Change in service quality.

I live in a mountainous area in northern California.
Five years ago I switched to Verizon from ATt&T
because the CDMA prodocol worked so much better
in this area. I was also instrumental in many of my
friends and associates (we're talking more than 100)
signing onto or even switching to Verizon because of
the better connectivity and over all service, and
because of the no-minute-charge mobile-to-mobile service.

Recently, within the last three to five months,
Verizon service has changed noticeably even dramatically.
So much so that some of my friends have changed providers.

Symptoms of the change are:
1. wider dead zones
2. Often smaller bar connection in previous "hot" areas.
3. "hanging calls" i.e. you dial land the phone sits on timer.
You have to hang up and call again, sometimes several times.

While these may be common cell phone user experiences and complaints
they are new to us in this region. And more importantly it represents
a change.

Some Verizon users report a return to better service and diminishment
of these symptoms when they purchased higher end Verizon phones.

Sprint and US Celluar users report NOT having these problems.

So, far Verizon has been unable to provide a remedy or even an
acceptable explanation.

I'm posting here to inquire if this is a change experience beyond our
regions.
And, of course, if anyone can offer an explanation or solution.

Thank you
CR

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:24:03 -0700 (PDT), Redigoogle
<redicliff@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I live in a mountainous area in northern California.
>Five years ago I switched to Verizon from ATt&T
>because the CDMA prodocol worked so much better
>in this area. I was also instrumental in many of my
>friends and associates (we're talking more than 100)
>signing onto or even switching to Verizon because of
>the better connectivity and over all service, and
>because of the no-minute-charge mobile-to-mobile service.
>
>Recently, within the last three to five months,
>Verizon service has changed noticeably even dramatically.
>So much so that some of my friends have changed providers.
>
>Symptoms of the change are:
>1. wider dead zones
>2. Often smaller bar connection in previous "hot" areas.
>3. "hanging calls" i.e. you dial land the phone sits on timer.
>You have to hang up and call again, sometimes several times.
>
>While these may be common cell phone user experiences and complaints
>they are new to us in this region. And more importantly it represents
>a change.
>
>Some Verizon users report a return to better service and diminishment
>of these symptoms when they purchased higher end Verizon phones.
>
>Sprint and US Celluar users report NOT having these problems.
>
>So, far Verizon has been unable to provide a remedy or even an
>acceptable explanation.
>
>I'm posting here to inquire if this is a change experience beyond our
>regions.
>And, of course, if anyone can offer an explanation or solution.
>

Are you absolutely certain you were previously getting digital signals
all those times and not analog ones? The analog channels were shut
down during the time period you referenced, which left a number of
dead spots in rural/mountainous areas.

The Ghost of General Lee wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:24:03 -0700 (PDT), Redigoogle
> <redicliff@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I live in a mountainous area in northern California.
>> Five years ago I switched to Verizon from ATt&T
>> because the CDMA prodocol worked so much better
>> in this area. I was also instrumental in many of my
>> friends and associates (we're talking more than 100)
>> signing onto or even switching to Verizon because of
>> the better connectivity and over all service, and
>> because of the no-minute-charge mobile-to-mobile service.
>>
>> Recently, within the last three to five months,
>> Verizon service has changed noticeably even dramatically.
>> So much so that some of my friends have changed providers.
>>
>> Symptoms of the change are:
>> 1. wider dead zones
>> 2. Often smaller bar connection in previous "hot" areas.
>> 3. "hanging calls" i.e. you dial land the phone sits on timer.
>> You have to hang up and call again, sometimes several times.
>>
>> While these may be common cell phone user experiences and complaints
>> they are new to us in this region. And more importantly it represents
>> a change.
>>
>> Some Verizon users report a return to better service and diminishment
>> of these symptoms when they purchased higher end Verizon phones.
>>
>> Sprint and US Celluar users report NOT having these problems.
>>
>> So, far Verizon has been unable to provide a remedy or even an
>> acceptable explanation.
>>
>> I'm posting here to inquire if this is a change experience beyond our
>> regions.
>> And, of course, if anyone can offer an explanation or solution.
>>
>
> Are you absolutely certain you were previously getting digital signals
> all those times and not analog ones? The analog channels were shut
> down during the time period you referenced, which left a number of
> dead spots in rural/mountainous areas.
>

Was analog service actually shut down? I was under the impression that
the providers were ALLOWED to shut down analog service but not REQUIRED
to do so.

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:16:21 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
<rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:

>The Ghost of General Lee wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:24:03 -0700 (PDT), Redigoogle
>> <redicliff@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I live in a mountainous area in northern California.
>>> Five years ago I switched to Verizon from ATt&T
>>> because the CDMA prodocol worked so much better
>>> in this area. I was also instrumental in many of my
>>> friends and associates (we're talking more than 100)
>>> signing onto or even switching to Verizon because of
>>> the better connectivity and over all service, and
>>> because of the no-minute-charge mobile-to-mobile service.
>>>
>>> Recently, within the last three to five months,
>>> Verizon service has changed noticeably even dramatically.
>>> So much so that some of my friends have changed providers.
>>>
>>> Symptoms of the change are:
>>> 1. wider dead zones
>>> 2. Often smaller bar connection in previous "hot" areas.
>>> 3. "hanging calls" i.e. you dial land the phone sits on timer.
>>> You have to hang up and call again, sometimes several times.
>>>
>>> While these may be common cell phone user experiences and complaints
>>> they are new to us in this region. And more importantly it represents
>>> a change.
>>>
>>> Some Verizon users report a return to better service and diminishment
>>> of these symptoms when they purchased higher end Verizon phones.
>>>
>>> Sprint and US Celluar users report NOT having these problems.
>>>
>>> So, far Verizon has been unable to provide a remedy or even an
>>> acceptable explanation.
>>>
>>> I'm posting here to inquire if this is a change experience beyond our
>>> regions.
>>> And, of course, if anyone can offer an explanation or solution.
>>>
>>
>> Are you absolutely certain you were previously getting digital signals
>> all those times and not analog ones? The analog channels were shut
>> down during the time period you referenced, which left a number of
>> dead spots in rural/mountainous areas.
>>
>
>Was analog service actually shut down?

For the most part, yes.

>I was under the impression that
>the providers were ALLOWED to shut down analog service but not REQUIRED
>to do so.

No, they weren't required to shut them down, but most carriers who had
AMPS service were happy to pull the plug as soon as they could. VZW
led the pack, as they could use the freed up channels for more digital
capacity.

On Jun 19, 10:36 pm, The Ghost of General Lee <gh...@general.lee>
wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:16:21 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
>
> >> Are you absolutely certain you were previously getting digital signals

The analog issue is the first explanation I entertained, and it may
well be the answer.
However, the reported change comes from many users and most report
digital only phones.
I've obtained conflicting information regarding my phone (LG VX4500)
whether it is dual mode or digitial only. Anyway, some users in this
area report a "return" to original service quality by purchasing an
upgrade phone such as the Razor or LG EnV

> No, they weren't required to shut them down, but most carriers who had

That's interesting. Verizon tech reps dump all the blame on the Feds.

I wonder if the change of which I complain has something to do with
this change
and/or did Verizon change or add protocol. That is to say, years ago
CDMA was reportedly the preferred protocol in a mountainous region and
GSM (ATT) didn't work so well.
Has Verizon made changes in this regard?

Thanks for the reponses.

On Jun 20, 8:43 am, Redigoogle <redicl...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> and/or did Verizon change or add protocol.

I'm seeing in Verizon's FAQs that they have two protocols
CDMA digital or PCS digital.
I'm wondering if they have subordinated one to the other
i.e. one has priority or more bandwidth or something?

CR

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 08:43:48 -0700 (PDT), Redigoogle
<redicliff@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Jun 19, 10:36 pm, The Ghost of General Lee <gh...@general.lee>
>wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:16:21 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
>>
>> >> Are you absolutely certain you were previously getting digital signals
>
>The analog issue is the first explanation I entertained, and it may
>well be the answer.

After a bit of research this morning, it seems the VX4500 is indeed a
digital only phone. I could find no reference to analog capability on
this model.

>However, the reported change comes from many users and most report
>digital only phones.
>I've obtained conflicting information regarding my phone (LG VX4500)
>whether it is dual mode or digitial only. Anyway, some users in this
>area report a "return" to original service quality by purchasing an
>upgrade phone such as the Razor or LG EnV

Some phones are just more sensitive than others.

>> No, they weren't required to shut them down, but most carriers who had
>
>That's interesting. Verizon tech reps dump all the blame on the Feds.

Somehow, I'm not surprised.

>I wonder if the change of which I complain has something to do with
>this change
>and/or did Verizon change or add protocol. That is to say, years ago
>CDMA was reportedly the preferred protocol in a mountainous region and
>GSM (ATT) didn't work so well.
>Has Verizon made changes in this regard?

Don't discount the fact that 800Mhz will generally carry further than
1900Mhz. And I trust you did the obligatory PRL update.

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:05:04 -0700 (PDT), Redigoogle
<redicliff@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Jun 20, 8:43 am, Redigoogle <redicl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> and/or did Verizon change or add protocol.
>
>I'm seeing in Verizon's FAQs that they have two protocols
>CDMA digital or PCS digital.

PCS isn't a protocol. It is the 1900Mhz band. CDMA can be used on
both the 800Mhz and 1900Mhz bands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona...ations_Service

>I'm wondering if they have subordinated one to the other
>i.e. one has priority or more bandwidth or something?

It depends on the area. Most VZW areas are 800Mhz, while a few are
1900Mhz. The PRL tells the phone which one to use (which is almost
always VZW's native system).

Redigoogle used his keyboard to write :
> On Jun 19, 10:36 pm, The Ghost of General Lee <gh...@general.lee>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:16:21 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
>>
>>>> Are you absolutely certain you were previously getting digital signals
>
> The analog issue is the first explanation I entertained, and it may
> well be the answer.
> However, the reported change comes from many users and most report
> digital only phones.
> I've obtained conflicting information regarding my phone (LG VX4500)
> whether it is dual mode or digitial only. Anyway, some users in this
> area report a "return" to original service quality by purchasing an
> upgrade phone such as the Razor or LG EnV
>
>> No, they weren't required to shut them down, but most carriers who had
>
> That's interesting. Verizon tech reps dump all the blame on the Feds.
>
> I wonder if the change of which I complain has something to do with
> this change
> and/or did Verizon change or add protocol. That is to say, years ago
> CDMA was reportedly the preferred protocol in a mountainous region and
> GSM (ATT) didn't work so well.
> Has Verizon made changes in this regard?
>
> Thanks for the reponses.

The LG 4500 was reported to have been one of the poorest phones for
reception. Check with users who have newer phones.

On Jun 20, 12:18 pm, TeddeLI <S...@nospam.neat> wrote:

These are very helpful responses.

Richard, I appreciate the verification that the 4500 is digital
and yes I've done the PRL, i.e. if *228 is the PRL
>
> The LG 4500 was reported to have been one of the poorest phones for
> reception. Check with users who have newer phones.

Yes, some users with newer, higher end phones report better service.
My experince when first obtaining the 4500 was that it obtained super
reception.
So, while the solution to our general problem here may be "get newer
phones"
I'm trying explore "why the change".

As a group in this area, we experience a dramatic change.
I would think that this almost certainly is because Verizon changed
something.

I'll check with Verizon regarding the 800 or 1900Mhz in our area.

It would be useful to know the wattage of any particular phone.
When I was with ATT the local rep was quite helpful and knowledgeable
and recommended
iirc a 1 watt phone. I think he said that was max allowable, while
most phones were in the .6-.8 w range.
I wonder if there is a data base on line somewhere with this sort of
info.

As I mentioned, recently a Verizon rep recommended I get a 3 watt
attache phone.

Thanks for all the help.
I continue to get responses from my group of friends and the consensus
grows regarding recent change of service quality. Of course, it is a
bit of a subjective thing. The most compelling or should I say
convicting evidence of a Verizon glitch is that Sprint and US Cellular
users in the area report experiencing no change.

Cliff