InterceptRadio.com Forums
http://interceptradio.com/bbs/

Cell reception
http://interceptradio.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=2967
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Atomic Taco [ Thu Jul 09, 2009 6:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Cell reception

So an article in uweek just got published and forwarded to me via e-mail. They're putting up "towers" on a few buildings around campus. Right now the only antennas on campus are down at the UW Medical Center, somewhere on what's called the BB Tower. No idea what that is.

The article points out that any coverage currently available is from "bleed" (my word, not theirs) from the areas surrounding. A quick check on Cell Reception shows only two, but that's not surprising since there are a bunch mounted on the tops of buildings and they don't have to register those.

I seem to be one of the few people that gets coverage in every building. I get decent coverage in some basements too. My internal antenna probably is doing little to pull in weak signals. I'm also one of the only ones with Verizon. Seems most people are on AT&T or T-Mobile with a handful of Sprinties (no Nexthells).


So, just wondering, is there something special about CDMA and/or 800 (or 1900) that makes its coverage better compared to 1900 TDMA/GSM/GPRS? I'd assume that 800 has better penetration than 1900 does.

Author:  Vizwar [ Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

I can't speak from a technical stand point on cellular but rather from experience.

CDMA does seem to get into more places and provide a larger coverage area but it's audio quality is often muffled compared to the GSM variations.

A recent study found Verizon's network to be the most stable. Meaning that it had the most consistent RSSI while the GSM networks would wobble from 3G, to 2G and back. The 3G networks though provides clear audio quality and higher data rates. :? It's all a wash to me. I like my AT&T. Even if their business practices are highly suspect.

Author:  jrw14493 [ Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

Any ideas on how Sprint's new 4G network will work out? Palm Pre -- here I come!

Author:  chpalmer [ Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

Keep in mind... lower frequencies propagate better. Higher frequencies are more directional and are easier to attenuate.

800mHz needs fewer tower sites to cover the same area that 1.9gHz needs...

The b side cellular service (now Verizon) had a head start building their tower sites.

Author:  Mark [ Fri Jul 10, 2009 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

The first 15 minutes of the GDGT podcast roundtable on the Palm Pre was about the IPhone....

Author:  jrw14493 [ Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

Mark wrote:
The first 15 minutes of the GDGT podcast roundtable on the Palm Pre was about the IPhone....


That's what I'm afraid of. I just cant justify to myself paying the $30/month alone for the data plan for that damn thing...if Apple wasn't a bunch of douches, Sprint would have the iPhone by now and I'd be peachy...

Author:  Atomic Taco [ Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

Apple first approached Verizon for the iPhone, but wanted to control too much of the process in which the customer acquires the phone. Since Verizon prides itself on its excellent customer service, they turned Apple down.

Author:  nickcarr [ Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

chpalmer wrote:
Keep in mind... lower frequencies propagate better. Higher frequencies are more directional and are easier to attenuate. 800mHz needs fewer tower sites to cover the same area that 1.9gHz needs...


Yup and this is why I'll never go back CDMA. GSM850 is almost mandatory around these parts due to the hills. Reception is better and the GSM audio quality is far superior.

I had Sprint for many years but their customer support was a joke. Also, their policy about giving "new" customers $250 off a brand new phone really pissed me off. So I've been a PAYING customer for 5 years but I have to stick with an inferior phone for 2 years. A new customer (with no previous history with Sprint) can buy their top of the line phone for $100 but I have to pay $350. That makes sense!

Don't get me started on their service termination agreements! :evil:

Author:  Rich [ Mon Jul 13, 2009 6:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

The iphone looked real cool until I saw how Apple wanted to be nazis over what software you put on your phone, plus the lack of a removable battery was kind of a joke. So I went with a HTC Touch Pro and Sprint service. It does everything an iphone can, has removable micro-SD storage, both a touchscreen and a keyboard, and a data plan is purely optional if wifi suits your needs. oh, and you can run the GPS software and maps locally without having to have a data plan and streaming the map data.

Why on earth people get iphones is beyond me. There is much better stuff out there.

Author:  Atomic Taco [ Mon Jul 13, 2009 6:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

Rich wrote:
Why on earth people get iphones is beyond me.

Because maybe you want to call your mom. Well, there's an app for that.
Maybe you need to split a check between two people and calculate a tip. There's an app for that too.
Or maybe you just want to charge the battery. Well, there's an app for that.


Oh crap, my phone from the turn of the century can do all that! And I hear you Rich--I'm in the exact same boat except with Verizon. But there are times when a data plan would come in handy. Not enough to justify $30 a month of $0.0015 a kilobyte.

Author:  KE7JFF [ Mon Jul 13, 2009 4:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

Some of us can do all of that with a BlackBerry :P

Author:  nickcarr [ Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

KE7JFF wrote:
Some of us can do all of that with a BlackBerry :P


...I could do this even BEFORE the iphone! :D

Author:  KE7JFF [ Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

nickcarr wrote:
KE7JFF wrote:
Some of us can do all of that with a BlackBerry :P


...I could do this even BEFORE the iphone! :D


Thats because you had your CDPD modem connected to your Newton :P

Author:  nickcarr [ Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

haha, the only apple products i buy are of the fruit variety! 8)

Author:  John Miles KE5FX [ Tue Jul 14, 2009 3:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cell reception

Funny, it's true that other phones have done all that stuff for years, but if you look at the statistics showing which phones users are actually using their web browser and other IP applications, it ain't Palm or Blackberry.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Copyright © 2013 Interceptradio.com