I am thinking about switching to suncom and I was wondering if anyone has other thoughts on Suncom and there coverage. I am looking at getting the unplan with unlimited minutes.

BTW, I tried replying to this topic but you can't if it is idle for 90 days

http://www.brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=329522

10/11/2005 8:54:43 AM

http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=350641
just keep that in mind when you're bitching about suncom in three months

10/11/2005 9:24:03 AM

who are you on now?

10/11/2005 9:32:25 AM

Cingular. The guy at Suncom said that coverage would be the same since they use Cingular towers where Suncom doesn't exist.

10/11/2005 9:34:48 AM

One of my co-workers has jumped on the class-action lawsuit.

If it weren't for the class-action she was already talking to her lawyer to file her own lawsuit.

She had been paying her bill but SunCom kept telling her that her that they had not recieved payment and were going to turn her over to a collections agency. She faxed them copies of the checks and bank account records that show that SunCom had deposited the checks. She spent hours trying to get a resolution to the problems but got a call on her cell phone from an automated message saying that her phone was going to be disconnected and that they were going to contact creditors and she called a lawyer.

Quote :

"Cingular. The guy at Suncom said that coverage would be the same since they use Cingular towers where Suncom doesn't exist."

This is true. At work we have identical BlackBerry 7290s and you can hold a SunCom one right next to a Cingular one and the Cingular device will have 2-3 bars but the SunCom one is stuck at "searching for service...".

Depends on where you are but for me, Cingular works better. (Also consider Alltel and Verizon.)

[Edited on October 11, 2005 at 9:38 AM. Reason : err]

10/11/2005 9:34:51 AM

Verizon is really great if alot of your friends/family/co-workers use it. The free "IN" calling with certain plans that extends to text messaging is pretty nice. Without the "IN" plan though, meh they're all really the same.

10/11/2005 9:40:23 AM

every suncom user i know is counting down the days till they are out of contract

10/11/2005 9:42:02 AM

^ Yes.

Of all of the friends and co-workers I have that went to SunCom only one of them seems to like it. The rest of them have been very vocal about how shitty the experience has been.

^^ It comes down to customer support and strenght of the network really. I have Alltel currently and they have been great in terms of support. They don't always have the best features but they are at least very easy to deal with.

[Edited on October 11, 2005 at 9:46 AM. Reason : +]

10/11/2005 9:43:08 AM

fuck suncom and fuck harry connick jr for being annoying as shit in those commercials

and when he says "we hook you up with the largest wireless network in the world"...just remember thats not Suncom's network...its Cingular's I believe, Suncom just literally "hooks you up" with that network

10/11/2005 9:45:46 AM

I'll be the odd man in this thread and say I don't have a single complaint with my Suncom service. I haven't had a problem to date, and coverage is great (for the places I go anyway).

10/11/2005 11:32:16 AM

I was at&t, but I guess I'm cingular/suncom now that they've merged. haven't noticed any difference and I've never had a problem.

10/11/2005 11:53:42 AM

cingular suncom havent merged

you are suncom now

10/11/2005 11:54:32 AM

I would stay away from Suncom. I got switched over to them and in all my years of having a cell phone I didn't start running into problems until then.

10/11/2005 12:00:25 PM

Cingular purchased AT&T everywhere but NC/SC/Puerto Rico. The FCC made Cingular work out an agreement with Suncom so that Suncom would not go bankrupt for losing all of the AT&T towers that were in these areas (which they depended on quite heavily). Cingular was given all of the SUNCOM customers in VA & WV and SUNCOM was given the AT&T customers in NC/SC/Puerto Rico.

There is a huge difference in tower quality between Suncom and Cingular. Suncom likes to advertise that they have the same coverage Cingular does, but in reality, they do not run their towers the same way Cingular does (ten digit dialing, network freq, etc) and anyone who has SUNCOM knows that their service is horrible. Cingular customers will actually roam on Suncom towers and know a huge difference when they do.

10/11/2005 12:15:05 PM

hey, they're better than sprint... maybe not.

