Jump to content
dkyeager

Coverage maps udpated for data (LTE) to 6/10

Recommended Posts

http://coverage.sprint.com/IMPACT.jsp?INTNAV=ATG:HE:Cov

 

No changes in the markets I frequent, but perhaps in yours.  This is sometimes a precursor to market launches.  Lately it has been reflecting increased coverage from (Band 26) LTE 800. New Spark (Band 41 LTE) will also appear here when launched.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes band 26 seems to show up now on the map, and it is quite obvious in my area however band 26 is not even broadcasting here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I dont think They should have changed to "show" b26, it already was too generous for current b26 in my area. Now It is showing some possible coverage to a town 30-40 miles away!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I dont think They should have changed to "show" b26, it already was too generous for current b26 in my area. Now It is showing some possible coverage to a town 30-40 miles away!

It seems as if coverage is way overshot on their B26 maps...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems as if coverage is way overshot on their B26 maps...

Yeah the voice coverage should have been the one that got updated to reflect 800 , not LTE maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not completely topical, but if I didn't have Sprint and was going to coverage maps to decide whose service to get, I would count them out just by how outdated their mapping system is.  That's the first place people like me go to on a carrier's site, and Sprint's looks like it is from 1983.  A static .jpg map of the whole country presents itself better than theirs.  Who do I write to in marketing to let them know how bad it is for a tech company to market themselves using outdated tech?

 

And obviously my area is well overstated, like everyone's.  I do like how frequently they update the map, and perhaps ease-of-updates is one reason they stick with such an ugly mapping solution. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UGH...every time someone reminds me of the Sprint coverage maps it just gets me mad.  The Sprint coverage maps are soooo horrible and very small.  I love how you have to wait for a buffer in order to just view the next county.  I hope if Sprint and Tmobile merge that they bring over the Tmobile coverage maps guy and revamp the Sprint coverage maps because it seriously needs help.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree on the outdated appearance and slowness of these maps, the item I find most ironic is how many months go by between when LTE is first turned on until it appears on these maps.  It can be more than six months.  This is really a fully launched market map more than a LTE available map.  Then of course is the exaggeration of all the carrier coverage maps (smaller carriers often hide their own maps).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UGH...every time someone reminds me of the Sprint coverage maps it just gets me mad.  The Sprint coverage maps are soooo horrible and very small.  I love how you have to wait for a buffer in order to just view the next county.  I hope if Sprint and Tmobile merge that they bring over the Tmobile coverage maps guy and revamp the Sprint coverage maps because it seriously needs help.

I am really not sure why they haven't updated this... It's not even mobile device friendly. Considering how many people do their shopping via tablets and mobile devices, they should really get to work on that. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree on the outdated appearance and slowness of these maps, the item I find most ironic is how many months go by between when LTE is first turned on until it appears on these maps.  It can be more than six months.  This is really a fully launched market map more than a LTE available map.  Then of course is the exaggeration of all the carrier coverage maps (smaller carriers often hide their own maps).

 

This really is a huge oversight - think of how many customers look at their market and choose to go with another carrier because there isn't any LTE showing up. When in reality, the market may be 99% launched. 

 

My home market of Binghamton NY is absolutely riddled with LTE everywhere, yet the maps only show 3G. It's been this way since early 2013. 

 

When a tower goes live, add a splotch of orange Sprint. Add a splotch. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UGH...every time someone reminds me of the Sprint coverage maps it just gets me mad.  The Sprint coverage maps are soooo horrible and very small.  I love how you have to wait for a buffer in order to just view the next county.  I hope if Sprint and Tmobile merge that they bring over the Tmobile coverage maps guy and revamp the Sprint coverage maps because it seriously needs help.

 

The new T-Mobile map is easy to navigate and does load quickly, I'll give it that. But I dislike the lack of variety in color, as well as the fact that you have to zoom in all the way to determine whether a town is original W-CDMA, HSPA+, or LTE. I think both of those characteristics are done to obscure how much of their footprint is limited to EDGE, so hopefully they wouldn't carry over to a Sprint map.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UGH...every time someone reminds me of the Sprint coverage maps it just gets me mad.  The Sprint coverage maps are soooo horrible and very small.  I love how you have to wait for a buffer in order to just view the next county.  I hope if Sprint and Tmobile merge that they bring over the Tmobile coverage maps guy and revamp the Sprint coverage maps because it seriously needs help.

 

I agree that it is a small map and that the second you want to zoom out to a reasonable level, it is all one color... yeah, what happened to that area being on the fringe? But I was just on the t-mobile site, and although I appreciate the detail in a zoomed out view, everything is shown as bright pink no matter what technology as long as there is a strong signal... which can be very misleading as well.  But the biggest problem I was having with the t-mobile map is that there was no zoom out button, and for the life of me I cannot zoom out.  Maybe its because I am using a laptop and chrome browser, but both maps could use work.

 

While I agree on the outdated appearance and slowness of these maps, the item I find most ironic is how many months go by between when LTE is first turned on until it appears on these maps.  It can be more than six months.  This is really a fully launched market map more than a LTE available map.  Then of course is the exaggeration of all the carrier coverage maps (smaller carriers often hide their own maps).

 

I agree that it is always better to under-promise and over-deliver with the map updates, because when people hear that an area is launched, they (falsely) assume that they should be able to drive to every corner of the area with perfect LTE.  So if they are going to wait to say that an area has LTE, why then show it more than overlapping the 3G in an area, when it certainly does not (as members here are fully aware of)... either they are claiming ignorance and need to fire the person responsible, or they are purposely deceiving their customers.  

 

On a side note, verizon is the worst in this area of mapping, as they just show every area that has one bar of signal as red and do not show any shading of the differences in signal quality... leading people to say that "I'm covered, the MAP says so..."  when as soon as they go inside they drop a call.  I believe most of the other maps at least try to be a little more accurate, though maybe falling short.  

 

This really is a huge oversight - think of how many customers look at their market and choose to go with another carrier because there isn't any LTE showing up. When in reality, the market may be 99% launched. 

 

My home market of Binghamton NY is absolutely riddled with LTE everywhere, yet the maps only show 3G. It's been this way since early 2013. 

 

When a tower goes live, add a splotch of orange Sprint. Add a splotch. 

 

If they are just shopping online, they might not see 4G and be scarred away, but most people go to a store and would be told that there is some LTE available and as soon as it is mostly complete they will officially announce the area as covered.  

 

I would prefer to have them show it on a tower by tower basis, but that is time consuming for the person editing the maps, and I believe that sprint would rather not show the splochy/spotty map as it would have almost the opposite effect on someone deciding weather to switch or not.  

 

The new T-Mobile map is easy to navigate and does load quickly, I'll give it that. But I dislike the lack of variety in color, as well as the fact that you have to zoom in all the way to determine whether a town is original W-CDMA, HSPA+, or LTE. I think both of those characteristics are done to obscure how much of their footprint is limited to EDGE, so hopefully they wouldn't carry over to a Sprint map.

 

I like the look as well, but the thing that really surprised me in my area is just how little coverage they have on a SQ MI basis, and they fall all the way to 2G or roaming in between populated areas.  I am in western Pa north of pittsburgh and sprint isn't great here, but they really offer a far wider coverage than t-mobile...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new T-Mobile map is easy to navigate and does load quickly, I'll give it that. But I dislike the lack of variety in color, as well as the fact that you have to zoom in all the way to determine whether a town is original W-CDMA, HSPA+, or LTE. I think both of those characteristics are done to obscure how much of their footprint is limited to EDGE, so hopefully they wouldn't carry over to a Sprint map.

 

All of the big four coverage map tools are flawed in some way -- from window size to color scheme to color gradient (or lack thereof).

 

I do not care for T-Mobile's main coverage map tool, but there are still two alternatives:

 

https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/pcc.aspx/

http://maps.eng.t-mobile.com/maps/index.html?map=metro

 

AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the big four coverage map tools are flawed in some way -- from window size to color scheme to color gradient (or lack thereof).

