New York City Cellular Comparison Web Site launched.

"http://nyccell.com"

The feedback to the Northern and California Cellular
Carrier Comparison web sites has been very positive.
These sites have have been dispassionate information
to cellular subscribers and potential subscribers in
California (and nationwide actually).

This lastest site was a challenge as I am 3000 miles
away, but I received a lot of assistance from people
back east who suggested that I do a New York City
version.

New York City is a little bit strange when it comes to
selecting the best carrier. AT&T and Verizon both have
very good coverage, but the AT&T TDMA network is very
congested, resulting in lower coverage scores for AT&T
than expected. AT&T GSM is not congested since not a
lot of subscribers have switched over yet. T-Mobile and
Cingular (who share network infrastructure) also have
capacity issues, in fact Sprint, Verizon, and Nextel
are the only carriers not suffering from capacity issues.

Please e-mail me if you see any errors or omissions, or
if you have a suggestion or even (gasp) a complaint. I
always get of e-mail in the first couple of weeks that
a new site launches, so don't be too concerned if the
changes and corrections take a few days to get onto the
site.

Steve
nyccellexpert@mailxhot.com (change domain to hotmail.com)
(insert the word "cellular" somewhere in the subject to get
through the spam filters).

Other Sites
-----------
http://sfbacell.com
http://socalcell.com
http://earthroam.com

"NYCCellExpert" <nyccellexpert@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c114a1db.0308122126.35e882f@posting.google.co m...
> New York City Cellular Comparison Web Site launched.
>
> "http://nyccell.com"
>
> The feedback to the Northern and California Cellular
> Carrier Comparison web sites has been very positive.
> These sites have have been dispassionate information
> to cellular subscribers and potential subscribers in
> California (and nationwide actually).
>
> This lastest site was a challenge as I am 3000 miles
> away, but I received a lot of assistance from people
> back east who suggested that I do a New York City
> version.
>
> New York City is a little bit strange when it comes to
> selecting the best carrier. AT&T and Verizon both have
> very good coverage, but the AT&T TDMA network is very
> congested, resulting in lower coverage scores for AT&T
> than expected. AT&T GSM is not congested since not a
> lot of subscribers have switched over yet. T-Mobile and
> Cingular (who share network infrastructure) also have
> capacity issues, in fact Sprint, Verizon, and Nextel
> are the only carriers not suffering from capacity issues.
>
> Please e-mail me if you see any errors or omissions, or
> if you have a suggestion or even (gasp) a complaint. I
> always get of e-mail in the first couple of weeks that
> a new site launches, so don't be too concerned if the
> changes and corrections take a few days to get onto the
> site.
>
> Steve
> nyccellexpert@mailxhot.com (change domain to hotmail.com)
> (insert the word "cellular" somewhere in the subject to get
> through the spam filters).
>
> Other Sites
> -----------
> http://sfbacell.com
> http://socalcell.com
> http://earthroam.com

"NYCCellExpert" <nyccellexpert@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c114a1db.0308122126.35e882f@posting.google.co m...
> New York City Cellular Comparison Web Site launched.
>
> "http://nyccell.com"
>
> The feedback to the Northern and California Cellular
> Carrier Comparison web sites has been very positive.
> These sites have have been dispassionate information
> to cellular subscribers and potential subscribers in
> California (and nationwide actually).
>
> This lastest site was a challenge as I am 3000 miles
> away, but I received a lot of assistance from people
> back east who suggested that I do a New York City
> version.
>
> New York City is a little bit strange when it comes to
> selecting the best carrier. AT&T and Verizon both have
> very good coverage, but the AT&T TDMA network is very
> congested, resulting in lower coverage scores for AT&T
> than expected. AT&T GSM is not congested since not a
> lot of subscribers have switched over yet. T-Mobile and
> Cingular (who share network infrastructure) also have
> capacity issues, in fact Sprint, Verizon, and Nextel
> are the only carriers not suffering from capacity issues.
>
> Please e-mail me if you see any errors or omissions, or
> if you have a suggestion or even (gasp) a complaint. I
> always get of e-mail in the first couple of weeks that
> a new site launches, so don't be too concerned if the
> changes and corrections take a few days to get onto the
> site.
>
> Steve
> nyccellexpert@mailxhot.com (change domain to hotmail.com)
> (insert the word "cellular" somewhere in the subject to get
> through the spam filters).
>
> Other Sites
> -----------
> http://sfbacell.com
> http://socalcell.com
> http://earthroam.com

