Todd Allcock wrote:

>> If you're buying by price, and know about SERO, Sprint is the best deal,
>> as long as you buy a handset that you can force to roam on Verizon.
>
>
> If not you can still use Sprint's perfectly adequate network. <Insert anti-
> 1900MHz reply here...>

Here we go again. 1900 MHz is a side issue that you seem to be obsessed
with. Sprint (and T-Mobile) often _want_ to install more cells to
mitigate the shorter range of 1900 MHz, but they are constantly being
blocked by residents that don't want towers in their neighborhood.

I.e. a failure for Sprint:

"Following testimony from residents of Cupertino's Jollyman Park
neighborhood, the city council unanimously denied an appeal from the
Sprint PCS wireless company to build a wireless antenna in the
community. Residents objected to its appearance and the proposed
placement on a church tower."

And a victory for T-Mobile:

"T-Mobile has been given the go-ahead to erect a 32-foot wireless
communications monopole on Bollinger Road. The commission denied
T-Mobile's prior application to build a 35-foot tall wireless monopole
at the same location in December 2005" (actually it wasn't the same
location, T-Mobile moved the tower from a location directly behind some
houses, over to the other side of a shopping center, away from the houses).

What really makes it difficult for Sprint and T-Mobile is that when the
hearings are held on granting permission for a tower, invariably
residents will show up and state that their cell phone service is fine,
and that they don't understand why Sprint or T-Mobile needs cells in the
specific location when the other carriers manage without them.

I'm sure there are area where Sprint's network is perfectly adequate.
But it's adequate in a lot less places than Verizon's and AT&T's,
because of their need for so many more towers to cover the same
geographical area, and the NIMBY's that don't want to let them install
them. It's not a problem that I invented, it's a very real issue in many
areas.