Verizon finally has some competition...

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Well, AT&T has started offering a no-roaming GSM plan with a real footprint
as opposed to the pathetic on-network footprint they started with. Here in
Oregon, this should include roaming anywhere T-Mobile or EdgeWireless has
coverage, and eventually Cellular One NW. GSM users will probably continue
to lose roaming on US Cellular (for very rural areas), unless US Cellular
decides to overlay GSM to get the roaming traffic.

The really cool thing AT&T has been doing for years (even on TDMA) is good
feature transparency even when roaming. With GSM, they've taken this yet
one step further with *data roaming*. The cool part is that they are not
charging anything extra to use data when roaming. This has got to have
extreme appeal to the business traveler.

Here in Oregon, Cingular had zero native coverage, so adding them, adds
nothing. In this regard, AT&T's GSM footprint is still small by comparison
to their own TDMA/analog footprint or Verizon's. Just the same, I can see
the business folks salivating at the option to use data anywhere their phone
works-- which is now dramatically improved. Add to that bluetooth enabled
phones so folks don't have to carry cables-- very cool.

My hope is that this will light a fire under Verizon's butt to get any
integration when roaming (SMS, Caller ID, Voicemail indication, and Data).
Most all of my features go bye-bye when I roam today, even when I roam
digitally. The only thing I get when roaming on Sprint, for example, is
Caller ID.

-Dan

--
Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
http://cell.uoregon.edu
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Now we have 3 competeitng - ATTWS vs SprintPCS ( with FCA that is)
vs Verizon . I bet Verizon will be dropping their prices in the near
future

On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 21:15:25 -0700, "Dan Albrich"
<junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:

>Well, AT&T has started offering a no-roaming GSM plan with a real footprint
>as opposed to the pathetic on-network footprint they started with. Here in
>Oregon, this should include roaming anywhere T-Mobile or EdgeWireless has
>coverage, and eventually Cellular One NW. GSM users will probably continue
>to lose roaming on US Cellular (for very rural areas), unless US Cellular
>decides to overlay GSM to get the roaming traffic.
>
>The really cool thing AT&T has been doing for years (even on TDMA) is good
>feature transparency even when roaming. With GSM, they've taken this yet
>one step further with *data roaming*. The cool part is that they are not
>charging anything extra to use data when roaming. This has got to have
>extreme appeal to the business traveler.
>
>Here in Oregon, Cingular had zero native coverage, so adding them, adds
>nothing. In this regard, AT&T's GSM footprint is still small by comparison
>to their own TDMA/analog footprint or Verizon's. Just the same, I can see
>the business folks salivating at the option to use data anywhere their phone
>works-- which is now dramatically improved. Add to that bluetooth enabled
>phones so folks don't have to carry cables-- very cool.
>
>My hope is that this will light a fire under Verizon's butt to get any
>integration when roaming (SMS, Caller ID, Voicemail indication, and Data).
>Most all of my features go bye-bye when I roam today, even when I roam
>digitally. The only thing I get when roaming on Sprint, for example, is
>Caller ID.
>
>-Dan
>
>--
>Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
>http://cell.uoregon.edu
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I am a former AT&T subscriber (eleven years)
and really doubt that premise. Leadership and
imagination are needed. I have VZW now and
it has some big shortcomings, but they try to
fix them, and do sooner or later. The mix of
GSM/TDMA/GPRS is challenging. It will be
interesting and probably amusing with Cingular
thrown in. Regards
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 19 May 2004 02:58:10 GMT, "Eric" <ceric20@frontiernet.net> wrote:

>Everyones got there own oppions on the cellular company they pick. I
>recently went from Verizon where i had them for 5 years to ATT and i got to
>tell ya i love ATT. I got a cool new phone with bluetooth. Verizon is a
>good company there coverge is great i will give them that but when it comes
>down to them getting new phones they are behind the times. Verizon in my
>own oppion has no good phones.

Coverage, coverage, coverage thats whats important. When I need my phone to make
a call, I need to make a call.

I don't care if its got a camera, a PDA, games, etc. NONE of that matters if I
CAN NOT MAKE a call.

Coverage will beat "cool" phones any day.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I agree. After playing witrh gadgets for the first month or so all I do is
make calls.
I've work for both companies. I can personally tell you the AT&T Wireless is
messed up. I still have friends that work there that will take any
opportunity to flee that place.

<xxnonexnonexx@tampascanner.info> wrote in message
news:va3na0d9su57d09npl3nbnddn5ugppu5t0@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 19 May 2004 02:58:10 GMT, "Eric" <ceric20@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
> >Everyones got there own oppions on the cellular company they pick. I
> >recently went from Verizon where i had them for 5 years to ATT and i got
to
> >tell ya i love ATT. I got a cool new phone with bluetooth. Verizon is a
> >good company there coverge is great i will give them that but when it
comes
> >down to them getting new phones they are behind the times. Verizon in my
> >own oppion has no good phones.
>
> Coverage, coverage, coverage thats whats important. When I need my phone
to make
> a call, I need to make a call.
>
> I don't care if its got a camera, a PDA, games, etc. NONE of that matters
if I
> CAN NOT MAKE a call.
>
> Coverage will beat "cool" phones any day.
>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 19 May 2004 12:49:55 -0400, xxnonexnonexx@tampascanner.info wrote:

> On Wed, 19 May 2004 02:58:10 GMT, "Eric" <ceric20@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
>>Everyones got there own oppions on the cellular company they pick. I
>>recently went from Verizon where i had them for 5 years to ATT and i got to
>>tell ya i love ATT. I got a cool new phone with bluetooth. Verizon is a
>>good company there coverge is great i will give them that but when it comes
>>down to them getting new phones they are behind the times. Verizon in my
>>own oppion has no good phones.
>
> Coverage, coverage, coverage thats whats important. When I need my phone to make
> a call, I need to make a call.
>
> I don't care if its got a camera, a PDA, games, etc. NONE of that matters if I
> CAN NOT MAKE a call.
>
> Coverage will beat "cool" phones any day.

Amen...................
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <1x5ssfaeh7upd$.joap87fu0x68.dlg@40tude.net>,
Traveling Man <> wrote:
>On Wed, 19 May 2004 12:49:55 -0400, xxnonexnonexx@tampascanner.info wrote:
>> I don't care if its got a camera, a PDA, games, etc. NONE of that matters if I
>> CAN NOT MAKE a call.
>>
>> Coverage will beat "cool" phones any day.

I have this vision of a person with one of those fancy phones stuck in
the desert. While they are dying of thirst because their phone cannot
complete a call to 911, they can take pictures of themselves for their
family to remember them by, and play games while waiting to die.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I live on Long Island, NY and just switched to VZW from ATTWS. The
coverage is different, but no better. The dropped calls just occur in
different places.


On Wed, 19 May 2004 19:02:16 -0700, "😛" <nugroove~@excite.com> wrote:

>I agree. After playing witrh gadgets for the first month or so all I do is
>make calls.
>I've work for both companies. I can personally tell you the AT&T Wireless is
>messed up. I still have friends that work there that will take any
>opportunity to flee that place.
>
><xxnonexnonexx@tampascanner.info> wrote in message
>news:va3na0d9su57d09npl3nbnddn5ugppu5t0@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 19 May 2004 02:58:10 GMT, "Eric" <ceric20@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Everyones got there own oppions on the cellular company they pick. I
>> >recently went from Verizon where i had them for 5 years to ATT and i got
>to
>> >tell ya i love ATT. I got a cool new phone with bluetooth. Verizon is a
>> >good company there coverge is great i will give them that but when it
>comes
>> >down to them getting new phones they are behind the times. Verizon in my
>> >own oppion has no good phones.
>>
>> Coverage, coverage, coverage thats whats important. When I need my phone
>to make
>> a call, I need to make a call.
>>
>> I don't care if its got a camera, a PDA, games, etc. NONE of that matters
>if I
>> CAN NOT MAKE a call.
>>
>> Coverage will beat "cool" phones any day.
>>
>>
>>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Although you might like to think so, Long Island, NY is not the whole
country