I've always liked verizon the best, but I'm using cingular right now since I was locked in at a really really low price with them and they've been pretty good.

I've heard mixed reports from people using both verizon and cingular, mixed but mostly bad from everyone who used sprint (I used to sell sprint cell phones at radioshack, those things were returned about 40% of the time for crappy coverage) and NOTHING good about suncom.

[Edited on October 11, 2005 at 1:49 PM. Reason : ]

10/11/2005 1:49:07 PM

suncom is great,
i have unlimited minutes for only $30 a month since im in with 4 other people

10/11/2005 2:21:05 PM

I'd recommend against it. I have a suncom account for personal use (until december once my contract is up) and a cingular account from work, and I prefer the cingular account since it has more features and less trouble than my suncom account. Suncom's wap service sucks pretty bad, especially after switching over from AT&T's which was fairly decent. I have had several problems with Suncom's txt messaging service. Also, you can not send AIM messages to a Suncom phone.

As for coverage, you're better off with cingular since for both Suncom and cingular they can terminate your contract if you use over half your minutes on someone else's network. This isn't a problem with cingular since you will be on their network most of the time anyway. However, you could theoretically run into problems with suncom, especially if you travel because of this.

10/11/2005 2:56:48 PM

Quote :

"As for coverage, you're better off with cingular since for both Suncom and cingular they can terminate your contract if you use over half your minutes on someone else's network. This isn't a problem with cingular since you will be on their network most of the time anyway. However, you could theoretically run into problems with suncom, especially if you travel because of this."

NCSU JEW -> Ignoring that for a minute, how do the two compare as far as signal and dropping calls?

10/11/2005 3:44:22 PM

^I have just about given up on using my cell phone at the college of textiles, which seems to be right on some sort of border. Sometimes i can use my cell phone to call my roommate at the dorm, and i finally bothered to save the number to my phone with the area code b/c all the damn error messages from suncom were pissing me off.
once i manage to make a call, it's easy to tell right away whether i'm on cingular's network or suncom's. with suncom, i can hear perfectly fine, but evidently, folks on the other end cant. they say there's a lot of silence and static.

10/11/2005 5:41:54 PM

When it comes to the local network:

Cingular > SunCom

no question

10/11/2005 6:24:38 PM

someone tell me what's so great about gsm...i have alltel (cdma) and i get service EVERYWHERE...i guess if you don't travel out of one city then gsm is alright, but i really don't understand why everyone thinks cingular is so wonderful...

10/11/2005 9:50:26 PM

True.

Even in the sticks (both the coast and mountains) my Alltel phone has worked when I needed it.

10/11/2005 9:53:40 PM

GSM is the INTERNATIONAL standard. that's why they advertise the "world phone" stuff. that doesn't matter for most people, but if you're in major cities GSM is fine in the US and getting better everywhere else, and internationally you're fucked if you use CDMA phones.

10/11/2005 10:04:06 PM

Quote :

"someone tell me what's so great about gsm"

technology available, ie better phones
better sound quality

10/11/2005 11:06:52 PM

3g data services

10/11/2005 11:27:09 PM

and yet...with gsm i can't make a phone call in the beartooth mountains of montana, or 10 miles outside of tampa, or at my parents house freakin' 30 minutes from here...gsm sucks for anyone who actually TRAVELS

10/12/2005 12:20:17 AM

enjoy your crappy analog signal while it lasts

10/12/2005 12:34:38 AM

oh...cdma is analog only? i thought the "d" meant digital...and what's this "sound quality" bit...my phone sounds just as good as yours (unless your range of hearing is superior to most people's)

you people are idiots...if gsm reps tell you your quality is better, you'll believe it (though you'll never hear it)...if they tell you your phone is "cooler" than mine, you'll believe it (certainly your $400 all-in-one phone that's out of date in 6 months looks prettier than mine)...if they tell you your limited-range, good-only-in-major-cities reception is "better" than mine, once again, you'll jump on the bandwagon and follow suit (after all, you're never going to journey more than 50 miles away from any major city or highway)

i'm all for international standards, but this is just beta vs vhs all over again...why can't they improve on already-superior technology instead of inventing new ones that have to catch up?

i'll bet you have yourself a pretty little ipod, too...way to shuffle along with the herd

[Edited on October 12, 2005 at 12:57 AM. Reason : bEta]

10/12/2005 12:54:52 AM

in the bumfuck areas yes, its an analog tower you are getting

the sound quality isnt as good and its harder on your battery

[Edited on October 12, 2005 at 1:06 AM. Reason : i dont need an ipod my phone has an mp3 player]

and actually the d stands for division dumb fuck

[Edited on October 12, 2005 at 1:06 AM. Reason : .]

10/12/2005 1:05:36 AM

lol...just out of curiousity, johnnyboy, do you specifically work to be stupid? or is it a talent? anyone who thinks GSM is better (overall) than CDMA is one a million stupid consumers, spending money on "pretty" phones and sub-par technology...let me enlighten you:

first of all, i'm aware that the "D" in CDMA stands for division...as you've proven, even a monkey can use Google to find out all kinds of things...i was referring to the "D" on my phone screen, which rarely changes into an "A" (to help you understand, the "D" means digital and the "A" means analog)...but at least my phone has the OPTION of getting reception, while you're simply SOL when you move too far from one of your preciously scarce towers

second: GSM is not "new" and the technology is not "better"...in fact, as a cellular phone technology, it's older than CDMA...it's been around longer, and is more widespread (like someone said, everyone else but us uses GSM almost exclusively)...but so what? just because something's widespread doesn't mean it's good, let alone superior...you just happen to think that because your phone has a sim card, or just because your phone costs more that it's automatically better...wrong

SIGNAL TYPES

GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) has a set bandwidth that it divides among its users (TDMA/FDMA multiplexing)...which means that when more people are using the same channel, there is a GREATER chance of dropped calls or poor reception since only 8 simultaneous calls can be made at one time per channel, whenever someone new tries to join the channel or you lose too much signal, you get bumped

CDMA (Code Division Mulitple Access) also multiplexes, but instead of doing something stupid like dividing bandwidth over a small spectrum, it utilizes spread-spectrum (every channel uses a full spectrum instead of a limited one) to break up the different simultaneous calls...this means that over an equivalent amount of GSM bandwidth, CDMA has significantly more available channels for users

*if you still think GSM technology is better...you're dumber than i thought, so you might as well quit reading and go fondle your pretty Sony Ericsson...CDMA is the clear winner in terms of service and signal availability/strength...clarity is subjective, but i'll happily match my CDMA Nokia against any of your GSM phones (but we'll have to find a place where you get as high a quality of signal as i do)

TRANSMISSION RATES

if you have a GSM phone, it MIGHT be equipped with EDGE (Enhanced Data Rates for Global Evolution), but unless it is specifically mentioned, you probably don't have it...if you do, however, then you're lucky enough to have the capability of reaching transmission rates of up to 384kbps...would you like a cookie? seriously...the problem is that not all GSM phones come equipped with EDGE, so it's not even a widespread feature...if you want it, you pay out your rear end for it

if you have a CDMA phone, however, you're much more likely to have 1xRTT, which runs up to 144kbps...granted, transmission rates are lower, but if your phone can download Axxess apps, then you've got 1xRTT built-in (and at this point, all phones sold by Alltel are Axxess capable, including their "free" and $.99 ones)

*who's the winner here? well, GSM has higher transmission rates (if you pay the initial cost PLUS the service fees), but CDMA doesn't have an up-front hardware cost associated with their phone data services...so let's call it a draw, shall we?

