Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Google Wireless Networking Technology

Nexus One Owners Report Spotty 3G Signals On T-Mobile 146

Posted by timothy
from the can't-get-a-dial-tone dept.
rsk writes "One of the most popular questions on the Google Nexus One support forums is the 'Spotty 3G?' thread with almost 700 posts of users complaining about their 3G signal coverage fluctuating up, down, and between EDGE/3G with the phone just sitting on the desk or compared to other 3G devices on the T-Mobile network that don't offer the same unpredictable behavior. One workaround that seems to fix the issue is forcing the phone into '3G' or 'WCDMA Only' mode. This is a bit of a downer given that T-Mobile just finished their 3G upgrade to 7.2Mbps. Official word from Google is 'We are investigating this issue....'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nexus One Owners Report Spotty 3G Signals On T-Mobile

Comments Filter:
  • by dgatwood (11270) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:28PM (#30754708) Journal

    No, really?

    Have you seen their coverage maps? They make AT&T look good.

    • by RobertB-DC (622190) * on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:52PM (#30755058) Homepage Journal

      No, really?

      Have you seen their coverage maps? They make AT&T look good.

      I <3 T-Mobile, but their coverage has always been an unattractive shade of Suck. Even in Dallas -- home of Texas Instruments, y'all -- my cheap touchscreen [howardforums.com] is constantly switching from 3G to EDGE, or dropping data altogether. Hearing that Nexus One users are having trouble with T-Mobile's 3G network is like hearing that bears have been discovered crapping in the woods.

    • by jittles (1613415) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:52PM (#30755066)
      I actually had the same problem with my iPhone 3G until the 3.0 OS update came out. I was lucky to have any signal at my desk sometimes. Updated to 3.0 and suddenly I had full bars. Hopefully this is a software issue on the Nexus too.
      • I'm having that problem with my iPhone 3GS on the Telus network (in Canada). Unfortunately, Telus doesn't have an Edge system for my phone to fall back to so when it loses its 3G connection, it turns into an iPod... Often, switching it to airplane mode and then back is all it takes to reconnect, but it's a wee bit of a pain. I blame Telus, however - they (and Bell) rushed to get their 3G network launched so I figure it still has some issues to work out. Time, of course, will tell if my assumption is correct
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by toleraen (831634)
        Sounds like your radio firmware got updated with 3.0. I'm guessing that's all the Nexus One needs as well.
      • by dgatwood (11270) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @04:27PM (#30755602) Journal

        I remember reading about that iPhone problem. I suspect that it's a bug in the stock firmware for that chipset and that this is another one of those obnoxious flaws in the way the chipset vendors handle patches. As I understand it from talking to some cell phone engineers, when you start out with a chipset, you get a standard copy of the baseband firmware from the chipset manufacturer. I'll call that the baseline version. Patches from clients for cell firmware end up going into a separate tree for that specific client and are not typically propagated back upstream to the baseline, so every phone manufacturer who develops a phone using any given chipset ends up having to find and fix the same set of hundreds of baseband bugs over and over. If that's true, I'm amazed that the cell manufacturers put up with it. That certainly explains why cell phones have so many hundreds (or thousands) of baseband crasher bugs, and it also probably explains why Google is having to relearn all the stuff that Apple just learned a few months ago, and probably Nokia learned a few months before that, and so on.

        Sad, really. Everyone suffers because of corporate paranoia and overly strong copyright protection on minor source code patches. Were the firmware an open source project, cellular communications would be in much better shape. Of course, the telecoms are terrified of that because then people would be running rogue baseband firmware, and the tower baseband software probably isn't much more robust than the cell phone baseband software is, so once again, corporate paranoia results in a poor customer experience. And to some degree, the cell companies probably like it this way because it makes it harder for new competitors to build phones that work.

        I'm so glad I don't work in telecom. *sigh*

        • Patches from clients for cell firmware end up going into a separate tree for that specific client and are not typically propagated back upstream to the baseline, so every phone manufacturer who develops a phone using any given chipset ends up having to find and fix the same set of hundreds of baseband bugs over and over. If that's true, I'm amazed that the cell manufacturers put up with it. That certainly explains why cell phones have so many hundreds (or thousands) of baseband crasher bugs, and it also probably explains why Google is having to relearn all the stuff that Apple just learned a few months ago, and probably Nokia learned a few months before that, and so on.

