Actual coverage areas

sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
> are lets just say a bunch of hype.
> They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
> cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
> honest.
> There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
> colored in.

I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.

---

› See More: Actual coverage areas

XFF wrote:
>
> sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
> > are lets just say a bunch of hype.
> > They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
> > cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
> > honest.
> > There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
> > colored in.
>
> I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
> coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
> this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
> wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
> Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
> and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.

*Every* provider has dead spots,

Larry

"Lawrence Glasser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> XFF wrote:
> >
> > sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> >
> > > Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
> > > are lets just say a bunch of hype.
> > > They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
> > > cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
> > > honest.
> > > There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
> > > colored in.
> >
> > I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
> > coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
> > this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
> > wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
> > Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
> > and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.
>
> *Every* provider has dead spots,
>
> Larry

Yes, and some of them even advertise coverage in LARGE dead spots. Large as
in 10-15 mile radiuses covering entire towns. Sprint does this and is doing
it now.

[email protected] (XFF) wrote in article
<[email protected]>:
> sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
> > are lets just say a bunch of hype.
> > They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
> > cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
> > honest.
> > There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
> > colored in.
>
> I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
> coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
> this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
> wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
> Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
> and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.

Not true at all. The reason the other 3 are the top is because of
mergers and acquistions. I'm surprised at all of the misconception that
exists on this issue.

[posted via phonescoop.com]

"Larry Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> [email protected] (XFF) wrote in article
> <[email protected]>:
> > sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> >
> > > Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
> > > are lets just say a bunch of hype.
> > > They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
> > > cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
> > > honest.
> > > There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
> > > colored in.
> >
> > I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
> > coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
> > this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
> > wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
> > Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
> > and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.
>
> Not true at all. The reason the other 3 are the top is because of
> mergers and acquistions. I'm surprised at all of the misconception that
> exists on this issue.
>
> [posted via phonescoop.com]

Well, regardless of how anyone gets to the top, I know that Sprint
advertises coverage in areas where there is none. They also ranked lowest
in customer service and have a higher churn rate than the other providers.
When I was with Voicestream, their map was really accurate, within a mile or
two. I probably had 3 dropped calls with Voicestream in the two years I was
with them. I've had no dropped calls with AT&T to date.

It's also a matter of network maintenance, which, of the four carriers I've
tried, Sprint has been the only one that advertised service in an area and I
couldn't use the phone.

Maybe if they can't play with the big boys, they should try something else.
Maybe Sprint and LG could go into the paperweight manufacturing business
together.

boy you must be smokin' sump'n the indians use to believe those maps. Our
daughter drives from Indiana to the west coast each summer both north-south
and easr-west using her cingular, that is 'when' she can find coverage. You
need to talk to more users.

"Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "Larry Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> >
> > [email protected] (XFF) wrote in article
> > <[email protected]>:
> > > sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > >
> > > > Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
> > > > are lets just say a bunch of hype.
> > > > They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
> > > > cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
> > > > honest.
> > > > There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
> > > > colored in.
> > >
> > > I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
> > > coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
> > > this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
> > > wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
> > > Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
> > > and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.
> >
> > Not true at all. The reason the other 3 are the top is because of
> > mergers and acquistions. I'm surprised at all of the misconception that
> > exists on this issue.
> >
> > [posted via phonescoop.com]
>
> Well, regardless of how anyone gets to the top, I know that Sprint
> advertises coverage in areas where there is none. They also ranked lowest
> in customer service and have a higher churn rate than the other providers.
> When I was with Voicestream, their map was really accurate, within a mile or
> two. I probably had 3 dropped calls with Voicestream in the two years I was
> with them. I've had no dropped calls with AT&T to date.
>
> It's also a matter of network maintenance, which, of the four carriers I've
> tried, Sprint has been the only one that advertised service in an area and I
> couldn't use the phone.
>
> Maybe if they can't play with the big boys, they should try something else.
> Maybe Sprint and LG could go into the paperweight manufacturing business
> together.
Guess you don't look at others maps to closely. The "biggest boy"
shows coverage in an area of Montana where the only service is by
satellite phone!. Also, Voicestream showed areas where THEY didn't
have coverage. Looks like you are in an area where SprintPCS has weak
coverage. What I have found is ALL carriers, INCLUDING THE BIG BOYS,
have problem spots, with AT&T having been found to have the most (as
has been stated in numerous independant studies, not surveys!).

I have both sprint and verizon service, and here in east tn, the
veriizon map is solid red--this is definitely an optimistic map, because
there certainly are areas, that without a 3 watt analog unit, there
would be no coverage, and I'm sure there are areas whre even it won't
work--however, I am relatively happy, in that coverage has improved so
much in the last few years. on the other side, I have sprint service in
areas that show no service--so much for maps

[email protected] (Ric) wrote in article
<[email protected]>:
> "Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > "Larry Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > >
> > > [email protected] (XFF) wrote in article
> > > <[email protected]>:
> > > > sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:<[email protected]>...
> > > >
> > > > > Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
> > > > > are lets just say a bunch of hype.
> > > > > They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
> > > > > cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
> > > > > honest.
> > > > > There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
> > > > > colored in.
> > > >
> > > > I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
> > > > coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
> > > > this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
> > > > wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
> > > > Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
> > > > and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.
> > >
> > > Not true at all. The reason the other 3 are the top is because of
> > > mergers and acquistions. I'm surprised at all of the misconception that
> > > exists on this issue.
> > >
> > > [posted via phonescoop.com]
> >
> > Well, regardless of how anyone gets to the top, I know that Sprint
> > advertises coverage in areas where there is none. They also ranked lowest
> > in customer service and have a higher churn rate than the other providers.
> > When I was with Voicestream, their map was really accurate, within a mile or
> > two. I probably had 3 dropped calls with Voicestream in the two years I was
> > with them. I've had no dropped calls with AT&T to date.
> >
> > It's also a matter of network maintenance, which, of the four carriers I've
> > tried, Sprint has been the only one that advertised service in an area and I
> > couldn't use the phone.
> >
> > Maybe if they can't play with the big boys, they should try something else.
> > Maybe Sprint and LG could go into the paperweight manufacturing business
> > together.
> Guess you don't look at others maps to closely. The "biggest boy"
> shows coverage in an area of Montana where the only service is by
> satellite phone!. Also, Voicestream showed areas where THEY didn't
> have coverage. Looks like you are in an area where SprintPCS has weak
> coverage. What I have found is ALL carriers, INCLUDING THE BIG BOYS,
> have problem spots, with AT&T having been found to have the most (as
> has been stated in numerous independant studies, not surveys!).

[posted via phonescoop.com]

[email protected] (Larry Thomas) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> [email protected] (XFF) wrote in article
> <[email protected]>:
>
> > I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
> > coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
> > this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
> > wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
> > Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
> > and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.
>
> Not true at all. The reason the other 3 are the top is because of
> mergers and acquistions. I'm surprised at all of the misconception that
> exists on this issue.

There's no misconception on my part, thank you! Look at the coverage
map for a rural service area (take CMA666 [Texas 15 - Concho]) for
example) from Sprint PCS or T-Mobile and then compare to that of the
two cellular providers in that area. Now you tell me if one doesn't
look like Swiss Cheese and the other one like wall-to-wall carpeting.

Yes, I know some providers lie about their true service area. Yes, I
know Sprint PCS has only been building out for a few years vs. the
cellular providers since the mid-80's. Yes I understand the economics
and consequences of covering low-density population areas.

All of this doesn't change the facts. For good rural coverage, the
PCS providers cannot compete against incumbant cellular providers.

"Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Well, regardless of how anyone gets to the top, I know that Sprint
> advertises coverage in areas where there is none. They also ranked lowest
> in customer service and have a higher churn rate than the other providers.

Actually T-Mobile has a slightly higher churn rate than Sprint PCS.
But you're correct in that it really doesn't matter how a provider
achieves good coverage, whether it's through mergers, acquisitions,
roaming agreements, etc. or building a network from scratch.

> It's also a matter of network maintenance, which, of the four carriers
I've
> tried, Sprint has been the only one that advertised service in an area and
I
> couldn't use the phone.

The Sprint maps are quite amusing. They show coverage (roaming) even
where the FCC maps of AMPS show no coverage.

> Maybe if they can't play with the big boys, they should try something
else.
> Maybe Sprint and LG could go into the paperweight manufacturing business
> together.

More likely that Sprint PCS will merge with another carrier.

I don't know why the LG phones in the U.S. have so many problems.
In Korea, LG has great products, including phones. Perhaps it has to
do with the excellent coverage in Korea, where a phone does not have
to deal with a poor quality network.

Larry Thomas wrote:
> [email protected] (XFF) wrote in article
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>>
>>
>>>Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
>>>are lets just say a bunch of hype.
>>>They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
>>>cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
>>>honest.
>>>There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
>>>colored in.
>>
>>I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
>>coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
>>this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
>>wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
>>Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
>>and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.
>
>
> Not true at all. The reason the other 3 are the top is because of
> mergers and acquistions. I'm surprised at all of the misconception that
> exists on this issue.

Actually, it is true. If Cingular, Verizon Wireless, or AT&T Wireless
decided that they were going to drop coverage in areas that were not by
themselves profitable, they would see an increase in customer churn.
Not only would you see coverage dropped intirely in some areas, total
states would have coverage dropped (Like North Dakota, South Dakota,
Montana, Wyoming, Idaho). The larger the coverage area, the more
subscribers that provider will have.

Jim-G wrote:
> boy you must be smokin' sump'n the indians use to believe those maps. Our
> daughter drives from Indiana to the west coast each summer both north-south
> and easr-west using her cingular, that is 'when' she can find coverage. You
> need to talk to more users.
>
>

It depends on whether you have a GSM, TDMA/AMPS, or AMPS only phone. I
drove from Bismarck, North Dakota to Orlando, Florida, and the only
areas without coverage were in the Chatanooga, TN area, where it was not
even safe to use the phone. The only place I hit roaming was in
Wisconsin and part of Illinois. I have a Moto C331t TDMA/AMPS phone,
and it beats the coverage of even CDMA phones for digital service and
quality (I had three CDMA phones -- all experienced unstable signal,
poor digital quality but good analog qualilty, and poor digital
coverage). I think it makes a difference what kind of phone you have -
GSM and CDMA are newer technologies, and therefore still have bugs that
are being worked out. In 10 years, it's possible that we may not even
see an AMPS system, or even a TDMA system, but it's possible that those
systems may even grow in coverage as some equipment manufacturers may
offer discounts to carriers expanding TDMA, more as a back-up system.

About Dakota <[email protected]> wrote in article
<[email protected]>:
>
>
> Larry Thomas wrote:
> > [email protected] (XFF) wrote in article
> > <[email protected]>:
> >
> >>sparks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >>
> >>
> >>>Well I went to the Cingular web page and the coverage areas
> >>>are lets just say a bunch of hype.
> >>>They show coverage over the entire state. Ok sprint shows the main
> >>>cities and the highways are covered, LOTS of missing areas...but
> >>>honest.
> >>>There is no way that Cingular coveres the entire area they have
> >>>colored in.
> >>
> >>I guess as a Sprint PCS customer you're just not used to having good
> >>coverage, even off the beaten path. But while I don't know whether
> >>this is the case in AR or not, it is very much possible to have
> >>wall-to-wall coverage from cellular providers. That's why VZW,
> >>Cingular, and AT&TWS are the top 3 wireless providers in the country,
> >>and not PCS providers like Sprint PCS or T-Mobile.
> >
> >
> > Not true at all. The reason the other 3 are the top is because of
> > mergers and acquistions. I'm surprised at all of the misconception that
> > exists on this issue.
>
> Actually, it is true. If Cingular, Verizon Wireless, or AT&T Wireless
> decided that they were going to drop coverage in areas that were not by
> themselves profitable, they would see an increase in customer churn.
> Not only would you see coverage dropped intirely in some areas, total
> states would have coverage dropped (Like North Dakota, South Dakota,
> Montana, Wyoming, Idaho). The larger the coverage area, the more
> subscribers that provider will have.
>
>

That has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make.

[posted via phonescoop.com]

The point I was trying to make is that the top 3 carriers didn't get to
be the top 3 because of their coverage area, customer service,
popularity etc. They got to be that way because of their mergers and
acquistions which kept them ahead of the pack. It just so happens that
the top 3 are mainly 800 Mhz cellular carriers. I'm not saying this is a
bad thing or that it even matters but I am saying it's the reason they
became the top 3. A lot of people mistaken think Verizon got to be the
largest carrier because they are the best carrier. It had nothing to do
with that. Let's AT&T & Cingular decided to merge next week. That would
make AT&T the largest carrier by far. Does that automatically mean they
become the best carrier then? No. If Sprint merged with let's say Nextel
(or someone else) then that would put them into the No. 3 position.
Whoever makes the most mergers is the carrier that will likely have the
most subscribers.


--
-Larry
Sprint user since 1997



[email protected] (XFF) wrote in article
<[email protected]>:

>
> There's no misconception on my part, thank you! Look at the coverage
> map for a rural service area (take CMA666 [Texas 15 - Concho]) for
> example) from Sprint PCS or T-Mobile and then compare to that of the
> two cellular providers in that area. Now you tell me if one doesn't
> look like Swiss Cheese and the other one like wall-to-wall carpeting.
>
> Yes, I know some providers lie about their true service area. Yes, I
> know Sprint PCS has only been building out for a few years vs. the
> cellular providers since the mid-80's. Yes I understand the economics
> and consequences of covering low-density population areas.
>
> All of this doesn't change the facts. For good rural coverage, the
> PCS providers cannot compete against incumbant cellular providers.

[posted via phonescoop.com]

It's highly unlikely that Sprint could even merge with Nextel, as they
use very different technological standards for delivery of their
services. It is more likely that Sprint would merge with Verizon
Wireless or Western Wireless, but you know mergers are coming up in the
near future, especially as number portability becomes madatorily
available to consumers. Western Wireless charges a $5.00 monthly fee in
some areas for this, which will increase their churn.

One thing that remains important about the largest providers -- they
stay largest because of their services, plans, CS, or other factors.
People can still switch if they don't like services. I have seen quite
a few people discontinue services they had from CommNet or AirTouch when
it became Verizon because calling plan options decreased.

Larry Thomas wrote:
> The point I was trying to make is that the top 3 carriers didn't get to
> be the top 3 because of their coverage area, customer service,
> popularity etc. They got to be that way because of their mergers and
> acquistions which kept them ahead of the pack. It just so happens that
> the top 3 are mainly 800 Mhz cellular carriers. I'm not saying this is a
> bad thing or that it even matters but I am saying it's the reason they
> became the top 3. A lot of people mistaken think Verizon got to be the
> largest carrier because they are the best carrier. It had nothing to do
> with that. Let's AT&T & Cingular decided to merge next week. That would
> make AT&T the largest carrier by far. Does that automatically mean they
> become the best carrier then? No. If Sprint merged with let's say Nextel
> (or someone else) then that would put them into the No. 3 position.
> Whoever makes the most mergers is the carrier that will likely have the
> most subscribers.
>
>