NEWS: Cingular claims US first with HSDPA handset

Cingular can CLAIM and PROMISE the moon!

And doubt they will deliver on time, the rated speed or even at all.

Cingular is PRO at worthless public "Fluff". If they follow true to form, it will be released 2 years late, in a few major cities and backed up with tons of bullshit techno-babble as to why it supposedly works...but doesnt at YOUR house...

Meanwhile..Verizon is here NOW....it works NOW...it's coast to coast NOW... NO promises, no Cingular bullshit...

Problem with LG brand phones is the radio sucks. LG needs to get the main function down (a radio that can reach a tower and hear a tower clearly) and then start adding gee whiz functions.

Seems like the phone makers have forgotten the critical function of their products, a relaible sensitive radio first everything else second. Motorola used to have great radios, then the Razr line came along and the quality of the radio fell to average at best.

Don't understand why the phone companies don't get after the phone makers on that issue, a bad radio makes their network seem bad.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

Verizon only works 'fast' in the major cities (Atlanta, Vegas, Dallas etc) it is like a bottom tier DSL in the third tier cities and non-existant in small towns. (talking data) No signal at all in Pacolet Mills, SC, but oddly my cell phone can find a digital tower to tell me I have voice mail etc as well as make and receive voice calls from the Hardees in the center of town. Go figure...

Note people on Cingular ask to borrow my Verizon phone when we are in Pacolet Mills -- the town wired phones are you guessed it BellSouth.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

Having visited Korea many times, (and having rented LG phones because I was always there to go to LG), I think the reason for the performance issues of their phones is that they design them for areas with a much better infrastructure of towers. Europe and Asia have a lot better wireless coverage than the U.S., and the radios don't have to be as good to "reach a tower."

I never had a problem with LG CDMA phones in Korea, but in the U.S. their phones were never as good as the Motorola CDMA phones.

Of course it is easy to have a lot of infrastrure in S Korea, it has a land mass less then California...

But you do have a point to some degree. I'd like better coverage but admit to being two faced about it, I don't really want a lot more eyesores err towers on the tops of the ridges in the mountains. Still how hard is it to build a better radio, as I said Motorola used to do it.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

In alt.internet.wireless Rico wrote: | In article , SMS wrote: |>Rico wrote: |>

|>> Problem with LG brand phones is the radio sucks. LG needs to get the main |>> function down (a radio that can reach a tower and hear a tower clearly) and |>> then start adding gee whiz functions. |>> |>> Seems like the phone makers have forgotten the critical function of their |>> products, a relaible sensitive radio first everything else second. Motorola |>> used to have great radios, then the Razr line came along and the quality of |>> the radio fell to average at best. |>> |>> Don't understand why the phone companies don't get after the phone makers |>> on that issue, a bad radio makes their network seem bad. |>

|>Having visited Korea many times, (and having rented LG phones because I |>was always there to go to LG), I think the reason for the performance |>issues of their phones is that they design them for areas with a much |>better infrastructure of towers. Europe and Asia have a lot better |>wireless coverage than the U.S., and the radios don't have to be as good |>to "reach a tower." |>

|>I never had a problem with LG CDMA phones in Korea, but in the U.S. |>their phones were never as good as the Motorola CDMA phones. | | Of course it is easy to have a lot of infrastrure in S Korea, it has a land | mass less then California...

How about having a lot of infrastructure in Rhode Island?

Of course if it's an issue of making the infrastructure be as large as people travel to, you need to also include Las Vegas for Californians.

| But you do have a point to some degree. I'd like better coverage but admit | to being two faced about it, I don't really want a lot more eyesores err | towers on the tops of the ridges in the mountains. Still how hard is it to | build a better radio, as I said Motorola used to do it.

But better is totally inconsistent with today's extreme hyper short term market growth investment strategies. See where Motorola is today.

It's also comes preloaded CRIPPLED! Got mine yesterday, and today I learned that the CU500 (unlike the CU320), will force the user to confirm each and every HTTP connection initiated by a Java applet (at least, applets not blessed by Cingular). Big deal, you say? Try using google maps:

I pay $100/month so Cingular can pull stupid stunts like this!? (Literally every connection; not just every instantiation of the applet.)

I've been waiting for this phone for months, now I'm regretting not having gone w/ Sprint.

And they wonder why the public doesn't jump all over these new wireless technologies they add to the phones. (answer all monopolies are run by the marketing brain dead) Cingular isn't a monoploy he says, well AT&T which owns cingular is a monopoly for the local loop in all areas it services. Where are the real trust busters when we need them?

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

AT&T is a monopoly in nothing [OK, you are partly right, the local loop for customers without alternatives means they are a local monopoly]. A large percentage of customers in AT&T's area can use Cable for phone, broadband or Internet. They also have an option to use DBS for TV and Internet [the latter being pretty marginal] and they also have the option for using cell phones rather than a land line. No, they are not a monopoly.

Yes and Verizon is cancelling people's data accounts at an alarming rate for doing things such as streaming video and music and anything else that goes against their policy of ONLY using EV-DO to email and surf the web. Why people use Verizon as an example compared to Cingular is beyond me. Not surprisingly, Verizon is against 3G routers whereas Sprint and Cingular actually embrace it and have worked with companies such as Junxion and others. I'm using HSDPA and have for a while and there is no comparison but if you must use EV-DO, Sprint's policy is that you do not run a server with public access over the EV-DO link.

Dave

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 05:08:44 -0700, David W Studeman wrote in :

Sadly, a few here are so consumed by personal vendettas against Cingular that facts don't matter.

HSDPA is indeed very good.

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:55:33 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote in :

Even with regard to the local loop, since ready alternatives exist, and since other competitors are free to run their own local loops.

Ever try to call the fire department using your Direct TV box, they'll show up in time to save the chimney. There is no choice for the consumer. I know you are brain washed into thinking cable = choice, it does not, you are just trading one monopoy for another. This is why the fight over net neutrality is so critical, because as a consumer you in fact have very few to no choices about the wire into your home.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

I don't know what country you live in John but in the entire USA there are three wire options into people's homes, the bell monopoly, the cable monopoly and the power monopoly. That is it, no one else is allowed by law to play. There ar esome reasonable and pratical reasons for this, but nver-the-less that is all the choice a consumer has and actually only two of them are even remotely viable. Are you sure you aren't in the direct pay of AT&T, I mean you are better then the official spokes person, even they admit there are very limited choices.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

This is not true at all. I can get a different phone company and they use the common carrier to deliver service. I can use DSL services via an ILEC like Covad if I like. Futher, there is no monopoly on Phone Service in general as I choose a different phone company [as already established], I can choose to use a company like Comcast or I can choose to use VoIP or even wireless.

So, in short, I can get telephone, data and television services from multiple sources, so none of the three are local monopolies. The ONLY local monopoly is your basic utilities [of which phone is no longer a part]; electricity, natural gas [if you get it] and water.

So, if you have issues with utilities ... including telephone services, you can talk to your PUC, but misusing the term monopoly won't get you far these days.

Note the word "INTO" in the above (there are three wire options into people's homes).... Sure you can use others, but there is ONLY one local company that can do the end part INTO your home...

On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 17:27:44 -0400, "Peter Pan" wrote in :

As a result of deregulation, there isn't any artificial limitation on "INTO" -- companies are free to overbuild even the last mile if they see a sufficiently good business opportunity. The problem is that the business opportunity isn't sufficiently good, not any monopoly.

On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 12:58:42 GMT, rico snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com (Rico) wrote in :

They'll respond just as fast whether you call with cable phone service, VoIP, sat phone, cellular, or landline.

There are actually lots of choices, some of which I've listed above.

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:27:06 -0700, William Ahern wrote in :

I do. That's the way Java-enabled phones are supposed to act. Otherwise customers can get hit with large bills or security issues.

I do. It's great.

No, just once for each instantiation.

Then return it.