 r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX | Re: Wow I really hope they dont Verizon is just as bad and I find they have less coverage.
My fiancee has Verizon and I have ATT and Verizon sucks for coverage and we have been all over the US.
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. | |
|
 | | Re: Wow I really hope they dont You go to some interesting locations. But all in all, Verizon has the most coverage, including 3G in a much larger area. | |
|
1 edit | I have to disagree with you... I have been from Seattle to Maine (2 miles from canada border where the Closest grocery store was 35 miles away and was a Walmart)
and all over the south. I have never lost a call and always get reception. The only thing i lost was my data plan and GPS with i was near the border
this is on verizon | |
|
 |
1 edit | Re: Wow I really hope they dont I've been from Seattle, WA to Canada to Vermont, to PA, to NYC, Boston, Detroit, and Chicago. I always get reception and great calls.
This is on AT&T.
Work pays for a Verizon cell and it's permanently forwarded to my AT&T phone because they have the better service.
Folks, they all suck - stop falling for the Verizon Brainwashing Machine. | |
|
| | | | Re: Wow I really hope they dont I know they suck, I have them and hate them with a passion. But their talk area is slightly bigger, and their 3g area is much bigger. | |
|
| r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T DSL Service
 ·row44
| said by questionable:I have to disagree with you... I have been from Seattle to Maine (2 miles from canada border where the Closest grocery store was 35 miles away and was a Walmart) and all over the south. I have never lost a call and always get reception. The only thing i lost was my data plan and GPS with i was near the border this is on verizon You must have flown, because on the major highways there are many areas where verizon losses signal across this country, especially in the midwest states.
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. | |
|
| | | | Re: Wow I really hope they dont I was wondering the same thing. I been up and down the east coast and watch my Verizon go from service to 1xrt to no service. My sprint phone did it too but at different points. | |
|
| |  en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | And AT&T is all roaming (on former Alltel Wireless) in those areas. | |
|
| | |  MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Wow I really hope they dont said by en102:And AT&T is all roaming (on former Alltel Wireless) in those areas. Did Alltel have GSM at some point? | |
|
| | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: Wow I really hope they dont said by Matt:said by en102:And AT&T is all roaming (on former Alltel Wireless) in those areas. Did Alltel have GSM at some point? Some of Alltel's predecessors were GSM then converted to CDMA, or they were CDMA but operated GSM for roamers only. | |
|
| | | | en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Alltel purchased Western Wireless, and became a 'roamer only' option carriers such as AT&T / T-Mobile that didn't want to deploy GSM service in the rural western states
Alltel runs GSM for roamers here:
»gsmworld.com/cgi-bin/ni_map.pl?cc=us&net=wh
AT&T will be picking up most of it as Verizon Wireless has to divest its overlap markets.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | |
| | | |  jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA | Re: Wow I really hope they dont said by r81984:said by en102:And AT&T is all roaming (on former Alltel Wireless) in those areas. I know ATT roams, so I guess ATT in itself does not have the best coverage, but GSM does have better coverage than CDMA. With free roaming ATT has the best coverage. Best coverage with free roaming? They are consistently ranked 3rd behind Verizon and Sprint in practically every measurable test that has been conducted in the last few years. | |
|
| | | | | r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX | Re: Wow I really hope they dont Nope | |
|
| | | | | en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | I wouldn't necessarily say that.
GSM coverage is 'good', but in general, CDMA (due to legacy carriers in a lot of places) are still CDMA with no GSM.
In Canada, its even worse. No GSM coverage in northwestern Ontario but lots of CDMA/AMPS. That is about to change though, as all the legacy CDMA carriers in Canada are deploying HSPA.
Actually, Sprint has typically rated bottom of the barrel, with T-Mobile tied with VZW - not on coverage though.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | | | | jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA | Re: Wow I really hope they dont What is legacy CDMA? The technology is newer, and more advanced than GSM.
Sprint has been rated low in customer support. I think they have made great improvements in this area, but that is subjective. When it comes to coverage and reliability, where does Sprint stand compared to AT&T?
Verizon says they have the most reliable network.
Sprint claims to have the largest broadband network.
AT&T claims to have the most powerful iPhone. They shy away from talk regarding their own wireless network, except to defend themselves when their own partners criticize it. (where is their promised backhaul improvements?) | |
|
| | | | | | | en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Wow I really hope they dont I use both Sprint CDMA (1x/EVDO) and AT&T GSM/WCDMA.
CDMA 1x uses an ANSI core (dating back to the AMPS days). Since all the major carriers in Canada are deploying WCDMA/UMTS, with the exception of Rogers (already GSM/WCDMA/UMTS).
GSM itself is a sales name used for the family of technologies used by the GSMA, as GSM runs both a TDMA based (legacy GSM?) and a WCDMA based interface.
CDMA is actually an air interface data scheme, as is TDMA.
CDMA 2000 is the name for the CDMA group of technologies, as CDMA can refer to CDMA one, CDMA 1x, CDMA EVDO or CDMA EVDV, etc.
One isn't really any more 'advanced' than the other, they just have different strengths and weaknesses. GSM's major strength in general, is its MAP core and global roaming abilities, while the CDMA 2000 'ANSI' core's strength is more in its continuous path from AMPS, and use of smaller carrier channels (1.25MHz vs 5MHz), making it a nicer fit for tight US spectrum.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
robo74
join:2003-10-23
Harvard, IL | Weird you say this...
My job takes me all over the US, East to West and many stops in between. My company once had AT&T, and my personal cell is Verizon... I often had to use personal cell to make calls. AT&T, does not have the best coverage.
We moved to sprint..sadly, I its not any better at all.
Wish we would to Verizon. | |
|
| MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Wow I really hope they dont said by robo74:Weird you say this... My job takes me all over the US, East to West and many stops in between. My company once had AT&T, and my personal cell is Verizon... I often had to use personal cell to make calls. AT&T, does not have the best coverage. We moved to sprint..sadly, I its not any better at all. Wish we would to Verizon. I used to work for a very large company who was recently bailed out and I was involved in a mobile migration to Blackberry devices. We could choose AT&T, Verizon, or Nextel (for the techies). If the user didn't specify which service they wanted, they were randomly assigned either a Verizon or AT&T Blackberry from the pile. People would call me up screaming because their AT&T service was so terrible and demand a Verizon phone.
I had users in every single contiguous state of our country and the only people who seemed to have decent coverage were in Texas. It mainly seemed to be that their coverage indoors was awful everywhere, as many of them said it was fine if they were outside. | |
|
| | | | Re: Wow I really hope they dont Sounds like those were 1900 only Blackberries as that seems to be a quality of the 1900 Mhz signal. | |
|
| | | MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Wow I really hope they dont said by itguy05:Sounds like those were 1900 only Blackberries as that seems to be a quality of the 1900 Mhz signal. It was during the "Orange to Blue" Cingular/AT&T consolidation back in 2005/2006. I'm not sure what frequency it was, but if they were 1900MHz that would make sense.
And to be fair, I had a Nextel Blackberry that was worse than all.  | |
|
| | | |  jester121Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | Re: Wow I really hope they dont Given Nextel's sorry data network (which I use on a daily basis) that's not surprising. Even first responder types we work with are starting to get tired of it. | |
|
 rudnickePremium
join:2004-10-23
Rantoul, IL
kudos:1 | I've only been one place where I didn't have a verizon signal. The backwoods of Indiana.
However, here in a major campus town (U of I), I can't get a decent AT&T signal inside any building. I get so many complaints from our outside users about the lack of coverage from AT&T. | |
|
| | I've found the opposite to be try. I regularly drive from one end of the U.S. to the other on I-5, I-10, I-40, I-68, I-70, I-71, I-75, I-79, I-15, I-95 and many more US roads... Verizon always has better than at&t. I've also had every carrier over the years. I just got out of a Verizon contract and am now on at&t. Verizon is generally better. at&t is ok. They are both better than Sprint, except you can drive from New Orleans to Columbus, Oh and have great data coverage all the way with Sprint. I think that your phone AND your wireless provider has something to do with your phone experience. Apple should be opening this thing up to all the carriers right now, including Verizon. | |
|
| | said by r81984:Verizon is just as bad and I find they have less coverage. My fiancee has Verizon and I have ATT and Verizon sucks for coverage and we have been all over the US. That is such a blanket statement.
I been saying this for years on this forum. Different handsets get different reception - the carriers wont admit it, but I have been seeing a trend of decreasing reception in newer handsets. I'll bet if you pick up some really old device, like lets say the V180 (for the AT&T side of course) I'm sure you will probably get great signal.
I am not familiar with Verizon's handsets but I'll bet if you grab an older handset you will get better reception.
In fact, to prove my point, put 2 AT&T handsets next to each other and watch the signal (maybe move them some inches away from each other). I will bet that they will report different signal. | |
|
|
|