"NYCCellExpert" <nyccellexpert@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c114a1db.0308122130.74595b02@posting.google.c om...
> New York City Cellular Comparison Web Site launched.
>
> "http://nyccell.com"
>
> These sites have have been dispassionate information

Oops, s.b.
These sites have have been providing dispassionate information

"NYCCellExpert" <nyccellexpert@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c114a1db.0308122130.74595b02@posting.google.c om...
> New York City Cellular Comparison Web Site launched.
>
> "http://nyccell.com"
>
> These sites have have been dispassionate information

Oops, s.b.
These sites have have been providing dispassionate information

In article <c114a1db.0308122126.35e882f@posting.google.com> ,
NYCCellExpert <nyccellexpert@hotmail.com> wrote:
>New York City Cellular Comparison Web Site launched.
>
> "http://nyccell.com"

Look, I am getting really sick of you representing yourself as an
expert on cell issues. Your sites are heavily weighted toward Verizon and
you fail to mention that Verizon has sub-par voice quality when riding on
their CDMA towers. It sounds warbly and has gotten worse since they
implemented the variable bit rate vocoder. Despite the fact CDMA is more
spectrally efficient than GSM or "TDMA" (both using TDMA as an air
interface), GSM sounds identical to a landline. In your sites, you don't
make enough mention of the differences in voice quality between GSM and
CDMA. It isn't a little -- it's a lot.

I would much rather see Qualcomm, a US based company with a fantastic
technology, win the standards wars, but not by lying about their weakest
point which is the shitty vocoder they use. We aren't doing ourselves a
favor by defending CDMA when it has such an obvious deficiency: its voice
quality. Why are you acting as a shill for Verizon and not being more
objective? Voice quality is not a minor thing when you spend several
hours a day on the phone. Even if GSM was forced by governments on the
nations of Europe which runs counter to my own market beliefs, I think it
is only fair and right that CDMA supporters admit that the vocoder needs
massive improvement.

For those who don't think CDMA sounds that bad, then I highly suggest
you take your CDMA phone to a T-Mobile store and make a call on your
Verizon or Sprint CDMA phone to "time and temperature" and then make the
same call on a T-Mobile (or ATT or Cingular) GSM phone. I think you will
agree that the voice quality is much clearer. It's like the difference
between the first digital cameras and 6 megapixel. The clarity is
distinctive and worth changing services if you spend a lot of time on the
phone.

RDT
--
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the
inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
--- Sir Winston Churchill

In article <c114a1db.0308122126.35e882f@posting.google.com> ,
NYCCellExpert <nyccellexpert@hotmail.com> wrote:
>New York City Cellular Comparison Web Site launched.
>
> "http://nyccell.com"

Look, I am getting really sick of you representing yourself as an
expert on cell issues. Your sites are heavily weighted toward Verizon and
you fail to mention that Verizon has sub-par voice quality when riding on
their CDMA towers. It sounds warbly and has gotten worse since they
implemented the variable bit rate vocoder. Despite the fact CDMA is more
spectrally efficient than GSM or "TDMA" (both using TDMA as an air
interface), GSM sounds identical to a landline. In your sites, you don't
make enough mention of the differences in voice quality between GSM and
CDMA. It isn't a little -- it's a lot.

I would much rather see Qualcomm, a US based company with a fantastic
technology, win the standards wars, but not by lying about their weakest
point which is the shitty vocoder they use. We aren't doing ourselves a
favor by defending CDMA when it has such an obvious deficiency: its voice
quality. Why are you acting as a shill for Verizon and not being more
objective? Voice quality is not a minor thing when you spend several
hours a day on the phone. Even if GSM was forced by governments on the
nations of Europe which runs counter to my own market beliefs, I think it
is only fair and right that CDMA supporters admit that the vocoder needs
massive improvement.

