Annoyance with sub average coverage-II

[plane]

Something went wrong with the original thread on this. This series of recent articles is a good place for the original poster to look for an explanation of the original poster's concern:

AT&T: https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhone...t-coverage-map
Sprint: https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhone...t-coverage-map
T-Mobile: https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhone...e-coverage-map
Verizon: https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhone...n-coverage-map

Geographic Coverage (native)

Verizon: 81%
AT&T: 66%
T-Mobile: 58%
Sprint: 29%

To see all the coverage maps together go to https://www.cellularmaps.com/net_compare.shtml

When comparing these numbers you have to realize that they don't include roaming coverage. On postpaid service, on all the carriers, you'll get some roaming, depending on whether or not the carrier is willing to pay for it. In some cases you'll get voice and text roaming, but no data roaming. For example, Sprint has the smallest native network, but Sprint customers can roam onto Verizon in most areas where Sprint does not operate a network (but not in areas where Sprint does operate a network and coverage is just sub-par). On prepaid, whether through an MVNO or directly from the carrier, roaming is usually much more limited if it exists at all, and on some MVNOs you can pay for voice roaming, but not get data roaming at all. The lack of roaming may not matter as much on a Verizon MVNO, but if you do any road trips it can matter a lot on T-Mobile and Sprint, and to a lesser extent on AT&T.

Geographic coverage doesn't tell the whole story. Within covered geographic areas, there are always areas where you can't get a signal. The legacy carriers have had an advantage, in most places, for two reasons. First, in most areas, the legacy carriers operate at 800MHz which has much greater range than 1900 MHz, though there are exceptions, such as in Florida, where AT&T ended up with both the A & B sides of 800 MHz due to a series of mergers and acquisitions. Second, the legacy carriers were able to install cell towers before communities placed limitations on placement.

You will often see claims that things will improve for the second-tier carriers as they deploy new low-band spectrum, and that's true. But for right now, if you want good coverage, you need to choose your carrier carefully. In the previous thread, some people insisted that they don't care about "gaping holes in coverage" but obviously the original poster did care.

To keep this thread civil, please refrain from accusations of posters being employees of competitors, and please use referenced facts to support your position.

Good post.

[caddypower]

Good post.

You have low standards if you think that's a good post. Not much is accurate from that site

[smsgator]

Good post.

Thank you. One thing I've found is that when posting on forums is that it's best to use referenced facts.

[plane]

You have low standards if you think that's a good post. Not much is accurate from that site

I agree about my low standards, but exactly what is not accurate.it's mostly statistics and other info which petty well concurs with most hottest articles on the subject. Have you actually read it?

[plane]

[QUOTE=wilbur101;17018856]You sure do post a lot of garbage on the board. Not sure what agenda you have against tmobile[/QUOTE

Maybe so, but at least there are some facts and numbers which back up his statements. Others should try it instead of spouting useless rhetoric and even less useful unfounded opinion.

I like Tm,what annoys me is the constant exaggerated pro propaganda her which in so many instances overstates the ability to provide service ,while mostly ignoring their deficits. Just be truthful, stop exaggerating.

[JasonRight]

Good post.

Thanks for sharing this list with us.