1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

ATT vs. Verizon - ATT Rant!

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by * * Chas, Jun 17, 2004.

  1. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     



    › See More: ATT vs. Verizon - ATT Rant!
  2. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  3. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  4. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  5. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  6. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  7. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  8. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  9. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  10. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  11. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  12. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  13. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  14. * * Chas

    * * Chas Guest

    "Alesandra" <rubyebbyrdNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2jf280F10l8b2U1@uni-berlin.de...
    > An interesting rant. 4 phones seems a bit much, but my

    partner carries
    > ATTWS and Verizon just to balance low cost time versus

    increased coverage.
    > I get fair ATTWS Digital (TDMA) coverage in Los Angeles,

    and really poor
    > voice quality in San Francisco, Sonoma and today in

    Carmel. I uneasy about
    > ATTWS GSM, and we've had serious trouble with Cingular and

    Sprint in the
    > past.
    >
    > I share you concerns. All I want is a company with good

    customer service
    > and reliable signal. There's one phone I can use Verizon

    and Globalstar on.
    > And Globalstar rates are hi but affordable in the US.

    Ever think of that
    > versus 4 phones?


    "Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    AT&T accounts...."

    That was before AT&T introduced their "One Rate" coast to
    coast no roaming charge service in 1999. I switched to the
    One Rate plan and it was a big improvement over what was
    available at the time.

    The absolute worst coverage is down in San Diego. I was
    doing some consulting with a company down there a few years
    ago. We tried ALL of the service providers in the market.
    Nextel was the worst! We had 3-4 different phones in the car
    to try them out. We couldn't get a good connection on any of
    them on the I-5 in downtown SD!

    When I was in LA a few months ago, a radio commentator was
    talking about LA ranking 571st in connection quality among
    cellular market areas in the US. The service along the 210
    between I-5 and the 215 really sucks!

    The folks using Verizon in the Bay Area seem to have a
    little better reception than with some of the other
    providers.

    The best coverage I ever had was with Cellular1 analog with
    a Fujitsu 3 Watt phone. It worked perfectly throughout most
    of California. Uninterrupted coverage from SF to Reno except
    for a few miles in Truckee Canyon!

    One thing that I found is that I usually have been able to
    get better plans when I call and bitch about the service.
    I'm up to 3200 minutes for $199.95 but when I can use the
    time because of bad connections, it doesn't do me much good!
    --
    Chas. verktyg@aol.spamski.com (Drop spamski to E-mail
    me)
     
  15. That's pathetic. The most populated areas (East coast and West) AT&T seems a
    bit rough. You'd think those areas would be worked on first and taken care
    of.

    "* * Chas" <dnafutz@aol.spam.com> wrote in message
    news:YNrAc.74193$Hh1.59769@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
    > "Jack Hamilton" <jfh@acm.org> wrote in message
    > news:iq92d0t6quqfkq1ev3dj55bg6kh6l9sg66@4ax.com...
    > > "Dan Albrich" <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:

    > <snip>
    >
    > I travel all over the US and up into Canada. I'm on the road
    > about 2-3 weeks a month.
    >
    > I've had AT&T Cellular in one form or another since 1996.
    > Back in the late 80's and early 90's my Cellular phone bills
    > used to be around $1000 a month.
    >
    > Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    > AT&T accounts to avoid heavy roaming charges on the West
    > Coast: one for Nevada, one for Oregon, one for Washington
    > plus Cellular1 for California. (Cellular1 was always
    > partially owned by AT&T)
    >
    > I live in the Bay Area with a clear view of downtown Oakland
    > and San Francisco. AT&T goes to ROAM while I'm sitting at my
    > desk. I loose up to 25% - 30% of my connections at home.
    > AT&T service is even worse in Southern CA.
    >
    > AT&T coverage sucks throughout most of the West Coast, same
    > thing for the East Coast. The coverage in the middle of the
    > country is generally pretty good.
    >
    > I have several Nokia 6160 phones. They work great in other
    > parts of the US and Canada so it's probably not my phones.
    >
    > The lame excuse I've heard for the poor service in
    > California is because of all of the hills! BS! When I go to
    > Pittsburgh, PA where there are many more hills in the urban
    > area the service is great!
    >
    > When I'm in the middle of Indiana or Illinois, people ask me
    > what service I have because "Nobody's phones work out
    > here.".
    >
    > The quality of AT&T's coverage in California has been
    > quickly deteriorating and it seems to be going south all
    > over the country. My guess is that they are not doing any
    > maintenance on their system pending the Cingular takeover.
    >
    > My current AT&T contract is about to expire so I started
    > check out other carriers. Verizon has the best over all
    > rating followed closely by Cingular; AT&T used to have that
    > tittle. Sprint is perennially at the bottom of the list but
    > AT&T is close on it's heals.
    >
    > I was about to switch to Cingular and did some home work on
    > them. They are taking over AT&T - eventually.
    >
    > But.... I read in a financial report that Cingular is going
    > to spin off their East Coast and West Coast systems and
    > going to adopt the old AT&T systems. If that is the case,
    > then they are going to inherit the same weaknesses that are
    > plaguing AT&T.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
  16. That's pathetic. The most populated areas (East coast and West) AT&T seems a
    bit rough. You'd think those areas would be worked on first and taken care
    of.

