1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!

Verizon and Rollover Minutes

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by susan, Oct 1, 2003.

  1. meghann garland <megz612@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > Its funny that you say VZW has the least coverage.


    First off, I didn't say that, Dan did.

    Second, yes, there are large parts of the US where Verizon doesn't have
    native service. I don't much mind, since the vast majority of it is roaming-
    free for me since I'm on AC. On the other hand, when Sprint has great
    coverage in Arizona on I-40, I see no reason why I should roam analog on
    Citizens Mohave Wireless instead of digital on Sprint; I have a tri-mode
    phone. For that matter, Sprint as a backup would serve me quite well here at
    home in Apple Valley, since we live in the less-populated part of AV up
    against the mountains. (AV is *huge*, stretching from San Bernardino in
    the south, almost forty miles up to Barstow. There are plenty of places
    in AV where my coverage is fine. But the terrain out here doesn't lend itself
    to great coverage without a lot of towers - if I had Sprint I could use a
    Sprint signal here at the house and a VZW signal everywhere else.)

    > looking at Tmobile, Sprint, Us-cellular, Cricket, and other carriers.
    > Their coverage is nill. Why else would VZW say "the largest, most
    > advanced and most reliable network"


    That implies it's yours, and to include roaming partners in that is
    completely misleading. (In my opinion)

    > do your homework.


    Pfft. Don't tell me to do my homework. I've done my homework. Have you
    taken your Verizon phone on a 3,000-mile cross-country drive lately? I have.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services
    22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
    Steve Sobol, Proprietor
    888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * sjsobol@JustThe.net



    › See More: Verizon and Rollover Minutes
  2. XFF

    XFF Guest

    hominid7@hotmail.com (Dan W.) wrote in message news:<vnr3u8g6uq7u45@corp.supernews.com>...

    > I should have known better than to post anything negative-verizon in the
    > verizon newsgroup=)


    Please, don't give me that nonsense. I'm about as unbiased and
    fact-adhering as anyone you will find around here.

    > As for Verizons Spectrum availability, check out:
    >
    > http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/regions.html


    Funny you should point that out, seeing that *I* am the one creating
    those maps. And your point was what? The fact is that VZW has very
    strong and solid license holdings all over the United States. Again,
    they have native cellular coverage in 82 of the top 100 markets, the
    #2 contender, Cingular Wireless, only has 50 of the top 100 markets,
    and the next runner ups, AT&T and ALLTEL, have 33 and 28 markets
    respectively. That's a pretty steep decline and no contest for VZW
    whatsoever. Once I create the nationwide cellular license composite
    maps for each of the top 10 carriers you will see VZW's superiority
    first hand.

    > As for Verizons Data capabilities, check out their website and click on
    > "national Enhanced Services" map. That will give you a better idea of
    > where they have "native" coverage. Yes, they have LOTS of it, but not
    > where i travel.
    >
    > http://tinyurl.com/pl22


    I think I have a pretty good idea, thank you. Show me one carrier
    that has more "native" nationwide coverage than VZW and I will happily
    join in with your tune.

    > I'm not sure if you are making a distinction between "cellular" and
    > "PCS" coverage, but i'm just talking "Coverage" in general. Verizon
    > DOES have excellent coverage, as per my origional statment, in certian
    > areas.


    They have the most licenses and the best coverage nationwide overall,
    there's absolutely no question about it. Unless you are stictly a
    major metro areas kinda guy that never leaves the city, then Sprint
    PCS or T-Mobile might be a better choice, but *only* then.

    > HOWEVER, in the areas *I* live, work and play, largely the
    > Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana area, Verizons coverage is greatly
    > lacking behind that of AT&T and Cingular.


    No argument there. VZW is a PCS carrier in TX/LA and (practically) no
    carrier in OK/AR. If you live and play in these four states I would
    never recommend VZW as your primary service provider. I'd go with
    Cingular, hands down (or again, if major metro areas are your thing
    then possibly Sprint PCS or T-Mobile).

    However, let's keep in mind that VZW is predominantly a cellular
    carrier and 80+% of its users are on a cellular network with superior
    local coverage. No question that the PCS areas do not share this
    advantage.

    But let's not generalize here. You said earlier:

    > The problem with Verizons coverage though, is they actually have very
    > little.


    That is just not true as it implies that there is not much native
    coverage nationwide overall. It may be true for YOUR home area, but
    the way you stated it originally it was wrong and that's why I called
    you on it. Based on facts, not because I don't like anything negative
    about VZW.

    You also said:

    > In addition if you look at their spectrum situation, Verizon is at the
    > bottom of the list.


    Show me that list and how you created it and we'll go from there.
  3. Ben Skversky

    Ben Skversky Guest

    Who told you rollover is a brand name? Please quote your source.


    "Sterling" <buggyboyvt@icehouse.net> wrote in message
    news:_Bveb.113$%y4.167353@news.uswest.net...
    > Thats a brand name.. Verizon, or anyone else could offer it.. they just
    > might not be able to call it Rollover!
    >
    > "About Dakota" <aboutdakota@REMOVEMEhotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:3F7A7C0B.1060205@REMOVEMEhotmail.com...
    > > > Any indication that Verizon has ever considered Rollover minutes as a

    > sales
    > > > angle?
    > > > Susan

    > >
    > > I once read an article on patents (magazine article, I think it was
    > > NEWSWEEK) where companies have started patenting "business ideas"
    > > instead of physical inventions. It seems very possible that Cingular
    > > has a patent on "Rollover". I did see a brochure from Cingular once
    > > that had "Rollover" trademarked (TM), but have not seen the (TM) since.
    > >
    > > I do have to admit that my days with Verizon are over. I recently
    > > switched full time to Cingular with their new national plan.
    > >
    > > $55.00/month gete me 500 anytime minutes with rollover, 5000
    > > night/weekend minutes, standard features, and it's "fully national" with
    > > night and weekend minutes also applicable while "roaming" on any system
    > > available. Check out the link below for my coverage map.
    > >
    > >

    >

    http://onlinestore.cingular.com/web...l/Maps/GulfStates/nation_GAIT_map_6_30_03.htm
    > >
    > > I only switched to this plan after a friend of mine (truck driver)
    > > switched to it and admitted that coverage is fantastic. No complaints
    > > here, either.
    > >
    > > AD
    > >

    >
    >
  4. m rae

    m rae Guest

    Too bad for you with Cingulars coverage. Try looking at the map online
    and then read the fne prnt. And, what are you going to do when Cingular
    is no longer?? Verizon is the largest most advanced and reliable service
    out there. It is slightly more expensive, but then again, you get what
    you pay for....

    "Ben Skversky" <bskversky@comcast.net> wrote in article
    <YDmdnV4MMJdJieKiU-KYgg@comcast.com>:
    > Who told you rollover is a brand name? Please quote your source.
    >
    >
    > "Sterling" <buggyboyvt@icehouse.net> wrote in message
    > news:_Bveb.113$%y4.167353@news.uswest.net...
    > > Thats a brand name.. Verizon, or anyone else could offer it.. they just
    > > might not be able to call it Rollover!
    > >
    > > "About Dakota" <aboutdakota@REMOVEMEhotmail.com> wrote in message
    > > news:3F7A7C0B.1060205@REMOVEMEhotmail.com...
    > > > > Any indication that Verizon has ever considered Rollover minutes as a

    > > sales
    > > > > angle?
    > > > > Susan
    > > >
    > > > I once read an article on patents (magazine article, I think it was
    > > > NEWSWEEK) where companies have started patenting "business ideas"
    > > > instead of physical inventions. It seems very possible that Cingular
    > > > has a patent on "Rollover". I did see a brochure from Cingular once
    > > > that had "Rollover" trademarked (TM), but have not seen the (TM) since.
    > > >
    > > > I do have to admit that my days with Verizon are over. I recently
    > > > switched full time to Cingular with their new national plan.
    > > >
    > > > $55.00/month gete me 500 anytime minutes with rollover, 5000
    > > > night/weekend minutes, standard features, and it's "fully national" with
    > > > night and weekend minutes also applicable while "roaming" on any system
    > > > available. Check out the link below for my coverage map.
    > > >
    > > >

    > >

    > http://onlinestore.cingular.com/web...l/Maps/GulfStates/nation_GAIT_map_6_30_03.htm
    > > >
    > > > I only switched to this plan after a friend of mine (truck driver)
    > > > switched to it and admitted that coverage is fantastic. No complaints
    > > > here, either.
    > > >
    > > > AD
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  5. N9WOS

    N9WOS Guest

    "m rae" <sweetpea123@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:vnujk034sumec6@corp.supernews.com...
    > Too bad for you with Cingulars coverage. Try looking at the map online
    > and then read the fne prnt. And, what are you going to do when Cingular
    > is no longer?? Verizon is the largest most advanced and reliable service
    > out there. It is slightly more expensive, but then again, you get what
    > you pay for....


    Troll troll troll your boat gently down the stream,
    merely merely merely, life is but a dream.

    I don't think cingular is going anywhere for the time being. :p
  6. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On 2 Oct 2003 09:00:15 -0700, xff@austin.rr.com (XFF) posted in
    alt.cellular.verizon:

    >scharf@hotmail.com (Steven Scharf) wrote in message news:<4f153f94.0310011838.716dc0a7@posting.google.com>...


    >> Verizon has never tried to be the low price leader;
    >> their value proposition has always been coverage, and
    >> they target customers that care about coverage. With
    >> Cingular GSM, you lose so much coverage, both locally
    >> (for California), and nationwide, that it isn't a
    >> viable choice for people for whom coverage is important.


    >Not true on the Cingular Nation plan, you get all the coverage that is
    >available for no extra charge. It's a truely great plan.


    The point is, though, that "all the coverage that is available" isn't
    that much.
  7. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:23:18 -0000, hominid7@hotmail.com (Dan W.)
    posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >The problem with Verizons coverage though, is they actually have very
    >little. Yes, their plans include massive areas, but largely that is via
    >roaming partners.


    Bottom line is that you get to use all that area, whether it's native
    Verizon or not.
  8. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 14:10:22 -0000, hominid7@hotmail.com (Dan W.)
    posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >In the south, where i live, AT&T, Sprint, and Cingular all offer much
    >larger data coverage areas than do verizon. I'm not knocking verizon,
    >they are great where they have coverage, but they have no coverage in
    >oklahoma, and limited coverage in North Texas


    Last time I looked the Dallas-Ft. Worth area was still in North Texas.
  9. N9WOS

    N9WOS Guest

    > >Not true on the Cingular Nation plan, you get all the coverage that is
    > >available for no extra charge. It's a truely great plan.

    >
    > The point is, though, that "all the coverage that is available" isn't
    > that much.


    You are insulting every cellular and PCS company in the USA
    with that comment.
    :)

    With the cingular nation plan, anywhere your GAIT phone can
    pick up a signal, you will be charged your home rate.
    Be it GSM 950/1900, TDMA 850/1900 or AMPS 850.

    The provider could be cingular, ATT, alltel, US cellular, dobson,
    western wireless, centennial, RFB, Kankakee, hickory tech,
    Rural cellular, cellular mobile systems, midwest wireless, cellcom,
    thumb cellular, Illinois vally cellular, fist celllular, western wireless,
    MoCelCo, northeast Colorado cellular, indigo wireless, comnet wireless,
    Cellcom, cellular 29 plus, min- Missouri cellular, union cellular..
    (On and on..)
    And finally verizon wireless it's self.

    If all those "isn't that much."
    Then the cellular industry in the USA is hurting badly. :p
  10. they will use it to roll over Geoff Brozny that fuck

    Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in article
    <952vnv4fqlorfldasiec7l2vfto4gspo30@Pern.rk>:
    > On 2 Oct 2003 09:00:15 -0700, xff@austin.rr.com (XFF) posted in
    > alt.cellular.verizon:
    >
    > >scharf@hotmail.com (Steven Scharf) wrote in message news:<4f153f94.0310011838.716dc0a7@posting.google.com>...

    >
    > >> Verizon has never tried to be the low price leader;
    > >> their value proposition has always been coverage, and
    > >> they target customers that care about coverage. With
    > >> Cingular GSM, you lose so much coverage, both locally
    > >> (for California), and nationwide, that it isn't a
    > >> viable choice for people for whom coverage is important.

    >
    > >Not true on the Cingular Nation plan, you get all the coverage that is
    > >available for no extra charge. It's a truely great plan.

    >
    > The point is, though, that "all the coverage that is available" isn't
    > that much.


    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  11. XFF

    XFF Guest

    Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message news:<952vnv4fqlorfldasiec7l2vfto4gspo30@Pern.rk>...
    >
    > On 2 Oct 2003 09:00:15 -0700, xff@austin.rr.com (XFF) posted in
    > alt.cellular.verizon:
    >
    > >Not true on the Cingular Nation plan, you get all the coverage that is
    > >available for no extra charge. It's a truely great plan.

    >
    > The point is, though, that "all the coverage that is available" isn't
    > that much.


    No, no. With Cingular Nation you can use any cellular system
    currently operating, regardless of who's system it is. Any and all of
    the cellular coverage that exists throughout the country is yours to
    use for no extra charge. Note that I was referring to Cingular
    Nation, not Cingular Preferred Nation or Cingular Nation GSM.
  12. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On 5 Oct 2003 00:41:57 -0700, xff@austin.rr.com (XFF) posted in
    alt.cellular.verizon:

    >Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote in message news:<952vnv4fqlorfldasiec7l2vfto4gspo30@Pern.rk>...
    >> On 2 Oct 2003 09:00:15 -0700, xff@austin.rr.com (XFF) posted in
    >> alt.cellular.verizon:


    >> >Not true on the Cingular Nation plan, you get all the coverage that is
    >> >available for no extra charge. It's a truely great plan.


    >> The point is, though, that "all the coverage that is available" isn't
    >> that much.


    >No, no. With Cingular Nation you can use any cellular system
    >currently operating, regardless of who's system it is.


    As long as it's compatible with your phone. If you have a Cingular
    GSM phone, and the only service where you're standing is CDMA or
    analog, you have no service.

    > Any and all of
    >the cellular coverage that exists throughout the country is yours to
    >use for no extra charge. Note that I was referring to Cingular
    >Nation, not Cingular Preferred Nation or Cingular Nation GSM.


    See above. You can't access service that isn't compatible with your
    phone. So the question comes down to how large is the {TDMA|GSM}
    footprint nationwide. In the boonies, not very. (And GSM isn't very
    large at all.)
  13. N9WOS

    N9WOS Guest


    > >> The point is, though, that "all the coverage that is available" isn't
    > >> that much.

    >
    > >No, no. With Cingular Nation you can use any cellular system
    > >currently operating, regardless of who's system it is.

    >
    > As long as it's compatible with your phone. If you have a Cingular
    > GSM phone, and the only service where you're standing is CDMA or
    > analog, you have no service.


    That is a cingular nation gsm plan.
    That is not what the other person is talking about.
    He is talking about a cingular nation plan which
    "requires" a multinetwork phone. (ie) GAIT phone.

    > > Any and all of
    > >the cellular coverage that exists throughout the country is yours to
    > >use for no extra charge. Note that I was referring to Cingular
    > >Nation, not Cingular Preferred Nation or Cingular Nation GSM.

    >
    > See above. You can't access service that isn't compatible with your
    > phone. So the question comes down to how large is the {TDMA|GSM}
    > footprint nationwide. In the boonies, not very. (And GSM isn't very
    > large at all.)


    A GAIT phone also supports AMPS.
  14. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 03:31:05 GMT, "N9WOS"
    <n9wos@nobug.worldnet.att.net> posted in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >And finally verizon wireless it's self.


    Verizon giving you service on a TDMA or GSM phone? Not likely.
  15. N9WOS

    N9WOS Guest

    > >And finally verizon wireless it's self.
    >
    > Verizon giving you service on a TDMA or GSM phone? Not likely.


    You can't be that dense. :-/

    Or are you just trolling?
  16. fedex

    fedex Guest

    hominid7@hotmail.com (Dan W.) wrote:
    >The problem with Verizons coverage though, is they actually have very
    >little. Yes, their plans include massive areas, but largely that is via
    >roaming partners. If you look at their "advanced services" map you get
    >a better idea of what kind of native verizon coverage you can expect.
    >In the far NE, in cali, and in Colorado, Verizon might be the coverage
    >king, but here in the south it's pretty sparse with the exception of the
    >greater houston area.
    >
    >In addition if you look at their spectrum situation, Verizon is at the
    >bottom of the list.
    >
    >--
    >Dan W.
    >North Texas
    >hominid7 "AT" hotmail "DOT" com
    >

    Dan, I think that you are "full of it".

