On Cell Phone Forums
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    K2NNJ
    Guest
    Consumer Reports January '09 issue rates cell phone coverage in 23 markets.
    Out of the 23 markets Verizon is #1 among readers in 20 of them which are:

    Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Denver, Detroit, Jacksonville,
    FL. , Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, NY, Philadelphia, Phoenix,
    San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, St. Louis, Washington.

    Alltel was #1 in Cleveland, Charlotte N.C., and Tampa, FL.

    AT&T was not #1 in any market that was tested.

    Areas that were graded were:

    No Service, Static, Circuits Full, and dropped calls.





    See More: Ratings: Cell Phone Service



  2. #2
    QN
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service


    "The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote in message
    news:g2f1j49g9ummai8c0okrv385drlprhths0@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:18:01 -0500, "K2NNJ"
    > <ktwonnj@nospam.optonline.net> wrote:
    >
    >>AT&T was not #1 in any market that was tested.

    >
    > Did they try Bum****istan?


    Yes. I saw that in their commercial.







  3. #3
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service

    K2NNJ wrote:
    > Consumer Reports January '09 issue rates cell phone coverage in 23
    > markets. Out of the 23 markets Verizon is #1 among readers in 20 of them
    > which are:
    >
    > Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Denver, Detroit,
    > Jacksonville, FL. , Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, NY,
    > Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle,
    > St. Louis, Washington.
    >
    > Alltel was #1 in Cleveland, Charlotte N.C., and Tampa, FL.
    >
    > AT&T was not #1 in any market that was tested.
    >
    > Areas that were graded were:
    >
    > No Service, Static, Circuits Full, and dropped calls.


    And soon Alltel will be part of Verizon, and Verizon will be #1 in 23
    out of 23 metro areas. This is a bad thing. Verizon will be even more
    proud of itself, and will think of some other ways to annoy its
    customers! Maybe they have a list of features that they remove from
    handsets as their ratings go up. Their November 14th move with required
    data packages on smart phones was their latest policy designed to annoy
    potential smart phone customers. I'm still trying to figure out why they
    felt compelled to remove "vibe then ring" on many of the Motorola phones
    (restorable with a SEEM edit); were they going to try to sell a "vibe
    then ring" ring tone?

    If you ever wonder why Verizon can get away with what they do in terms
    of their handset selection, defeaturing the handsets they do offer, and
    their policies that annoy their customers, it's because so many
    consumers now understand that there are _tremendous_ differences between
    carriers, and that you can't select a carrier solely on price, number of
    minutes, or things like rollover. Consumer Reports (and other
    independent publications) unwittingly help Verizon get away with what
    seems to have become a war against their customers. In the SF Bay area,
    there's a non-profit publication called Consumer Checkbook that also
    conducts surveys with very large sample sizes, and Verizon does very
    well in that survey too, since in this area the other carriers are
    especially poor in comparison. If you have Verizon and have not had
    another carrier in a long time, you often don't realize just how bad
    things can actually be in terms of coverage, especially in suburbs with
    hills, valleys, and canyons, or when in very rural areas. Never think
    "well after all this time, the other carriers must have caught up."

    Last Monday I attended a planning commission meeting in my city where
    the city's volunteer (and non-technical) technology committee
    recommended allowing cell phone towers in city parks because some
    carriers have coverage issues that can't be solved unless towers are
    permitted in places they've never been permitted before. Yet today we
    went hiking in these canyons and hills where coverage supposedly sucks,
    and my wife was yakking away on her phone, making me think that maybe I
    should switch to AT&T, Sprint, or T-Mobile in order to have no coverage.
    AT&T is pretty clever with their latest ad campaign, where they go
    outside the U.S. to GSM-only countries in Europe for their "More Bars in
    More Places" schtick, as they've actually found places where their
    coverage is better than Verizon's (though now Verizon offers a phone
    with quad band GSM in addition to dual band CDMA).



  4. #4
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service

    QN wrote:
    > "The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote in message
    > news:g2f1j49g9ummai8c0okrv385drlprhths0@4ax.com...
    >> On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:18:01 -0500, "K2NNJ"
    >> <ktwonnj@nospam.optonline.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>> AT&T was not #1 in any market that was tested.

    >> Did they try Bum****istan?

    >
    > Yes. I saw that in their commercial.
    >
    >


    I wonder if AT&T realizes the message they're sending about their native
    U.S. coverage with those commercials? I remember being at San Francisco
    Airport at a gate with a TV and the AT&T commercial about being stuck in
    a hostel instead of being on the train to Paris came on, and someone
    yelling at the TV, 'I don't care about Paris, I want to make calls in
    San Francisco.' Almost as funny as at an SF Giants game when they played
    "Take Me Out to the Ball Game" at the 7th inning stretch, and someone
    behind be yelling "I can't afford peanut and cracker jacks at this park."



  5. #5
    Janet Wilder
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service

    SMS wrote:
    <snipped some good stuff>
    > AT&T is pretty clever with their latest ad campaign, where they go
    > outside the U.S. to GSM-only countries in Europe for their "More Bars in
    > More Places" schtick, as they've actually found places where their
    > coverage is better than Verizon's (though now Verizon offers a phone
    > with quad band GSM in addition to dual band CDMA).


    Having recently been in Europe, and having seen the stupid AT&T
    commercials before I left, I was totally amazed that they have
    absolutely no presence there, while the other GSM provider, T-Mobile,
    was everywhere.

    I got a Verizon global phone before I left and put in the GSM chip. It
    worked perfectly in all of the countries I traveled. When I got back, I
    simply switched it back to CDMA.

    If people want to be able to use their phones wherever they go, they can
    keep Verizon and upgrade their phones.
    --
    Janet Wilder
    Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
    Good Friends. Good Life



  6. #6
    Pegleg
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service



    K2NNJ wrote:
    > Consumer Reports January '09 issue rates cell phone coverage in 23
    > markets. Out of the 23 markets Verizon is #1 among readers in 20 of them
    > which are:
    >
    > Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Denver, Detroit,
    > Jacksonville, FL. , Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, NY,
    > Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle,
    > St. Louis, Washington.
    >
    > Alltel was #1 in Cleveland, Charlotte N.C., and Tampa, FL.
    >
    > AT&T was not #1 in any market that was tested.
    >
    > Areas that were graded were:
    >
    > No Service, Static, Circuits Full, and dropped calls.


    Consumer Reports January '09?



  7. #7
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service

    Janet Wilder wrote:
    > SMS wrote:
    > <snipped some good stuff>
    >> AT&T is pretty clever with their latest ad campaign, where they go
    >> outside the U.S. to GSM-only countries in Europe for their "More Bars
    >> in More Places" schtick, as they've actually found places where their
    >> coverage is better than Verizon's (though now Verizon offers a phone
    >> with quad band GSM in addition to dual band CDMA).

    >
    > Having recently been in Europe, and having seen the stupid AT&T
    > commercials before I left, I was totally amazed that they have
    > absolutely no presence there, while the other GSM provider, T-Mobile,
    > was everywhere.
    >
    > I got a Verizon global phone before I left and put in the GSM chip. It
    > worked perfectly in all of the countries I traveled. When I got back, I
    > simply switched it back to CDMA.
    >
    > If people want to be able to use their phones wherever they go, they can
    > keep Verizon and upgrade their phones.


    That's true. Verizon just introduced a new global phone as well.

    Whether I had a GSM or CDMA provider, I'd take an unlocked GSM phone and
    use a global prepaid SIM card, since it's much cheaper than roaming
    internationally on any of the carriers.



  8. #8
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service

    Janet Wilder wrote:
    > SMS wrote:
    > <snipped some good stuff>
    >> AT&T is pretty clever with their latest ad campaign, where they go
    >> outside the U.S. to GSM-only countries in Europe for their "More Bars
    >> in More Places" schtick, as they've actually found places where their
    >> coverage is better than Verizon's (though now Verizon offers a phone
    >> with quad band GSM in addition to dual band CDMA).

    >
    > Having recently been in Europe, and having seen the stupid AT&T
    > commercials before I left, I was totally amazed that they have
    > absolutely no presence there, while the other GSM provider, T-Mobile,
    > was everywhere.
    >
    > I got a Verizon global phone before I left and put in the GSM chip. It
    > worked perfectly in all of the countries I traveled. When I got back, I
    > simply switched it back to CDMA.


    Verizon could do a good commercial using their global phones, since they
    provide coverage in more places than AT&T or T-Mobile.



  9. #9
    K2NNJ
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service

    Yes, it's about a month away. Comes after December and before February.

    "Pegleg" <brian.pegleg.jones@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:ggro13$feu$2@aioe.org...
    >
    >
    > K2NNJ wrote:
    >> Consumer Reports January '09 issue rates cell phone coverage in 23
    >> markets. Out of the 23 markets Verizon is #1 among readers in 20 of them
    >> which are:
    >>
    >> Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Denver, Detroit,
    >> Jacksonville, FL. , Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, NY,
    >> Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle,
    >> St. Louis, Washington.
    >>
    >> Alltel was #1 in Cleveland, Charlotte N.C., and Tampa, FL.
    >>
    >> AT&T was not #1 in any market that was tested.
    >>
    >> Areas that were graded were:
    >>
    >> No Service, Static, Circuits Full, and dropped calls.

    >
    > Consumer Reports January '09?





  10. #10
    Janet Wilder
    Guest

    Re: Ratings: Cell Phone Service

    SMS wrote:
    > Janet Wilder wrote:
    >> SMS wrote:
    >> <snipped some good stuff>
    >>> AT&T is pretty clever with their latest ad campaign, where they go
    >>> outside the U.S. to GSM-only countries in Europe for their "More Bars
    >>> in More Places" schtick, as they've actually found places where their
    >>> coverage is better than Verizon's (though now Verizon offers a phone
    >>> with quad band GSM in addition to dual band CDMA).

    >>
    >> Having recently been in Europe, and having seen the stupid AT&T
    >> commercials before I left, I was totally amazed that they have
    >> absolutely no presence there, while the other GSM provider, T-Mobile,
    >> was everywhere.
    >>
    >> I got a Verizon global phone before I left and put in the GSM chip. It
    >> worked perfectly in all of the countries I traveled. When I got back,
    >> I simply switched it back to CDMA.
    >>
    >> If people want to be able to use their phones wherever they go, they
    >> can keep Verizon and upgrade their phones.

    >
    > That's true. Verizon just introduced a new global phone as well.
    >
    > Whether I had a GSM or CDMA provider, I'd take an unlocked GSM phone and
    > use a global prepaid SIM card, since it's much cheaper than roaming
    > internationally on any of the carriers.


    I didn't pay roaming. I did pay $1.29 per minute. If I thought I was
    going to be making a lot of calls, I would have paid $3.99/month to get
    a rate of .99 per minute.

    Making one call a week to check my voice mail was way less expensive
    than buying another phone.

    --
    Janet Wilder
    Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
    Good Friends. Good Life



  • Similar Threads