    "* * Chas" <dnafutz@aol.spam.com> wrote in message
    news:YNrAc.74193$Hh1.59769@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
    > "Jack Hamilton" <jfh@acm.org> wrote in message
    > news:iq92d0t6quqfkq1ev3dj55bg6kh6l9sg66@4ax.com...
    > > "Dan Albrich" <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:

    > <snip>
    >
    > I travel all over the US and up into Canada. I'm on the road
    > about 2-3 weeks a month.
    >
    > I've had AT&T Cellular in one form or another since 1996.
    > Back in the late 80's and early 90's my Cellular phone bills
    > used to be around $1000 a month.
    >
    > Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    > AT&T accounts to avoid heavy roaming charges on the West
    > Coast: one for Nevada, one for Oregon, one for Washington
    > plus Cellular1 for California. (Cellular1 was always
    > partially owned by AT&T)
    >
    > I live in the Bay Area with a clear view of downtown Oakland
    > and San Francisco. AT&T goes to ROAM while I'm sitting at my
    > desk. I loose up to 25% - 30% of my connections at home.
    > AT&T service is even worse in Southern CA.
    >
    > AT&T coverage sucks throughout most of the West Coast, same
    > thing for the East Coast. The coverage in the middle of the
    > country is generally pretty good.
    >
    > I have several Nokia 6160 phones. They work great in other
    > parts of the US and Canada so it's probably not my phones.
    >
    > The lame excuse I've heard for the poor service in
    > California is because of all of the hills! BS! When I go to
    > Pittsburgh, PA where there are many more hills in the urban
    > area the service is great!
    >
    > When I'm in the middle of Indiana or Illinois, people ask me
    > what service I have because "Nobody's phones work out
    > here.".
    >
    > The quality of AT&T's coverage in California has been
    > quickly deteriorating and it seems to be going south all
    > over the country. My guess is that they are not doing any
    > maintenance on their system pending the Cingular takeover.
    >
    > My current AT&T contract is about to expire so I started
    > check out other carriers. Verizon has the best over all
    > rating followed closely by Cingular; AT&T used to have that
    > tittle. Sprint is perennially at the bottom of the list but
    > AT&T is close on it's heals.
    >
    > I was about to switch to Cingular and did some home work on
    > them. They are taking over AT&T - eventually.
    >
    > But.... I read in a financial report that Cingular is going
    > to spin off their East Coast and West Coast systems and
    > going to adopt the old AT&T systems. If that is the case,
    > then they are going to inherit the same weaknesses that are
    > plaguing AT&T.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
  17. That's pathetic. The most populated areas (East coast and West) AT&T seems a
    bit rough. You'd think those areas would be worked on first and taken care
    of.

    "* * Chas" <dnafutz@aol.spam.com> wrote in message
    news:YNrAc.74193$Hh1.59769@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
    > "Jack Hamilton" <jfh@acm.org> wrote in message
    > news:iq92d0t6quqfkq1ev3dj55bg6kh6l9sg66@4ax.com...
    > > "Dan Albrich" <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:

