Jump to content

Who roams on whom? (Updated Title)


burnout8488

Recommended Posts

I guess I'm most curious on who the other networks will roam on rather than who sprint roams on. But its cool to see how it differs in different areas.

 

In my hometown, we only have the big 4 networks. Would Verizon customers roam on Sprint? Are the devices capable of this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who roams on who?

 

Uh oh, did Citizens United make wireless operators "people," too?

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this is still Sprint, but here it's Carolina West (full native bilateral roaming), then Alltel, then US Cellular, then Verizon.

 

Edit: forgot to mention Cricket, I think they're after Alltel and before Verizon, probably same priority as USCC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've roamed on Cricket and US Cellular in Tulsa. I've roamed onto Nextech in Kansas and Colorado. While in Idaho I've roamed on Inland Cellular.

 

On T-Mobile I've roamed onto Union Wireless, Viaero, CellularOne (Comnet and Chinook), Chinook (it actually said Chinook), and for what little they allow AT&T. Most of this roaming was HSPA but I imagine it was seriously throttled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In East Texas I've had Sprint roam on metropcs, and Alltel. Had a T-Mobile Sim in my nexus 5 and said it was roaming on Chinook wireless,which is labeled as cellular one. That is sad because I'm getting coverage from a roaming partner the next county over, with a farther tower, than I am with T-Mobile with a closer tower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In NYC, Sprint roams on Verizon exclusively. MetroPCS has a presence here but my guess is that Sprint simply has greater signal propagation than Metro so I never encounter their signal.

Since MetroPCS never had a PCS CDMA network in NYC, Sprint would never roam on MetroPCS in NYC. Sprint could only roam on MetroPCS in Texas, Florida, Michigan, and California, where MetroPCS had PCS CDMA.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint is pretty well covered in this thread now, what about the other carriers? 

 

T-Mobile roams on AT&T, but only in certain, specific, hand-picked areas (on a nearly tower by tower basis). It's usually only allowed in places *far* removed from T-Mobile's own native coverage.

 

AT&T does not usually allow any roaming on T-Mobile, even when they have no native service and T-Mobile does. (This might be different for Business or M2M customers, or in some hand-picked markets -- I don't know about that specifically. But generally, normal lines do not allow roaming of any kind onto T-Mobile.)

 

This isn't always true however.  For instance, during Hurricane Sandy,  AT&T and T-Mobile agreed to complete network sharing temporarily, so that you could switch between them at any time on any device - http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/31/att-and-t-mobile-temporarily-share-their-networks-in-nyc-nj/

 

But acts like that (while always 100% technologically available) are very rare to see in practice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ManBearPig roams the Earth alone.  ManBearPig simply wants to get you.

 

Ghjkl.JPG

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since MetroPCS never had a PCS CDMA network in NYC, Sprint would never roam on MetroPCS in NYC. Sprint could only roam on MetroPCS in Texas, Florida, Michigan, and California, where MetroPCS had PCS CDMA.

This explains why I get connected to MetroPCS around Los Angeles at times. I thought their CDMA network was dismantled already after the T-Mobile merger.

Link to comment
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

  • Posts

    • Looks like there's a slightly taller building going up next door to where the decommissioned site used to be. Taking a look at StreetView, T-Mobile likely decommissioned the site because the east facing sector would blocked by the new building. If I had to guess, T-Mobile has already agreed to move to the roof of the new building and is just waiting for it to be completed to install the site there. What they should've done is just rearrange the sectors in the meantime but it seems like T-Mobile just bit the bullet and decommed the tower in the short term. — — — — — A permit was issued for a Sprint conversion at 150 Prospect Park West, finally filling in what is T-Mobile's largest coverage gap in Park Slope. Verizon is collocated on that building and AT&T has placed small cells along Prospect Park West to fill in coverage there while T-Mobile struggled using two sites, one at Grand Army Plaza at the far north and another at Bartel Pritchard Square to the far south.  
    • Yep, you can see the site was taken down between Aug 2022 and Apr 2023.
    • Verizon site at Woodbury Commons finally got C-band. I'm seeing upwards of 600Mbps there, a massive improvement over the <1Mbps I used to see. LTE is now at 10-20Mbps which is significantly better than before where speed tests would often fail. My only complaint is that C-band is super inconsistent. Not sure if it's a software issue but sometimes I'm connected to it and get the 600Mbps speeds previously mentioned and other times I connect and only see 15Mbps. Seems like whatever load balancing the network is trying to do is still shoving a ton of people to LTE, even in conditions where I have a strong C-band signal.  — — — — — You're absolutely right. The site on top of Bais Sarah Hall at 6101 16th Ave got decommissioned. Sad that they haven't installed a new site to fill in that coverage gap.  — — — — — In other news a carrier reached out to the board of my grandmother's building in Brooklyn about installing antennas on top of it so she called me today because she knows I map cell towers and she said a lot of people in her building, especially the folks on the upper floors, are worried about the health effects lol. I asked her if she knew what carrier it would be but she said she doesn't know. A quick glance at Cellmapper tells me it's either Dish or AT&T since Verizon and T-Mobile both have sites within a two block radius of her building but AT&T barely builds new sites so I'm leaning Dish. They're asking for a 25-year lease with an option to renegotiate the lease after 10-years. The board of her co-op said that if they do it, maintenance fees will go down since they'll be offset by the rent that the carrier would be paying them. She said she already voted in favor of it but she thinks that a lot of the older people in her building are against it.
    • Galaxy S7 FE most certainly doesn't have the same level of NR CA (if at all), it also looks like it doesn't have SA NR, so it's is inherently going to be much slower since most of the spectrum is now focused on NR rather than LTE. It's likely the same generation radio as the S21 (or maybe S20). Having trouble finding which it would be.
    • T-Mobile seems to be paying close attention to how much of B2 they refarm for NR, as on this trip down to South Padre Island I saw both 20x20 n25 and 20x20 B2 (but not both simultaneously) at various points on the trip. At South Padre itself, seems like someone else has 2.5 GHz licensed so the n41 setup here is 20+80 MHz. Speeds are still decent, but VZW has 100+60 MHz n77 live (and AT&T has some 80+40).
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...