Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
  1. #1
    Steve
    Guest
    http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html

    Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top just
    behind local (regional) US Cellular.





    See More: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago




  2. #2
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    Steve wrote:
    > http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html
    >
    > Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top just
    > behind local (regional) US Cellular.


    Sprint's had problems in Chicago in the past. I'm sorry to see they are
    apparently still having problems.

    It was amusing, however, watching Sprint, Verizon, and some other carriers who
    had problems reported reply "but that's not what *our* test results show!"

    (Links to carrier replies are at the bottom of the web page.)




    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / [email protected]
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.



  3. #3

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    I honestly don't think Sprint is having problems in Chicago. These
    type of tests are often flawed and unreliable and favor the 800 Mhz
    carriers. They've invested so much money in Chicago over the past 4
    years that I don't believe they're really that bad.




  4. #4
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    [email protected] wrote:
    > I honestly don't think Sprint is having problems in Chicago. These
    > type of tests are often flawed and unreliable and favor the 800 Mhz
    > carriers. They've invested so much money in Chicago over the past 4
    > years that I don't believe they're really that bad.
    >


    I have been in Chicago twice in my life, in 1994 with only a pager and at the
    end of 2003 with a Verizon phone, so I have to take people on their word when
    they say Sprint sucks or has sucked in Chicago. The TV crew is in Chicago, as
    are the people who have complained about the area in the past.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / [email protected]
    PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
    Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.



  5. #5
    Orac
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Steve wrote:
    > > http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html
    > >
    > > Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top just
    > > behind local (regional) US Cellular.

    >
    > Sprint's had problems in Chicago in the past. I'm sorry to see they are
    > apparently still having problems.


    Actually, I was just in Chicago a week ago. I had been there about a
    year ago and noticed how much better Sprint worked than it had in
    earlier trips in 2000 and 2001, which had suggested to me that by 2003
    Sprint had finally cleaned up its act in Chicago. Unfortunately, last
    week, when I was there, I noticed a lot of failures to connect despite
    good signal strength, which made me wonder if Sprint was deteriorating
    there again.

    --
    Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
    |
    |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
    | inconvenience me with questions?"



  6. #6
    ZJ Driver
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago


    "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news[email protected]
    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > Steve wrote:
    > > > http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html
    > > >
    > > > Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top

    just
    > > > behind local (regional) US Cellular.

    > >
    > > Sprint's had problems in Chicago in the past. I'm sorry to see they are
    > > apparently still having problems.

    >
    > Actually, I was just in Chicago a week ago. I had been there about a
    > year ago and noticed how much better Sprint worked than it had in
    > earlier trips in 2000 and 2001, which had suggested to me that by 2003
    > Sprint had finally cleaned up its act in Chicago. Unfortunately, last
    > week, when I was there, I noticed a lot of failures to connect despite
    > good signal strength, which made me wonder if Sprint was deteriorating
    > there again.


    I was in Chicago in August. While I did experience the occasional dead spot
    it was nowhere near as bad as it was a couple years ago. If Sprint is the
    worst in Chicago then it must be a very well covered city because I thought
    the coverage was acceptable.

    -F





  7. #7
    Suzi W.
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago


    "Steve" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html
    >
    > Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top just
    > behind local (regional) US Cellular.
    >

    Weird, I have always had good luck with my coverage in and around the
    Chicago area with my Sprint PCS phone, yet my friend who has Verizon has
    horrible luck with coverage in and around same area. "Can you hear me now?
    NO! Can you hear me now? NO! Can you hear me now? NO!"

    Suzi





  8. #8
    Yeah Right
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    "Suzi W." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<yX7kd.386714$D%[email protected]_s51>...
    > "Steve" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html
    > >
    > > Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top just
    > > behind local (regional) US Cellular.
    > >

    > Weird, I have always had good luck with my coverage in and around the
    > Chicago area with my Sprint PCS phone, yet my friend who has Verizon has
    > horrible luck with coverage in and around same area. "Can you hear me now?
    > NO! Can you hear me now? NO! Can you hear me now? NO!"
    >
    > Suzi


    Yah, Sprint DOES suck in Chicago. At least that's the case for me. I
    live in the Chicago northwest burbs. My personal cell phone carrier is
    Verizon, but my employer provided me with a work related cell phone
    from Sprint. Sanyo SCP-7300.

    At home my Verizon phones have always given me crystal clear reception
    for the last 4 years. Yet this Sprint phone totally sucks; there are
    complete dead zones in my condo, and I pretty much have to open the
    sliding glass door and step outside just to have decent reception. On
    top of that, while in my car driving around the northwest burbs while
    talking on this Sprint phone, I have noticed many dead zones with
    dropped calls and reception that fades in and out. Pitiful.

    Yet my girlfriend just told me recently that she's had very good
    reception with her Sprint phone for a couple years. She lives about 10
    miles from me. Go figure.



  9. #9
    Frank Harris
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    Based on what I see on the web, I don't understand what US Cellular is
    selling in Chicago. On Andrew Shepherd's maps, Cingular is Chicago's
    cellular A-side carrier and Verizon is the cellular B-side carrier.
    Sprint PCS and T-Mobile are on PCS. I don't know about ATTWS - on PCS
    as well?

    But US Cellular is the A-side CDMA carrier in neighboring Wisconsin and
    some parts of northwest Illinois. Do they have PCS spectrum in Chicago?
    Or are they roaming on Verizon but selling under their own name (and
    so have coverage equal to Verizon)?

    Steve wrote:

    > http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html
    >
    > Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top just
    > behind local (regional) US Cellular.


    --
    Frank Harris in San Francisco with an A680



  10. #10

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    I know that PrimeCo originally had PCS service in Chicago but later
    (around 2000) sold it off to somebody and it didn't become Verizon in
    this case I don't think.




  11. #11
    Jerome Zelinske
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    How does her phone work in your house?



  12. #12
    Randy
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    IIRC, Verizon acquired PrimeCo, and since Verizon acquired the Ameritech
    network in Chigcao as
    part of the Ameritech/SBC merger they had to divest Chicago and a few other
    markets,
    which US Cellular picked up.

    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >I know that PrimeCo originally had PCS service in Chicago but later
    > (around 2000) sold it off to somebody and it didn't become Verizon in
    > this case I don't think.
    >






  13. #13
    David S
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:52:14 -0600, "Randy" <@> chose to add this to the
    great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

    ><[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >>I know that PrimeCo originally had PCS service in Chicago but later
    >> (around 2000) sold it off to somebody and it didn't become Verizon in
    >> this case I don't think.

    >
    >IIRC, Verizon acquired PrimeCo, and since Verizon acquired the Ameritech
    >network in Chigcao as
    >part of the Ameritech/SBC merger they had to divest Chicago and a few other
    >markets,
    >which US Cellular picked up.


    Those two facts are both true (more or less), but totally separate from
    each other. SBC kept its Cellular One A-side franchise and divested the
    Ameritech B-side franchise to GTE. A few months later, GTE was included in
    the Verizon merger. At some point, (I don't know if it was the same merger
    or later) PrimeCo was folded into VZW and its Chicago holdings divested. I
    believe there was actually no service for quite a while (or maybe it
    continued under the PrimeCo name with little or no promotion) on that chunk
    of spectrum, until USCC took it over and started service in what is, after
    all, its hometown.

    --
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "If you give iron ore to modern American workers, it will get into their
    Starbucks mocha latte, and they will sue you, and they will win."
    - Dave Barry




  14. #14
    theOne
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    ZJ Driver wrote:
    > "Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news[email protected]
    >
    >>In article <[email protected]>,
    >> Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Steve wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html
    >>>>
    >>>>Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top

    >
    > just
    >
    >>>>behind local (regional) US Cellular.
    >>>
    >>>Sprint's had problems in Chicago in the past. I'm sorry to see they are
    >>>apparently still having problems.

    >>
    >>Actually, I was just in Chicago a week ago. I had been there about a
    >>year ago and noticed how much better Sprint worked than it had in
    >>earlier trips in 2000 and 2001, which had suggested to me that by 2003
    >>Sprint had finally cleaned up its act in Chicago. Unfortunately, last
    >>week, when I was there, I noticed a lot of failures to connect despite
    >>good signal strength, which made me wonder if Sprint was deteriorating
    >>there again.

    >
    >
    > I was in Chicago in August. While I did experience the occasional dead spot
    > it was nowhere near as bad as it was a couple years ago. If Sprint is the
    > worst in Chicago then it must be a very well covered city because I thought
    > the coverage was acceptable.
    >
    > -F
    >
    >

    You know, I live in Palatine (surburb of Chicago) and let me tell you...
    I never knew what a dead spot was (with T-Mobile) until I switched to
    Sprint. Not only does the signal fade to 1 bar in my apartment (with
    T-Mobile [GSM]) it was always full bars) but there are a bunch of dead
    zones on the Northwest Line commuter train entering or leaving the city.

    Sprint Sucks in Chicago-LAND!

    I found their post humorous too. Never accepting fault. Whatever, I have
    about 8 months left. BYe-Bye Sanyo PM-8200


    -theOne



  15. #15
    theOne
    Guest

    Re: MEDIA: Sprint Worst in Chicago

    Yeah Right wrote:
    > "Suzi W." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<yX7kd.386714$D%[email protected]_s51>...
    >
    >>"Steve" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>news:[email protected]
    >>
    >>>http://cbs2chicago.com/special/local...309163624.html
    >>>
    >>>Sprint is the worst on a survey list in Chicago. Verzion at the top just
    >>>behind local (regional) US Cellular.
    >>>

    >>
    >>Weird, I have always had good luck with my coverage in and around the
    >>Chicago area with my Sprint PCS phone, yet my friend who has Verizon has
    >>horrible luck with coverage in and around same area. "Can you hear me now?
    >>NO! Can you hear me now? NO! Can you hear me now? NO!"
    >>
    >>Suzi

    >
    >
    > Yah, Sprint DOES suck in Chicago. At least that's the case for me. I
    > live in the Chicago northwest burbs. My personal cell phone carrier is
    > Verizon, but my employer provided me with a work related cell phone
    > from Sprint. Sanyo SCP-7300.
    >
    > At home my Verizon phones have always given me crystal clear reception
    > for the last 4 years. Yet this Sprint phone totally sucks; there are
    > complete dead zones in my condo, and I pretty much have to open the
    > sliding glass door and step outside just to have decent reception. On
    > top of that, while in my car driving around the northwest burbs while
    > talking on this Sprint phone, I have noticed many dead zones with
    > dropped calls and reception that fades in and out. Pitiful.
    >
    > Yet my girlfriend just told me recently that she's had very good
    > reception with her Sprint phone for a couple years. She lives about 10
    > miles from me. Go figure.



    HMMM...another NW surburbs resident... It really stinks out here doesn't
    it. I was shocked when I first bought my phone.

    By the way, that whole 14 days trial doesn't sit well with me. What
    common consumer whats to go through the arduous process of selling there
    phones on e-bay (is there another option?) and then going through the
    phone number process again?



  • Similar Threads

    1. alt.cellular.attws
    2. alt.cellular.verizon
    3. alt.cellular.cingular
    4. alt.cellular.cingular
    5. alt.cellular.cingular



  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast