|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Verizon wireless > December 2005 > Re: Verizon is best carrier for third year. In SF Bay Area, it's 1-Verizon, 2-T-Mobile, 3-Sprint, 4
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: Verizon is best carrier for third year. In SF Bay Area, it's 1-Verizon, 2-T-Mobile, 3-Sprint, 4
|
|
| Mij Adyaw 2005-12-08, 5:48 pm |
| Coverage is very subjective, it all depends upon your location. Verizon
coverage in unusable at my home in Laguna Niguel California, however, Sprint
has full signal strength at my home. One mile down the street, Verizon
coverage is better than Sprint. Do you get my drift? In some areas, Cingular
provides the best signal.
That is all that there is to it and it is not possible to draw any other
conclusions. On the other hand, Sprint and Cingular customer service suck
when compare to Verizon. Verizon is very customer oriented while Sprint and
Cingular could care-less about the customer as long as it does not eat too
much into the bottom line.
The horrible Sprint and Cingular customer service will cause Verizon to win
every year on all counts. It is really that simple.
-mij
These is no one carrier that provides the best coverage. "SMS"
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:43987c4d$0$3862
9$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Justin wrote:
>
> The relative coverage quality does vary by geographic area, but
> technically Verizon will have better coverage, if you have a tri-mode
> phone, versus a digital-only Cingular phone. There is simply no way around
> this, AMPS coverage is still very good, and even after the FCC permits it
> to be turned off in 2008, it will still remain in service in areas where
> digital service is not available.
>
> There are areas of the country, where Verizon was not the A or B side
> cellular carrier (and hence is 1900 Mhz only), where the Cingular digital
> coverage should be better, i.e. South Florida.
>
>
> This is often the case in my area, the San Francisco Bay area (not on a
> paintball field, but in the outlying areas in mountains and valleys that
> are not close to a city or town). Now some people will claim that they
> like to not be available when relaxing on a hike or whatever, but this is
> really a cop-out because for many people, the very time they most want
> their phone to work is when they are out in the boondocks.
>
> Sprint is also very bad in my area, because of the lack of towers, and the
> shorter range of the 1900 Mhz sites.
|
|
|
|
|