NEW/FUTURE TECHNOLOGY

GSM loses...in fact, they lose horribly, writhing in the dirt as CDMA kicks them repeatedly in the ribs...GSM has adopted WCDMA (wideband CDMA) or UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunications System) as it's 3G solution...reaching whopping speeds of 2Mbps

CDMA, however, uses EV-DO (data only at 2.4Mbps) as it's 2.5G solution (that's what they're using when they advertise video feeds on Verizon's network) and EV-DV (data and voice at 5.2Mbps) as their 3G solution

*last time i checked, both 2.4 and 5.2 were larger numbers than 2...doesn't that mean, then, that CDMA's data transfer rates will be (in Verizon's case, ARE) higher than GSM's? i admit that i'm not good at math, so until someone corrects me, i'll assume CDMA won this battle, too

FEATURES

there really aren't any features that are exclusive to one technology or the other, save for sim cards in GSM phones...which are essentially pointless considering most decent modern CDMA phones come with bluetooth so you can connect them to your computer and upload/download everything (i particularly like Nokia's phone interface)

*another draw, unless i've forgotten anything major

RADIATION

i'm sure none of you care (though you might when you develop brain tumors), but GSM signals produce 10 times more radiation than do CDMA signals...this happens because CDMA checks its transmission levels 800 times per second...what this means is that if you're the person talking on the phone, you're receiving the radiation, while GSM networks don't really care who's talking - you both receive the same amount of radiation

*if you're looking for increased microwaves through your brain, enjoy your GSM...otherwise, i'll stick with CDMA and hopefully not develop a cellular-phone-induced brain tumor somewhere down the line

CONCLUSION

GSM, as a service, is inferior to CDMA...it's that simple...i admit that i'm by no means an engineer or physicist or whatever it is you have to be to completely understand the jargon associated with cellular phone technologies, but i'm pretty sure that i have a greater understanding than the average user...if something i've said above is wrong, please please PLEASE correct me, insult me, and give your source and i will graciously (though red-faced and possibly crying) admit i was wrong

overall, your choice in carrier really depends on what you want it for...if you want to download video feeds, you have to go with Verizon (CDMA) because they're the ones that offer it...if you want to buy a Sony Ericsson phone, you have to go with someone like Cingular (GSM)...if you want to be able to travel within the United States, yet outside of major metropolitan areas, then you have no choice but to with CDMA...if you want to travel to Europe (and take your cell phone) and pay roaming charges that will equal the cost of a small mobile home, go with GSM

other than that, it's the features of the phone that matter...but when you bundle my $100 MP3 player/1.2mp camera with flash/video recorder/MMC expansion slot/speakerphone/bluetooth/infrared/BEST FREAKING RECEPTION OF ANY PHONE ON THE PLANET with the fact that i can go almost anywhere in the country and still be able to call my shrink, i'll take CDMA over GSM any day

10/12/2005 1:55:51 PM

^ i would just like to know where you got that information from, especially the part about GSM service losing out to CDMA. links plz

10/12/2005 2:36:52 PM

Quote :

"RADIATION"

You are retarded

10/12/2005 2:46:18 PM

i would like to see some credible links plz

10/12/2005 3:36:49 PM

Good thing I can afford GSM/EDGE/GPRS or else I would have to talk through two cans and a string.

Well that's what Family Guy (Quagmire02) is basically saying.

And as far as the radiation...bluetooth headset..a lot safer in cars too..Quagmire..you do have a car don't you..or is still horse and buggy in the country with your CDMA phones.

[Edited on October 12, 2005 at 3:56 PM. Reason : addition]

10/12/2005 3:53:36 PM

^ son, you're an idiot...radiation emitted from a bluetooth headset is miniscule, and since it's omnidirectional (meaning it radiates in all directions instead of one in particular), it's far less concentrated than a cellular phone signal (not to mention that bluetooth has a range of what? 30 meters? that's a TAD less powerful than a cell phone, i'd say)

as for the quagmire thing...very original...and like i've said a dozen times before, i had this aim sn long before family guy was around

as for everyone else, here are SOME links, not all...when i get back to the computer i was using to look stuff up, i'll post more:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/151/1
http://www.naavi.org/cl_editorial_04/edit_dec_04_04_01.htm
http://www.gemplus.com/techno/cdma/
http://www.mobileinfo.com/3G/3G_Wireless.htm
http://www.mouthshut.com/review/GSM_Mobile_Technology_Vs_CDMA_Mobile_Technology-34613-1.html
http://www.cdg.org/technology/cdma_technology/capacity/capacity_comparison_paper.asp
http://www.cellular-news.com/coverage/usa.shtml (interactive map at bottom of page)

while some of these sources i certainly wouldn't use in a research paper, i'm inviting all of you to prove that my statements are wrong...if you do, then i'll admit i'm wrong, or we'll debate it or something...until then, simply disagreeing with me and calling me a "retard" is just a lame way of admitting that not only are you wrong, you're ignorant and pathetic

