America's 10 Worst Cities for Mobile Phone Reception

[delta772er]

An interesting article by TIME, it shows the "10 worst" cities for cell phone reception throughout the country and in all but one city Sprint ranked as the "best" carrier in those areas:

 

http://techland.time.com/2012/08/20/can-you-hear-me-now-the-10-u-s-cities-with-the-worst-cell-phone-reception/#detroit-michigan

[S4GRU]

An interesting article by TIME, it shows the "10 worst" cities for cell phone reception throughout the country and in all but one city Sprint ranked as the "best" carrier in those areas:

 

http://techland.time...etroit-michigan

 

Even though it paints Sprint in really good light, I don't put much credence in this article.

 

Robert

[Contreramanjaro]

It seems to be using OpenSignalMaps which runs on input from phone via an Android app. Sounds like Sensorly to me but that site's maps show me as not having 3G on Sprint where I'm sitting and I do. Long story short. This sort of thing is a great idea but no basis for a full blown carrier comparison. I know that Sensory maps are Sprint biased since they were kind of a big deal for WiMax at the time.

[keelerman8042]

Wow if there is any truth to this that's crazy Toledo is in this... Thought it'd be tmo tho inside Toledo tmo was decent outside of it was terrible

[tybo31316]

I'm in one of the cities on the list and I can tell you that sprints in building coverage isn't that great. When I go into any building in the city of Jacksonville or any of the surrounding towns theirs a 50/50 chance that I will roam when I go in side. Hopefully that problem will be gone when 800 cdma comes online.

[Rasta Cheesehead]

i think this article is fantastic from a brand stand point for Sprint. This type of press helps with that and its good to see something positive in Sprint's favor. Service in Milwaukee is very solid, Sprint I think shares the title with US Cellular, since the article said it only tested 4 major carriers, this would be accurate for the area. Hope we see more and more good press like this as network vision starts to sweep the country.

Edited August 23, 2012 by Rasta Cheesehead

[Lkr]

I'm in one of the cities on the list and I can tell you that sprints in building coverage isn't that great. When I go into any building in the city of Jacksonville or any of the surrounding towns theirs a 50/50 chance that I will roam when I go in side. Hopefully that problem will be gone when 800 cdma comes online.

are you using wimax or 3g? i only have 3g on sprint, and i don't go downtown very often, but verizon and at&t seem better from the expereince of friends. sprint isn't bad in the area though. i know that metropcs is AWFUL in the area though

[JonnygATL]

Even though it paints Sprint in really good light, I don't put much credence in this article.

 

Robert

 

Maybe Sprint Android users are the main ones using this app? It mentions that the Open Signal Maps app is the one used to collect the data..so it begs the question - who are those who most use this app? Perhaps some of the answer lies there.

[JonnygATL]

I'm in one of the cities on the list and I can tell you that sprints in building coverage isn't that great. When I go into any building in the city of Jacksonville or any of the surrounding towns theirs a 50/50 chance that I will roam when I go in side. Hopefully that problem will be gone when 800 cdma comes online.

 

A second note - I am from Lexington, Kentucky and visit still at least once or twice per year and was last there in March of this year. I can tell you that Sprint 3G there is basically non-existent. Downtown, near the University of Kentucky, near the Keeneland race track, near Blue Grass Airport...and in the outlying areas. It's all abysmal. Horrid, even. 3 years ago the 3G speeds were great. Not anymore. So, yeah, it's true that Sprint service is horrible there. But Verizon, on the other hand, has had 4G LTE for over 6 months and was very recently greatly expanded as part of Verizon's lastet 4G LTE expansion. So Verizon service is awesome there. ATT has 4G HSPA+ there is well. It's just Sprint's network that is so faulty in Lexington.

[S4GRU]

I believe this article focused on coverage, not quality of data performance.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

[Ascertion]

I do think sprint has the best voice network. Unfortunately I care more about speeds. :-)

[irev210]

With free roaming, it makes sense that Sprint has the best coverage.

 

So, from a coverage perspective, it makes sense.

[boomerbubba]

I believe this article focused on coverage, not quality of data performance.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

 

That's the way I read it, FWIW. I actually have seldom experienced problems with Sprint on its voice coverage or even dropped calls, although I have nothing kind to say about the current state of legacy 3G data.

[JeffDTD]

The assumption or immediate unquestioned correlation between "quality" and data performance is a great reminder of the average wireless users evolved expectation set. I feel so old fashioned, but I still fret over ending up somewhere with gsm that i desperately need help and have no coverage.

 

Then I wonder.... if they would fix that damn bandwith hungry facebook app to be more efficient, how many of these data complaints would go away?

[iansltx]

*shrugs* FB has used ~66MB over the past half-month over the cellular network on my phone. It represents maybe 12% of my total cellular usage.

 

On the other hand, I'll add my voice to the choir about Sprint having excellent voice service practically everywhere...but data is a whole other ball game.

[wigunowner]

Didn't even surprise me a little to see Milwaukee on the list.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

[dabhome]

I live in Detroit Metropolitan area and the coverage has always been bad (if you include all phone companies). I have had Sprint for 11 years and I hear all my friends complaining about no signal (in particular, inside buildings). However, I almost always have signal. Almost never drop, etc. So I would say Sprint is definitely better in Detroit (from a phone point of view).

 

However, Detroit has been short-shifted for any kind of fast data connection. They never really rolled out WiMax (a few unannounced towars) and their roll out of 4G LTE is later than most other big cities.

[Fraydog]

I think the OpenSignal Maps methodology is flawed. Verizon and Sprint can fall back on each other, where AT&T and T-Mobile usually can't. I like RootMetrics' testing better, where they send people to test speed and calls in every market.

[Calvin200]

i think this article is fantastic from a brand stand point for Sprint. This type of press helps with that and its good to see something positive in Sprint's favor. Service in Milwaukee is very solid, Sprint I think shares the title with US Cellular, since the article said it only tested 4 major carriers, this would be accurate for the area. Hope we see more and more good press like this as network vision starts to sweep the country.

We aren't close to US Cellular in any aspect in Milwaukee, voice or data, and US Cellular wasn't rated. The "usual" 4 were rated. Your silver lining is made out of aluminum foil.

[pyroscott]

Your silver lining is made out of aluminum foil.

 

Still silver...

[markjcc]

I believe this article focused on coverage, not quality of data performance.

 

Robert via CM9 Kindle Fire using Forum Runner

Coverage on sprint is great its just data..

[MarkyD311]

the fact that Oklahoma City is listed as Sprint being the best in terms of coverage immediately invalidates this in my mind. I'm really rooting for Sprint, but they are the absolute worst of the major carriers in OKC in terms of just about everything - coverage, dropped call percentage, data speeds...everything. This is from my own personal experience as well as RootMetrics' findings.