St. Paul MN

If you do only plan on using it in the metro and Rochester, and don't travel to Northern MN, ND, SD, or WI, I would probably recommend Sprint, even though I've heard some complaints about them here too.

I've just finished compiling a comparison of the Sprint and Verizon network, and it turns out Sprint has about 150 more towers to cover this area, which means fewer dead spots! St. Paul is kind of tricky though, it really depends on what part of town you plan to use it the most. The major downside with Sprint is all the partners on their network such as Virgin Mobile, Qwest, etc, etc.

I would post a couple of maps, but I think attachments are frowned upon here.

Dan

 

Dan, don't forget that Verizon operates at 800 MHz while Sprint operates at 1900 MHz. This means that Verizon can cover more area with fewer towers because the lower frequency is picked up by the handsets at a further distance. The lower frequency also results in better building penetration.

 

Right, Verizon also has a really limited native coverage area outside of the Twin Cities metro, but they do have good roaming agreements in place.

 

I've been with Verizon for many years (even when they were AirTouch) and
never had a problem until this year. I use it mostly in the TC Metro area
and SE Minn (Winona and Rochester) area. In January I couldn't get a
digital signal in Winona and they charged me roaming even though the
"America" plan should have given me a least digital-extended network non-
charge for Winona. This problem wasn't corrected until May when a new PRL
came out.
Now I've also been using VirginMobile for over 1.5 years in the area (SE MN
also). They use the Sprint network exclusively. I have never had a
reception problem!! I'm so satisfied with the Sprint network that I'll be
opening a new acct (3 family phones) within the next week.........
Greg...

 

Let me add that Verizon has just purchased (almost) all of the Qwest licenses and cell sites in MN. This means VZ will be able to expand to most of the surrounding areas outside of the immediate M/SP area.

Don't expect this to happen in less than 6 months, but when it does, new service will be available immediately, and they will also be able to expand beyond these areas as well.

The new markest in MN are:

Fergus Falls-Alexndra, MN
Rochester-Austin, MN
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN*
Willmar-Marshall, MN
St. Cloud, MN

* While VZ already cover M/SP, the PCS license is for a larger geographic area than the current license.

But, as i always say, get the wireless service that works TODAY, and I agree that if your travels take you outside the metro area, Sprint has a slight edge over VZ. VZ has done a lot to improve their roaming agreements across the state, but with Sprint you will be on your home network more often.

Don't leave town? You can price-shop.

 

The purchase of Qwest is something I haven't heard of, but low and behold, I just checked news.vzw.com and dang if there isn't an article there. What surprises me about this move is VZW has always seemed to be anti-PCS. It's not completely surprising since according to www.cdg.org, they both use the same brand equipment, at least in MN.

So, since people are making arguments that Sprint needs more towers to cover the same area as 800 Mhz and Qwest's network is known to be a little weak, does this mean that Verizon will build out Qwest's PCS license as good as Sprint has built out their's? If not, we will only be worse off by this buyout, with the history of VZW, they will probably even pull every other roaming partner, including CMS which hasn't even finished their overlay yet.

I'd much rather have an 800 Mhz roaming partner than a native PCS signal, especially in rural counties, where I woundn't be surprised if VZW were to just pull the plug all together. They can't even provide decent 800 coverage in ND and SD, how will they ever cover MN with PCS?

Do you think this means they get every single PCS site, including building tops? If so, any chance they may even update the PCS sites with 800 equipment? If so, there may be hope yet that I can get coverage at my house! So now they have the B license, the F PCS license and now the D license. They aren't even using the old Northcoast license yet, how do we know they plan on offering phone service on Qwest's network? I think the D license is even shared with a couple of other rural carriers besides.

Now we have even fewer choices:
AT&T owns Cellular A + PCS
VZW owns Cellular B + 2 PCS
Sprint owns PCS
T-Mobile owns PCS
NextWave's PCS license just went back to the FCC

So go ahead, tell me to try another carrier, which one is even an alternative? We now only have 4 choices and non of them have viable rural service! Might be time to change my address to Mankato, but the rural companies have those 50-50 rules of where you use minutes.

Dan

 

I think the license blocks they get from Qwest are better than the network. Qwest had a borderline functional network. Their coverage, at least in MN, was pretty bad. I think Verizon can build a better PCS network in these areas, and use the PCS blocks to add capacity in the Twin Cities, but the Qwest networks on their own are pretty much worthless, you are far better off roaming on Sprint or RCC/Unicel etc...

 

VZ has purchased a LOT of PCS spectrum lately, including over $600 Million for the Northcoast licenses, new PCS service in Arkansas, new service in Leavenworth, KS, and PCS licenses in OR and several major markets. And, of course, all of Verizon's Gulf Coast coverage is PCS from Texas through FL (w/the exception of Houston), and Wisconsin, too. That is not an insignificant percentage of PCS as part of their original network.

That might be true in some areas, but, as an example, Verizon has made their TX PCS network very robust. Yes, there were detractors who said the old Primeco network wasn't good, but Verizon made it work very well, and in one of the most expansive rural states in the nation.

It would be better to be on a carrier's own native network than roaming, and Verizon has proven they can make a marginal network into a contender, I'd say it will improve service significantly for MN. At least as good as Sprint and T-Mobile.

How about Nextel?

 

I think the reason why Verizon has not done much Cellular/PCS is that they did not need to. now with EV-DO they need more capcity. Verizon has never been anti-PCS ever. The problem with SD and ND is that the most of the network up to 2003 was still designed for 3watt car phones Verizon is finally fixing the problem and should have the network up to par by next year. I do think they will build a good PCS network in MN. It will be ok for the 1st year it is up in an area they as VZW get more land spots to build more tower it will be a strong network

 

It is a really tough area to build PCS in for anyone. It is too rural, not what PCS is best for. It is possible though and I do hope VZW turns it into a viable network.

 

Wow, all this news about VZW getting Qwest's network here is good to hear, I have been wanting to see some native coverage in the St. Cloud area. But back to Walchka's original question. I would almost recomend Sprint or Tmobile for your needs. VZW gives you coverage almost everywhere, but since you don't need that, I would stick with a carrier that gives you native coverage where you need it, and in this case that is possible. The only thing I would be concerned about is that you said the Rochester "area". Does this mean in Rochester, or are you talking about rural areas in the south eastern part of the state? Rural areas could be a problem for the PCS carriers.

 

I don't know about Sprint, but Midwest wireless has a tower about a mile West of Plainview South of SR-42 on the way to Elgin.

The only metro company I know of that roams on Midwest Wireless is Verizon, so if you want to use your phone at those locations, I guess that's your only choice.

It might be worth your while to post some more specific locations you plan to use your new phone, and maybe someone can give you more guidance.

Dan

 

No problem, I guess by specific, I was talking about the metro.

I don't usually like to attach images, but I'll try this time. This map will show you the documented MWW towers in the Rochester area. I haven't verified these, so there could be more and some could be outdated.

Dan

 

In Florida, VZW left AT&T Wireless and Alltel in the PRL despite having a strong PCS system, vastly improved from the PrimeCo days.

 

Walchka,

I'm not trying to beat the drum for Vrizon, but If I were in your shoes I would be going with Verizon. Like mentioned earlier, Verizon and Midwest Wireless have a good roaming agreement (will be interesting to see with the PCS purchase of Qwest though down the road) and Midwest Wireless is comfortably ahead of anyone covering Southern MN, including Rochester and the surrounding rural areas. If you get off the beaten path with Sprint you are almost certainly going to be roaming (probably on Midwest at a high rate). I believe Sprint covers Rochester decent, but up in Plainview and surrounding towns I find it hard to believe Sprint can compete.

I would decide if Verizon's coverage of St. Paul and Metro area is sufficient for you first. With their roaming agreements with Midwest in Southern MN, no other carrier is going to be shoulder to shoulder with them there as far as coverage.

 

I agree with Dogma. Like I said before, VZW will cover you almost everywhere (for a price), so if you only needed coverage in the metro and right in Rochester you could go with a cheaper alterative. Since you need some rural coverage down south than VZW might be your only really good option.

 

DanPFW,

Like you mentioned, there are a few more sites there than your map is showing, That map is probably a little outdated.

 

walchka, sorry to say, but that is way of Verizon's weaker locations in this city. Maybe the new Qwest system will help, but not for another year anyway. If you are within a mile of these locations you'll be ok, but if not, try to find someone who already has service to check your locations. I've heard very bad things along Grand Ave.

Dan

 

I justed looked over some Sprint data and noticed they also have a tower just SW of Plainview. This probably provides good coverage for Plainview, but it's hard to say how it would be in Elgin. Might be worth trying both if you have access to them.

Dan

 

I sell T-Mobile, Sprint, Nextel, Verizon, and AT&T and I think I am pretty non-biased as our company pays me the same for each activation. Based on feedback from my customers in Downtown Mpls for the last few years, when it comes down to Verizon vs. Sprint: I would go Verizon every time. Sprint has a horrible time in the buildings downtown and seems to have more complaints about dropped calls and downtown is where most of my customers want to use their phones. St. Paul or other parts of the metro could be different, but unless you want 7pm night REALLY bad or a certain phone that only Sprint offers, Verizon is the best network in the Twin Cities. Period. People go to Sprint for the phones and 7pm nights. People go to Verizon because of the network (which is why Verizon doesn't have to offer 7pm promos, flashy phones, waived deposits, etc...).

As far as Midwest wireless, it all depends where you are going to have your billing address. As far as i know, if you live in the 7 county metro, you can't even sign up for MWW. If you live south of the Metro, outside of the 7 county metro you may be able to get MWW.

Hope that helps. I get complaints about almost every carrier almost every day, but after a few years you start to notice patterns, ya know.

 

Hey Croixboy...
How does T-Mobile & AT&T-GSM compare in regards to coverage with Verizon? I have friend's/family in the Mpls area and out in western Minn near Eagle Bend/Alex area...was wondering how to steer them for the best coverage. Thanks!