T-Mobile announces phone that will work on both ATT & T-Mobile networks

[MGS_forgot_password]

Coincidently, the Nokia Astound was announced yesterday. Nokia's Symbian^3 phones are the only ones in the world that will handle both 3G networks.
The link

[silvarios]

Penta band baby!

[silvarios]

I should add the Nokia N8 also works on AWS and the 3G almost everyone else uses. What other Symbian^3 phones are out right now?

[MGS_forgot_password]

Currently announced pentaband phones : N8, C6-01, C7, E7

[Jimmypoo]

For those that don't know --- T-Mobile and AT&T have been sharing their network FOR YEARS.

I know a programmer in Atlanta who has worked for both. She is at ATT now, and she is continually working
on a program called "Taggert" - that is the billing software that the two companies use to bill each other
back and forth for time on the network by the other carrier.

So this crap about "expanding coverage" is nothing but BULLSHIIIITTTTT!!!!!

It's been going on for years -- just as it has been in the CDMA market. The fact that this blatantly obvious
tower sharing deal has been no secret - yet is ABSENT from every article about this "merger" is just poor
journalism to get a story out there that ignores the obvious - and isn't going to mean a damned thing
about better coverage "combining the two systems."

[SteveO]

This merger completely sucks. It will be horrible for consumers and will turn ATT into even more of a juggernaut. I thought we had laws against monopolies?

I switched to T-Mo to get away from ATT. You can bet I'll be leaving when my contract is up.

As for the "journalists" getting it right...no. Journalism is dead. They are now the satellite PR departments for corporations and government.

[DRR]

Yes there are laws against monopolies. Be careful not to confuse "large" with "monopoly."

Did you have any complaints when Verizon bough Alltel?

[thermarest]

Jimmypoo wrote:

...isn't going to mean a damned thing
about better coverage "combining the two systems."

I agree 99.9% (or maybe more). But I was in Yosemite Valley last fall and my T-Mo phone did not get a single bar of coverage anywhere. AT&T & Verizon both had coverage, and my associate's AT&T phones worked fine. I could not roam. T-Mo customer service could not tell me anything about why not, though this fact was indeed depicted accurately on their coverage map. Anyway, not really relevant to the big picture of this merger and the gobbledy-gook being spewed....

[Chakravartin]

Jimmypoo wrote:
For those that don't know --- T-Mobile and AT&T have been sharing their network FOR YEARS...

So this crap about "expanding coverage" is nothing but BULLSHIIIITTTTT!!!!!

Not quite.

To avoid those fees, AT&T devices give preference to AT&T cell towers when they are within range, even if they'd get better reception by roaming on a closer T-Mobile tower.

Making them all AT&T towers will improve some reception issues.

[silvarios]

DRR wrote:
Yes there are laws against monopolies. Be careful not to confuse "large" with "monopoly."

Did you have any complaints when Verizon bough Alltel?

Exactly my point the last few days. While I don't think this merger will be good for consumers, although I fervently hope that I am wrong, AT&T is not a monopoly once they buy T-Mobile. If Verizon and AT&T start (continue?) colluding, something could be done, but that sort of legal attention could already be applied. Pre T-Mobile devouring, AT&T and Verizon already accounted for 60ish% of the market. Now they are combined 70ish%.