          This is precisely why Apple will never make a CDMA iPhone for Verizon using a Qualcomm chipset. The baseband firmware workload for maintaining fixes for two different chipset vendor's code bases is not justifiable. Apple chose Infineon for their chipset, and I expect their product roadmaps to remain closely aligned regardless of Qualcomm's offerings.

          Apple makes a very limited number of hardware SKUs that can be sold worldwide. Don't expect them to offer variants for specific markets.

          That, and Apple HATES

        • by ppanon (16583) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @05:23PM (#30756446) Homepage Journal

          And to some degree, the cell companies probably like it this way because it makes it harder for new competitors to build phones that work.

          This.

          In fact the current state you describe is almost certainly due to cell manufacturers. It's not just about barriers to entry but also about competitive advantage. Otherwise the first adopters of new chips would spend lots of money on bug fixing in development. In contrast, their competitors would be able to release shortly afterwards with the shared firmware bug fixes and price their product lower because they wouldn't need to amortize the debugging costs that the first mover had to absorb. A manufacturer would only let that happen to them once, then they would find another supplier that didn't work that way. It's an interesting variant on the tragedy of the commons.

          • by mspohr (589790)
            I don't think this is a variant on "the tragedy of the commons". There is no "commons" here, just a bunch of walled gardens. If there were a commons of code for these modems, then everyone would have access to the code. There is a "fear of the commons" here that others will profit from the first mover improvements to the commons. It should be the responsibility of the modem manufacturer to provide solid software and they should compensate the phone manufacturers for their work fixing bugs if that is nec
            • by ppanon (16583)

              I don't think this is a variant on "the tragedy of the commons". There is no "commons" here, just a bunch of walled gardens. If there were a commons of code for these modems, then everyone would have access to the code. There is a "fear of the commons" here that others will profit from the first mover improvements to the commons.

              Just what exactly do you think "the tragedy of the commons" [wikipedia.org] is?

              Central to Hardin's article is an example (first sketched in an 1833 pamphlet by William Forster Lloyd), of a hypothet

              • by mspohr (589790)
                In this case there is no shared code base. There is no commons. Every phone manufacturer is keeping their modifications to themselves. They are afraid that if they create a commons that it will hurt them.

                You could argue that they should create a commons and then benefit from sharing code fixes but they are not doing that.

        • by fermion (181285)
          While I am every bit the conspiracy theorist, we do need to look at reality. The reality is that Google products are in infinite beta. They only have to work well enough to get by, and if data is lost it does mean the end of their business. No one is going to know if a server went down and the search results are different than if the serve was up. Mail accounts are deleted ad hoc, and they are only truly responsible for the few paying end users.

          What does this mean? Cell phones are pretty much embedde

      • by Old97 (1341297)
        I'm still having that problem with my iPhone 3Gs. I work in the Loop in Chicago. It varies with the time of day too. I suspect that the amount of demand at any given moment is a big part of it.
      • by MrCrassic (994046)

        A minor nitpick: The complaint here is that Nexus One owners are experiencing spotty 3G coverage on their phones. Since none of the iPhones support T-Mobile's 3G band, none of them would have this problem.

    • Spotty 3G Signals On T-Mobile?

      There’s a map for that.