 

I do not care for T-Mobile's main coverage map tool, but there are still two alternatives:

 

https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/pcc.aspx/

http://maps.eng.t-mobile.com/maps/index.html?map=metro

 

AJ

 

Wow, there coverage blows around here... :td:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new T-Mobile map is easy to navigate and does load quickly, I'll give it that. But I dislike the lack of variety in color, as well as the fact that you have to zoom in all the way to determine whether a town is original W-CDMA, HSPA+, or LTE. I think both of those characteristics are done to obscure how much of their footprint is limited to EDGE, so hopefully they wouldn't carry over to a Sprint map.

Well I still find it most accurate to assume that you will only get LTE in the Two darkest shades for Tmobile. My house according to the Links AJ provided has satisfactory LTE coverage, when in turn I have Poor gprs signal to no signal at all, outside and inside. Not even Sprints LTE coverage on their maps is that bad here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UGH...every time someone reminds me of the Sprint coverage maps it just gets me mad.  The Sprint coverage maps are soooo horrible and very small.  I love how you have to wait for a buffer in order to just view the next county.  I hope if Sprint and Tmobile merge that they bring over the Tmobile coverage maps guy and revamp the Sprint coverage maps because it seriously needs help.

 

I like the Google Map used for the CLEAR Coverage Map. It is far more better than both coverage maps.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the Google Map used for the CLEAR Coverage Map. It is far more better than both coverage maps.

 

One of my favorite, check out C-Spire's coverage map, I think you will like theirs too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my favorite, check out C-Spire's coverage map, I think you will like theirs too.

Wait? C-Spire has native coverage in Mass?

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5S using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait? C-Spire has native coverage in Mass?

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5S using Tapatalk 2

Through either Verizon or Sprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Through either Verizon or Sprint.

Ah, ok.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5S using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait? C-Spire has native coverage in Mass?

 

Yes. Remember C Spire is Cellular South. And with Mitt Romney, Massachusetts is now the South.

 

;)

 

AJ

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is interesting, the area near my moms house for voice and 3G went from Fair to "off network roaming"

 

Im surprised at the honesty!

 

Note: This wasnt necessarily part of this update, just within the past year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the big four coverage map tools are flawed in some way -- from window size to color scheme to color gradient (or lack thereof).

 

I do not care for T-Mobile's main coverage map tool, but there are still two alternatives:

 

https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/pcc.aspx/

http://maps.eng.t-mobile.com/maps/index.html?map=metro

 

Yes, I find it interesting that they still link to that first map on the business site. Wasn't aware of the Metro map, but it looks like that one's about the same as the new consumer TMUS map, just in blue rather than pink.

 

I think I like US Cellular's coverage map the best of the top 6 carriers, with AT&T a close second. However, even they seem to "blur" their data coverage together compared to the voice maps, which have better gradation to the point where you can usually pick out where individual towers are. It's annoying since of course LTE is going to drop before the older 2G/3G airlinks that still carry voice.

 

One of my favorite, check out C-Spire's coverage map, I think you will like theirs too.

 

 

They use Google Maps, which is good, but there is no distinction made between native and roaming coverage, which limits its usefulness.

 

P.S. Somebody should probably fix the misspelling in the thread title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I find it interesting that they still link to that first map on the business site. Wasn't aware of the Metro map, but it looks like that one's about the same as the new consumer TMUS map, just in blue rather than pink.

 

I think I like US Cellular's coverage map the best of the top 6 carriers, with AT&T a close second. However, even they seem to "blur" their data coverage together compared to the voice maps, which have better gradation to the point where you can usually pick out where individual towers are. It's annoying since of course LTE is going to drop before the older 2G/3G airlinks that still carry voice.

 

They use Google Maps, which is good, but there is no distinction made between native and roaming coverage, which limits its usefulness.

 

I agree that diffentiation between native and roaming is that map's biggest flaw (unless they allow unlimited roaming). The USCC and AT&T maps are nice too... Between those two, C-Spires's, and the old Clearwire map, there are elements that I would use to create an ideal coverage map.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...