Sprint vs AT&T vs T-Mobile LTE via Sensorly

[WiWavelength]

Actually, no you didn't. I changed it to that.

mhm sure you did.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuJwfsV1Ux8

 

AJ

[Rukin1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuJwfsV1Ux8

 

AJ

[Paynefanbro]

It's also worth noting that Verizon doesn't have any native EVDO or 1x in Alaska, just LTE. I don't know if the same is true for AT&T.

[jamesinclair]

It's also worth noting that Verizon doesn't have any native EVDO or 1x in Alaska, just LTE. I don't know if the same is true for AT&T.

 

Does ANYBODY have native coverage in Alaska?

 

Sprint doesnt. Verizon doesnt, but theyre building it. I dont see why AT&T and tomobile would.

[Paynefanbro]

Does ANYBODY have native coverage in Alaska?

 

Sprint doesnt. Verizon doesnt, but theyre building it. I dont see why AT&T and tomobile would.

 

Alaska Communications 

 

http://www.alaskacommunications.com/Online-Care/Service-Coverage.aspx

[koiulpoi]

Does ANYBODY have native coverage in Alaska?

 

Sprint doesnt. Verizon doesnt, but theyre building it. I dont see why AT&T and tomobile would.

I had a customer just a few days ago, confused about what store she was in (she had a T-Mobile phone), and proceeded to tell us that T-Mobile is the only company that has coverage in Alaska, where she's from. And sure, she's right, roaming coverage.

[WiWavelength]

Does ANYBODY have native coverage in Alaska?

 

Does anybody actually need mobile phone service in Alaska?  Apparently, the place is so small that one can see Russia from one's house.

 

AJ

[Paynefanbro]

Sprint has native service in Alaska, but I doubt it'll be converted to LTE.

[Rawvega]

AT&T has native coverage in Alaska I believe from their acquisition of Dobson Cellular. Sprint's coverage maps show native coverage in Fairbanks, Anchorage and several other spots. I believe that's provided via an agreement with Alaska Digitel. Verizon had no native service until their recently constructed LTE network. T-Mobile has no native coverage there at all AFAIK.

[WiWavelength]

AT&T has native coverage in Alaska I believe from their acquisition of Dobson Cellular. Sprint's coverage maps show native coverage in Fairbanks, Anchorage and several other spots. I believe that's provided via an agreement with Alaska Digitel. Verizon had no native service until their recently constructed LTE network. T-Mobile has no native coverage there at all AFAIK.

 

Correct.  Sprint was the first national provider to acquire spectrum and construct coverage -- albeit license protection sites -- in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau.  That was 10-15 years ago.  AT&T (Cingular) came second through its acquisition of DCOC about six years ago.  Finally, VZW is the johnny come lately to Alaska via its Trojan horse...er, LTE in Rural America program.

 

AJ

[mhammett]

It would be nice if Sensorly would publish stats such as square miles and population covered. It doesn't have to be real-time, maybe weekly or even monthly updates. It should be pretty easy to compute that.

[jamesinclair]

Alaska Communications 

 

http://www.alaskacommunications.com/Online-Care/Service-Coverage.aspx

 

I notice they have both 4G LTE and 4G...

 

Theyre CDMA, so whats the non-lte? Wimax?

 

 

Sprint has native service in Alaska, but I doubt it'll be converted to LTE.

 

 

I thought it was fake-native, ie, Shentel

[mhammett]

There are a bunch of non-LTE "4G" technologies. LTE won, WiMax is in second place, then a long way to everything else. If it was a recent deployment, then I'm not sure what else it would be.

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Rukin1]

Correct.  Sprint was the first national provider to acquire spectrum and construct coverage -- albeit license protection sites -- in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau.  That was 10-15 years ago.  AT&T (Cingular) came second through its acquisition of DCOC about six years ago.  Finally, VZW is the johnny come lately to Alaska via its Trojan horse...er, LTE in Rural America program.

 

AJ

i didn't know that. thanks sir

[supersanborn]

So stupid question, I've heard it said before that Sensorly isn't super accurate for T-Mo, but if that's the case, what app do T-Mo people use? I've been wanting to evaluate their coverage in my area as so far the only experience I've had is an (old) international Mifi of mine being unable to get 3G service in my house.

[4GHoward]

So stupid question, I've heard it said before that Sensorly isn't super accurate for T-Mo, but if that's the case, what app do T-Mo people use? I've been wanting to evaluate their coverage in my area as so far the only experience I've had is an (old) international Mifi of mine being unable to get 3G service in my house.

 

They are probably using RootMetrics.

 

T-Mobile chooses RootMetrics CoverageMap app for carrier comparisons

[supersanborn]

They are probably using RootMetrics.

 

T-Mobile chooses RootMetrics CoverageMap app for carrier comparisons

Thanks, I see what you mean. I'd love to know what their coverage is like where I live. DH has been talking about leaving Sprint forever, and at this point I'm happy for whatever means I don't have to hear about how much he hates Sprint :-)

[markjcc]

I think we can all see who the true coverage winner here is *Cough*

[Yuhfhrh]

I think we can all see who the true coverage winner here is *Cough*

 

Alaska Communications?

[markjcc]

Alaska Communications?

Nope its red and starts with a V and ends with a Zon

[SWMich4G]

Hey Rukin, where'd you get the idea for this thread?    Speaking of which, would people have interest in me doing those comparison maps (ATT only/Sprint only) every week or two?  That post seemed to get a lot of likes so I could keep doing it if people want.  Also let me know if you want any other carriers compared. 

 

 

 AT&T covers alot more interstates that connect those cities, but Sprint will get there..

No, no, and no!  Why do people keep saying this?  Gray is NO SIGNAL.  Sprint probably has better highway coverage than AT&T.  You can drive from Kalamazoo to Traverse City, MI and have LTE 95% of the trip on Sprint.  You can go from Salina, KA to Corpus Christi, TX and have the same result (850 miles btw).  These are obviously cherry-picked examples, but AT&T doesn't have anything like that. 

 

Look at a map WITHOUT the gray and tell me where do you see highway coverage for AT&T?  I can count maybe a dozen highway-only towers in the country that provide rural highway coverage for AT&T.  They do have a couple more thin lines on sensorly, simply because Sprint's highway coverage also extends (or is simply better mapped) AROUND the highway, making the thin line into a blob instead. 

 

Gray removed:

 

ATT

 

Sprint

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

 

EDIT: And on a related note, in my interpretation the sheer amount of gray on the AT&T map suggests a lot more people are mapping for AT&T than most of you assume.  Certainly Sprint has more mappers, and especially within cities mapping the entire coverage of individual towers, but you can't deny AT&T must have some very avid mappers to turn that much highway gray. 

[Rukin1]

Hey Rukin, where'd you get the idea for this thread?    Speaking of which, would people have interest in me doing those comparison maps (ATT only/Sprint only) every week or two?  That post seemed to get a lot of likes so I could keep doing it if people want.  Also let me know if you want any other carriers compared. 

 

 

No, no, and no!  Why do people keep saying this?  Gray is NO SIGNAL.  Sprint probably has better highway coverage than AT&T.  You can drive from Kalamazoo to Traverse City, MI and have LTE 95% of the trip on Sprint.  You can go from Salina, KA to Corpus Christi, TX and have the same result (850 miles btw).  These are obviously cherry-picked examples, but AT&T doesn't have anything like that. 

 

Look at a map WITHOUT the gray and tell me where do you see highway coverage for AT&T?  I can count maybe a dozen highway-only towers in the country that provide rural highway coverage for AT&T.  They do have a couple more thin lines on sensorly, simply because Sprint's highway coverage also extends (or is simply better mapped) AROUND the highway, making the thin line into a blob instead. 

 

Gray removed:

 

ATT

 

Sprint

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

 

EDIT: And on a related note, in my interpretation the sheer amount of gray on the AT&T map suggests a lot more people are mapping for AT&T than most of you assume.  Certainly Sprint has more mappers, and especially within cities mapping the entire coverage of individual towers, but you can't deny AT&T must have some very avid mappers to turn that much highway gray. 

Lol Update it once a week or two. Maybe I'll do that instead of once a month. Btw I never have been in that thread lo

[Rukin1]

UPDATED.

[rf40928]

Hey Rukin, where'd you get the idea for this thread?    Speaking of which, would people have interest in me doing those comparison maps (ATT only/Sprint only) every week or two?  That post seemed to get a lot of likes so I could keep doing it if people want.  Also let me know if you want any other carriers compared. 

 

 

No, no, and no!  Why do people keep saying this?  Gray is NO SIGNAL.  Sprint probably has better highway coverage than AT&T.  You can drive from Kalamazoo to Traverse City, MI and have LTE 95% of the trip on Sprint.  You can go from Salina, KA to Corpus Christi, TX and have the same result (850 miles btw).  These are obviously cherry-picked examples, but AT&T doesn't have anything like that. 

 

Look at a map WITHOUT the gray and tell me where do you see highway coverage for AT&T?  I can count maybe a dozen highway-only towers in the country that provide rural highway coverage for AT&T.  They do have a couple more thin lines on sensorly, simply because Sprint's highway coverage also extends (or is simply better mapped) AROUND the highway, making the thin line into a blob instead. 

 

Gray removed:

 

ATT

 

Sprint

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

 

EDIT: And on a related note, in my interpretation the sheer amount of gray on the AT&T map suggests a lot more people are mapping for AT&T than most of you assume.  Certainly Sprint has more mappers, and especially within cities mapping the entire coverage of individual towers, but you can't deny AT&T must have some very avid mappers to turn that much highway gray. 

 

moved post to below

[mhammett]

only two technologies, “LTE-Advanced” and “WirelessMAN-Advanced" would be REAL 4G Cell tech..

WiMax 2?

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2