Tungsten W Nearing Availability With AT&T

I am a long time AT&T wireless cust. and just purch. Tung. T for the purpose of getting e-mail via bluetooth. After reviewing At&T GSM coverage I am having 2nd thoughts. Although I work in NYC I travel within the US frequently and I'm concerned I won't be able to make or recieve calls in many areas. I was just starting to think about T-mobile.

Any thoughts re: the 2 services would be appre. Thanks.

If you already have solid T-Mobile coverage in your area, then it's best to use them. The two networds are compatible, so you won't have to buy a new phone if you decide to switch to a different GSM/GPRS provider later on.

Jim

-------
James Sorenson

Granted Verizon is behind everyone else in bringing out cool phones in general and BT phones in particular (especially egregious being their decision to bring out the T606 without BT).

That being said, some people still use the Timeport 270c with the bluetooth battery adaptor on Verizon. A much less well known ooption is the SE T68i, which can be purchased as a Verizon replacement phone (see http://www.ustronics.com/bsonert6verr.html) and used with the DBA-10 bluetooth add-on module.

No, they are not cool, and yes Verizon is to be despised for their recent dearth of cool phones, but it is possible to use a Tungsten T with with a Verizon bluetooth enabled phone.

Thanks, Robrecht

However there is hope. The companies over here, particularly OPTUS finally do have an excellent GSM Coverage. It took some time, but its happened.

The range for a GSM base station (in my understanding) does not stretch anywhere near as far as the AMPS (older system)/CDMA antennas. This means that each company has to deploy a stack more antennas to have coverage up to scratch with CDMA.

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but the old AMPS base stations covered something like 20kms (and I think CDMA is similar), whereas GSM base stations only cover a fraction of the area.
So this means that more base stations need to cover the same area.

Mark

Now, $549 for a hi res wireless with fastest radio on market and longest battery...Nice deal.

-----
Ceci n'est pas une signature.

I like Palm, but its hardware keeps missing the boat while its competition is sailing down the river winning the race.

TSC

Thomas

Check out the Palm Tungsten|T review at www.comp-talk.co.uk

-

"If it weren't for electricity we'd all be watching television by candlelight." - George Gobol.

To top matters off and make me a very unhappy camper, I finally ponied up the major $$$ necessary to buy an overpriced cable (Palm UC to Mot. v60) from the Supplynet. I had to have some sort of wireless connectivity when on the road and WAP on my cell phone wasn't cutting it. Of course, the cable barely makes contact with the UC on my T|T and the slightest nudge/breeze makes it fall out and drop the connection. Sigh....

Somehow I feel majorly ripped off...almost enough to dig the ol' m505 out again and keep using it. What's the point of adhering to a "Universal Connector" standard if it actual physical connection is _barely_ supported the latest and greatest pice of Palm hardware?

There is NO SUCH ANIMAL for travelers...nor will there be until we have a unified digital nationwide network. In fact, there is no bluetooth phone that is also multiband (gsm, gprs, tdma).

Hmm... Here in Oz, the Nokia 6310i aint a smartphone, no colour screen, however its GSM, has gprs and uses 900/1800/1900Mhz Frequencies.

Thats probably as close as you're likely to get
Mark

This is why I would much rather have a bluetooth enabled phone and a bluetooth enabled PDA than a convergence device at this point. If replacable batteries start becoming available, I'll reconsider. But for now, if you use your cell phone a lot, the battery technology is just not there yet.

Thanks, Robrecht