Community weekly poll: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one?
- 4/4/07 10:36 AM
If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one?
by Lee Koo (ADMIN) - 4/4/07 10:36 AM
If the U.S. had to choose one cellular technology, which one do you think it should be?
CDMA (Why?)
GSM (Why?)
iDEN (Why?)
Other (What would that be?)
US DOESNT WIN WHEN PLAYING OUTSIDER....
by CARL C - 4/4/07 1:37 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I learned a long time ago that my adherence to SONY technically superior standards left me with museum pieces. The market didn't follow. The best recent example, for camera buffs, MEMORY STICKS.
Standards for cell technology, if you leave the US, have us in GSM quad band (two for here, two for there) territory.
I don't have to know or care that CDMA 2000 or beyond (or WiMax) has great technical specs.
What I have to know is, If I want to communicate everywhere but here, it will be through GSM....
Pray for GSM folks to evolve the standard at a parallel rate to CDMA.
CDMA- in America
by james11f - 4/4/07 6:28 PM In reply to: US DOESNT WIN WHEN PLAYING OUTSIDER.... by CARL CMy dad has been with verizon from the beginning. He has never moved. Why? Because verizon has awesome implementation. Everywhere I go, I have never NOT been able to get a call through. Dropped Calls? Not with my phone, usually it is someone of the cingular network. Cingular, the network with the fewest dropped calls...what?
Which cellular technology
by kstebleton - 4/4/07 1:39 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
GSM is the "world standard". It works well for me - better than CDMA ever did. I was stuck with NEXTEL for years, issued to me at work. I'd prefer 2 tincans and a string, at least anywhere around Detroit.
I run a satellite truck, and I've been using GSM for the past few months. The GSM have been ROCK SOLID, and I am very happy with the performance. (My outdoor antennas certainly help with my odds there!)
Seriously, if only one standard were to be used, let's get onboard with the global standard. I don't experience any trouble with GSM, so why buck the world trend?
We (The US) always buck the world
by Gcmartt - 4/4/07 3:35 PM In reply to: Which cellular technology by kstebletonMetric system is much better, TV siginals in Europe and asia have been much better far ahead of us because Sarnoff bought the Congress and had his lousey TV signal made our standard.
We are just plain arrougant!
GSM is a clear world wide leader
by euspos - 4/4/07 3:50 PM In reply to: Which cellular technology by kstebletonFirst, Nextel's proprietary techonolgy (iDen) is actually a GSM derivative. Only after Sprint's acquisition of Nextel has CDMA come into the picture via "dual-mode" phones.
That said, both technologies (GSM and CDMA) have their advantages. A GSM phone can be taken (essentially) anywhere, and as long as it supports the frequencies used (N.A. 850/1,900 MHz, elsewhere 900/1,800 MHz) I can use my phone, either as a local phone (buy a pre-paid SIM card) or via superexpensive roaming rates (assuming my home carrier have interworking agreement with the network I am visiting).
Even in the U.S., I can as a Cingular subscriber use t-mobile's network (or others), should Cingular not be present.
I also like the fact that I can easily switch phones. Day tiem, a PDA type phone for work, while I'll pull the SIM and plug it into a smaller (rugged) device for evening and weekends.
CDMA is more tied down to the handset. Your "subscribtion" is tied to the phone hardware. You have to call the carrier in order to swithc phones. I a GSM handset, you plug in a new SIM card and that's it.
Sure, now many will say that "can't do it, phone is (SIM)locked". That has really nothing to do with technology, but instead the (stupid) consumer that wants everything for free and due to the fact that the carriers are sort of forced to "lock down" a handset so you cannot just take it (before you have paid it off) and move to the next carrier. If people realized that phones DO cost money (not much though) they would buy an "unlocked" phone and not be tied to a certain carrier. I have NEVER (ever) used a locked phone, and been able to travel freely with my GSM phone to Europe, Asia, Africa, South America. Works everywhere there is a network!
CDMA still has a somewhat lead on the data rates, it is in most cases faster, not so much due to technology, but due to Verizon's and Sprint's wider (so far) implemention of high speed data networks.
As in everything else, it'll change over time. One year "CDMA" type carriers are faster, next year it is the GSM camp that are leading the speed races. Like Ferrari versus Maserati, it is very dynamic.
As you might know, next generation "GSM", W-CDMA, is also a CDMA based technology, with the major difference that there is clear evolution path from GSM to W-CDMA. Handsets are there to support both air interfaces, as are other devices.
GSM or CDMA are essentially two different approaches on how to best utilize the limited resources (in this case spectrum) the carrier has at hand. There are basic physical limitations to RF technology, and depending on how the network (GSM or CDMA) is implemented in the field, is really what will rule which technology is "better" (only talking about the transmission between BTS and mobile device).
The "consumer experience" have little do to with GSM or CDMA. It is much more a matter of handset design and what protocols that are being used. For example Multimedia, the CDMA camp have used BREW and the GSM camp traditionally JAVA. But, there is nothing that prevents BREW from running on a GSM phone and vice versa.
Bottom line, there is no really "better" or "best" technology. They are (both) compromises and if you want/plan to travel, GSM is the clear leader. But, if you like "happy features" maybe you'd go to Helio, a carrier that is using Verizon's (CDMA) network for its "transport". Helio has been very active in the design aspect of the phones they offer and they are "tuned" to the Helio services.
Once again, really nothing to do with CDMA, they could just as well used a GSM networkj as the carrier for its services.
And, as many of you probably experience, networks get better over time. Every carrier is drive testing their networks continously. If there are network (quality) issues AND there is traffic in a sector, the carrier will improve on the network.
On the other hand, if you are the ONLY customer in a certain area, the carrier will likely not pay too much attention to the quality in your little pocket. It is a matter of market economics, and not charity.
Hence, if you get nowhere with a carrier, switch. But, when you sign up, make sure that you DO NOT sign up for a free phone and a two-year agreement. Go month to month. You can then leave at YOUR choosing, w/o penalties.
Been with AMPS, CDMA.....now am with GSM.
by Diva_Dew - 4/4/07 3:58 PM In reply to: Which cellular technology by kstebletonTo each his or her own...but to me, GSM is indeed the world standard. While it may not currently have all the US coverage that CDMA does, it's rapidly progressing and growing. We all gave other things time to grow, why not give the same opportunity to GSM in the US?
In terms of phones, I like GSM best. If I decide that I want to use an alternative phone, I can simply pop my SIM card out of one & into another (providing it's unlocked or with the same provider).
CDMA Just works better...
by videoguy21 - 4/4/07 1:56 PM In reply to: If the U.S. had to choose one cell technology... which one? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I you want dropped calls, and poor coverage go with GSM.
Perhaps it is shoddy implementation here in the US, but non the less, if you want great performance go with CDMA.
Note that Verizon does not even support GSM.
Yes, I like some of the features of GSM, but I also like to be able to make a call.....
Don't blame dropped calls to GSM
by alaw168 - 4/4/07 2:41 PM In reply to: CDMA Just works better... by videoguy21Verizon or Sprint / Nextel may have better coverage in your area, but don't blame dropped calles to the technology. It's perhaps poor implementation on the part of Cingular / T-Mobile in certain areas. GSM is used in the rest of the world with no problems. However, I don't know if the frequency we use here has anything to do with the quality of GSM service. We use 1900MHz, whereas most of Europe and Asia use either 900MHz or 1800MHz. Needlessly to say, GSM call quality is miles better in Europe and Asia.
GSM is my choice...
by ridy163 - 4/4/07 8:39 PM In reply to: CDMA Just works better... by videoguy21Looks to me, that you have very limited and poor knowledge of communication industry. You might not know that CDMA as a technology does not provide better coverage at all. It's all network. What do you mean by great performance??? What do you mean by saying that V* does not support GSM??? Do you know any difference between these two standards?
V* does not support GSM because it works with CDMA. If you are speaking of performance in general, then GSM holds the lead. I don't get any dropped calls. Verizon is way more expensive and the choice of the phones is limited.
There are right and wrong points to both posts
by sdnelson33 - 4/10/07 12:58 AM In reply to: GSM is my choice... by ridy163"I you want dropped calls, and poor coverage go with GSM."
>>>>> Agree in a sense, but as the responder below said, it's really more about the network. That said, it just so happens that the poor coverage and dropped-call carriers use GSM.
It's funny to see a Cingular phone post 5 bars RSSI but when you try to use it, voila!, no signal. It's called trickery - send out a strong pilot signal beacon, make the user think there's great signal, but then, whoa, what happened? 5 bars everywhere. It is probably grounds for a class action suit, if anyone wants to initiate (if it hasn't happened already).
"Perhaps it is shoddy implementation here in the US, but non the less, if you want great performance go with CDMA."
>>>>> Agree, again not the technology, but it coincides.
-----------------------
"Looks to me, that you have very limited and poor knowledge of communication industry."
>>>> Stop slamming people on this board as so far it is just as apparent that you don't have a handle on the subject any more than the ones you are criticising. From what I can tell from your experiences with the industry, you probably spend most of your time in a single cubicle and/or armchair recliner.
"You might not know that CDMA as a technology does not provide better coverage at all."
>>>>> This is true. But, it is a fact that in the U.S., the technology with better true RF coverage in POPS and geography is CDMA.
"V* does not support GSM because it works with CDMA."
>>>>> This is true.
"If you are speaking of performance in general, then GSM holds the lead."
>>>>> I beg to differ in a big, big way. I implement mission-critical systems and it is a given in the industry that quality solutions do not implement on the GSM network due to coverage, voice quality, call droppage, and interference issues (mostly radiated emissions). Low budget systems may use GSM, but there is an acknowledgement that performance and reliability are traded off for cost savings.
>>>>> Please, also qualify what you mean by 'holds the lead'. World subs # on GSM, yes. And there are several reasons for that. Performance and technical advance are not among them.
"I don't get any dropped calls."