10/12/2005 4:10:42 PM

You're the one who's ignorant if you actually beleive that the radiation emitted from cell phones causes cancer.

http://health.discovery.com/centers/cancer/top10myths/myth8.html

http://cancer.about.com/od/causes/tp/cancermyths.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4196762.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4432755.stm

The only thing that's pathetic is you trying to argue an urban myth as basis for the superiority of a product. I don't care about the CDMA/GSM argument, but:

Quote :

"You are retarded"

[Edited on October 12, 2005 at 6:19 PM. Reason : ]

10/12/2005 5:55:26 PM

Quote :

"^ i would just like to know where you got that information from"

google
like he criticized me for (even though i just posted something that i knew, something thats pretty common knowledge)

[Edited on October 12, 2005 at 9:15 PM. Reason : and it doesnt really matter cause when i said better technology i was referring to the phones]

10/12/2005 9:13:35 PM

you people amuse me...if i seriously thought the amount of harmful radiation determined the superiority of a product, then i don't suppose i'd be staring at this 19" crt computer monitor (i would shell out the extra cash for a lcd)...it was just another (of many) reasons why CDMA is better

but congratulations to all of you who have refuted me with your research and evidence...oh, wait, that would be none of you...

score: 1 point cdma users (quagmire02 in particular) / 0 points gsm users (practically everyone else on this thread)

10/13/2005 12:49:34 AM

i dont think being the only one that takes the time to write an essay response really makes you the winner

but whatever gets your rocks off

10/13/2005 1:00:39 AM

Quote :

"cdma is analog only? i thought the "d" meant digital"

Quote :

"first of all, i'm aware that the "D" in CDMA stands for division...as you've proven, even a monkey can use Google to find out all kinds of things"

you are now but you weren't when you made that post


so whats Suncom's signal quality like these days?
I'm really thinking about jumping to the $59 unlimited plan (no contract) they're running right now...

11/19/2005 4:31:35 PM

the first was a poor attempt at sarcasm in response to johnnyboy and his typical "i talk only out of my ass" responses to informed users and their posts

i admit, it wasn't really that funny

the second was readily-available information that anyone who can google could find in less than 3 seconds

suncom's service and service coverage still suck.

[Edited on November 19, 2005 at 6:20 PM. Reason : blah]

11/19/2005 6:20:01 PM

ive had suncom unplan for 1 year,
its worth any signal problems cause i dont worry at all about minutes
i definately would not go back to any other plans

right now i pay about $30 a month for unlimited cause im on a plan with four other people

11/19/2005 6:26:36 PM

anyone else have suncom and love/hate it?

11/20/2005 12:14:18 PM

I know one guy that paid to get out of his suncom service.

He has Verizon now and couldn't be happier

(he went to V after my recommendation)

11/20/2005 12:47:30 PM

if your number one priority is price i wouldnt go with verizon
just get suncom and reserve the right to complain

11/20/2005 2:36:20 PM

Quote :

"just get suncom and reserve the right to complain"

They've been warned though ...

11/20/2005 2:41:15 PM

DONT GET SUNCOM!!!!! Please, i beg you. I hope they go bankrupt. I have had them for the past almost 2 years and im about to go to court with them. They get horrible signal, and dont let the good plans fool you. They extended my contract for an extra month and cannot give me a reason why. and the customer care people hang up on me when i ask about it. Im so ready to get rid of them. Please do not get suncom....you will thank me later.

[Edited on November 21, 2005 at 2:21 AM. Reason : cant type]

11/21/2005 2:10:36 AM