    > <snip>
    >
    > I travel all over the US and up into Canada. I'm on the road
    > about 2-3 weeks a month.
    >
    > I've had AT&T Cellular in one form or another since 1996.
    > Back in the late 80's and early 90's my Cellular phone bills
    > used to be around $1000 a month.
    >
    > Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    > AT&T accounts to avoid heavy roaming charges on the West
    > Coast: one for Nevada, one for Oregon, one for Washington
    > plus Cellular1 for California. (Cellular1 was always
    > partially owned by AT&T)
    >
    > I live in the Bay Area with a clear view of downtown Oakland
    > and San Francisco. AT&T goes to ROAM while I'm sitting at my
    > desk. I loose up to 25% - 30% of my connections at home.
    > AT&T service is even worse in Southern CA.
    >
    > AT&T coverage sucks throughout most of the West Coast, same
    > thing for the East Coast. The coverage in the middle of the
    > country is generally pretty good.
    >
    > I have several Nokia 6160 phones. They work great in other
    > parts of the US and Canada so it's probably not my phones.
    >
    > The lame excuse I've heard for the poor service in
    > California is because of all of the hills! BS! When I go to
    > Pittsburgh, PA where there are many more hills in the urban
    > area the service is great!
    >
    > When I'm in the middle of Indiana or Illinois, people ask me
    > what service I have because "Nobody's phones work out
    > here.".
    >
    > The quality of AT&T's coverage in California has been
    > quickly deteriorating and it seems to be going south all
    > over the country. My guess is that they are not doing any
    > maintenance on their system pending the Cingular takeover.
    >
    > My current AT&T contract is about to expire so I started
    > check out other carriers. Verizon has the best over all
    > rating followed closely by Cingular; AT&T used to have that
    > tittle. Sprint is perennially at the bottom of the list but
    > AT&T is close on it's heals.
    >
    > I was about to switch to Cingular and did some home work on
    > them. They are taking over AT&T - eventually.
    >
    > But.... I read in a financial report that Cingular is going
    > to spin off their East Coast and West Coast systems and
    > going to adopt the old AT&T systems. If that is the case,
    > then they are going to inherit the same weaknesses that are
    > plaguing AT&T.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
  18. That's pathetic. The most populated areas (East coast and West) AT&T seems a
    bit rough. You'd think those areas would be worked on first and taken care
    of.

    "* * Chas" <dnafutz@aol.spam.com> wrote in message
    news:YNrAc.74193$Hh1.59769@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
    > "Jack Hamilton" <jfh@acm.org> wrote in message
    > news:iq92d0t6quqfkq1ev3dj55bg6kh6l9sg66@4ax.com...
    > > "Dan Albrich" <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:

    > <snip>
    >
    > I travel all over the US and up into Canada. I'm on the road
    > about 2-3 weeks a month.
    >
    > I've had AT&T Cellular in one form or another since 1996.
    > Back in the late 80's and early 90's my Cellular phone bills
    > used to be around $1000 a month.
    >
    > Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    > AT&T accounts to avoid heavy roaming charges on the West
    > Coast: one for Nevada, one for Oregon, one for Washington
    > plus Cellular1 for California. (Cellular1 was always
    > partially owned by AT&T)
    >
    > I live in the Bay Area with a clear view of downtown Oakland
    > and San Francisco. AT&T goes to ROAM while I'm sitting at my
    > desk. I loose up to 25% - 30% of my connections at home.
    > AT&T service is even worse in Southern CA.
    >
    > AT&T coverage sucks throughout most of the West Coast, same
    > thing for the East Coast. The coverage in the middle of the
    > country is generally pretty good.
    >
    > I have several Nokia 6160 phones. They work great in other
    > parts of the US and Canada so it's probably not my phones.
    >
    > The lame excuse I've heard for the poor service in
    > California is because of all of the hills! BS! When I go to
    > Pittsburgh, PA where there are many more hills in the urban
    > area the service is great!
    >
    > When I'm in the middle of Indiana or Illinois, people ask me
    > what service I have because "Nobody's phones work out
    > here.".
    >
    > The quality of AT&T's coverage in California has been
    > quickly deteriorating and it seems to be going south all
    > over the country. My guess is that they are not doing any
    > maintenance on their system pending the Cingular takeover.
    >
    > My current AT&T contract is about to expire so I started
    > check out other carriers. Verizon has the best over all
    > rating followed closely by Cingular; AT&T used to have that
    > tittle. Sprint is perennially at the bottom of the list but
    > AT&T is close on it's heals.
    >
    > I was about to switch to Cingular and did some home work on
    > them. They are taking over AT&T - eventually.
    >
    > But.... I read in a financial report that Cingular is going
    > to spin off their East Coast and West Coast systems and
    > going to adopt the old AT&T systems. If that is the case,
    > then they are going to inherit the same weaknesses that are
    > plaguing AT&T.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
  19. That's pathetic. The most populated areas (East coast and West) AT&T seems a
    bit rough. You'd think those areas would be worked on first and taken care
    of.

    "* * Chas" <dnafutz@aol.spam.com> wrote in message
    news:YNrAc.74193$Hh1.59769@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
    > "Jack Hamilton" <jfh@acm.org> wrote in message
    > news:iq92d0t6quqfkq1ev3dj55bg6kh6l9sg66@4ax.com...
    > > "Dan Albrich" <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:

    > <snip>
    >
    > I travel all over the US and up into Canada. I'm on the road
    > about 2-3 weeks a month.
    >
    > I've had AT&T Cellular in one form or another since 1996.
    > Back in the late 80's and early 90's my Cellular phone bills
    > used to be around $1000 a month.
    >
    > Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    > AT&T accounts to avoid heavy roaming charges on the West
    > Coast: one for Nevada, one for Oregon, one for Washington
    > plus Cellular1 for California. (Cellular1 was always
    > partially owned by AT&T)
    >
    > I live in the Bay Area with a clear view of downtown Oakland
    > and San Francisco. AT&T goes to ROAM while I'm sitting at my
    > desk. I loose up to 25% - 30% of my connections at home.
    > AT&T service is even worse in Southern CA.
    >
    > AT&T coverage sucks throughout most of the West Coast, same
    > thing for the East Coast. The coverage in the middle of the
    > country is generally pretty good.
    >
    > I have several Nokia 6160 phones. They work great in other
    > parts of the US and Canada so it's probably not my phones.
    >
    > The lame excuse I've heard for the poor service in
    > California is because of all of the hills! BS! When I go to
    > Pittsburgh, PA where there are many more hills in the urban
    > area the service is great!
    >
    > When I'm in the middle of Indiana or Illinois, people ask me
    > what service I have because "Nobody's phones work out
    > here.".
    >
    > The quality of AT&T's coverage in California has been
    > quickly deteriorating and it seems to be going south all
    > over the country. My guess is that they are not doing any
    > maintenance on their system pending the Cingular takeover.
    >
    > My current AT&T contract is about to expire so I started
    > check out other carriers. Verizon has the best over all
    > rating followed closely by Cingular; AT&T used to have that
    > tittle. Sprint is perennially at the bottom of the list but
    > AT&T is close on it's heals.
    >
    > I was about to switch to Cingular and did some home work on
    > them. They are taking over AT&T - eventually.
    >
    > But.... I read in a financial report that Cingular is going
    > to spin off their East Coast and West Coast systems and
    > going to adopt the old AT&T systems. If that is the case,
    > then they are going to inherit the same weaknesses that are
    > plaguing AT&T.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
  20. That's pathetic. The most populated areas (East coast and West) AT&T seems a
    bit rough. You'd think those areas would be worked on first and taken care
    of.

    "* * Chas" <dnafutz@aol.spam.com> wrote in message
    news:YNrAc.74193$Hh1.59769@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
    > "Jack Hamilton" <jfh@acm.org> wrote in message
    > news:iq92d0t6quqfkq1ev3dj55bg6kh6l9sg66@4ax.com...
    > > "Dan Albrich" <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:

    > <snip>
    >
    > I travel all over the US and up into Canada. I'm on the road
    > about 2-3 weeks a month.
    >
    > I've had AT&T Cellular in one form or another since 1996.
    > Back in the late 80's and early 90's my Cellular phone bills
    > used to be around $1000 a month.
    >
    > Before the advent of AT&T coast to coast service, I had 3
    > AT&T accounts to avoid heavy roaming charges on the West
    > Coast: one for Nevada, one for Oregon, one for Washington
    > plus Cellular1 for California. (Cellular1 was always
    > partially owned by AT&T)
    >
    > I live in the Bay Area with a clear view of downtown Oakland
    > and San Francisco. AT&T goes to ROAM while I'm sitting at my
    > desk. I loose up to 25% - 30% of my connections at home.
    > AT&T service is even worse in Southern CA.
    >
    > AT&T coverage sucks throughout most of the West Coast, same
    > thing for the East Coast. The coverage in the middle of the
    > country is generally pretty good.
    >
    > I have several Nokia 6160 phones. They work great in other
    > parts of the US and Canada so it's probably not my phones.
    >
    > The lame excuse I've heard for the poor service in
    > California is because of all of the hills! BS! When I go to
    > Pittsburgh, PA where there are many more hills in the urban
    > area the service is great!
    >
    > When I'm in the middle of Indiana or Illinois, people ask me
    > what service I have because "Nobody's phones work out
    > here.".
    >
    > The quality of AT&T's coverage in California has been
    > quickly deteriorating and it seems to be going south all
    > over the country. My guess is that they are not doing any
    > maintenance on their system pending the Cingular takeover.
    >
    > My current AT&T contract is about to expire so I started
    > check out other carriers. Verizon has the best over all
    > rating followed closely by Cingular; AT&T used to have that
    > tittle. Sprint is perennially at the bottom of the list but
    > AT&T is close on it's heals.
    >
    > I was about to switch to Cingular and did some home work on
    > them. They are taking over AT&T - eventually.
    >
    > But.... I read in a financial report that Cingular is going
    > to spin off their East Coast and West Coast systems and
    > going to adopt the old AT&T systems. If that is the case,
    > then they are going to inherit the same weaknesses that are
    > plaguing AT&T.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?