>>>>> I'm guessing this is because you don't move from your cubicle or you spend all of your time under one tower in a single sector sitting in your recliner.
"Verizon is way more expensive."
>>>>> You may be right about 'more expensive'. You might have to qualify 'way' more expensive. You get what you pay for, though.
"...and the choice of the phones is limited."
>>>>> The choice of phones is limited on any U.S. carrier, even those on GSM.
More freedom with GSM>
by ridy163 - 4/10/07 10:17 AM In reply to: There are right and wrong points to both posts by sdnelson33May be my opinion is subjective but not more than yours. My personal experience tells me that I would never look at CDMA.
So, I have too choices; #1. Go to verizon store and get a phone. What I don't like about Verizon is that it is expensive, all their phones have the same stupid looking menus and as the addition, they don't work very well due the software issues. They don't have the choice of the phones GSM has. Gsm phones as the fact are more advanced. Verizon's phones luck a sim unit and are not very mobile compare to GSM where you can switch phones and instantly synchronize them. and etc. ...
On the other hand We have sprint PCS, with the same technology as Verizon but with less developed infrastructure and "almost OK" coverage. Not an option for me.
And you might laugh but I am T mobile customer. And for past 4 years I had plenty of great GSM experience.
I can choose any phone I want from Blackberry to A DVD quallity camcorder cellphone, or may be I want to get an iPhone... so many choices. The mobility is much better. As a t mobile customer I would be access Cingular network according to the roaming agreement. International roaming can be expensive, but it works, and you can always buy a local Sim Card. I can switch phones. And I do It a lot. I have a nokia E61 and Nokia 3250. I can sync the contacts and messages over BT in a seconds and start using the new phone by switching sim. The data plan I have only costs me 5.99 a/mo. Provide unlimited traffic , access to wap,http, E mail. can't beat that!!!
The voice quallity is great. May be if you start comparing, CDMA will provide better voice quallity. However, even if the voice quallity in GSM is lower that CDMA it's still accaptable for me. I have no problem with hearing people. And don't forget that GSM is going through the evolution. They implement new codec such as AMR and the entire industry is moving to the direction of UMTS/HSDPA. However they are implementing back compatibility.
"The choice of phones is limited on any U.S. carrier....."
by euspos - 6/27/07 4:34 PM In reply to: There are right and wrong points to both posts by sdnelson33sdnelson33 wrote:
>>>>> The choice of phones is limited on any U.S. carrier, even those on GSM.
Well, that is exactly NOT true. With GSM you can buy ANY (given frequency support) GSM phone and plug in your SIM card. voila, you have a working phone.
What is true is that the carrier (even the GSM carriers) try to limit the selection of phones. It simply cost them too much to support - in their minds - too many phone models. But, GSM at least allows you to use "any" phone. Try that with Sprint or Verizon. you have to "reg" the phone with their custoemr support, and it might be a "no" if you plan on using a model they do not support or a model where they do not have the serial number in their databases.
But, this is not so much technical as it is commercial. That said, GSM provides for more freedom.
but you get screwed...
by FRANKIEMOUSE - 4/5/07 6:05 AM In reply to: CDMA Just works better... by videoguy21I believe the only CDMA service in my area is Verizon. I absolutely hate Verizon. Every phone I've looked at from Verizon has the exact same menu, this horribly limits your phone's capabilities. I have Cingular and they seem to use the manufacturer's menu structure to allow the user to have access to all the phones features. I work with someone who has the exact same phone model that I have, but through Verizon. I can customize six different buttons as to which features I can access, she can do that with only one button on her handset. Her phone doesn't even work the same. Verizon's menus are geared toward the LCD so if you do get a good phone from them you can't take advantage of it because the menu doesn't allow you to access those features. To top it off the menu structure is not the slightest bit intuitive. It's ridiculous and the main reason I have not switched. My girlfriend has Verizon, but I can't bring myself to deal with their crappy phones and menus. I've been to their stores and checked out their phones and the ones that don't suck are severely hampered by the Verizon standard menu. I refuse to buy a $200, or $300 phone and not be able to access all the features, or customize the buttons so I can use the phone to it's fullest and most efficiently. If Verizon sold more Nokia phones that used Nokia's OS and menu structure I'd have switched long ago. Unfortunately I don't travel to other countries much and wouldn't be hampered by having a CDMA phone not working in Europe. I love the fact that I can switch phones simply by inserting my SIM card.
Been there, still there
by rustytoo - 4/6/07 12:16 AM In reply to: CDMA Just works better... by videoguy21had Verizon since it was GTE, and had NO problems with signal/call quality. GSM (the orange guys) now and can't believe that I can sit and watch the signal meter and see it go from no signal to 3 or 4 bars, come on, either you get a signal or not, whats up with that. Have to agree that I like the GSM phones offered over the CDMA phones, Only reason I'm where I'm at now, but it IS supposed to be a PHONE FIRST before all of the added goodies and in that regard it does tend to suck at it.
I LOVE gadget phones, but if the call sucks, what's it mater anyway.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
