"Ron" <ronclifford@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:o17324lk3qm8ni85pb18qnkk607gjaodu9@4ax.com...

>>> However an area like mine, a suburb in Silicon Valley, has terrible
>>> Sprint
>>> and T-Mobile coverage because the zoning in the large residential areas
>>> doesn't allow for cell sites.
>>
>>That's an atypical situation, though.
>
>
> That's an all too common situation.
>
> With 1900 MHz used by Sprint and T-Mobile doing less well at building
> penetration, all too often Sprint customers discover too late their
> cell phone won't work at home, or at work. One need only to
> read the SprintPCS newsgroup to realize the angst caused by that fact.

"Discover too late?" You mean people don't try their phone at home or work
during the 14-30 day trial period?

Again, there are 70+ million 1900MHz phone users in the US. 1900MHz has
been used here for well over a decade. Where's the backlash of irate
customers? If this situation was "all too common" we'd all have jumped ship
back to 800MHz carriers long ago.

When I moved to my southwest suburb in the Denver Front Range four years
ago, only T-Mobile, Sprint, and Nextel worked here. Verizon and AT&T, the
incumbent 800MHz cellular carriers didn't cover my neighborhood until
relatively recently, so I can play SMS' "anecdotal evidence" game too...
If "coming late to the party" prevented coverage, why couldn't the two
companies servicing my area for 25 YEARS provide service before the
Johnny-Come-Latelies?

When I visit my mother in suburban Providence, RI, Verizon (800), Sprint
(1900) and T-Mo (1900) provide excellent service, where AT&T (800 MHz!) is
very hit or miss (and was back in the analog/TDMA days as well, so this
isn't a "GSM" issue, either, which ranks a close #2 behind "1900 MHz" in
SMS' list of "Why All Carriers Other Than Verizon Blow Chunks..."

Are their situations were 800MHz performs better than 1900? Sure. So
1900MHz carriers have to compensate with additional towers. In urban and
suburban areas this is generally not a hardship, because more towers are
needed for capacity issues than are required for bare-bones coverage anyway,
so it's not like they need any more towers than 800 MHz carriers do in
populated areas. In rural areas, however, 1900 certainly has a significant
disadvantage, in the number of towers needed for a full build-out, which is
why they typically lack robust coverage in those areas, instead just
covering the interstates, tourist traps, and towns.

Sprint and T-Mobile have building out their networks, and supplementing with
roaming for over a decade. Coverage, for the most part, is simply no longer
an issue for the vast majority of consumers, as a reading of the SprintPCS
NG seems to bear out, despite your insistence that scores of folks are
complaining about coverage.