Page 5 of 54 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 804

Thread: T-Mobile’s Ray: We’ll match Verizon’s LTE coverage this year

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,754
    Device(s)
    iPhone 7
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, Verizon
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dnywlsh View Post
    My guess is that most of these areas will be replaced with 3G roaming by the end of the year. If not, then definitely in Q1 2017.
    I hope so. The last two times roaming has been lost (Unicel and CSpire), they have just opted to leave those as no signal zones.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    33
    Feedback Score
    0
    I live in the thumb of Michigan which for who may not know is a rural, boring place lol. I've had experiences with all carriers here and t mobile and Verizon are pretty close here. Sprint is majority garbage, att isn't all that great in my experience either. Go inside a building and lose signal and low spotty signal in other areas.

    That leaves us with Verizon and t mobile which are quite even up here. There's places t mobile works where Verizon doesn't and vice versa but I almost always have LTE on tmobile. A year ago they had nothing here and now they have 3 areas with band 4 and the rest with band 12 to fill the Gapps. I've done alot of mapping with sensory and cell mapper and have to say the "underdog" impresses me.
    Different markets different situations though just thought I'd share my experience.

    Sent from my Pixel XL using HoFo mobile app

  3. #63
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    carriers have weak areas and strong areas. I can list many areas where Verizon's coverage is terrible, just as Verizon customers can list many areas where T-Mobile's coverage is terrible."

    But the two truly nationwide carriers, AT&T and Verizon, have few weak areas. The distant second and third networks, T-Mobile and Sprint, have vast weak areas.

    "People should use what works best for them, and not criticize others for their choices."

    But if the choices of others are much worse or based on lies, it is wise to point that out.

    "Wow! That's quite the exaggeration! You've been all over every state yourself to test this? If T-Mobile's coverage is so awful, why do they have 70 million customers and counting, while AT&T hasn't gained a single postpaid customer in over a year?"

    I'm just referring to facts, not attempts to deceive or lie. Quarter after quarter, twice as many customers chose AT&T over T-Mobile (four times as many if you count both good networks), not just AT&T. And your attempt to cook numbers shows an attempt to deceive. That is the only reason for your "postpaid" mention. Count all customers.

    As for going to every state, it is not necessary. One has to simply look at T-Mobile's native coverage map. Most states are covered well by AT&T or Verizon, and most aren't well covered by T-Mobile (and it's even worse with Sprint, which only has good coverage in 10 states.

    While T-Mobile might be a good landline replacement for most of the population, it remains a rather poor choice as a mobile network since it doesn't do a good job of covering where people go. This is reflected by the distant-third place that T-Mobile comes up in when customers choose carriers. T-Mobile simply does not meet the needs of most Americans, and it probably WILL once it covers the vast majority of America.

    I look forward to T-Mobile becoming a viable third truly nationwide network. But they have a lot of gaps to cover, a lot of coverage to complete, before they even come close. It is a lie, or "fake news" to close this gap with false claims as you have.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by freakonomics101 View Post
    Hahahaha this is so funny!!! T-Mobile's map is such a lie.... not as bad as AT&T, but still. There are several places where T-Mobile stated the area was covered with LTE when I roamed on AT&T 4G.
    The one area I am most familiar with is a large chunk of land that claims to have T-Mobile but has none. This would make T-Mobile's own native coverage claims, in which most states have poor coverage, even worse if this were generalized across the country (which I will not do, as I stick to objective facts)

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    660
    Carrier(s)
    BOOM! Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Surprised nobody is talking about capacity issues. T-Mobile only has 5 MHz for 700 while ATT and Verizon have 10. I see this creating issues if your distant from a tower since there will probably be too much attenuation to use AWS or PCS LTE carriers.

    Also, AFIK there is many areas T-Mobile doesn't have a 700 license.

    Unless they plan to build an extremely dense network I don't see this happening for a while.

    Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk

  6. #66
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Adonis View Post
    I believe Neville said "materially," match LTE coverage by end of year and literally match within 12 months.

    The rate and speed which T-Mobile has grown over 2 years and the way they have turned the industry upside down should not leave any doubt in anyone's mind. They are the global leaders in WiFi calling, VoLTE and according to T-Mobile they have the world's highest VoLTE customer penetration rate
    That reads like a press release. T-Mobile HAS grown, but only enough to pull ahead of Sprint. They are still significantly behind AT&T and Verizon. And they haven't turned anything "upside down": that's like it comes from someone yelling during a used car commercial on TV after 11 PM.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantasy2c View Post
    I live in the thumb of Michigan which for who may not know is a rural, boring place lol. I've had experiences with all carriers here and t mobile and Verizon are pretty close here. Sprint is majority garbage, att isn't all that great in my experience either. Go inside a building and lose signal and low spotty signal in other areas.

    That leaves us with Verizon and t mobile which are quite even up here. There's places t mobile works where Verizon doesn't and vice versa but I almost always have LTE on tmobile. A year ago they had nothing here and now they have 3 areas with band 4 and the rest with band 12 to fill the Gapps. I've done alot of mapping with sensory and cell mapper and have to say the "underdog" impresses me.
    Different markets different situations though just thought I'd share my experience.

    Sent from my Pixel XL using HoFo mobile app
    Michigan is one of the states served poorly by T-Mobile and Sprint (which each cover about half of the state) And Verizon, AT&T cover the vast majority of the state's territory.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by HokieAl View Post
    I think it would be much more realistic to provide the square miles of coverage. That would surely have a big difference between TMUS and VZ.
    That's obvious, and you are very correct. That is far and away the best indicator of how good a mobile network is: how much territory they cover.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    864
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6s
    Carrier(s)
    T-mobile for the whole globe , Att reactivated!!!
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by pclover View Post
    Surprised nobody is talking about capacity issues. T-Mobile only has 5 MHz for 700 while ATT and Verizon have 10. I see this creating issues if your distant from a tower since there will probably be too much attenuation to use AWS or PCS LTE carriers.

    Also, AFIK there is many areas T-Mobile doesn't have a 700 license.

    Unless they plan to build an extremely dense network I don't see this happening for a while.

    Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk
    True story, I went for a party yesterday, center of Boston, Att 57 download, VZW46, Sprint 6.2, T-mobile 1.2. I really feel congested after the party. :-) VZW has not too much spectrum left and yhey build small cells, just announced 300M$ FIOS in Boston buildout to support small cells. Att deployed B29,B30 and convert GSM to LTE soon.

    T-mobile announced that they are going to install 7000 small cells in the begining of the year. 8 months ago I was told by their engineers that my cell site would be upgraded to B12 in 6 months. I contacted them couple weeks ago, was told to wait another 6 months.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    13,554
    Device(s)
    Samsung Avant, Nexus 5X, Moto G
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, Project Fi, PagePlus
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by pclover View Post
    Surprised nobody is talking about capacity issues. T-Mobile only has 5 MHz for 700 while ATT and Verizon have 10. I see this creating issues if your distant from a tower since there will probably be too much attenuation to use AWS or PCS LTE carriers.

    Also, AFIK there is many areas T-Mobile doesn't have a 700 license......
    AT&T's 700 MHz holdings are extensive but somewhat "chaotic". Sometimes they own more 700 where they don't have cellular but this is not a rule. I think they have no dual-channel low-band at all in Oklahoma's panhandle. In my particular neck of the woods they have no cellular and only one 2x5 700 MHz license, plus the 1x5 D-block they have everywhere.

    Limited 700 MHz capacity is less of an issue if it's well managed. CA should help a lot because the uplink is often the weak link in the connection. Mid-band downlink can work at much longer ranges than most handsets can uplink on mid-band. If one sector of a 700 MHz site is frequently congested, it should signal engineering that they need to add more mid-band cells under that sector. However, it's true that if there's a fishing tournament on some lake and the only service is 5x5 700 MHz, not many live videos will be transmitted.
    Donald Newcomb

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    2,625
    Device(s)
    iPhone SE
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    But the two truly nationwide carriers, AT&T and Verizon, have few weak areas. The distant second and third networks, T-Mobile and Sprint, have vast weak areas.
    You clearly haven’t travelled much with them, if you think they have “few” weak areas. There are plenty of examples on this website alone of Verizon and AT&T’s weak spots.

    As you can see from my signature, I had AT&T for 4 years, and Verizon for 5 years, so I’m definitely not a T-Mobile “fan boy”, as much as you might like to think so.

    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    But if the choices of others are much worse or based on lies, it is wise to point that out.
    In some areas, yes, they are much worse. Again, don’t make generalizations. There are areas where Verizon and AT&T are worse, too.

    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    I'm just referring to facts, not attempts to deceive or lie. Quarter after quarter, twice as many customers chose AT&T over T-Mobile (four times as many if you count both good networks), not just AT&T. And your attempt to cook numbers shows an attempt to deceive. That is the only reason for your "postpaid" mention. Count all customers.

    As for going to every state, it is not necessary. One has to simply look at T-Mobile's native coverage map. Most states are covered well by AT&T or Verizon, and most aren't well covered by T-Mobile (and it's even worse with Sprint, which only has good coverage in 10 states.

    While T-Mobile might be a good landline replacement for most of the population, it remains a rather poor choice as a mobile network since it doesn't do a good job of covering where people go. This is reflected by the distant-third place that T-Mobile comes up in when customers choose carriers. T-Mobile simply does not meet the needs of most Americans, and it probably WILL once it covers the vast majority of America.

    I look forward to T-Mobile becoming a viable third truly nationwide network. But they have a lot of gaps to cover, a lot of coverage to complete, before they even come close. It is a lie, or "fake news" to close this gap with false claims as you have.
    No, you’re generalizing. Imagine if I said “Verizon is slow and congested everywhere.” You’d probably disagree with that, right? Because it’s a sweeping generalization that isn’t true.

    My attempt to “cook” numbers? Not at all. This information is publicly available to anyone in their quarterly earnings reports. Postpaid customers are what people compare, because that shows profit and growth for these companies. The total number of customers includes prepaid, tablets/hotspots, wholesale, and other irrelevant information.

    As I’m sure you know, the coverage maps are not particularly accurate for any carrier, so you can’t get a good idea of what their coverage is actually like simply by looking at the coverage maps.

    I completely disagree with you. 70 million+ people have chosen T-Mobile, and that number continues to grow. I’ll ask you again: If T-Mobile’s network is as terrible as you claim, why do customers continue to switch to them, with their churn rate getting lower every year? Most of these customers are staying with T-Mobile, not immediately leaving for another carrier.

    If you find yourself living or frequently traveling to rural areas like Montana, the Dakotas, or other places like this, then obviously T-Mobile is not for you. I’ve never claimed that T-Mobile is the perfect carrier for everyone. (Neither is Verizon and AT&T, by the way. Coverage isn’t the only thing that matters to customers.) Personally, I switched to T-Mobile because of the price, and because of all of the features T-Mobile offered and the other carriers didn’t. We were paying nearly $200/month for three lines on Verizon, and are now paying only $90 a month, with the same coverage in our area, faster speeds, and better features.
    Cingular/AT&T customer from 2006-2008
    Verizon customer from 2008-2013
    AT&T customer from 2013-2015
    T-Mobile customer from 2015-Present

  12. #72
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bolshayaptica View Post
    I contacted them couple weeks ago, was told to wait another 6 months.
    That's all I ever got from Sprint. For a few years. Through now, even: nothing ever happened.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    "If you find yourself living or frequently traveling to rural areas like Montana, the Dakotas, or other places like this, then obviously T-Mobile is not for you."

    Or the rest of a list of 30 or more states...most of the states in the US. And customers agree: the vast majority decide that T-Mobile is not for them. Not because they go to the Dakotas and Montana, but because they go elsewhere where T-Mobile lacks coverage: between a half and a third of the US territory (coast to coast).

    "Coverage isn’t the only thing that matters to customers."

    It isn't the only thing, but it overrides all else. Because if you have no coverage, you might as well have a carved bar of soap in your hand. T-Mobile provides poor/no coverage in most of the places Americans live, work, and play.

    "I’ll ask you again: If T-Mobile’s network is as terrible as you claim, why do customers continue to switch to them.

    You are parroting the T-Mobile press release deception. When all is said and done concerning customers switching to them, few are, actually... and even in 3Q 2016, 4 times as many customers chose the better networks. Sure, there is a slight gain in T-Mobile subscribers, but it is nothing compared to AT&T (or Verizon) totals. Go ahead and sit down with a calculator: at these rates, T-Mobile will match AT&T sometime toward the end of the century. A couple hundred thousand of relative gain each year takes decades to make a dent in a customer-choice difference between the two companies that is in the 10s of millions.

    "In some areas, yes, they are much worse. Again, don’t make generalizations. There are areas where Verizon and AT&T are worse, too."

    Generalizations is what customers do for mobile networks. They look for a carrier that will do the best at covering America. And they make a choice on that.

    "My attempt to “cook” numbers? Not at all."

    That is exactly what you are doing. Because the numbers you present have nothing to do with anything: once you sweep away misleadingly-presented PR claims, 4 times as many people choose the good nationwide networks than choose the inferior ones.

    Of course, this can chance. If T-Mobile got good coverage, the bigger two would no longer be bigger, and T-Mobile would end up being the same size as them quickly. But not now.... as at this point, and for at least a few years yet, T-Mobile provides poor coverage in most states.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    That sort of puts the hole in the idea that T-Mobile is good in a few big cities and bad everywhere else. From your anecdotal evidence, it is bad in the big cities as where as everywhere else.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    2,251
    Device(s)
    Samsung GS7, Nokia 6350
    Carrier(s)
    Cricket, T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dnywlsh View Post
    You clearly haven’t travelled much with them, if you think they have “few” weak areas. There are plenty of examples on this website alone of Verizon and AT&T’s weak spots.

    As you can see from my signature, I had AT&T for 4 years, and Verizon for 5 years, so I’m definitely not a T-Mobile “fan boy”, as much as you might like to think so.



    In some areas, yes, they are much worse. Again, don’t make generalizations. There are areas where Verizon and AT&T are worse, too.



    No, you’re generalizing. Imagine if I said “Verizon is slow and congested everywhere.” You’d probably disagree with that, right? Because it’s a sweeping generalization that isn’t true.

    My attempt to “cook” numbers? Not at all. This information is publicly available to anyone in their quarterly earnings reports. Postpaid customers are what people compare, because that shows profit and growth for these companies. The total number of customers includes prepaid, tablets/hotspots, wholesale, and other irrelevant information.

    As I’m sure you know, the coverage maps are not particularly accurate for any carrier, so you can’t get a good idea of what their coverage is actually like simply by looking at the coverage maps.

    I completely disagree with you. 70 million+ people have chosen T-Mobile, and that number continues to grow. I’ll ask you again: If T-Mobile’s network is as terrible as you claim, why do customers continue to switch to them, with their churn rate getting lower every year? Most of these customers are staying with T-Mobile, not immediately leaving for another carrier.

    If you find yourself living or frequently traveling to rural areas like Montana, the Dakotas, or other places like this, then obviously T-Mobile is not for you. I’ve never claimed that T-Mobile is the perfect carrier for everyone. (Neither is Verizon and AT&T, by the way. Coverage isn’t the only thing that matters to customers.) Personally, I switched to T-Mobile because of the price, and because of all of the features T-Mobile offered and the other carriers didn’t. We were paying nearly $200/month for three lines on Verizon, and are now paying only $90 a month, with the same coverage in our area, faster speeds, and better features.
    Don't feed the trolls. Most of this user's HoFo posts state the same overstated generalizations about network coverage. Some people can't imagine that anyone else might be different -- or have a different experience -- from them.

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S7 using HoFo mobile app

Page 5 of 54 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 30
    Last Post: 08-24-2014, 04:11 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-11-2010, 09:58 PM
  3. Mobile Tv on Telus,Rogers and Bell this year!
    By chapinrico in forum TELUS Mobility
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-02-2005, 09:38 PM
  4. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-23-2003, 08:08 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks