Can anybody indicate whether T-Mobile's coverage [including roaming] is as
good as Cingular's coverage? I understand that where both native Cingular and
native T-Mobile exist, there may be holes where Native T-Mobile doesn't quite
cover, and of course vice versus. BUT .. when roaming (i.e. Northern
Minnesota), can I expect the same roaming coverage as Cingular for the most
part? The maps look nearly the same, but I am not sure what real users are
seeing out there.

Signature
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
-= Hawk =- - 24 Jul 2006 19:29 GMT
>Can anybody indicate whether T-Mobile's coverage [including roaming] is as
>good as Cingular's coverage? I understand that where both native Cingular and
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>part? The maps look nearly the same, but I am not sure what real users are
>seeing out there.
I don't trust their maps. I've been in a section that t-mobile's map
states there is NO coverage in and made calls without a problem.
Frater Mus - 25 Jul 2006 04:30 GMT
> I don't trust their maps. I've been in a section that t-mobile's map
> states there is NO coverage in and made calls without a problem.
I think they're doing the "underpromise and overdeliver" thing. I
find the TMO maps to be pretty danged accurate.

Signature
...I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building
W., October 12, 2000.
Cyrus Afzali - 26 Jul 2006 08:54 GMT
>Can anybody indicate whether T-Mobile's coverage [including roaming] is as
>good as Cingular's coverage? I understand that where both native Cingular and
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>part? The maps look nearly the same, but I am not sure what real users are
>seeing out there.
It's changing all the time, but my experience has been that we don't
have 850 mHz roaming rights with partners in many areas that are
off-the-beaten path and are covered by Cingular's 850 mHz network.
So I'd still say the rule applies that if you need truly "everywhere"
coverage, Cingular and Verizon are really your only options.
Thomas T. Veldhouse - 26 Jul 2006 13:26 GMT
> So I'd still say the rule applies that if you need truly "everywhere"
> coverage, Cingular and Verizon are really your only options.
Actually, I can throw in Sprint PCS as well, due to the free AMPS and CDMA
roaming that they offer. The only catch is that if you are in an area that
the PRL says is covered by native Sprint, your phone will fight hard to avoid
roaming ... leaving you with minimal or no coverage depending upon the phone.

Signature
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
Bill Radio - 09 Aug 2006 06:28 GMT
Thomas,
I use both and the true answer depends on your usage. In town and where
T-Mobile coverage exists, they are noticeably better than Cingular. But
outside of town, Cingular has an advantage because parts of the network use
high-powered 850 MHz sites, which MAY give you better coverage odds. But I
was in UT Sunday and was talking on my Verizon phone and lost service. I
looked at my collection of phones and found that only the T-Mobile phone has
coverage on that part of I-80.
T-Mobile wins as my phone #2 because it has worked where I needed it.
Bill Radio
Click for Wireless Reviews at:
http://www.mountainwireless.com
> Can anybody indicate whether T-Mobile's coverage [including roaming] is as
> good as Cingular's coverage?
Cyrus Afzali - 12 Aug 2006 06:36 GMT
>Thomas,
>I use both and the true answer depends on your usage. In town and where
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>T-Mobile wins as my phone #2 because it has worked where I needed it.
To follow up, I've been monitoring the T-Mobile coverage maps, and
testing out addresses where I've traveled over the years and gotten no
service. (I knew I wouldn't in advance because of the coverage maps in
place at the time).
From what I can tell, things have NOTICEABLY improved over the past 4
months. Even my parents hometown, where I didn't have the ability to
roam on my 850 mHz-capable Blackberry, now shows coverage, most likely
thanks to expanded roaming partnerships with Cingular.
none - 14 Aug 2006 16:23 GMT
>> Thomas,
>> I use both and the true answer depends on your usage. In town and where
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> roam on my 850 mHz-capable Blackberry, now shows coverage, most likely
> thanks to expanded roaming partnerships with Cingular.
FYI,
I traveled by Amtrack train a few weeks ago from Mich. to Denver and had
coverage most of the way on my Moto V330. Voice, text, & data using the
$5.99 TMO Web. Only blank spots were western IA and occasional spots in
NE. We roamed on about 3 or 4 different networks and everything was
working normally (voice, txt, & data). I also travel to northern Mich.
where I used to have no coverage and now thanks to TMO's new roaming
partners on the 850 Mhz band I've got great coverage up there too.
Including data. It seems TMO is trying to expand their networks. Hope
they keep it up!
Vinny
Cyrus Afzali - 21 Aug 2006 21:16 GMT
>FYI,
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>Including data. It seems TMO is trying to expand their networks. Hope
>they keep it up!
I just returned from a weekend in Vermont and NH in areas where we
previously had no coverage and I had 850 mHz coverage on Unicell, both
for voice and GPRS. So it seems an 850 mHz device is becoming an
essential component for anyone wanting widespread roaming.
John L - 22 Aug 2006 02:03 GMT
>I just returned from a weekend in Vermont and NH in areas where we
>previously had no coverage and I had 850 mHz coverage on Unicell, both
>for voice and GPRS. So it seems an 850 mHz device is becoming an
>essential component for anyone wanting widespread roaming.
Are you prepaid or postpaid?
Cyrus Afzali - 22 Aug 2006 19:54 GMT
>>I just returned from a weekend in Vermont and NH in areas where we
>>previously had no coverage and I had 850 mHz coverage on Unicell, both
>>for voice and GPRS. So it seems an 850 mHz device is becoming an
>>essential component for anyone wanting widespread roaming.
>
>Are you prepaid or postpaid?
Postpaid.