T-Mobile Keeps Expanding 3G NetworkSacramento this week, Memphis & Tampa next week.... ( old news - 11:31AM Saturday Oct 18 2008) tags: coverage · business · wireless · T-Mobile USAs you might expect, being the first carrier to launch a phone with the Android OS got T-Mobile lots of attention, though it also drew attention to the fact the carrier's 3G HSDPA network has one of the smallest footprints among major carriers. T-Mobile is quickly trying to change that, announcing that they launched 3G this week in Sacramento, California, bringing the number of major cities currently served with 3G coverage to 92. Next week, T-Mobile says they'll be offering wireless broadband service in the Memphis, Tennessee, and Tampa, Florida markets. Washington DC should see service in late November, at which point the carrier hopes to serve 120 major cities.
Related:- Shock: Broadband Phones No Fun Without Broadband
- Clearwire Nabs New CEO
- Sprint Highlights '4G' Launch Plans
- T-Mobile 3G Launch Schedule Leaked
- Verizon LTE Network Completed By 2014?
- T-Mobile Quietly Reinstates Handset Upgrade Fee
- Leaked T-Mobile 3G Launch Schedule
- Breakdown of 3G Network Speeds, Reliability
|
 pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA
 ·Mediacom
| Great, 92 cities. Lots of work to do... Sorry, but T-Mo's 3G is pretty laughable. AT&T gets a bad rap around here and elsewhere for their (admittedly) sparse 3G offerings but T-Mo really stinks. They need to really ramp it up if the G1 is even a fraction as popular as folks want to believe. | |
|  | 
NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Great, 92 cities. Lots of work to do... said by pabster  :Sorry, but T-Mo's 3G is pretty laughable. Their coverage in general is pretty laughable. Verizon, Sprint and ATT have the metro area I live in fully covered with voice, data and 3G, even pretty far out into the boonies. T-Mobile doesn't have very much coverage in the city itself and almost none outside of the city.
They need to put more energy into their coverage. 3G is nice, but when people try to use it and they get no coverage at all, they aren't going to be pleased.
--
---
Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
| | | Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
 ·SONIC.NET
| Re: Great, 92 cities. Lots of work to do... I must be in a rare spot where T-Mobile gets the best coverage, and all the other carriers stink. I'm at the intersection of US-I-CA-680 and US-101 in San Jose, California, so perhaps I'm getting a lot of interference from vehicle phones, or the nearby bridges and freeway walls (full of rebar).
Everyone I know in the area that has T-Mobile gets good coverage. Often, AT&T has bad coverage around here.
Who knows why -- my main theory is that AT&T oversells more than T-Mobile, although who knows what both would do if each were given the opportunity to do it (we already know what AT&T would do). P.S., iphones don't work in our house at all (zip nada nothing) -- not exactly in the boonies, here. | |
| | | | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: Great, 92 cities. Lots of work to do... There's a long story on that one in California/Nevada.
T-Mobile runs what 'was' Cingular/PacBell Wireless network, which T-Mobile and Cingular 'shared', and was built up from the ground as a GSM 1900 network in California/Nevada.
AT&T now uses what 'was' former AT&T Wireless network, which was patch work... Analog->TDMA->GSM->3G running on 2 different bands.
T-Mobile may not have always had the 'best' overall coverage, but it worked well.
AT&T's 3G uses 1900MHz (while GSM using 850/1900 here in SoCal).. giving weaker signal of the 2 bands, and allocating 5MHz for 3G voice+data, while GSM has 17.5MHz
T-Mobile's approach will work a little better for usability (not handset availability though), using 1700/2100MHz - not sacrificing existing spectrum, and using a band similar to what is already in use (1900MHz).
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | | 
schmol
join:2001-12-26
Windsor, PA | there are always people out there that bitch about everything.  | |
| | | |
NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Great, 92 cities. Lots of work to do... said by schmol :there are always people out there that bitch about everything.
You need to learn the difference between bitching and a legitimate complaint.
T-Mobile is trying to compete in a high competitive field, one where coverage is what makes or breaks you and T-Mobile's network has some pretty serious coverage holes, even in large metro areas. Like I said before, 3G is nice, but when you have major coverage holes, users aren't going to like not being able to use the 3G service they pay for every month.
--
---
Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
| | 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by pabster :Sorry, but T-Mo's 3G is pretty laughable. AT&T gets a bad rap around here and elsewhere for their (admittedly) sparse 3G offerings but T-Mo really stinks. They need to really ramp it up if the G1 is even a fraction as popular as folks want to believe. Both at&t and T-mobile are a joke in my state. I guess slightly less so. Still consdiering the at&t is the local POTS provider for most of the state that's pretty sad. Meanwhile Verizon has 3G avilable to 90% of the state at&t looks REALLY pathetic. | |
| | | 
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| Re: Where T-Mobile 3G is available I'd dispute that Chicago offering, at least on the south side. You see, this is how the FCC gets bad broadband coverage numbers.T-Mo covers in several spots in a major metropolitan area and then lists the city as covered. It's not, and T-Mos coverage here is non-existant. The FCC should hire the Verizon guy (metaphorically speaking) in order to scrutinize areas that are supposedly covered by all carriers, not just this s***ty company.
--
The "Lifetime" channel is responsible for 83% of all divorces...Robert Ginty | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 
whfsdude
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC | Correct because TMO uses 1700mhz/2100mhz (AWS) | |
| | | | | 
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·T-Mobile US
 ·Packet8
| Re: Where T-Mobile 3G is available said by whfsdude :Correct because TMO uses 1700mhz/2100mhz (AWS) Which one where?
I have a HTC TyTn (quad band GSM/GPRS/EDGE 850/800/1800/1900
and tri band UMTS/HSDPA 850/1900/2100) and since AT&T's data speed now (since 3G iTards flooded in) constanly fucked up here (NYC) I'd gladly give TMO a try if I know they use 2100MHz here (I doubt though)...
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
whfsdude
Premium
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC
1 edit | said by kamm :I have a HTC TyTn (quad band GSM/GPRS/EDGE 850/800/1800/1900 and tri band UMTS/HSDPA 850/1900/2100) and since AT&T's data speed now (since 3G iTards flooded in) constanly fucked up here (NYC) I'd gladly give TMO a try if I know they use 2100MHz here (I doubt though)... You need both 1700/2100. One is the downlink and the other is the uplink (not sure which one).
Another reason they've been able to launch so many sites so quickly is because they actually have been building out the network and were just waiting for the government to clear AWS (which was overdue). | |
| | 
Toguro
join:2003-10-23
Ottawa, IL | Thanks for the list i see t-mobile is listing Chicago burbs as full cities shame. | |
| | DarnellP
join:2004-10-12
Las Vegas, NV | LMAO!! They list Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Sunrise Manor, Spring Valley and Paradise as separate markets?!?! And before anybody says anything, yes I'm sure all the other carriers do it too, but it's still laughable nonetheless. | |
| |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Similar (yet much better) than when AT&T rolled out its 3G, and claimed ~ a dozen or so cities in SoCal, most of them were adjacent to Los Angeles itself, and part of Los Angeles 'Metro' area. I'm pleased to see that for the most part, T-Mobile covered the area vs. launching a small area/city.
These can almost be considered Los Angeles (I suspect someday they'll all merge into one).
eg.
Burbank, CA
East Los Angeles, CA
Glendale, CA
Long Beach, CA
Los Angeles, CA 
Norwalk, CA
Ontario, CA
Pasadena, CA
Pomona, CA
These are actually in a different county, but still in L.A. metro area.
Anaheim, CA
Santa Ana, CA
Irvine, CA
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | GameGuy369
join:2004-07-09
Olathe, KS
clubs:
| KC next too My sister works for T-Mobile and she told me that T-Mobile will be bringing 3G to the Kansas City area before the end of 2008. No official dates yet but at least for those of you who live here have something to look forward to.
By the way, if T-Mobile can improve coverage, they would be by far the best carrier in my opinion. Their customer service is ridiculously good. | |
| droga
join:2002-06-30
Aguadilla, PR | Puerto Rico T-Mobile I went to T-Mobile today and they told me that the G1 should be available in Puerto Rico by the end of December... now I wonder... do they even plan on having 3G coverage on the island or they really expect us to have a 3G phone with EDGE speeds? | |
| | pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA | Re: Puerto Rico T-Mobile Well considering a fair number of iPhone 3G owners are stuck on EDGE across the country, I'd say yes, they expect you to use EDGE.  | |
| 
kgforce
join:2001-04-18
Marana, AZ | Tucson, Please! Come on, T-Mo... drive down Interstate 10 from Phoenix and hook Tucson up! The half-dozen AZ cities are all essentially the Phoenix metro area. | |
| | 
TomClancy
Freedom isn't free
join:2003-04-23
...
| sux... It sux that we can't use European 3G phones in the USA on the T-Mobile 3G network. In a month or so I'll be down at Philly airport and will be testing my Sony Ericsson P1i to see if 3G works or not. I hope they have 3G coverage at airport. I guess we'll see.
--
Freedom isn't free! | |
| flyingjoey
join:2005-11-07
Jersey City, NJ
2 edits | How Long Before? So how long before TMo offers this kinds of speeds?
5 Years. So by then, Sprint will be offering FIOS speeds wireless. | |
| 
Tomek
Premium
join:2002-01-30
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8
·Verizon VoiceWing
| Bad coverage In NYC TMO coverage is pathetic, a joke. Once my contract expires I will move to more reliable carrier. In the city one would think it will have perfect coverage. ATT yes, TMO no. Outside the city, I need a big mast to have signal while ATT subscribers can enjoy their service from handsets.
--
Semper Fi | |
| 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Lame We *just got* (literally 3 hours ago) 3G service right here where I live, far outside of a real city. I find these articles about T-Mobile expanding its service laughable as they will be playing catch up for many years compared to AT&T, Verizon and Sprint. Welcome to 2005!
--
"At the moment of conception." | |
| 
Cellinnovation
@charter.com
| Typical "Coverage Sucks," Comments Usually when these stories get published, you get lots of bitching from all of those who just happen to live in areas with bad coverage. They may have not even tested the service within the last 12 months or longer but still factor their opinion in as valid, current or even relevant.
I think it's funny that we have to read through this garbage when we're really trying to get more insight on the article at hand namely the 3G expansion.
I live in the LA market. My T-Mobile network outperforms my brother's AT&T network at home, at our places of work, neighborhood etc. Still, he won't even admit it as if his pride would be hurt to echo those sentiments. He can drop all the calls in the world, get garbly call quality and inconsistent 3G coverage, but his pride keeps him from paying out the @ss to a carrier who fails to live up to their "best coverage," promises.
My friend who works for Verizon is the same way. He acts like my phone has no service anywhere. I asked him if he's ever used T-Mobile? He says no but he's "heard," bad things about them. Rest my case.
Where a carrier sucks is only relevant to the user in the areas he/she uses it. I don't care if T-Mobile sucks in some remote county of upstate New York when I will never even use my phone there.
I think everyone should utilize the trial period and make an educated decision for themselves. | |
| | | |
|
|
Where T-Mobile 3G is available
·