Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 69
  1. #1
    daniel cairns
    Guest
    Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
    they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
    metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
    down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint. Heres
    the plan I had at TM: 3000 anytime mins @ $49.00 (no kidding) that was
    awfully hard to give up. So I now have SprintPCS:700 mins @$55.00. What I
    have is solid service just about anywhere I go. So when I see the Beauty
    Queen on the television solving all those problems with family members
    talking to each other I notice they don't even mention how great or even
    mediocre the coverage is. But they girl is beautiful so that is what really
    matters.
    Thanks for listening,
    Daniel Cairns

    "Viper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]_s72...
    > Now why can't Verizon have features like that? I also like T Mobile's plan
    > pricing. Verizon needs to be more flexible with there plans and offer more
    > instead of take away from users ( from what I heard ). More flexible +
    > more features + better pricing = happy customer.
    >
    > "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >> For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
    >> Coverage Check.
    >>
    >> They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
    >>
    >> I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
    >> Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
    >> what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....
    >>

    >
    >






    See More: Signal coverage--truth in advertising




  2. #2
    daniel cairns
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising


    "Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > daniel cairns wrote:
    >> Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
    >> they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
    >> metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
    >> down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint.
    >> Heres the plan I had at TM: 3000 anytime mins @ $49.00 (no kidding) that
    >> was awfully hard to give up. So I now have SprintPCS:700 mins @$55.00.
    >> What I have is solid service just about anywhere I go. So when I see the
    >> Beauty Queen

    >
    > Ok, as a guy, would you rather watch Catherine Zeta-Jones or the Sprint
    > PCS dude? :P
    >
    > (of course, in asking that question, I'm assuming you're heterosexual)

    You are correct sir! The "skirt" is attractive fer sure, I honestly see
    right through the BS though. There is so much riding on any kind of ad
    campaign I guess. It's just that T-Mobile has a ton of phones that work with
    their service, they are literally so easy to come by, that I do miss that
    company. And I would still be with them and not even be paying any attention
    to this group if they had a working cell tower right smack in the heart of
    downtown Dearborn Michigan. Am still stumped with all the retoric from the
    CSR about trying a different phone(tried 4 different phones) maybe a new SIM
    card, or maybe the proverbial Trouble Report would get me a signal. What did
    me in was when went to a TM store in Dearborn and within 4 seconds the dude,
    after knowing right where I worked, said " you are in a dead spot". I said
    good day and within 30 Mins I had new service with Sprint with my # from TM.
    Oops, I did not answer your question. I like watching the dude better 'cause
    he conveys a smart assey sarcasm that I have not yet mastered.
    DC

    >
    >
    > --
    > Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
    > Company website: http://JustThe.net/
    > Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
    > E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307






  3. #3
    Viper
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    Now why can't Verizon have features like that? I also like T Mobile's plan
    pricing. Verizon needs to be more flexible with there plans and offer more
    instead of take away from users ( from what I heard ). More flexible + more
    features + better pricing = happy customer.

    "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
    > Coverage Check.
    >
    > They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
    >
    > I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
    > Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
    > what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....
    >






  4. #4
    Larry
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    "Viper" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]_s72:

    > Now why can't Verizon have features like that?


    How could they lie if there was a REAL RF coverage map just sitting there
    exposing the truth? Don't hold your breath.

    These maps exist. They are filed with the FCC, who does nothing to force
    the companies to actually cover the territory they are licensed to provide
    real service for. All companies have poor coverage, some poorer than
    others. If a broadcast station provided this type of coverage, FCC would
    fine them $10,000/day until they complied with filling their coverage area
    with a good level of signal.

    FCC used to tell us "it's because it's new and they're still in the
    buildout phase". It's kind of hard to swallow this BS, now, so far in the
    future, any more. FCC needs to provide coverage, one way or the
    other....you either put up the towers necessary or you are forced to share
    (allow company-paid roaming) on other systems IN MARKET. FCC also needs to
    inform cellular what digital modulation scheme they must use, instead of
    this hodge-podge of incompatible nonsense invented to prevent churning we
    have now.



    --
    Larry



  5. #5
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    daniel cairns wrote:
    > Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
    > they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
    > metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
    > down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint. Heres
    > the plan I had at TM: 3000 anytime mins @ $49.00 (no kidding) that was
    > awfully hard to give up. So I now have SprintPCS:700 mins @$55.00. What I
    > have is solid service just about anywhere I go. So when I see the Beauty
    > Queen


    Ok, as a guy, would you rather watch Catherine Zeta-Jones or the Sprint PCS
    dude? :P

    (of course, in asking that question, I'm assuming you're heterosexual)


    --
    Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
    Company website: http://JustThe.net/
    Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
    E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307



  6. #6
    Notan
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    daniel cairns wrote:
    >
    > <snip>


    YO, DANIEL!

    Check your system clock... You're ~1 day behind!!!

    Notan



  7. #7
    Ben Skversky
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    I've been with T-Mobile for ten days. So far the service is great. No
    dropped calls. 1000 minute family plan for $69.99.

    "daniel cairns" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
    > they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
    > metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
    > down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint. Heres
    > the plan I had at TM: 3000 anytime mins @ $49.00 (no kidding) that was
    > awfully hard to give up. So I now have SprintPCS:700 mins @$55.00. What I
    > have is solid service just about anywhere I go. So when I see the Beauty
    > Queen on the television solving all those problems with family members
    > talking to each other I notice they don't even mention how great or even
    > mediocre the coverage is. But they girl is beautiful so that is what
    > really matters.
    > Thanks for listening,
    > Daniel Cairns
    >
    > "Viper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]_s72...
    >> Now why can't Verizon have features like that? I also like T Mobile's
    >> plan pricing. Verizon needs to be more flexible with there plans and
    >> offer more instead of take away from users ( from what I heard ). More
    >> flexible + more features + better pricing = happy customer.
    >>
    >> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]
    >>> For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
    >>> Coverage Check.
    >>>
    >>> They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
    >>>
    >>> I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
    >>> Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
    >>> what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >






  8. #8
    Richard Ness
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    39bB contours are what is on file. Always has been.
    Your contention that's something of higher detail is "on file"
    is a 100% TOTAL crock of ****. YOU are also full of crap.

    As usual, you are spouting total bull ****, not knowing what the facts are.

    You bring up this 'FCC should dictate' **** often also. Wake up, we are not
    in the old USSR, China or somewhere government rules with iron fist.
    Does 'free market economy' mean anything to you?? The FCC has let
    a free market decide. The idea that it's all some conspiracy to prevent
    churn
    is idiotic, paranoid and sheer stupidity.

    You demonstrate cranial rectal insertion just about every time you post.



    "Larry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "Viper" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]_s72:
    >
    >> Now why can't Verizon have features like that?

    >
    > How could they lie if there was a REAL RF coverage map just sitting there
    > exposing the truth? Don't hold your breath.
    >
    > These maps exist. They are filed with the FCC, who does nothing to force
    > the companies to actually cover the territory they are licensed to provide
    > real service for. All companies have poor coverage, some poorer than
    > others. If a broadcast station provided this type of coverage, FCC would
    > fine them $10,000/day until they complied with filling their coverage area
    > with a good level of signal.
    >
    > FCC used to tell us "it's because it's new and they're still in the
    > buildout phase". It's kind of hard to swallow this BS, now, so far in the
    > future, any more. FCC needs to provide coverage, one way or the
    > other....you either put up the towers necessary or you are forced to share
    > (allow company-paid roaming) on other systems IN MARKET. FCC also needs
    > to
    > inform cellular what digital modulation scheme they must use, instead of
    > this hodge-podge of incompatible nonsense invented to prevent churning we
    > have now.
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Larry






  9. #9
    Jim Seymour
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Steve Sobol <[email protected]> writes:
    [snip]
    >
    > Ok, as a guy, would you rather watch Catherine Zeta-Jones or the Sprint PCS
    > dude? :P

    [snip]

    Catherine Zeta-Jones, of course . But, as I was telling my wife
    just recently: T-Mobile sounds nice. There's a portability advantage
    with GSM. But their coverage sucks, and even Catherine Zeta-Jones
    can't make up for that.

    Speaking of coverage... So my wife, who's on VZ, has been telling me,
    who's on SPCS, that VZ' coverage is better. We went out to a big,
    big, *big* park yesterday. Guess who had solid coverage and who was
    out-of-service?

    --
    Jim Seymour | "There is no expedient to which a man will not
    [email protected] | go to avoid the labor of thinking."
    http://jimsun.LinxNet.com | - Thomas A. Edison



  10. #10
    Larry
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    "Richard Ness" <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > You bring up this 'FCC should dictate' **** often also. Wake up, we
    > are not in the old USSR, China or somewhere government rules with iron
    > fist. Does 'free market economy' mean anything to you?? The FCC has
    > let a free market decide. The idea that it's all some conspiracy to
    > prevent churn
    > is idiotic, paranoid and sheer stupidity.
    >


    FCC is tasked by law with providing the public with licensed public
    services, like cellular phones, etc. through their licensees regulated by
    the Commission. Cellular airwaves belong to the PUBLIC and are used under
    license by that PUBLIC by companies who hold a monopoly by virtue of that
    license for the PUBLIC good. Those licenses could be pulled away and the
    systems darkened by FCC enforcement actions, just like any other public
    radio service sold to consumers.

    You cellular boys think the goddamned companies own the airwaves. They do
    not.


    --
    Larry



  11. #11
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    Because those features must not be sufficiently compelling to subscribers. If
    those features were sufficiently compelling, presumably more subscribers would
    migrate from Verizon to T-Mobile (aided by number portability), and Verizon
    would have to respond. That's how the free market works, and that's not
    happening -- Verizon continues to have low churn.

    In <[email protected]_s72> on Sun, 31 Jul 2005 01:47:46 GMT,
    "Viper" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Now why can't Verizon have features like that? I also like T Mobile's plan
    >pricing. Verizon needs to be more flexible with there plans and offer more
    >instead of take away from users ( from what I heard ). More flexible + more
    >features + better pricing = happy customer.
    >
    >"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >> For an eye-opener, head to tmobile.com and look at their Personal
    >> Coverage Check.
    >>
    >> They make no bones about it: here's what your coverage will look like.
    >>
    >> I have to give them credit. That's a great feature. I sure wish
    >> Cingular had it. Funny thing--TMobile's coverage map matches up with
    >> what I experience with my Cingular blue service. Hmmmm.....


    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  12. #12
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Sat, 30 Jul 2005 22:04:33 -0400,
    Larry <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"Viper" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]_s72:
    >
    >> Now why can't Verizon have features like that?

    >
    >How could they lie if there was a REAL RF coverage map just sitting there
    >exposing the truth? Don't hold your breath.
    >
    >These maps exist. They are filed with the FCC,


    They are? Then presumably they are available to the public, under Freedom of
    Information if nothing else. Form or Docket Number please.

    >who does nothing to force
    >the companies to actually cover the territory they are licensed to provide
    >real service for.


    Under what statute or regulation?

    >All companies have poor coverage,


    Actually pretty good in my experience.

    >some poorer than
    >others.


    True.

    >If a broadcast station provided this type of coverage, FCC would
    >fine them $10,000/day until they complied with filling their coverage area
    >with a good level of signal.


    Huh? Then why is broadcast radio and TV coverage so bad here in the East Bay
    part of the San Francisco Bay Area? Cellular coverage is better by far!

    >FCC used to tell us "it's because it's new and they're still in the
    >buildout phase". It's kind of hard to swallow this BS, now, so far in the
    >future, any more. FCC needs to provide coverage, one way or the
    >other....you either put up the towers necessary or you are forced to share
    >(allow company-paid roaming) on other systems IN MARKET.


    No need for that -- let the market continue to work.

    >FCC also needs to
    >inform cellular what digital modulation scheme they must use, instead of
    >this hodge-podge of incompatible nonsense invented to prevent churning we
    >have now.


    Really Bad Idea! The "hodge-podge" has now sorted itself out in the market
    into two principal standards, which fosters competition.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  13. #13
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:34:36 -0400,
    Larry <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"Richard Ness" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >news:[email protected]:
    >
    >> You bring up this 'FCC should dictate' **** often also. Wake up, we
    >> are not in the old USSR, China or somewhere government rules with iron
    >> fist. Does 'free market economy' mean anything to you?? The FCC has
    >> let a free market decide. The idea that it's all some conspiracy to
    >> prevent churn
    >> is idiotic, paranoid and sheer stupidity.

    >
    >FCC is tasked by law with providing the public with licensed public
    >services, like cellular phones, etc. through their licensees regulated by
    >the Commission.


    Really? What specific (paragraph and section of) law?

    >Cellular airwaves belong to the PUBLIC and are used under
    >license by that PUBLIC by companies who hold a monopoly by virtue of that
    >license for the PUBLIC good.


    Where are you getting that "PUBLIC good" stuff? Spectrum is allocated and
    licensed for specific purposes, not various kinds of "PUBLIC good."

    >Those licenses could be pulled away and the
    >systems darkened by FCC enforcement actions, just like any other public
    >radio service sold to consumers.


    Nonsense. Can you cite specific examples?

    >You cellular boys think the goddamned companies own the airwaves. They do
    >not.


    Actually they pretty much do. They paid for them, and the government couldn't
    take them back without REALLY good justification that just doesn't exist.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  14. #14
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    Ben Skversky wrote:
    > I've been with T-Mobile for ten days. So far the service is great. No
    > dropped calls. 1000 minute family plan for $69.99.


    Again, coverage varies.

    Sprint and T-Mobile *both* used to suck a whole lot more than they do now,
    coverage-wise.

    --
    Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
    Company website: http://JustThe.net/
    Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
    E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307



  15. #15
    Steve Sobol
    Guest

    Re: Signal coverage--truth in advertising

    (PeteCresswell) wrote:
    > Per daniel cairns:
    >
    >>Please know that T-Mobile does show a coverage map,that much is true, but
    >>they have serious dead spots all over the place. Even in high populated
    >>metro areas. They do offer some great plans at super prices, it just came
    >>down to having service when I needed it. So I ported over to Sprint.

    >
    >
    > That's almost exactly where I am right now - but I'm still on T-Mob until the
    > contract runs out.


    Out of curiosity, which area are you in, Daniel?

    Also, I'm on a nationwide FamilyTime share plan. I can roam onto other
    carriers, including Cingular (at no extra charge!) if I happen to hit a
    T-Mobile dead spot or travel somewhere where they don't have coverage, and
    apparently that includes the area where I live even though T-Mobile has
    native coverage here. Do you have a local or regional plan, or a nationwide
    plan?

    --
    Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
    Company website: http://JustThe.net/
    Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/
    E: [email protected] Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast