[RicanMedic78]

outside of the rest of the advances with each phone (Bold, 8900, Niagara), and outside the network comparisons, which radio technology is newer and perhaps more advanced, GSM or CDMA?

So far, the one thing I do know is that CDMA radios are larger and cannot do voice/data. So does that make it a dinosaur in terms of the technology of the radio itself? Or does it have other benefits that outweigh the GSM tecnology?

[Dukie22731]

I did some research on it and found that CDMA is actually the newer technology. The reason why GSM is so prevalent is because the EU requires cell phone carriers to use GSM only so there would be a standard in all of Europe. I do not know the technical things, but what I have read says that GSM allows you to have simultaneous voice and data, but the voice quality is not as good as CDMA for some reason. Also, the hand off from cell tower to cell tower as you are moving is more abrupt so that is why GSM drops more calls than CDMA. CDMA has softer "hand offs" so dropped calls between towers is not as frequent. However, with CDMA you don't have simultaneous voice and data.

Once again this is just from memory of doing some light research between the two. If I am wrong someone please correct me.

[blevin3]

Wikipedia FTW

Comparison of mobile phone standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[richro]

Hopefully in a couple years LTE will become a global standard and we'll all have much better phone selection regardless of network, and all phones will be "world phones."

[bigman2]

GSM uses two different antennas for voice and data respectively. CDMA uses the same antenna for both. Or at least EVDO does. There was a competing tech that did both at the same time, but for whatever reason Verizon went with EVDO which pretty much killed the other system.

And given this is something of a subjective topic, I'd be a bit wary of anything Wikipedia has to say on the subject. It's fine so long as all you need to do is copy and paste data from somewhere, but any time there's a subjective element... Wikipedia needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Especially if it's an even remotely controversial subject.

[blevin3]

And given this is something of a subjective topic, I'd be a bit wary of anything Wikipedia has to say on the subject. It's fine so long as all you need to do is copy and paste data from somewhere, but any time there's a subjective element... Wikipedia needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Especially if it's an even remotely controversial subject.

Much like everything in these (or any) online forums!!!

[dmcgrady]

CDMA will penetrate dense buildings much better than GSM.

[RicanMedic78]

actually I'm pretty sure its the opposite!

[lnichols]

CDMA2000 is better than pre 3G GSM. 3G GSM (UMTS) is actually based on Wideband CDMA. Verizon and Sprint are using the CDMA2000 spec and are now rolling out or have rolled out EVDO Rev A. 3G GSM is probably the better technology now cause it allows the simultaneous voice/data and higher data rates than EVDO RevA. Unfortunately until Sprint and Verizon get 4G out we won't see any improvements to the CDMA2000 because their is nothing on the roadmap past Rev A. Verizon and most everyone else is going with LTE, Sprint with WiMax for 4G.

[briankeith513]

I did some research on it and found that CDMA is actually the newer technology. The reason why GSM is so prevalent is because the EU requires cell phone carriers to use GSM only so there would be a standard in all of Europe. I do not know the technical things, but what I have read says that GSM allows you to have simultaneous voice and data, but the voice quality is not as good as CDMA for some reason. Also, the hand off from cell tower to cell tower as you are moving is more abrupt so that is why GSM drops more calls than CDMA. CDMA has softer "hand offs" so dropped calls between towers is not as frequent. However, with CDMA you don't have simultaneous voice and data.

Once again this is just from memory of doing some light research between the two. If I am wrong someone please correct me.

This all more-or less accurate. Also, with GSM with HSDPA has the ability to be faster than CDMA's EVDO Rev A, the "real world faster speeds" haven't been implemented yet for HSDPA, but it will be soon. So, in a nut shell, CDMA-better voice quality, however, GSM-HSDPA-global coverage, simultaneous voice and data, plus ability to have faster speeds. Just keep in mind, this is the current situation, and the above might be changing soon with LTE, that's yet to be seen though.

[skunkd]

actually I'm pretty sure its the opposite!

nope he is correct.

[RicanMedic78]

nope he is correct.

Read below... particularly at advantage/disadvantages

Comparison of mobile phone standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[vrs626]

Read below... particularly at advantage/disadvantages

Comparison of mobile phone standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia isn't always right. From someone that has had both GSM and CDMA phones, CDMA penetrates buildings much better than GSM.

[md12]

CDMA will penetrate dense buildings much better than GSM.

this isn't really true, CDMA penetrates buildings much better than 1900 mhz GSM but the 850 mhz GSM is comparable to CDMA.

ATT uses both 1900 and 850

[theadrock13]

Wikipedia is about as unbiased as a Marin County Public School Teacher on the Board of Greenpeace. On the whole, Wiki is good, but by no means unbiased in their articles. They definitely have a slant, and unless you're a member of the elitist Wiki club you can't get an honest edit in. Always cross-check info you get on Wiki if you want to avoid any false data.

As for the topic of penetration, my experience is CDMA wins. When I had GSM I'd have zero service in a particular "underground" shopping mall, whereas CDMA works perfect in that same spot. Anecdotal but emperical.

[RicanMedic78]

Wikipedia is about as unbiased as a Marin County Public School Teacher on the Board of Greenpeace. On the whole, Wiki is good, but by no means unbiased in their articles. They definitely have a slant, and unless you're a member of the elitist Wiki club you can't get an honest edit in. Always cross-check info you get on Wiki if you want to avoid any false data.

As for the topic of penetration, my experience is CDMA wins. When I had GSM I'd have zero service in a particular "underground" shopping mall, whereas CDMA works perfect in that same spot. Anecdotal but emperical.

so lets disregard that rubbish and go with your "EXPERT" analysis

[noaim]

Read below... particularly at advantage/disadvantages

Comparison of mobile phone standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia is the greatest thing ever, Anyone in the world can type anything they want about any subject...

This way you know you are ALWays getting the most reliable information!

[noaim]

As for the topic of penetration, my experience is CDMA wins. When I had GSM I'd have zero service in a particular "underground" shopping mall, whereas CDMA works perfect in that same spot. Anecdotal but emperical.

This is quite hard to use as a comparison the only way to truly test it would be to have a cell tower from gsm and cdma at the same distant with the same obstructions..

if the gsm tower closest was 1 mile farther away it could cause this (I dont know much about cell towers but I would assume this would be correct)



I do find that my verizon phone keeps a better signal / voice + data as it seems (I could be wrong) that the amount of bars I have doesn't seem to effect the phone as much. I have talked with 1 bar and with full bars and it never seemed to hinder it.


Where as with my Iphone on at&t if I was down to 1 bar it was good luck making a call sometimes...

I am not sure if this is fact but it does make me wondor..

[Crucial_Xtreme]

This all more-or less accurate. Also, with GSM with HSDPA has the ability to be faster than CDMA's EVDO Rev A, the "real world faster speeds" haven't been implemented yet for HSDPA, but it will be soon. So, in a nut shell, CDMA-better voice quality, however, GSM-HSDPA-global coverage, simultaneous voice and data, plus ability to have faster speeds. Just keep in mind, this is the current situation, and the above might be changing soon with LTE, that's yet to be seen though.

Rev A is maxed out a 3.1. While AT&T's current 3G is 3.6. Depending on where you live, those speeds may vary, but AT&T's is technically faster. Now as you said, AT&T is currently rolling out and testing HSDPA, which will be rolled out before Verizon and their LTE. Once this happens, the roles will be reversed for a bit. AT&T's HSDPA coverage will be larger than Verizon's LTE. As Verizon continues their build-out, AT&T will then switch over to LTE. Which will then flip-flop, and it will be like the current situation with Verizon having the larger LTE foot print. It will be a little easier for AT&T to roll out LTE, as the handoff from LTE to legacy standards is easier, but eventually we'll all see LTE, and there won't be a need for this convo.

[RicanMedic78]

Rev A is maxed out a 3.1. While AT&T's current 3G is 3.6. Depending on where you live, those speeds may vary, but AT&T's is technically faster. Now as you said, AT&T is currently rolling out and testing HSDPA, which will be rolled out before Verizon and their LTE. Once this happens, the roles will be reversed for a bit. AT&T's HSDPA coverage will be larger than Verizon's LTE. As Verizon continues their build-out, AT&T will then switch over to LTE. Which will then flip-flop, and it will be like the current situation with Verizon having the larger LTE foot print. It will be a little easier for AT&T to roll out LTE, as the handoff from LTE to legacy standards is easier, but eventually we'll all see LTE, and there won't be a need for this convo.

crucial, so at the end of the day, would you consider GMS HSDPA the "newer" or "better" technology over CDMA EVDO Rev A?

[Crucial_Xtreme]

For sure. While I will agree that EVDO has a larger foot-print in the US, albeit it in mostly rural areas, GSM's HSPA is in my opinion the better technology. It is faster. Voice and data alone make it better than EVDO in my eyes. And the fact that I can unlock a GSM device and use on different carriers, is definitely a pus as well. I'm just ready for LTE. Its going to be great. I have seen some tests, and have a buddy who was present at some Verizon tests, and the technology is wonderful. Not even going to mention the speed, because its hard to grasp after using EVDO or AT&T's 3G.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[gvillager]

Wikipedia is the greatest thing ever, Anyone in the world can type anything they want about any subject...

This way you know you are ALWays getting the most reliable information!

Much like these forums.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[dmcgrady]

I work on steel tugboats. And I'm telling you people that CDMA will penetrate dense buildings better than GSM. Its kind of like this 2/3 of the people I work with have Alltel and Verizon. They are able to talk, text, and browse the web anywhere on the boat. Including the engine room, which has no windows.

The rest of us dummies have T-Mobile, and we all look like a bunch of refugees huddled around a window trying to get a signal.

If you guys don't get the picture now, then its quite possible that you are biased in your opinions, or are much like an ostrich, or both.

By the way I am posting this through my CDMA Broadband Connection. While my phone is sitting here looking for a signal.

You might think about this the next time you can't get a signal.

[gvillager]

I work on steel tugboats. And I'm telling you people that CDMA will penetrate dense buildings better than GSM. Its kind of like this 2/3 of the people I work with have Alltel and Verizon. The are able to talk, text, and browse the web anywhere on the boat. Including the engine room, which has no windows.

The rest of us dummies have T-Mobile, and we all look like a buch of refugees huddled around a window trying to get a signal.

If you guys don't get the picture now, then its quite possible that you are biased in your opinions, or are much like an ostrich, or both.

By the way I am posting this through my CDMA Broadband Connection. While my phone is sitting here looking for a signal.

You might think about this the next time you can't get a signal.

CDMA is not any better then GSM as far as building penetration goes. T-Mobile operates on 1900 megahertz, VZW/Alltel operate on both 800 & 1900 megahertz in many parts of the country. Lower frequencies provide better building penetration.

[dmcgrady]

CDMA is not any better then GSM as far as building penetration goes. T-Mobile operates on 1900 megahertz, VZW/Alltel operate on both 800 & 1900 megahertz in many parts of the country. Lower frequencies provide better building penetration.

Well you use your infinite wisdom and tell me why T-Mobile has 4-5 Bars outside of a Tug Boat or Building. And has no bars inside of a Tug Boat, And only 2 Bars inside of a building. But Alltel and VZ have almost no measurable degradation in signal either inside or outside.

I guess a simple hypothesis would allow one moderately intellegent human being to understand that in this particular case CDMA offers much better coverage than GSM.

I would venture a guess that 800 MHZ GSM might work, but we don't have the luxury of having service inside of the steel boat to determine that.

As I said before the only way to get a useable signal on TMO'S network is to stand next to an open window, or go outside of the boat. Meanwhile CDMA equipped users remain comfortably inside of the boat with no notable loss of service.

Does anyone know what frequency ATT works on and able to honestly describe what kind of indoor reception they are getting?

This area for the record is Savannah, GA

Thanks for sharing your wisdom.