For those who don't think CDMA sounds that bad, then I highly suggest
you take your CDMA phone to a T-Mobile store and make a call on your
Verizon or Sprint CDMA phone to "time and temperature" and then make the
same call on a T-Mobile (or ATT or Cingular) GSM phone. I think you will
agree that the voice quality is much clearer. It's like the difference
between the first digital cameras and 6 megapixel. The clarity is
distinctive and worth changing services if you spend a lot of time on the
phone.

RDT
--
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the
inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
--- Sir Winston Churchill

It confirms what some of us have known for years... Verizon is
unquestionably the best, in both system availability and audio
quality.

I started off back in 1996 with Cellular One (now ATT) and was very
disenchanted with the service. People calling (in) to my phone could
almost never get through and I often had to push 'Send' multiple times
to make an outgoing call. From what people tell me, it's not much
different today. I switched to Verizon (then Bell Atlantic) and it was
like night & day. The calling plans are on the average about $10 more
than their competitors for comparable services, but you get what you
pay for.

A_C



>Best Carrier for New York City?
>Cutting to the chase, for those who have no time or interest to peruse this site, here is the best carrier
>for New York City:
>
>Verizon Wireless has the best nationwide coverage, the best nationwide roaming plans,
>AMPS analog service for rural areas that have no digital service on any carrier. Verizon
>is also a little more expensive than the other carriers. There is very little international
>roaming available on Verizon since most of Europe and Asia are not CDMA, but the
>GSM carriers provide international roaming at the expense of local and national
>coverage. Verizon does not have the best selection of handsets, but their are sufficient
>choices. Verizon and Nextel are the only carrier that have local landline phone numbers
>to access your voicemail (though Verizon does not publicize them,
>see http://www.bridog.net/cellular/voicemail.txt).

It confirms what some of us have known for years... Verizon is
unquestionably the best, in both system availability and audio
quality.

I started off back in 1996 with Cellular One (now ATT) and was very
disenchanted with the service. People calling (in) to my phone could
almost never get through and I often had to push 'Send' multiple times
to make an outgoing call. From what people tell me, it's not much
different today. I switched to Verizon (then Bell Atlantic) and it was
like night & day. The calling plans are on the average about $10 more
than their competitors for comparable services, but you get what you
pay for.

A_C



>Best Carrier for New York City?
>Cutting to the chase, for those who have no time or interest to peruse this site, here is the best carrier
>for New York City:
>
>Verizon Wireless has the best nationwide coverage, the best nationwide roaming plans,
>AMPS analog service for rural areas that have no digital service on any carrier. Verizon
>is also a little more expensive than the other carriers. There is very little international
>roaming available on Verizon since most of Europe and Asia are not CDMA, but the
>GSM carriers provide international roaming at the expense of local and national
>coverage. Verizon does not have the best selection of handsets, but their are sufficient
>choices. Verizon and Nextel are the only carrier that have local landline phone numbers
>to access your voicemail (though Verizon does not publicize them,
>see http://www.bridog.net/cellular/voicemail.txt).

With all other things equal I have not see a great difference (good or
bad) among GSM, TDMA (including iDEN), and CDMA voice quality.

Now, a specific handset, carrier, market, or physical loc. can make a
huge difference. And, if you overload CDMA it will suck but that is a
QOS issue that the carrier decides on (poor voice quality vs. blocking
calls) not an issue with the CDMA air interface.

-D

taite@panix.com ("RDT") wrote in message news:<bhd2bb$c9q$1@panix2.panix.com>...
> In article <c114a1db.0308122126.35e882f@posting.google.com> ,
> NYCCellExpert <nyccellexpert@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >New York City Cellular Comparison Web Site launched.
> >
> > "http://nyccell.com"
>
> Look, I am getting really sick of you representing yourself as an
> expert on cell issues. Your sites are heavily weighted toward Verizon and
> you fail to mention that Verizon has sub-par voice quality when riding on
> their CDMA towers. It sounds warbly and has gotten worse since they
> implemented the variable bit rate vocoder. Despite the fact CDMA is more
> spectrally efficient than GSM or "TDMA" (both using TDMA as an air
> interface), GSM sounds identical to a landline. In your sites, you don't
> make enough mention of the differences in voice quality between GSM and
> CDMA. It isn't a little -- it's a lot.