SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (50756)3/17/2002 3:05:40 PM
From: mightylakers  Read Replies (2) of 54805
 
Here is an old article about the study of overall voice quality among different technologies.

mobilecomputing.com

As a lot may already knows, I'm a CDMA supporter but I always tried to keep an objective views of which is better. So from what I understand about the wireless technology. CDMA is clearly the superior technology compare to TDMA/GSM from academic point of view.

Of course I know a lot will say yeah in theory. So let me give your my own personal experience.

I have a lot of friends using Cingular, Sprint and Verizon. Oddly enough I have none using AWE, so I would say I can't say anything about them as far as real life experience concerns.

1) Cingular. Bad service, bad voice quality and above average coverage.

I have a lot of friends using Cingular/PacBell. The most common problem they have is getting all circuits busy, esp. during the weekend, I rarely can dial them through at the first couple tries. The voice quality is bad, with a lot of background noise and distorted choppy sounds. Just this Friday night, another friend of mine showed me his Cingular phone, and it displayed "SOS call only", that is another way the Cingular keeps people away from calling when all lines are taken.

That is why I think that article saying Cingular has great this and that is a big joke, well maybe Cingular has better service somewhere else but I challenge anyone saying so in Southern California.

2) Sprint. Marginal Service, good voice quality and bad coverage.

Among all my friends who are using Sprint(including myself), the consensus is that the voice quality is real good, as long as you are in the coverage. They have good fancy phones, they have some interesting gadgets but the bottom line is the coverage sux. There are a lot of dead spots at my home and surrounding area. There can be a lot of dropped calls when you are moving around.

Granted I know that Sprint built everything from ground up, so they don't have the advantages of installation base. However that's not what the customer cares. In the past Sprint offered very cheap plans with the "National Plans", however that gap is closing in by the competitor like Verizon, so if Sprint can't get their act together then I see it will lose in a long run.

3) Verizon, Good voice quality, good Coverage and so so service.

I have another phone with verizon. The coverage is excellent and the sound quality is real good. I almost never had dropped calls. The signal appears to be forever strong other than some real tough spots. The service is so so, not too good and not too bad. They have screwed up a couple times with my bill but overall no harm no foul.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext