Yep looking good so far! I hope they get the new towers added in the past 90 days function to work and then everything will be set.
I agree Andy. My house is listed as "good" coverage, but outdoors I will fluctuate from -88 at best all the way to no service. Indoors I have never seen a reading below -95db.
As far as I've seen none of carriers coverage maps are very accurate. They're close but RF coverage isn't an exact science and no reasonable amount of money will provide the level of maps most here seem to expect.
You have a good point here, but my question is how is T-Mobile able to make their maps accurate and even too conservative when everyone else just makes themselves look much much better...that's not really all that beneficial to the consumer. If someone gets Sprint because their parents house, where they spend half of the year is listed as excellent coverage but when they get there it has only -98 at best outside and nothing inside, then how did that map help??? T-Mobile's map is dependable and IMO conservative for my area at least.
I think TMobile is very conservative on their maps and it's not a bad policy for other carriers to follow. From the TMobile maps I've seen they are using a different signal level gradient that others are and the areas are roughly based on the tower location and a radius around it.
EC/IO is often a more important indicator than the dbs. If the EC/IO is below 10 then I consider that to be either good or excellent. A -95 db is just as good as a -70 db as long as the EC/IO is low.
Well in that case I guess every carrier can just paint their maps excellent in most areas, just like Cingular did as well...A map cannot display an excellent signal that when I stand between a tree or a house and the cellsite like in my neighborhod that your signal fades but the whole area is listed as EXCELLENT...and I'm not even talking about indoor coverage which is nonexistant.
As I said, RF coverage isn't an exact science. There are many variables in the process that can alter coverage in exact locations. Coverage maps are only there to say that overall an area has XXXX coverage. These tests are done from the road and they state their maps do not include interiors of buildings.
maps are working for me now too......they are pretty good.......similar to T-Mobile's........i like how you can compare the Sprint coverage and the Nextel coverage in a hybrid map
Nah...and I'll put up with less than perfection considering the sweet deals I get on service and my free blackberry!
Hey Matt, if you look at the Glendale/Peoria areas West of I-17 I'm actually surprised to see some holes in coverage there. I never have problems when I visit there every year.
Patience everyone. That was only the beta link. The maps will be back on the site officially on Monday from what I hear. Maybe sooner if we're lucky.
Looks like it's back online. Would like to see a checkbox for user-generated-content, where users can report signal (with strength) not shown on maps. The EVDO maps are way too conservative. There is much more area with EVDO than the maps indicate.
Yes it is back up, thank you for letting us know larry. Since Sprint introduced this new tower feature with their maps, hopefully they will keep it updated.
So that means not one tower has been put up on all of Long Island or the Buffalo, NY area in the last 90 days, hmmmm. Yeah, that sounds about right
It shows one tower along the Wasatch Front here in my area...to me that sounds about right since Sprint has not been doing a whole lot here...no idea about there though.