how-to block ads
St Thomas, VI
·Sprint Mobile Br..
|reply to LightS |
Re: Gee, what a surprise
said by LightS:The point I am trying to convey is all cellular carries make their maps look better than what they are. Why did Sprint generalize their maps since LTE launched? I am not sure but just cause it says I have coverage I don't expect it to always work. WiMax is a perfect example. Even though it says there is or is not WiMax in certain areas I always try it out. There are areas with wimax that are not on the map and vice versa. At one hotel I may get great Wimax and then literally next door I get zero signal. Happens with any technology using high frequencies.
Excuse me, but have you used Sprint in the DFW area? In comparison to AT&T and VZW, it's flaky, and is far from reliable. It constantly switches from LTE to other technologies, and in quite a few areas I understand them not giving a street-by-street coverage map, but hell, at least Verizon & AT&T's coverage maps are far more accurate.
For example, take Garland, Grapevine, Irving, Plano, and Flower Mound. All of these are fairly wealthy areas, and according to Sprints coverage map, they have LTE coverage.
In reality, no. They shouldn't just blanket an entire region and say "we have coverage" when they don't have anywhere near what they proclaim or advertise on their coverage map.
So you can advocate Sprint's awful coverage maps, but until you use the service (esp. for certain people that decide a carrier based upon a coverage map) you really have no position to tell people to cry.
My signature is on strike.
But this isn't a matter of stepping 30 feet away and losing signal. There are literally entire communities in the DFW area (hundreds of thousands of people) that are a complete dead zone, where Sprint shows coverage.
I can completely empathize with the fact that you may lose connectivity and sporadically, it's just the nature of wireless, but large areas that are conveyed to have coverage with the coverage but don't, it's almost false advertising.