|
02-14-2015, 09:53 PM
|
|
|
|
24,497 posts, read 37,515,385 times
Reputation: 12879
|
|
|
RootMetrics RootScore Reports
Obviously, it varies in specific regions and locations. But in terms of nationwide coverage, Verizon wins out (again).
|
|
02-15-2015, 04:06 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: USA
199 posts, read 233,447 times
Reputation: 107
|
|
|
Coverage is one thing, quality coverage is another. In my area I have access to all of the major carriers and out of them all, Verizon has always had more problems for me (I had it a few of different times). I just couldn't get reliable coverage and I have even had good quality coverage issues when traveling as well so it's not just my area. My sister and mother both switched for the same reason.
I'll take quality of coverage over all else.
|
|
02-15-2015, 04:34 AM
|
|
|
|
24,497 posts, read 37,515,385 times
Reputation: 12879
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by eGeekUniverse
Coverage is one thing, quality coverage is another. In my area I have access to all of the major carriers and out of them all, Verizon has always had more problems for me (I had it a few of different times). I just couldn't get reliable coverage and I have even had good quality coverage issues when traveling as well so it's not just my area. My sister and mother both switched for the same reason.
I'll take quality of coverage over all else.
|
How do you define quality of coverage? How does that differ from reliability of coverage? |
|
02-15-2015, 08:23 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: Charlotte, NC
1,763 posts, read 2,077,615 times
Reputation: 1655
|
|
|
No surprise there. Their coverage is impressive but not worth the cost if you live in an area with other options. Their data plan offerings are pathetic as well which was the main reason I dumped them.
What these numbers do show however is that the two smaller carriers are closing the gap with the top two. Last year it was wider. As it gets closer and closer Verizon will be forced to compete more on features and price rather than coverage.
|
|
02-15-2015, 10:41 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: Sierra Nevada Land, CA
9,301 posts, read 10,389,852 times
Reputation: 15822
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest
How do you define quality of coverage? How does that differ from reliability of coverage?
|
In my area att has better voice quality and data. Half of Verizon's towers in my area are 3G, whereas ATT is mostly LTE with some 4G. I tried Verizon for four month and was disappointed with the voice quality at my home and office. Plus the data speed at my house was.5 Meg I had15 Megs with ATT at my house. So I switched back to ATT a month ago. |
|
02-15-2015, 12:54 PM
|
|
|
|
24,497 posts, read 37,515,385 times
Reputation: 12879
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150
In my area att has better voice quality and data. Half of Verizon's towers in my area are 3G, whereas ATT is mostly LTE with some 4G. I tried Verizon for four month and was disappointed with the voice quality at my home and office. Plus the data speed at my house was.5 Meg I had15 Megs with ATT at my house. So I switched back to ATT a month ago.
|
RootMetrics already took voice quality and data into consideration. Since eGeekUniverse differentiated "quality coverage" from the defined coverage metrics used in the study, I'm curious as to how she defines "quality coverage". Based on her previous post, it's not just by voice quality and data [speeds]. |
|
02-15-2015, 01:08 PM
|
|
|
|
1,918 posts, read 848,300 times
Reputation: 1363
|
|
|
The coverage of Sprint and T-Mobile is actually not horrible according to this study. Yes, still worse than Verizon and ATT, but not horrible.
T-Mobile is dead last. I wonder if that's because Sprint benefits from roaming on Verizon, and as a result, there is coverage wherever Verizon has coverage.
|
|
02-15-2015, 01:38 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Sierra Nevada Land, CA
9,301 posts, read 10,389,852 times
Reputation: 15822
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest
RootMetrics already took voice quality and data into consideration. Since eGeekUniverse differentiated "quality coverage" from the defined coverage metrics used in the study, I'm curious as to how she defines "quality coverage". Based on her previous post, it's not just by voice quality and data [speeds].
|
Bear in mind that while Verizon may be better overall, it may not be better where one lives. I tried Verizon for the coverage, but found it lacking for voice quality and data speed in my area. My area being the operative phrase. |
|
02-15-2015, 01:47 PM
|
|
|
|
24,497 posts, read 37,515,385 times
Reputation: 12879
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150
Bear in mind that while Verizon may be better overall, it may not be better where one lives.
|
That's basically what I said. |
|
02-16-2015, 12:47 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: USA
199 posts, read 233,447 times
Reputation: 107
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest
How do you define quality of coverage? How does that differ from reliability of coverage?
|
Well, there coverage was reliable as in able to always get a good signal but the voice quality was bad compared to other carriers I was using. Even after a half dozen different phones, still lacking in "Voice Quality". The company I worked for at that time even switched to a different carrier for that exact reason.
They were reliable as in I always had a signal, but the voice quality and call dropping often declined the quality of that coverage.
It was reliable in the sense that I could rely on poor voice quality and calls dropping way too often. |
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
