>>I am a T-Mobile user. T-Mobile coverage in Upstate NY is a bit thin. I
>>have been looking at ATTWS and their GSM (1900/850) service. They seem to
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Not sure what map you are looking at but ATT doesn't have much coverage in
> upstate NY. Look at Cingular they have much better coverage in that area.
Judging from the maps, it looks like for the most part, where one ha
service, the other does not. It really irks me that we cannot roam in
those areas since T-Mobile has zilch.
Anyway, Cingular seems to have the central part of the state covered -
Syracuse and surrounding area, while ATTWS seems to have the lower partof
the state covered (Elmira, Corning, surrounding areas). There is even some
DobsonUS coverage in that area.
> If you choose a ATTWS local plan, the coverage in upstate NY would
> include all those Cingular coverage.
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>> Not sure what map you are looking at but ATT doesn't have much coverage in
>> upstate NY. Look at Cingular they have much better coverage in that area.

Signature
********************************
David William Botsch
dwb7@cornell.edu
********************************
Robert M. - 30 Mar 2004 01:22 GMT
> Judging from the maps, it looks like for the most part, where one ha
> service, the other does not. It really irks me that we cannot roam in
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> the state covered (Elmira, Corning, surrounding areas). There is even some
> DobsonUS coverage in that area.
Despite all promising to honor an Industry Code for Consumers, no
carrier has yet published a proper map showing coverage that includes
their dead zones.
Scott Stephenson - 30 Mar 2004 01:27 GMT
> Despite all promising to honor an Industry Code for Consumers, no
> carrier has yet published a proper map showing coverage that includes
> their dead zones.
Then why do you routinely use them as a refernece when answering coverage
questions inthe alt.cellular groups?