"Paul Diggs" <pdiggs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:8fqdc0tgoomjcun3frpul7g1o2003035dh@4ax.com...
> I live on Long Island, NY and just switched to VZW from ATTWS. The
> coverage is different, but no better. The dropped calls just occur in
> different places.
>
>
> On Wed, 19 May 2004 19:02:16 -0700, "😛" <nugroove~@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >I agree. After playing witrh gadgets for the first month or so all I do
is
> >make calls.
> >I've work for both companies. I can personally tell you the AT&T Wireless
is
> >messed up. I still have friends that work there that will take any
> >opportunity to flee that place.
> >
> ><xxnonexnonexx@tampascanner.info> wrote in message
> >news:va3na0d9su57d09npl3nbnddn5ugppu5t0@4ax.com...
> >> On Wed, 19 May 2004 02:58:10 GMT, "Eric" <ceric20@frontiernet.net>
wrote:
> >>
> >> >Everyones got there own oppions on the cellular company they pick. I
> >> >recently went from Verizon where i had them for 5 years to ATT and i
got
> >to
> >> >tell ya i love ATT. I got a cool new phone with bluetooth. Verizon is
a
> >> >good company there coverge is great i will give them that but when it
> >comes
> >> >down to them getting new phones they are behind the times. Verizon in
my
> >> >own oppion has no good phones.
> >>
> >> Coverage, coverage, coverage thats whats important. When I need my
phone
> >to make
> >> a call, I need to make a call.
> >>
> >> I don't care if its got a camera, a PDA, games, etc. NONE of that
matters
> >if I
> >> CAN NOT MAKE a call.
> >>
> >> Coverage will beat "cool" phones any day.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I want my cell phone to work where I want to use it.

If a cell phone company had service everywhere in the universe "EXCEPT"
where you wanted to use it - Would it still be a great cell phone company to
you?


"AceMechanic" <AVEM@ikuuygd.com> wrote in message
news:NgDxc.1491$IO.1085338@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> Although you might like to think so, Long Island, NY is not the whole
> country
>
>
>
> "Paul Diggs" <pdiggs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:8fqdc0tgoomjcun3frpul7g1o2003035dh@4ax.com...
> > I live on Long Island, NY and just switched to VZW from ATTWS. The
> > coverage is different, but no better. The dropped calls just occur in
> > different places.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 19 May 2004 19:02:16 -0700, "😛" <nugroove~@excite.com> wrote:
> >
> > >I agree. After playing witrh gadgets for the first month or so all I do
> is
> > >make calls.
> > >I've work for both companies. I can personally tell you the AT&T
Wireless
> is
> > >messed up. I still have friends that work there that will take any
> > >opportunity to flee that place.
> > >
> > ><xxnonexnonexx@tampascanner.info> wrote in message
> > >news:va3na0d9su57d09npl3nbnddn5ugppu5t0@4ax.com...
> > >> On Wed, 19 May 2004 02:58:10 GMT, "Eric" <ceric20@frontiernet.net>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >Everyones got there own oppions on the cellular company they pick. I
> > >> >recently went from Verizon where i had them for 5 years to ATT and i
> got
> > >to
> > >> >tell ya i love ATT. I got a cool new phone with bluetooth. Verizon
is
> a
> > >> >good company there coverge is great i will give them that but when
it
> > >comes
> > >> >down to them getting new phones they are behind the times. Verizon
in
> my
> > >> >own oppion has no good phones.
> > >>
> > >> Coverage, coverage, coverage thats whats important. When I need my
> phone
> > >to make
> > >> a call, I need to make a call.
> > >>
> > >> I don't care if its got a camera, a PDA, games, etc. NONE of that
> matters
> > >if I
> > >> CAN NOT MAKE a call.
> > >>
> > >> Coverage will beat "cool" phones any day.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Get a grip dude, your a liar. You want something way cheap and don't give a
dang about service. If you REALLY wanted service from anywhere, you'd have a
sat phone that works from almost anywhere in the world, but costs a whole
bunch more per minute than a cell.

If you are gonna bitch, at least be honest and say you are cheap. :)

"IMHO" <imho@net.net> wrote in message
news:LaQxc.31436$%T.8243@okepread05
> I want my cell phone to work where I want to use it.
>
> If a cell phone company had service everywhere in the universe
> "EXCEPT" where you wanted to use it - Would it still be a great cell
> phone company to you?
>
>
> "AceMechanic" <AVEM@ikuuygd.com> wrote in message
> news:NgDxc.1491$IO.1085338@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
>> Although you might like to think so, Long Island, NY is not the whole
>> country
>>
>>
>>
>> "Paul Diggs" <pdiggs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>> news:8fqdc0tgoomjcun3frpul7g1o2003035dh@4ax.com...
>>> I live on Long Island, NY and just switched to VZW from ATTWS. The
>>> coverage is different, but no better. The dropped calls just occur
>>> in different places.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 19 May 2004 19:02:16 -0700, "😛" <nugroove~@excite.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree. After playing witrh gadgets for the first month or so all
>>>> I do is make calls.
>>>> I've work for both companies. I can personally tell you the AT&T
>>>> Wireless is messed up. I still have friends that work there that
>>>> will take any opportunity to flee that place.
>>>>
>>>> <xxnonexnonexx@tampascanner.info> wrote in message
>>>> news:va3na0d9su57d09npl3nbnddn5ugppu5t0@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 19 May 2004 02:58:10 GMT, "Eric"
>>>>> <ceric20@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Everyones got there own oppions on the cellular company they
>>>>>> pick. I recently went from Verizon where i had them for 5 years
>>>>>> to ATT and i got to tell ya i love ATT. I got a cool new phone
>>>>>> with bluetooth. Verizon is a good company there coverge is great
>>>>>> i will give them that but when it comes down to them getting
>>>>>> new phones they are behind the times. Verizon in my own oppion
>>>>>> has no good phones.
>>>>>
>>>>> Coverage, coverage, coverage thats whats important. When I need
>>>>> my phone to make a call, I need to make a call.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't care if its got a camera, a PDA, games, etc. NONE of that
>>>>> matters if I CAN NOT MAKE a call.
>>>>>
>>>>> Coverage will beat "cool" phones any day.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 10:39:07 GMT, Paul Diggs wrote:

> I live on Long Island, NY and just switched to VZW from ATTWS. The
> coverage is different, but no better. The dropped calls just occur in
> different places.

Yep. You are using a RADIO system. Different towers will give different
coverage.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Yes, I am so cheap that my wife & I have VZW phones.
The reason we have VZW phones is that they work the best where we live, work
& travel.
It does not really matter what kind of coverage there is everywhere else in
the world.
What I want is service where I live, work & travel - that is MY WORLD.
Good service where I never go & BAD/NO service where I do go does me no
good.

"Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2iqjnnFn9b3bU1@uni-berlin.de...
> Get a grip dude, your a liar. You want something way cheap and don't give
a
> dang about service. If you REALLY wanted service from anywhere, you'd have
a
> sat phone that works from almost anywhere in the world, but costs a whole
> bunch more per minute than a cell.
>
> If you are gonna bitch, at least be honest and say you are cheap. :)
>
> "IMHO" <imho@net.net> wrote in message
> news:LaQxc.31436$%T.8243@okepread05
> > I want my cell phone to work where I want to use it.
> >
> > If a cell phone company had service everywhere in the universe
> > "EXCEPT" where you wanted to use it - Would it still be a great cell
> > phone company to you?
> >
> >
> > "AceMechanic" <AVEM@ikuuygd.com> wrote in message
> > news:NgDxc.1491$IO.1085338@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> >> Although you might like to think so, Long Island, NY is not the whole
> >> country
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Paul Diggs" <pdiggs@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> >> news:8fqdc0tgoomjcun3frpul7g1o2003035dh@4ax.com...
> >>> I live on Long Island, NY and just switched to VZW from ATTWS. The
> >>> coverage is different, but no better. The dropped calls just occur
> >>> in different places.
<SNIP>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom