Best Coverage and service

[vicken]

I have been looking at reports from JD Power and Consumer Reports and they both consistently show Verizon and T-Mobile to be the best wireless carriers in almost all regions. I went to deadcellzone.com and consistently in most areas verizon and t-mobile had the least amount of dead zones. Is T-Mobile really that good? Are they better than Sprint as far as overall coverage in California and the US?

[dalbrich]

You ask a good question.

Since I "run" a wireless review website, I have great difficulty ranking providers. It's not because I'm not intimately familiar with who does what well and even where (because I have years of experience with all of the national providers). It's because what we all care about varies.

Here's my take: It's critical that providers offer a high quality of service within their advertised footprint. Historically, I'd give carriers with broader national coverage higher ratings, but actually, quality of service is ultimately more important.

Verizon and T-Mobile really work well where they say they do, and with a very high degree of reliability. This means lower rate of dropped calls, or calls going to voicemail without ringing your phone. I'd rank Verizon #1, but T-Mobile is also very good. Verizon gets the "nod" because they do both well (meaning local coverage, and large roaming area included in rate plans).

Sprint and Cingular may have (through native and included roaming) vast coverage. Their quality of coverage in my home state of Oregon (and places I travel) are very bad compared to the competition. Both have high incidences of capacity problems, and other issues I haven't had on either Verizon or T-Mobile.

So yes, for me personally, Verizon is #1, T-Mobile is #2, and Cingular and Sprint are about a wash for #3 (although I'd give Cingular the nod due to vast included data roaming).

It's interesting that Sprint had such a poor 4th quarter. My guess is that all of the national carriers are scrambling to catch up with Verizon.

-Dan

PS: Verizon seems to do great network monitoring. They tend to anticipate capacity demand, and build out before they need it better than any other carrier. Folks can yammer all day long about features people want, but the bottom line is that they want their phone to work as a phone reliably first, and everything else is secondary.

[larry]

Originally Posted by dalbrich

It's interesting that Sprint had such a poor 4th quarter. My guess is that all of the national carriers are scrambling to catch up with Verizon.

I wouldn't call it a poor quarter. It wasn't too good for direct corporate additions but resale and affiliate/partner numbers were impressive. Churn held steady or even slightly improved. Coming off a big merger I wouldn't expect things to be rosy this quickly.

[josephd]

And if I may add, I have always said no carrier is totally superior over the other. Yes VZW is the coverage king but I disagree to some point about T-Mobile being better than Cingular, they still lack spectrum in a lot of areas and the 1900 network does not really help them. Before I left for AZ. I heard a lot of negativity about Cingular's coverage there but I saw otherwise my Cingular service was as good if not better as it is here in MA.

[vicken]

Thanks for the responses. I have a question about roaming and how it relates to T-Mobile and Cingular. It looks like roaming is included and you don't have to pay for it with T-Mob. How about Cingular, is their roaming free or are you charged for it?

Also, when you roam with T-Mobile are you roaming on Cingular/AT&T? If this is the case, isn't that what makes T-Mobile better than Cingular as far as coverage is concerned?

[josephd]

Originally Posted by vicken

Thanks for the responses. I have a question about roaming and how it relates to T-Mobile and Cingular. It looks like roaming is included and you don't have to pay for it with T-Mob. How about Cingular, is their roaming free or are you charged for it?

Also, when you roam with T-Mobile are you roaming on Cingular/AT&T? If this is the case, isn't that what makes T-Mobile better than Cingular as far as coverage is concerned?

On a nationwide plan with Cingular you are not charged for roaming,there are certain markets where one roams off of the other.As for coverage I say your best off with Cingular, for customer service and plan costs T-mobile seems to have the edge. But again it depends on your area and what works best for you if you have good T-mobile coverage than T-Mobile would be worth a look. You have to explore your options closely and take full advantage of the grace period Cingular offers 30 days and T-Mobile I think is 14. Good luck

[Andy]

If you're mainly planning on using your phone in Souther California, right now you will be a LOT better of with T-Mobile than with Cingular. Cingular is trying to force all their customers onto the old AT&T network which could barely handle the old AT&T subscribers, and is now handling thousands and thousands more people and the service is horrible in a lot of areas of Southern California.
You will be much better of with T-Mobile in So.Cal for a while since T-Mobile now owns the old Cingular network there which was excellent in most areas.

In a lot of/most rural areas T-Mobile will roam on the same carriers Cingular will- and roaming is always free on T-Mobile as well, just like with cingular and Verizon.

[JR1]

Yes roaming is included with Cingular. Where I live in rural Kentucky....only Cingular offers service here. I don't have a lot of choice. I have been all over the country and have never been without service in any state due to being able to roam nationally.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by JR1

Yes roaming is included with Cingular. Where I live in rural Kentucky....only Cingular offers service here. I don't have a lot of choice. I have been all over the country and have never been without service in any state due to being able to roam nationally.

Well, T-Mobile, Verizon, Sprint...with whatever carrier you are with you will have service, including roaming service in every state of this country, if you are on a national plan.

[jones]

Originally Posted by vicken

I have been looking at reports from JD Power and Consumer Reports and they both consistently show Verizon and T-Mobile to be the best wireless carriers in almost all regions. I went to deadcellzone.com and consistently in most areas verizon and t-mobile had the least amount of dead zones. Is T-Mobile really that good? Are they better than Sprint as far as overall coverage in California and the US?

those jdpowers are Not right.

[vicken]

What about consumer reports? Deadcellzones.com? Are those NOT correct also? Why do you say it is not "right"? Back it up with some evidence.

[jones]

The best JUDGE is YOU.
What works for you,
since dead zones are getting smaller.

NOT other peoples perception.

[vicken]

Yeah, you are correct. But that is a little unrealistic don't you think. I can't try every major carrier in every single place to see who works the best in most places. I don't have that kind of time or money. So JD Power and Consumer Reports does their research, that's what they are paid to do. Along with asking other people's opinions and going on a web site like this, those companies provide valuable information for people like me.

[larry]

Originally Posted by vicken

What about consumer reports? Deadcellzones.com? Are those NOT correct also? Why do you say it is not "right"? Back it up with some evidence.

This topic has been debated a number of times on this forum. Consumer Reports tends to come up with the exact same results every time they do a study and it is suspected (and confirmed) that they repeatedly interview the same people over and over again to arrive at their conclusions. Does their study include a large enough cross section of the wireless using population to be accurate? Maybe or maybe not.

As for deadcellzones.com I can tell you to take that with a grain of salt. The reports on there are often times years old and there's no quality control to make sure anything on there is fact or fiction. Carriers are always fixing their dead spots and what was a dead spot 2 years ago or even 6 months ago might not be a dead spot today.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by larry

This topic has been debated a number of times on this forum. Consumer Reports tends to come up with the exact same results every time they do a study and it is suspected (and confirmed) that they repeatedly interview the same people over and over again to arrive at their conclusions. .

Really? CR has been confirmed to repeatedly ask the same people the same questions? I've been a subscriber for 10 years, and my annual surveys aren't the same each year. I've never done one for cell phones. Just because a few people may get the same section in the survey, doesn't reduce the randomness of the survey.

[powertoburn]

Originally Posted by vicken

I have been looking at reports from JD Power and Consumer Reports and they both consistently show Verizon and T-Mobile to be the best wireless carriers in almost all regions. I went to deadcellzone.com and consistently in most areas verizon and t-mobile had the least amount of dead zones. Is T-Mobile really that good? Are they better than Sprint as far as overall coverage in California and the US?

I happen to subscribe to:

Cingular (BLUE) & (ORANGE) - I was signed up with both AT&T & Cingular at one time due to mobile to mobile being seperate at one time.

Sprint PCS - CDMA) & (iDen - Nextel)

T-Mobile

Verizon Wireless

I use my phone all over Southern CA. in Los Angeles & Orange County

In Orange County - Sprint PCS has quickly improved their coverage - I practically have full signals everywhere I go and the phone does not need to roam anymore onto VZW.

Cingular, T-Mobile, Verizon also perform similiarly.

Nextel has me frequently in spots with "NO SERVICE" - "Santa Ana" and "Irvine" are the worst.

In Los Angeles County it is a different story.

Around the San Gabriel Valley particularly around Alhambra, Monterey Park, Rosemead, San Gabriel, San Marino, South Pasadena, and Temple City.

Cingular & T-Mobile are king. Practically full signals everywhere I go including iindoors.

Nextel still has spots of no coverage including outdoors but less problems then in Orange County.

Sprint on the other hand is quickly improving coverage outdoors in many areas there is full signal now and indoors the signal in residential areas is now much stronger but still on the weak side.

VZW works pretty much everywhere outdoors but indoors in San Marino, CA the phone will garble & drop calls. This is due to congestion on the sites leading to less coverage. The major traffic is along Huntington Drive. Verizon techs will claim cell shrinkage is the issue.

Overall for me I feel the best providers are in terms of coverage:

#1 T-Mobile
#2 Cingular
#3 VZW
#4 Sprint
#5 Nextel

However Nextel & Sprint are co-locating sites in many areas already so the coverage can quickly improve for Sprint CDMA in my neck of the woods due to Nextel having some of the prime locations for coverage.

The best carriers for customer care are:

#1 T-Mobile & AT&T
#2 VZW & Nextel
#3 Cingular & Sprint

[Andy]

Wow, you are rating cingular above Verizon in terms of coverage??
Have you not experienced any problems with your service??
People I know down there are quite frustrated with Cingular at this time, after being moved to the Blue network, and most of them have switched. When I was down there with my cingular phone a few weeks ago, service was horrible, unless, of course, forced to the T-Mobile (orange) network.

[powertoburn]

Originally Posted by Andy84094

Wow, you are rating cingular above Verizon in terms of coverage??
Have you not experienced any problems with your service??
People I know down there are quite frustrated with Cingular at this time, after being moved to the Blue network, and most of them have switched. When I was down there with my cingular phone a few weeks ago, service was horrible, unless, of course, forced to the T-Mobile (orange) network.

My Cingular 64K sim is a regional one so I am still homed to Orange which is now T-Mobile. With my AT&T sim the phone hardly needs to roam onto Orange anymore. The coverage in my immediate area has improved greatly - this is in San Marino, CA and surrounding areas. New cell sites are being activated.

VZW in San Marino, CA still needs work. In the residential areas the phone indoors is unuseable during the day due to congestion on Huntington Drive. Cell shrinkage according to VZW tech but NIMBY is preventing a badly new site to be installed. And recently I find even with fulll signal calls garble & drop.

[jones]

Originally Posted by Andy84094

Wow, you are rating cingular above Verizon in terms of coverage??

He's Not a VZW Cheerleader.
Perception and TV ads don't
improve coverage.

[nickname]

For the past few years, I have had both T-Mobile and Sprint accounts. I also have good friends on both Cingular and Verizon.

Based on these experiences, I summarize each at this time:

Cingular (Soon to be called AT&T...again):
Locally, coverage problems due to transition to AT&T network, but nationally pretty good coverage.
Customer service on average, probably the worst of all carriers.

Verizon:
Consistently good coverage locally and nationally... with some dead spots like all carriers.
Customer service on average, pretty good.

Sprint (PCS network only):
Pretty good coverage locally and nationally, particularly if you have 'America' option. Coverage was among the worst in late '90s when network was initially built by COX, but steadily improved in the past five years.
Customer service can be hit or miss, depending on who you get -- this is true of all carriers, but it seems to be more variable.

T-Mobile:
Pretty good coverage locally, and nationally quite improved due to new 850 roaming.
Customer service consistently the best with informed CSRs.

So which is the best? I personally find T-Mobile and Sprint still the best choices for me. Though, I am biased since I have been a charter subscriber with each since they first offered service in SoCal. I prefer Sprint more for the technology (e.g. EV-DO, CDMA phone choice,Java platform for loading personal stuff--BREW doesn't do much for me) and T-Mobile for their balance of customer service/coverage and world phones -- got a collection of them now, each unlocked thanks to T-Mobile. Try getting that from Cingular.

[vicken]

So do you feel that overall T-Mob has better coverage in southern CA than Sprint? What about nationally (Sprint vs T-Mob), who is better?

[nickname]

Originally Posted by vicken

So do you feel that overall T-Mob has better coverage in southern CA than Sprint? What about nationally (Sprint vs T-Mob), who is better?

Honestly, based on my use and movement patterns in SoCal, I would call coverage between the two a wash. Nationally too, I regularly go to places where Sprint coverage is better and other places where T-Mobile has better coverage. Mind you, all of the above experience has been solely on their native networks and not on their roaming partners (Verizon mostly for Sprint and Cingular, et. al. for T-Mobile). I also am not considering rural areas as I have not really been out of major cities or off major highways.

My hypothesis is today, with roaming, is that they are both basically equal overall for voice coverage, with each having some coverage issues somewhere. Customer service wise, I would definitely say T-Mobile is better; however this doesn't mean you can negotiate with them as much as you can with Sprint (ala retention) so I don't define customer service in terms of giving me everything I want. It's just that in my experience the reps have been more knowledgeable and helpful at T-Mobile.

If I did not need much wap access or if I wanted a family share plan with messaging or I did more international traveling, I like what I see at T-Mobile. For individual plans and faster, more robust wap, I like Sprint.

Of course, I have kept lines on each so I am still basically sitting on the fence.

[Studogvetmed]

At least with T-mobile you can get street level idea of service (of course not perfect).

We considered T-mobile over sprint when looking briefly as we have some colelgues all who use T-mobile here in Colrado and love it, However we typed in Olin, IA in there coverage location and got nill. That ruled them out for us as we will do substantial traveling to that area, so chose sprint for their better roaming agreements and 6pm nights (though if we're lucky we'll get native coverage in that area of Iowa...) I'm excited to test out sprint that direction this weekend.

During our research in the last two weeks I was told that T-mobile will be expanding there network by *can't remember number*% in the coming months. Not sure if that is the same discussion of the addition of 850 roaming that has already gone through....

For T-mobile use their great coverage locater for all the places you think you might want to visit. This will at least give you an idea on top of people's real life experiences.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Studogvetmed

We considered T-mobile over sprint when looking briefly as we have some colelgues all who use T-mobile here in Colrado and love it, However we typed in Olin, IA in there coverage location and got nill. That ruled them out for us as we will do substantial traveling to that area, so chose sprint for their better roaming agreements and 6pm nights (though if we're lucky we'll get native coverage in that area of Iowa...) I'm excited to test out sprint that direction this weekend..

There is something seriously wrong with the T-Mobile maps for Iowa! They are missing tons of coverage from their affiliate I-Wireless. That wasn't like that a week or so ago....

Go here:

http://www.iwireless.com/plans_local.asp#

and click where it says "click here for coverage" and you get the local I-Wireless coverage in Iowa and the surrounding area. (I attached the map you get below) For some reason that has disappeared from the T-Mobile website. You can see at the bottom of the I-Wireless logo that they are affiliated with T-Mobile so I don't know what the problem is with the maps. T-M has lots of roaming coverage in the eastern half of Iowa.

[Studogvetmed]

Originally Posted by Matt

There is something seriously wrong with the T-Mobile maps for Iowa! They are missing tons of coverage from their affiliate I-Wireless. That wasn't like that a week or so ago....

Go here:

http://www.iwireless.com/plans_local.asp#

and click where it says "click here for coverage" and you get the local I-Wireless coverage in Iowa and the surrounding area. (I attached the map you get below) For some reason that has disappeared from the T-Mobile website. You can see at the bottom of the I-Wireless logo that they are affiliated with T-Mobile so I don't know what the problem is with the maps. T-M has lots of roaming coverage in the eastern half of Iowa.

Interesting you bring that up Matt, there is an Iowa Wireless tower less then two miles from my mother in laws house.... Strange

Sprint did pretty good on our trip, we had some dead zone here and there, but we were able to roam okay in Olin Iowa and heading out one or two miles in the general direction of Cedar Rapids got us a strong native sprint signal. Deeping into the flood plains really cuts into your signal, but overall we were satisifed with what we got.

Thanks for the info. I wrote down the SIDs of what carrier we may have been roaming on in my Mother in Laws house, going to research that later.

Cheers,
stu

[Matt]

T-Mobile's maps are fixed. Here's an image from their webpages:

http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage

[Studogvetmed]

Nice. I've got to say I love T-mobiles map. Looking at the maps, the addition of the areas of Iowa is a pleasent surprise, but still quite a few areas of South Dakota/Wyoming we travel aren't covered. Of course if Sprint actually delivers on these areas of Wyoming and South Dakota still remains to be seen on an upcoming trip, but sprint got high marks across Nebraska and in areas of Iowa in our book.

Thanks for sharing the maps. I love those maps. The most realistic idea of service that any company provides. T-Mobile get's high marks for that.