Jump to content
Paynefanbro

Verizon's Coverage Comparison

Recommended Posts

Am I the only one that likes to look at Verizon's coverage comparison tool. I think it gives a good idea of a carrier's generalized coverage as far as those cities that have been announced. However, it takes a while for it to get updated. I look at Verizon's map and think, no one will ever build an LTE network of that size. When I look at T-Mobile, I see a spotty, spread out network. AT&T is also spotty with a few highways covered here and there. Sprint seems to be more put together as in even if it is spotty, they are in blobs rather than random remote areas.

 

I've also found a few places that Sprint has coverage in but not Verizon such as in southern Texas.

 

http://www.verizonwireless.com/wcms/consumer/4g-lte.html

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one that likes to look at Verizon's coverage comparison tool. I think it gives a good idea of a carrier's generalized coverage as far as those cities that have been announced. However, it takes a while for it to get updated. I look at Verizon's map and think, no one will ever build an LTE network of that size. When I look at T-Mobile, I see a spotty, spread out network. AT&T is also spotty with a few highways covered here and there. Sprint seems to be more put together as in even if it is spotty, they are in blobs rather than random remote areas.

 

I've also found a few places that Sprint has coverage in but not Verizon such as in southern Texas.

 

http://www.verizonwireless.com/wcms/consumer/4g-lte.html

It's not super surprising that Verizon doesn't serve parts of Texas because that would have been an SBC area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, it's overly generous for their own coverage (as all carriers' maps are) and is lacking quite a bit on the other carriers' maps.  You can see they literally have a dot for every verizon tower when you look in areas like Montana and Wyoming, but then entire states like Kentucky, South Carolina, New York, and Nevada are left blank with sprint despite having the same or better coverage than AT&T in some of the cities in those states.  There are also areas they filled in in their own map that I know from living in the area that they don't have LTE coverage.  And I really don't believe they have that much LTE in the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Kansas...there really have to be some LTE dead spots somewhere in the Dakotas. 

 

So like all carriers' maps, it needs to be taken with a very large grain of salt. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, it's overly generous for their own coverage (as all carriers' maps are) and is lacking quite a bit on the other carriers' maps.  You can see they literally have a dot for every verizon tower when you look in areas like Montana and Wyoming, but then entire states like Kentucky, South Carolina, New York, and Nevada are left blank with sprint despite having the same or better coverage than AT&T in some of the cities in those states.  There are also areas they filled in in their own map that I know from living in the area that they don't have LTE coverage.  And I really don't believe they have that much LTE in the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Kansas...there really have to be some LTE dead spots somewhere in the Dakotas. 

 

So like all carriers' maps, it needs to be taken with a very large grain of salt. 

I have to agree 100%, I was working with a large County IT department in Michigan on a project and we got talking about their migration from Sprint to Verizon.  Sprint wouldn't even talk to them about coverage gaps, so they are moving to VZW.  They had been taking VZW engineers all over the county to dead/weak spots for 1X, EVDO/eHRPD, & LTE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had the time and money I would independently audit the Verizon coverage in the Dakotas and Nebraska and Kansas.  I mean, the population density is so low in those states, how could they possibly afford to cover them edge to edge with LTE?  Methinks their map is showing licensed areas in those states rather than actual coverage.

 

Hopefully if/when Sprint activates their 800 LTE, there will be a lot more green on their map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Verizon customer, I can tell you their maps are overstated. I almost never get any signal in their Extended LTE coverage areas depicted. Even with a super strong performing MiFi. However, I will say this, driving from Denver to Rapid City via I-76 and the Nebraska Panhandle, I never lost a Verizon native signal. I had LTE all but 20 miles of the way, and it fell back to EVDO in those 20 miles.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In central/southwest Arizona, Verizon has Sprint beat dead to right. But,,,, it's at a cost.

Now Sprint is slowly improving, so let's see in 6 months????? Most likely not.

I went with cost in up-grading with the hope Sprint will continue to improve.

 

Lateck,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in an area that has great Verizon coverage according to their maps, also great AT&T coverage.

But of course the maps are both wrong with these carriers. T-Mobile's is a little ambitious, but more realistic.

 

Sprint's is more realistic, especially since they updated their maps a few months ago removing many square miles of coverage here in WA.

 

People do pay a premium for Verizon cell service, for a better coverage area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in an area that has great Verizon coverage according to their maps, also great AT&T coverage.

But of course the maps are both wrong with these carriers. T-Mobile's is a little ambitious, but more realistic.

 

Sprint's is more realistic, especially since they updated their maps a few months ago removing many square miles of coverage here in WA.

 

People do pay a premium for Verizon cell service, for a better coverage area.

I can say all of them over estimate their coverage. I notice once sprint updated the maps with LTE in my area, the coverage grew, but They can not accurately tell where a dead spot is without going to most locations. But they widened the coverage a few miles out, which I wonder if they are saying that will be what LTE will look like after everything is done, including 800LTE?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had the time and money I would independently audit the Verizon coverage in the Dakotas and Nebraska and Kansas.  I mean, the population density is so low in those states, how could they possibly afford to cover them edge to edge with LTE?  Methinks their map is showing licensed areas in those states rather than actual coverage.

 

Hopefully if/when Sprint activates their 800 LTE, there will be a lot more green on their map.

Because these areas are FLAT FLAT FLAT with low population density (Maybe not the blackhills, but much of ND, SD and NE is) . A well situated cell site with CDMA 800 and LTE on 700 can cover a huge area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because these areas are FLAT FLAT FLAT with low population density (Maybe not the blackhills, but much of ND, SD and NE is) . A well situated cell site with CDMA 800 and LTE on 700 can cover a huge area.

 

Not exactly.  The LTE airlink is so relatively fragile that even LTE 750 will not usably cover as much footprint as you might think.

 

AJ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AT&T will have claim to over 300 million POPS of LTE by next year.  Soon there should be a great blue map to match that great red map. 

 

Truth be told though:  That red map is a bit too red for so many extremely remote areas and unless people are there to validate the accuracy of these maps there is just no way to tell for sure.  I'm pretty sure some of these areas have little to no backhaul to support anything too fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly.  The LTE airlink is so relatively fragile that even LTE 750 will not usably cover as much footprint as you might think.

 

AJ

 

I think the map IS an exaggeration of their LTE coverage. I think they are assuming usable LTE 700 where they have usable CDMA 800 on the same site. I'm just saying you'd be surprised how much terrirory you can cover with both CDMA 800 and LTE on 700 with just a handful of towers. When you have a flat area with few people and low band spectrum, you can cover quite a bit of territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is the reason we need sensorly.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is the reason we need sensorly.

100% AGREE!! Sensory is the best out there in my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who worked at Best Buy in the past, I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that Verizon's map is over exaggerated. Customers would constantly point to the fact that it was red where they lived & complain they dropped calls & data was slow... I would then show them that there was a white spot a few hundred meters from where they were talking & that it was the edge of signal before it dropped off. Verizon should do a better job having a gradiated map that shows signal strength & not just a red 'yes there SHOULD be some LTE there'.

Not that all 3 other companies don't exaggerate, but most of the time they show iffy areas as 1 bar & say outdoor coverage or the always popular 'signal strength varies'.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By danlodish345
      Even though Sprint doesn't have the best coverage in my area. I do have lots of memories and nostalgia with the company. I wonder who else here will miss Sprint besides me?
    • By vanko987
      I'm new to this forum, and I've seen people mention cell sites with specific ID's (for example, SF33XC664). Is there any significance to these ID's, and is there a way to decode them? Also, how do I figure out what the cell site ID's are for towers near me?
      Thanks! I'm excited to start talking on this site more 😀
    • By Paynefanbro
      I figured since Verizon's 5G-NR network officially launched it would make sense for there to be a thread for it.
  • Posts

    • I'm envisioning the others carriers raising their flutes to toast with champagne and sprint with coors banquet
    • Band 2 on T-Mobile got expanded to 15MHz.
    • I think they stay. Shentel and T-Mobile are in negotiations about either acquisition or affiliation.
    • I wonder what happened to the Boost stores in Shentel land.
    • Hey folks, I haven't been around here in a long time. I guess I just got distracted by other things, especially after Sprint 4G LTE became commonly available for me.   Then, in February of 2018, I defected from Sprint to T-Mobile. That move allowed me to get on the "T-Mobile ONE 55+" plan, (yeah, I'm an old geezer) and at the time, grab a limited time offer add-on called "ONE Plus International" that adds a lot of features, but most importantly "UNLIMITED 4G LTE Hotspot" on a phone.   The move was both for the service and price. I was paying Sprint $179 for service on one phone, and one USB 3G modem. The modem was what kept me with Sprint for so long. I bought it in 2007, when mobile data was just starting to catch on in popularity. Everyone else had low data caps and high overage charges at the time, but, Sprint was slow to jump on that bandwagon. They even had an ad campaign at the time, something like: "Use all the data you want, have fun"! I bought the modem outright, and paid $59.99/mo for unlimited 3G data. As an over the road truck driver, at the time, that was the same price I paid Comcast for home Internet, that was hardly home to use. I canceled Comcast, and that USB thing became my only non-phone Internet connection.   The bad part of that was, shortly after I got that deal, Sprint discontinued that plan, and I was stuck. If I made ANY changes to that line/device, I would lose that plan, and have to take whatever offers were current. I couldn't activate any new device on the data account. So I milked that device and plan for just over 11 years, until Feb. 2018. After so long, the device was struggling, and the data was just damn slow.   After my upgrade to T-Mobile, I have my main phone, (currently a OnePlus 7T Pro 5G McLaren edition), an Aristo 2 Plus, used mostly as a hotspot, and a Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 10" with unlimited 4G LTE, all for $132.41. About $45 a month less than what I gave Sprint, and I have one extra device, and all with much faster data.   On Sprint, my average speed was usually less than 15/2, on T-Mobile I get over 100 down and around 40 up.   Of course with this arrangement, one day I will find myself in a similar situation, a line stuck on old tech, even though I CAN upgrade my T-Mobile device, the data add-on specifically says "4G LTE data", So I hope that sticks around for a while as 5G becomes a thing. If I make any changes on that line, I will lose that add-on.           Sorry for all the rambling, I just looked at all the stuff I just typed, and can't bring myself to delete all that work. I guess I just got nostalgic when Facebook on Tuesday showed me a memory post from 2013, the pics are below. My first cell phone was a Nextel, that's how I wound up on Sprint, after that merger. It was 7 years ago already, that Sprint shut off Nextel. Now, Sprint is about to be shut off by T-Mobile. Everything changes. You can't see the date on the pic with "NO SIGNAL", those old Nextel phones didn't even have a proper clock, it just displayed what the network sent it, so, no signal, no clock. How far we have come.   Anyway, I guess with the merger, I'm back in the family, so here I am looking to learn about a new rollout, this time 5G on 2.5 GHz, specifically in the West Michigan area.   Sent from my HD1925 using Tapatalk      
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...