I have narrowed my choices for NH/MA/CT coverage to either Verizon or ATT. Since I live in Strafford County NH I cannot get a local number with Verizon. I am told that maybe in November 2004, but most likely not until next spring. I went to a local ATT store and they offered me the 59.99 National GSM plan with additional line for 9.99, 900 anytime minutes, nights starting at 7pm, which is really nice, and they have a nice GSM LG phone (buy one get one free as of tomorrow). The salesperson said he would waive the activation fees (I have it in writing). ATT's map is so similar to Verizon's map I can't tell much of a difference, and I really like the GSM thing. That is the main reason I went with T-Mobile (leaving for too many reasons to list). What do you think? Feedback is much appreciated. By the way, the 30-day trial would really allow me to test the phone out.
I don't get this at all. First, you narrow your choices down to Verizon or AT&T, but you seem to like GSM better and the plan AT&T offered. However, then you said that was the reason you went with T-Mobile? Doesn't make much sense to me.....
I have been a customer with AT&T for about 3 months now. Overall I have been pretty happy with them (mostly NYC/NJ area). I have not been up to NH or MASS, but in western CT the AT&T coverage is spotty along I-84 between Danbury and Waterbury. Much of the time is spent roaming on Cingular in this area so you pretty much always have a signal, but it can be a pain if you are in the middle of a call and you switch to Cingular (the call will drop).
I went with T-Mobile for the following reasons: 1. Price 2. GSM (I either get reception or I don't, No roaming) 3. Did not have to pay 9.99, 14.99, or 24.99 for the extra phone for my wife. 4. The ability to change plans as needed and my contract does not start over, nor do I get a penalty. Now my reception is heinous. I drive up 95N and lose calls all the time. I make a call and it just gets dropped when I have 4 bars and so does my wife. Verizon is just so pricy and I cannot get a local number. I suppose I could use my work address, which is in Chelmsford, but then I would have to get a Massachusetts number. ATT's plan sounds good.
As far as getting a phone number I don't think it matters where your address is. My friend lives in Hartford and went to a Verizon store in Hartford. He signed up and requested a Boston (617) number with no problem, even with his Hartford address. This was over a year ago so maybe things have changed, but have you asked Verizon?
JerseyPhoneGuy, I think KingofGondor wants an exchange close to his house. Verizon isn't currently licensed in his county, their customers roam on Unicel, so he can't get a number like that from them. Kingofgondor, If you get a phone/plan from AT&T I very strongly recommend that you test it fully in all the areas that you haunt, during their trial period. Specifically, check it out in northern NH and Vermont if you go there often. I think you are going to find that GSM coverage there is sp****. I expect it to get better as Cingular/AT&T build out their GSM network, but I wouldn't base current decisions on future coverage. If the coverage doesn't meet your needs, return the phone and cancel the contract. Verizon should be able to give you a number near your work, and if and when they can provide coverage in Strafford County NH, then you could have them switch your number to a local one there. -way
My wife wants Verizon and I want ATT. If I go with ATT, you can be sure I will be using the 30 day trial to test the phone. My personal opinion is that GSM is the way to go. Yes, I do want an exchange close to my house. My zip is 03820. If I go to Verizon's website and type in 03801 or 03833 I am all set. I talked with a fried who was in charge of about 75 employees who worked in NH and she said that 50 of them had ATT contracts and the rest were Verizon or US Cellular. She said that the ones with ATT were by far the happiest. Does Verizon offer GSM?
Is there an advantage to GSM over CDMA? I keep hearing that GSM will eventually take over because it can handle more data, or something like that.
Oh my God! let's not start with that again! No, GSM is not going to take over anything, neither is CDMA. If anything CDMA is more efficient with data handling, which is why 3GSM is based on a form of CDMA technology. You should not shop around thinking about which technology you should get. You should get what works for you and what you find has the features you want. Now, did I get this correctly? You went with T-Mobile because of: 1. Price 2. GSM (I either get reception or I don't, No roaming) 3. Did not have to pay 9.99, 14.99, or 24.99 for the extra phone for my wife. 4. The ability to change plans as needed and my contract does not start over, nor do I get a penalty. Well, frankly, T-Mobile does give you the most minutes for your buck. But if you are in an area where reception is not so good, you are going to be more frustrated in the end with your choice because you can't use all those minutes anyway. You either get reception or you don't. Well, that's not necessarily a good thing. At least with AT&T and Cingular you can roam and more than likely have a signal. Roaming is not a bad thing when it's free. Only Verizon and Sprint charge extra to have all roaming included: - With Verizon? You need an expensive SingleRate plan. - With Sprint? You need to pay an extra $5 for Free & Clear. Unfortunately, you were misinformed about T-Mobile plans. T-Mobile will restart your contract depending on which plan you are changing to. Usually promotional plans require you to start your contract. This is the same with any other carrier. You can always go up and down in your existing type of plan without entering or extending your contract just like any other carrier. Also, try and get out of your T-Mobile contract. You'll find there is a penalty just like any other carrier.
Okay, I get it now. I am misled no more. It is easy to get caught up in the CDMA vs. GMS thing. If T-Mobile had better reception I would just stick with them, but I have had the same dead spots and dropped calls issue for 8 months+. Thanks for clearing things up for me. It looks like I will give ATT a shot.
That is true, except the only area where a VZW could possibly get charged for roaming (but it's unlikely because VZW has native service there) in NH/VT is a tiny area the the southeastern corner of NH where Cingular serves (Derry, Londonderry, Portsmouth, Salem).
CDMA will eventually go away in time. i dont know why verizon and sprint still use CDMA, GSM is taking over, everyonw throught the world uses GSM, verizons network is limited to only the states. GSM signal is a constant signal, while CDMA is intermittent, you will miss a few phone calls now and then, they will go straight to voicemail. Geting a local number is big deal to most people, when you have to call your wife on her cell from home so she wont forget to pick up the milk do you want to pay long distance? when your kid uses the payphone at school to call you for a ride but your out and he needs to call your cell, he is going to need $0.75 to call you now instead of a quarter. a local number is a big deal. Come November when verizon can give you a local exchange are you going to want to start your 2 year contract over? verizon will make you, new number new contract! With AT&T wireless GSM america plans you pay no roaming, use any signal you get without the worrie of roaming charges! I live in upstae NY, and often travel to VT, MA, and PA and was worried about my coverage, i had used verizon for allmost 3 years and had no worries with my coverage, Come December i begun my employement with AT&T wireless and was worriedabotu coverage with my new phone. I did not get rid of my verizon for allmost 4 months. After those 4 months i had traveled to all of my regular travel spots and had NO reception problems. The only place for my verizon phone at that point was the shoe box under my bed. i canceled the contract and have had no regrets. Get the AT&T wireless phone try it out for 30 days, if you know there is someplace you will need the phone to work but wont be able to travel there in 30 days e-mail me with the address and i can give you the location of the closest towers and let you know if your phone will work!! e-mail john.wilcox@attws.com
I've been happy with AT&T. Just, I don't have signal north of my front yard. Hope you're happy with them. Treat yourself to a really nice phone while your at it LOL
hey willy, you think you can help me? tell me the nearest tower to my house (where i have 1 or 2 bars). if you need more information private message me please.
I wouldn't say everyone in the world uses GSM. There are pre-dominantly CDMA networks out there. GSM does have most of Europe with CDMA niches here and there. They also have a few countries in Asia. The two dominant CDMA markets are in Korea and Japan. Korea's numbers are somthing like 75% CDMA 25% GSM. In Japan, I've read that they don't even have GSM networks. Their proprietary CDMA networks enables them to prevent their phones from being used anywhere else.
I will never be going to Japan, so I am not worried about that. Canada is probably out of the question too. I went there once a few years ago and I left the same day. I plan on going back to Germany at some point because I was stationed there for 2 years and the countryside is beautiful. I lived in a town that had its own castle and the town itself was like 675 years old! They have really good beer too.
For those who didn't know, the UMTS and further generations of the GSM standard (Global Systems for Mobile Communications) is CDMA-based. It's not the same as CDMA2000 or IS-95, nor is it compatible with those systems, but the base technology is the same. CDMA is not dying; leave that title to IS-136 TDMA. (Today's incarnation of GSM is TDMA-based. That interference you hear is the timeslots.)
willycox420, that was a highly misinformed paragraph you typed there. GSM is not taking over anything. GSM is just catching up with CDMA in the Americas. Nothing else. CDMA and GSM will co-exist for the next few years and when 3G becomes a reality, then you'll no longer have CDMA vs. GSM. Instead, we'll have CDMA vs. W-CDMA. Get the picture? Just for the record, WCDMA = UMTS = 3GSM. This means the majority of the world market share will be on WCDMA eventually.
And by the time UMTS comes to true fruition in the US, the CDMA2000 networks will be on something entirely different (both major ones moving to EV-DO and eventually to EV-DV). The way I understand it, UMTS/wCDMA will be deployed data-only first, then a gradual move to voice as well, much like the CDMA carriers will be deploying EV-DO (data-only) and EV-DV (data/voice) in that order. The two competing standards will be competing in the US for a long time to come, though at some point, it is likely that the world will converge on one standard.
Yes, that's what's going to happen for the time being. UMTS will be much like EV-DO and upgrades to UMTS will allow voice eventually. The same will happen when EV-DO gets replaced with EV-DV.