    • by skirtsteak_asshat (1622625) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @04:00PM (#30755182)
      Then the other guy came out with a reliable, fast network. Were we scared? Hell, no. Because we hit back with a little thing called 3G. That's three G's and a touch pad. For touching. But you know what happened next? Shut up, I'm telling you what happened—the bastards went to four G's. Now we're standing around with our cocks in our hands, selling three G's and a touchpad. Touching or no, suddenly we're the chumps. Well, fuck it. We're going to five G's. Sure, we could go to four G's next, like the competition. That seems like the logical thing to do. After all, three worked out pretty well, and four is the next number after three. So let's play it safe. Let's make a bigger screen and call it the 3G Turbo. Why innovate when we can follow? Oh, I know why: Because we're a business, that's why! Stop. I just had a stroke of genius. Are you ready? Open your wallets, baby birds, cause Mama's about to drop you one sweet, fat nightcrawler: $40 Data plans. You think it's crazy? It is crazy. But I don't give a shit. From now on, we're the ones who have the edge in the cell phone game. We make the rules. What part of this don't you understand? If two G's is good, and three G's is better, obviously five G's would make us the best fucking network that ever existed. Comprende? We didn't claw our way to the top of the network game by clinging to the two-G industry standard. We got here by taking chances. Well, five G's is the biggest chance of all. Here's the report from Engineering. Someone put it in the bathroom: I want to wipe my ass with it. They don't tell me what to invent—I tell them. And I'm telling them to stick two more G's in there. I don't care how. Make the clients so thin they're invisible. Put some on the handle. I don't care if they have to cram the fifth G in perpendicular to the other four, just do it! You're taking the "fast" part of "fast network" too literally, grandma. Cut the strings and soar. Let's hit it. Let's roll. This is our chance to make network history. Let's dream big. All you have to do is say that five G's can happen, and it will happen. If you aren't on board, then fuck you. And if you're on the board, then fuck you and your father. People said we couldn't go to three. It'll cost a fortune to manufacture, they said. Well, we did it. Now some egghead in a lab is screaming "Five's crazy?" Well, perhaps he'd be more comfortable in the labs at Norelco, working on fucking electrics. Rotary phones, my white ass! Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe we should just ride in Bic's wake and make pens. Ha! Not on your fucking life! The day I shadow a penny-ante outfit like Bic is the day I leave the phone game for good, and that won't happen until the day I die! The market? Listen, we make the market. All we have to do is put her out there with a little jingle. It's as easy as, "Hey, browsing with anything less than five G's is like scraping your beard off with a dull hatchet." Or "You'll be so well-connected, I could snort lines off of your chin." Try "Your wallet is going to be so friggin' soft, someone's gonna walk up and tie a goddamn Cub Scout kerchief under it." I know what you're thinking now: What'll people say? Mew mew mew. Oh, no, what will people say?! Grow the fuck up. When you're on top, people talk. That's the price you pay for being on top. Which AT&T is, always has been, and forever shall be, Amen, sweet Jesus in heaven.
    • It looks like if you don't live within a 15-20 mile radius of a major city you're lucky if you can even get EDGE service. There are vast portions of Ohio that have *no* coverage at all, not even GSM voice. Their entire network clusters around the six "big" cities in Ohio and trickles along the interstate highway system, but if you stray away from those areas you get absolutely no coverage at all.

      • by hazydave (96747) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @07:55PM (#30758496)

        This IS a real problem. And no one really talks about this.. except maybe Verizon, because they largely don't have it.

        Ok.. set the way-back machine to the dawn of cellular phone technology. It was all AMPS, the original analog phone service. And it was 850MHz in the USA, 900MHz in Europe, deal done. Each area could support two cellular providers on that band, period. In the USA, one was usually Verizon (and, to a small extent, the companies Verizon sucked up over the years), the other was probably AT&T (and likewise).

        Now, even in this, Verizon was doubly blessed. For one, they started with CDMA, they use CDMA today. Second, the CDMA 3G technology, EvDO, works in the same bandwidth (down to 2.5MHz.. 1.25MHz up, 1.25MHz down) as plain old voice. So every Verizon cell is a 3G cell. Sure, you lose 3G at the fringes, or sometimes when a particular cell is busy, but that's that. And they have the advantage of an 850MHz slot, which means, much more range for the same power. And it works much better in rain, and much, much better through forests and walls. Of course, Verizon also has 1900MHz (1800MHz in Europe) like everyone else.

        AT&T Mobility was successful, but not Verizon successful. Neither was Cingular. Together, though, they made themselves the #2 network in the USA. One small problem: AT&T Mobility used DAMPS, the digital TDMA replacement for AMPS. Cingular used GSM (not originally, but by the time of the merger/acquisition). The proper move forward was GSM, but AT&T had to phase that out. That was also where most of their 850MHz slots were being used. They shut down the last DAMPS cell in 2008.. but had to upgrade them.

        Two problems here, however, One is that DAMPS had greater range than GSM for regular voice/2G stuff. So some parts of today's cell grid from AT&T is not optimal. That's particularly bad on a standard GSM voice call, because GSM does hard handoff--- one cell drops you before the next one picks you up, as you move. If that fails, you drop the call. CDMA, and GSM/3G (UMTS/HSPA) do soft handoffs... the phone is actually connected to multiple cells at once, and one is dropped only when better ones are connected.

        Then there's the GSM 3G technology. You can get that 7.2Mb/s downlink, versus a max of 3.1Mb/s on CDMA, largely because of fatter physical pipes. To see 7.2Mb/s (at least based on AT&Ts set regulation of per-user downlink speeds), you need a full HSPA+ setup, which is two cells bonded together, for a total of 20MHz bandwidth. Even for regular UMTS, you need 10MHz (5MHz up, 5MHz down) for the normal 3G. This meant new spectrum, rather than the CDMA folks being able to re-use their existing spectrum. Kind of.

        AT&T actually had more licenses at 1900MHz, thanks to their merger with Cingular, so they could actually do 10MHz at least, 20MHz in some markets, using 850MHz and/or 1900MHz. So they just did. Which is in opposition to what had been planned, but it was legal.

        Now, enter T-Mobile. They used to be tiny VoiceStream, at the time the only GSM company in the USA. They were acquired by the German Telecom, which might have been a problem, but they got Catherine Zeta Jones as their spokeswoman, and being really happy to see more of her on a regular basis, I know I didn't mind Germans running the thing. Besides, it's not as if the original VoiceStream did much good.

        VoiceStream had a tiny network, and while they built it, they usually only had the single 1900MHz slot. So they didn't the range of AT&T or Verizon. Enter 3G... THEY actually needed the extra spectrum. Which was auctioned off... 1700MHz and 2100MHz. But this took time, of course... they were late to the party. And also, less investment in infrastructure, so even the completed 3G network covers much less.

        At this point, though, you have to ask if 3G even matters. AT&T thinks it does... they're still upgrading their network for 7.2Mb/s HSPA+, and claim they'll have over 30 cities wired with the really fast 3G by mid 2010 (if you're an iPod 3GS user, you

    • by zn0k (1082797)

      You're kidding, right?

      http://www.cellularmaps.com/3g_compare.shtml [cellularmaps.com]

      AT&T's 3G coverage is horrible compared to Verizon. T-Mobile's 3G coverage is horrible compared to AT&T.

    • by AndrewNeo (979708)

      Just 3G coverage? Where I live they make some MVNOs look good. You're lucky to get EDGE here, otherwise you get some pretty consistent GPRS at least. This is a 'major' city, too, we even have actual AT&T 3G. I don't think we'll see good T-mobile coverage here for years.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      No, really?

      Have you seen their coverage maps? They make AT&T look good.

      If you even bothered to read the summary, you would know that the Nexus One is having a hard time keeping a 3G signal even in places where other T-Mobile 3G phones pick it up just fine. The Nexus One owners aren't complaining that T-Mobile's 3G coverage is bad (although that's a valid complaint as well), they're complaining that the coverage is even worse with this specific phone.

      • This happens on my Droid with Verizon as well.

        3G coverage seems to fluctuate wildly just sitting at my desk or at home.
        I can try to download email and it will timeout, but while surfing the web, different websites will load immediately or sometimes not at all.

        When I'm at home at least I can hop on the wifi and things improve somewhat.

        I'd really like to have a network quality feedback app for Android like AT&T has for the iPhone. Actually I'd like to have a feedback app for a lot of the things on Android

    • T-Mobile has always had coverage issues, they don't suscribe to the verizon plan of cover everywhere and charge your customers more for the towers that don't get used.
      • by hazydave (96747)

        That fails on several levels.

        For one, there's a technology difference. Every Verizon (and probably Sprint) cell is a 3G cell. The EvDO technology works in the same bandwidth as 2G/EDGE/Voice, the original 2.5MHz block. So they don't need new spectrum. So, much cheaper upgrade. GSM's UMTS/HSPA needs at least 10MHz, and the 7.2Mb/s HSPA+ stuff needs 20MHz. They don't necessarily have the license, and even if they do, it's much more gear to add to a cell site.

        Second.. Verizon has 850MHz coverage nearly everywh

    • by lanner (107308)

      Real-world TMobile customer here, with a MyTouch 3G.

      I don't have any problem with 3G coverage in Phoenix AZ. Do I really expect to get 3G coverage outside of the city? No. I get EDGE and regular old GSM out on the road and in rural areas, and that's just fine.

      More than anything, I would say that 3G and coverage complaints are an issue of expectation management. Customers expect wacky things, like their phones to work underground and behind four feet of concrete and metal, or to get 3G in Podunk Alaska.

  • by Infiniti2000 (1720222) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:31PM (#30754768)
    I post from my phone frequently and never hav
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by greyline (1052440)
      How did you submit if you lost connection?
    • by Paul Carver (4555)

      I bet you're wishing that your connection had dropped out just before you clicked submit so that you wouldn't have uploaded that incomplete comment. Too bad that your connection was so reliable that it successfully uploaded your comment as soon as you hit the button.

  • by cmkeane (240429) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:32PM (#30754780)

    I ordered the N1 right out of the box, and it has performed almost flawlessly. The 3G has held as good as anything in REAL use. And it has compared favorably with my experience on the myTouch on t-mobile, and a long list of WM phones on AT&T. It is possible there is a bad batch in the initial production line, or perhaps people are spending WAY too much time looking at their signal status! I have never seen any phone be perfect in holding steady bars/speed level on any carrier in real use - you know, moving about in a building, driving a car, and even just sitting in my office. Too many variables. Its a friggin' phone, not a magical device and large production runs may have some flaws. Now the apparent lack of customer support planned, that is a different story.

  • by DustyShadow (691635) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:37PM (#30754854) Homepage
    Should be "T-Mobile Service is Terrible No Matter What Phone You Use"
    • by Bo'Bob'O (95398)

      I have a G1 and indeed, I have the same trouble. I tend to lock it into Edge mode most of the time.

      • I had the displeasure of having a G1 for a little more than a week before I send it back from whence it came. I couldn't even get Edge unless I strolled around my neighborhood looking for their pathetic signal. This after I spent six months competing in the android developer challenge. What a massive disappointment.

        I am utterly baffled why Google would sully their reputation by attaching themselves to such a shit network.

        How about releasing a CDMA nexus one on Sprint??

        • by Mr2001 (90979)

          I am utterly baffled why Google would sully their reputation by attaching themselves to such a shit network.

          More likely, I think, is that they designed the first version of the phone to use the same 3G frequencies that are used in most of the world, so they'd be able to sell it worldwide.

          Unfortunately, in the US, T-Mobile is the only carrier that uses the worldwide frequencies. AT&T uses different, incompatible 3G frequencies. It's easy for us to think that T-Mobile is the outlier because AT&T is so much bigger in the US, but it's really the other way around.

          • Because the only thing better than mediocre connectivity stateside is getting ass-raped with roaming charges when I place a call overseas. Sigh.

            Thanks for the explanation though...

  • Who knew? (Score:4, Funny)

    by MongooseKY (760783) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:42PM (#30754906)
    T-Mobile has 3G?
  • "Nexus One is still in beta. You gotta expect the odd hiccup or two. (pause) What?"
  • it's still in beta (Score:4, Insightful)

    by alen (225700) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:47PM (#30754992)

    seriously, i was checking the Android Central forums and there is a whole thread there how it's a known issue with HTC phones going back at least a year and affects all carriers

  • I have friends who live in suburban developments near where I live, and I can't get any signal while at their house. Two blocks in one direction from there is 4 bars, one block in another direction is 3 bars (followed by a dead spot another block past). I don't give a damn about 3g on T-mobile (as a T-mobile customer) - I just want to be able to use my phone as a phone. I have a pretty decent signal at home, but I can't very well drive home from anywhere and hold signal all the way home.

    And even worse, the coverage maps on T-mobile claim that I should get "good" coverage in these locations where I have no signal. And this is on a quad-band blackberry.
    • This is why I refuse to switch off Verizon regardless of what awesome deals T-Mobile comes to the table with. I hate everything about Verizon except the fact their coverage can't be beat. I have a Blackberry on AT&T provided by my company, and I will admit it gets similar connectivity in most places I go around cities. But once I go down into the Metro, or anywhere 30 miles+ away from a city, my Blackberry goes dead while my Verizon phone continues to pick up enough of a signal to make a call.

      I th
    • My G1 keeps roaming even though there's no place anywhere I go that doesn't have t-mobile. I keep having manually selecting T-mobile but when I check back an hour later there's a big R and no data.

  • Welcome to reality. (Score:5, Informative)

    by jtownatpunk.net (245670) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @03:51PM (#30755048)

    This is the same with every 3G phone on every network I've ever used. I've had to add (or un-hide) a band selector on every 3G phone I've ever had because the default settings are always designed to lock onto the STRONGEST signal rather than the FASTEST signal. If I'm going to be doing data-intensive stuff, lock it in 3G. When I'm done, switch it back to auto.

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      by Tikkun (992269)
      Don't you mean welcome to the USA?
    • by kindbud (90044)

      That's a good tip. Not all devices support it, though. But I never have switch it back to auto. I use 3G on Verizon, where I get four bars and 2.5 Mbps on my boat moored at Catalina Island, 26 miles off the coast of Los Angeles. With Verizon, you can pretty much fix it to 3G-only and never have a problem, except in parts of West Texas.

      I wonder sometimes whether the difference is that Verizon uses CDMA, or that Verizon just has way more towers than the other carriers.

    • by raehl (609729)

      I have a 3G phone as well as a 3G broadband modem (a couple actually) The modems are configured to go for 3G at all costs, and I find they do a much better job at sticking to 3G than phones do.

      For phones, it's really a no-win situation... do you want customers to be pissed that their data rate stinks or that their call quality/total connectivity stinks?

      • It's one thing to set the phones to behave in a certain way by default. Every device needs to have some sort of common base configuration that meets the needs of the largest number of customers. It's another thing entirely to hide/disable/remove the utilities that would allow the customer to adjust those settings to meet their individual needs. For me, my device is a data link which I occasionally use for voice calls. Since I make more than 0 calls per month, I need the phone feature but it's a distant

    • by fm6 (162816)

      Didn't even know you could do this. A link to supporting documentation and/or software will earn you a small bribe.

      • Does this [nttdocomo.co.jp] help?

      • Google is your friend. Each phone and carrier are different. Search for

        [carrier] lock [phone_model] in 3g mode

        or something similar. Most WinMo phones have bandsel.exe hidden and either unhiding it or creating a shortcut to it will restore its functionality. Tho sometimes it is removed and sometimes it doesn't work properly with that particular phone/carrier combo. And, obviously, that won't help with non-WinMo phones. So do a search for your specific setup.

        • by fm6 (162816)

          Gee! Googling for information?! What a novel concept!

          It isn't obvious to me that "choose the fastest, not the strongest" is the same as "lock in 3G". If it is, well then thanks for the tip, if not the attitude.

          • Your mouth is smarter than your brain. "Sort by fastest" is not the same as "fastest only". If you can't figure out the difference, it's no wonder you can't work google.

            • by fm6 (162816)

              I work Google just fine. (I can no longer read a book without a computer handy, in case I need to look up something.) I also try to express myself clearly, a skill you seem to need work on, since I have no idea what you're trying to say.

          • Oh, and just to be clear since you seem a little dense. I didn't give you attitude. (Tho I am now, obviously.) I gave you a search string that should lead you to the information you need. I don't have all of the information needed to provide direct links to a solution for your specific configuration. I did, however, provide an example of the platform with which I'm most familiar and pointed out that, even in this single environment which represents a very small subset of the number of possible phone/ca

            • by fm6 (162816)

              I didn't give you attitude.

              "Google is your friend" is usually a sarcastic reminder to people that they can look stuff up for themselves. If you're not being sarcastic, you should avoid the expression.

              Civility is your friend. Sorry, not trying to be sarcastic, just illustrating how sarcasm can be more obvious to the sarcasee.

              • I don't need to be civil. I'm on the Internet. I know I'm a jerk and I'm good with that.

                • by fm6 (162816)

                  I'm glad you feel good about yourself. But if you think that "being a jerk" and "giving attitude" are two different things, then there's something wrong with your brain.

    • by VoltageX (845249)
      And not just in the US either. Here in Australia I am constantly setting the band on my N95 to stop it either a) locking on to the 1-bar 3G signal when the 2G network is fine, or b) locking on to the 5-bar 2G signal when the 3-bar 3G signal would work fine.
  • Since T-Mobile is a lower-tier provider in the U.S. (although has pretty good customer service from what I recall) perhaps they'd be better to reinvent themselves by partnering with a like-minded company. They should merge with America Online so they can truly jump the shark.

    Seriously though, after 8+ years of heavy business use of Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile I'd put them in that order in terms of service coverage. And AT&T and T-Mobile are so far down the pecking order it's a joke...

  • I bought it because it rhymes with Lexus.
  • T-mobile in my area has a problem. when my friend called up to complain about his mytouch they said he's between two towers so it bounces back and forth. Something is wrong with their implementation of 3g? I really want a nexus but having my phone being pinged back and forth by two towers would suck. Im even considering putting up a repeater in the attic
  • A great phone doesn't mean shit when your only choice for service is a string and tin can.

  • Poor service in far too many cases, hardware locked into service providers, limitations on use contrary to the advertising (and, sometimes, contract), but the chumps/marks/"customers" can't really complain, 'cause the major carriers own enough of the government to stifle any redress.

    Get used to it; it isn't going to get any better.

    Yeah, it may be a troll/whine, but until the tech "fanboys" (us) go cold turkey and stop buying the contracts, there's not even a hope of change (and, yes, I have).

  • Who would have guessed that there would be spotty coverage on TMobile.

    More like NO COVERAGE.

    They are DISTANT 4th in the US marketplace among national level carriers.

    There are regional carriers which have far more coverage in their region than TMobile as a whole.

    Next time pick a REAL CARRIER, translation VERIZON!

  • I switched to Sprint from AT&T years ago because of crappy coverage in the switch to digital, but recently caved and got a Cliq from Tmobile. I'd tried the G1 a year ago, and knew what I was getting into, resigning myself to buying a $300 cellular repeater just so I could use the phone at home. It's nice having the features in the Cliq (the options from Sprint were too limited for my tastes, and I travel internationally from time to time and wanted a phone that would work globally), and it works well

  • by sukotto (122876) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @05:32PM (#30756570)

    You got a response from Google about a technical problem with one of their products?

    How the hell did you accomplish that?

  • by Pointy_Hair (133077) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @05:34PM (#30756598)

    ... it's always your blood all over the floor. Give it a while and they'll have that shiny new gadget patched up real nice!

  • Typical (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tgibbs (83782) on Wednesday January 13, 2010 @09:04PM (#30759386)

    Doesn't this happen anytime anybody releases a smartphone that is easy to use? All of a sudden, people are actually using the web browser in their phones, and complaining when their internet access is slow. And the demand for bandwidth goes up, and the weaknesses in coverage and the algorithms the phones use to lock onto the network start to stand out. If history is any guide, these problems will gradually subside after a few months and a couple of system upgrades.

  • There's a simple explanation for why Tmobile's coverage fluctuates so much even when you are stationary. It's all about relativity. I don't think they actually have any towers, just mobile trucks that circle the city from time to time providing signal. Think about it. The signal is fluctuating around like you are driving through the city, only it's not you that's moving, it's the towers!

HOST SYSTEM NOT RESPONDING, PROBABLY DOWN. DO YOU WANT TO WAIT? (Y/N)

Working...