri-band" phones will soon be required just for domestic coverage. Cricket requires 850/1700/1900 MHz phones for their 6 new markets, and late next year, some carriers will add 700 MHz to the equation. It's like having a 4-speed transmission, but only 3 work. You may get where you're going but it won't be a pleasant trip.

[Barciurek]

Originally Posted by BillRadio

This will get worse shortly. "Tri-band" phones will soon be required just for domestic coverage. Cricket requires 850/1700/1900 MHz phones for their 6 new markets, and late next year, some carriers will add 700 MHz to the equation. It's like having a 4-speed transmission, but only 3 work. You may get where you're going but it won't be a pleasant trip.

He meant triband as in 900/1800/1900.... (GSM triband)

[BillRadio]

I am aware of what he meant, that is why I specified "850/1700/1900", which are in use today." Those euro tri-band phones will be at even more disadvantage when we will need 700/850/1700/1900 for service here...and the FCC announced this week another 25 MHz to be auctioned at 2300 MHz.

Originally Posted by Barciurek

He meant triband as in 900/1800/1900.... (GSM triband)

[sid pearlman]

Originally Posted by BillRadio

I am aware of what he meant, that is why I specified "850/1700/1900", which are in use today." Those euro tri-band phones will be at even more disadvantage when we will need 700/850/1700/1900 for service here...and the FCC announced this week another 25 MHz to be auctioned at 2300 MHz.

Hi Bill,

I've been on a long hiatus!
Will any carriers be using the new frequencies/bandwidth for voice traffic or mainly for faster/advanced mobile data services?

Seems what counts is not simply which bands a handset can access, but what specific inter-carrier agreements might allow access to a competitors network, under the roaming agreement du jour?

I discovered a prepaid T-Mobile GSM handset, had less coverage than monthly subscribed customers, I'm assuming on more foreign systems. More expensive plans seem to offer more systems, so there are tiers of greater access, with the same carrier.

Out west, any standout prepaid (GSM) accounts, having the greatest access to available networks and the least amount of blocked ones? Or is a CDMA/(Analog?) cellular route still better away from populated city centers?

-
Sid

[BillRadio]

Originally Posted by sid pearlman

Will any carriers be using the new frequencies/bandwidth for voice traffic or mainly for faster/advanced mobile data services?

It looks like a little of each. Cricket is using AWS (1700/2500 MHz) now for all their services in 5 markets.

I discovered a prepaid T-Mobile GSM handset, had less coverage than monthly subscribed customers, I'm assuming on more foreign systems. More expensive plans seem to offer more systems, so there are tiers of greater access, with the same carrier.

I do not use T-Mobile postpaid, however I do believe postpaid does have slightly more coverage. AT&T has 5 levels of coverage based on plan.

Out west, any standout prepaid (GSM) accounts, having the greatest access to available networks and the least amount of blocked ones? Or is a CDMA/(Analog?) cellular route still better away from populated city centers?

AT&T offers service to their postpaid customers wherever there is a GSM signal. However, with a few exceptions, there are still more areas with CDMA (and analog) only, especially in Alltel areas. One glaring exception is the Navajo reservation which has only 2 Commnet CDMA sites. AT&T customers can access all their GSM sites and they don't allow Verzion and Alltel roamers, but do allow Sprint roamers on their analog sites. Until Alltel transmits GSM from all their sites, CDMA will have a slight advantage.

[Mobile Mike]

Originally Posted by BillRadio

I do not use T-Mobile postpaid, however I do believe postpaid does have slightly more coverage. AT&T has 5 levels of coverage based on plan.

AT&T offers service to their postpaid customers wherever there is a GSM signal. However, with a few exceptions, there are still more areas with CDMA (and analog) only, especially in Alltel areas. One glaring exception is the Navajo reservation which has only 2 Commnet CDMA sites. AT&T customers can access all their GSM sites and they don't allow Verzion and Alltel roamers, but do allow Sprint roamers on their analog sites. Until Alltel transmits GSM from all their sites, CDMA will have a slight advantage.

It's interesting to see what AT&T's coverage is depending on the plan.

[Barciurek]

Originally Posted by BillRadio

I am aware of what he meant, that is why I specified "850/1700/1900", which are in use today." Those euro tri-band phones will be at even more disadvantage when we will need 700/850/1700/1900 for service here...and the FCC announced this week another 25 MHz to be auctioned at 2300 MHz.

US equvalent of those Euro triband is 850/1800/1900....
In Europe phone working on 900/1800/1900/2100 UMTS is considered a triband phone.

[Mobile Mike]

Originally Posted by Barciurek

US equvalent of those Euro triband is 850/1800/1900....
In Europe phone working on 900/1800/1900/2100 UMTS is considered a triband phone.

On older phones this is the case. With the spectrum auctions of the last few years, several carriers are now activating service on other bands, which is what BR was talking about.

BillRadio is a long-time member here with great experience in this field. He knows what he's talking about.

[Barciurek]

I am aware of that but just wanted to point out that phone that works on 900/1800/1900 PLUS 2100 UMTS is still considered a triband in Europe.