Online coverage maps updated

After about a year with no updates the online maps have finally been
updated. For example they now show the new coverage in Kansas along
Hwy 54 West of Witchita. They also show the new coverage along I-5 in
San Diego in the Camp Pendelton area. There is also some new planned
future coverage that wasn't marked before. Examples: Arizona and New
Mexico along I-10 and I-40.

---

› See More: Online coverage maps updated

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Larry Thomas) wrote:

> After about a year with no updates the online maps have finally been
> updated. For example they now show the new coverage in Kansas along
> Hwy 54 West of Witchita. They also show the new coverage along I-5 in
> San Diego in the Camp Pendelton area. There is also some new planned
> future coverage that wasn't marked before. Examples: Arizona and New
> Mexico along I-10 and I-40.

The maps are still totally unacceptable, ignoring "smaller" deadzones of
two or three miles in size.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Larry Thomas) wrote:
>
> > After about a year with no updates the online maps have finally been
> > updated. For example they now show the new coverage in Kansas along
> > Hwy 54 West of Witchita. They also show the new coverage along I-5 in
> > San Diego in the Camp Pendelton area. There is also some new planned
> > future coverage that wasn't marked before. Examples: Arizona and New
> > Mexico along I-10 and I-40.
>
> The maps are still totally unacceptable, ignoring "smaller" deadzones of
> two or three miles in size.

And who made you Grand Poobah? Your twisted reading of the CTIA Consumer
Code is incorrect.

Robert M. wrote:
> The maps are still totally unacceptable, ignoring "smaller" deadzones of
> two or three miles in size.

Obviously you don't understand radio theory and how it relates
to quality of service. Radio systems are engineered to provide
at coverage in 90% of the area 90% of the time.

If it's unacceptable, don't look.

Scotty


"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Larry Thomas) wrote:
>
> > After about a year with no updates the online maps have finally been
> > updated. For example they now show the new coverage in Kansas along
> > Hwy 54 West of Witchita. They also show the new coverage along I-5 in
> > San Diego in the Camp Pendelton area. There is also some new planned
> > future coverage that wasn't marked before. Examples: Arizona and New
> > Mexico along I-10 and I-40.
>
> The maps are still totally unacceptable, ignoring "smaller" deadzones of
> two or three miles in size.

Thanks.

I will be down that way ( San Diego ) this weekend so, I'll try it out.

Scotty


"Larry Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> After about a year with no updates the online maps have finally been
> updated. For example they now show the new coverage in Kansas along
> Hwy 54 West of Witchita. They also show the new coverage along I-5 in
> San Diego in the Camp Pendelton area. There is also some new planned
> future coverage that wasn't marked before. Examples: Arizona and New
> Mexico along I-10 and I-40.

Kentucky map is still the old one. Sprint has added coverage along the I-75
corridor going into TN and some on I-64E towards Mt. Sterling which still
are not on the map.


"Larry Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> After about a year with no updates the online maps have finally been
> updated. For example they now show the new coverage in Kansas along
> Hwy 54 West of Witchita. They also show the new coverage along I-5 in
> San Diego in the Camp Pendelton area. There is also some new planned
> future coverage that wasn't marked before. Examples: Arizona and New
> Mexico along I-10 and I-40.

In article <[email protected]>,
"Scott Nelson - Wash DC" <[email protected]> wrote:

> If it's unacceptable, don't look.
>
> Scotty

SprintPCS bragged that its a signatory to the Indutry Consumer Code, and
violates one of its main points.

And then its apologists wonder why its always cominbg in worst in
studies of Customer Satisfaction?

"Alphad" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<z3Mec.125333$K91.340831@attbi_s02>...
> Kentucky map is still the old one. Sprint has added coverage along the I-75
> corridor going into TN and some on I-64E towards Mt. Sterling which still
> are not on the map.

Yeah it appears that some of the maps have been updated and some haven't.

"Larry Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Alphad" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<z3Mec.125333$K91.340831@attbi_s02>...
> > Kentucky map is still the old one. Sprint has added coverage along the
I-75
> > corridor going into TN and some on I-64E towards Mt. Sterling which
still
> > are not on the map.
>
> Yeah it appears that some of the maps have been updated and some haven't.

They might be updating the regions on a piecemeal basis. Didn't see anything
new on the Charlotte map.

Bob

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<drWec.7867
> They might be updating the regions on a piecemeal basis. Didn't see anything
> new on the Charlotte map.
>
> Bob

I just noticed the Bakersfield, CA map (which oddly is the only map
that shows the CA Central Coast area) has also been updated. There's a
lot of new coverage along Hwy 101 between Santa Barbara and Monterey.

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> SprintPCS bragged that its a signatory to the Indutry Consumer Code, and=
=20
> violates one of its main points.
>=20

Isn't that for the CTIA to decide, since it's the certifying=20
authority? Or are you now also more of an expert than the experts?

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> SprintPCS bragged that its a signatory to the Indutry Consumer Code, and=
=20
> violates one of its main points.
>=20

Isn't that for the CTIA to decide, since it's the certifying=20
authority? Or are you now also more of an expert than the experts?

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > SprintPCS bragged that its a signatory to the Indutry Consumer Code, and
> > violates one of its main points.
> >
>
> Isn't that for the CTIA to decide, since it's the certifying
> authority? Or are you now also more of an expert than the experts?

It would be nice if a map **EVER** actually showed all the known dead
spots, or you think it's OK to have dishonest maps?

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > SprintPCS bragged that its a signatory to the Indutry Consumer Code, and
> > violates one of its main points.
> >
>
> Isn't that for the CTIA to decide, since it's the certifying
> authority? Or are you now also more of an expert than the experts?

It would be nice if a map **EVER** actually showed all the known dead
spots, or you think it's OK to have dishonest maps?