    I have been using wireless phones (over 2000 minutes a month) since 1992 and
    have used Cingular, Verizon (even Celluar One/GTE), SprintPCS, NextTel, etc.
    I have gotten the most coverage out of Verizon HANDS DOWN. Sprint --> only in
    the major metro areas, NextTel --> even worse than Sprint outside of major
    urban areas, Cricket --> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (but it only costs $30 a month),
    Cingular (old Bellsouth Mobility here) --> only one that comes close, but still
    have more signal loss and dropped calls than Verizon.
    Oh, and to prove you wrong even more --- in the South (South East - Texas is
    not the only South), Cellular One started building THEIR OWN tower/coverage
    service back in the very early 90s - going against Bellsouth Mobility --> there
    was no Sprint, NexTel, Cricket, etc even around. Verizon IS Cellular One nad
    here in the South East, Verizon OWNS TONS of towers and the system to use them.
    I have two friends that have worked for Verizon - one under Cellular One/GTE
    WIreless (he left after Verizon took over becuase he didn't like their
    management style) and the second for GTE WIreless and Verizon (until a year ago
    - couldn't pass up the money that AT&T was willing to pay him) ---> BOTH OF
    THEM AGREE THAT IN THE SOUTH EAST, VERIZON HAS THE BEST COVERAGE HANDS-DOWN.


    I am not tooting Verizon's horn because I think that they have some major
    problems with their pricing and customer service; but I have had TONS less
    coverage/connection problems with them than all of the other companies. Also,
    whether or not a company owns the towers that they use matters NOTHING as long
    as the signal strength and call connections are high.

    But since you seem to be basing your "knowledge" on only the Houston area and I
    am basing mine on the entire state of Tennessee, the lower half of Kentucky,
    and the the Northern parts of Miss, Ala, and Ga - along with lots of use in DC,
    Baltimore, North part of VA, and some of Maryland, I think that you need to
    "rethink" your "sweeping" comments on Verizon's coverage in the South. -
    maybe in Texas, Verizon's coverage sucks - I do not know since I spend very
    little time West of the Mississippi River; but East of the Mighty Mississippi
    River, Verizon's coverage (and only their coverage) is the best that I have
    found.

    FedEx steps down off his soapbox and apologizes to all of the people who were
    "caught" in his flood of correction rant...
  17. Dan W.

    Dan W. Guest

    Thank you for the personal attack. I shall refrain from doing
    likewise.

    In my initial post i allowed that verizon had very good coverage in
    parts of the US, but i was rather responding to the notion that verizon
    had the best coverage everywhere.

    In looking at Verizons own map i see terrific coverage in Tennessee, as
    you stated, but i see almost none in Mississippi, S. Alabama, N.
    Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma large chunks of Kentucky, all of west
    Texas, and only limited coverage in the Midwest states of Nebraska,
    Kansas, Missouri, and ever shrinking coverage in Oregon (I suspect the
    shrinking coverage has to do with the recent mandate to provide more
    accurate "coverage" maps instead of "rate" maps).

    Verizon has EXCELLENT coverage in the rockies, the South west, the north
    east, and parts of the country south but still lacks native coverage in
    the aforementioned areas.

    As for your suggestion that it does not matter whos tower you are
    connecting to, well, thats true if all your wanting to do is make and
    (hopefully) receive calls. However, again in my initial post i was
    referring to "advanced" services such as data, voicemail notification,
    text messaging, etc...

    Verizon has done a good job at putting together a network of their own
    coverage as well as roaming coverage to give much of the public voice
    coverage that generally works well where they travel, work and play.
    However verizon has only recently made available maps that depict where
    specific services are likely to work, and where their coverage is
    through that of roaming agreements and analog towers.

    The reason Verizon does not have their own coverage in many areas, is
    not from lack of effort, it is lack of spectrum that remains their
    problem. Despite other posters rantings to the contrary, Verizon does
    not own spectrum in many areas. They attempted, but through no fault of
    their own, failed at getting the Nexwave spectrum deal to go through.

    It's ironic, Verizon has the deep pockets to build just about anything
    anywhere, but it's struggling Sprint who owns spectrum EVERYWHERE
    without the $ to put it to use. While Sprints coverage is still
    lacking, it's growing and while their financial situation is troubled,
    it's improving. Verizon is in no way in trouble though as their profits
    continue to be strong and the "perception" that they are the "best"
    carrier continues to remain as well.

    I have and continue to recommend Verizon to those people who live and/or
    travel a great deal in areas with strong Verizon coverage. Generally
    speaking where verizon has coverage, they do an excellent job at it.

    In deciding who is the "best" carrier, i make no accusations or
    judgments. It's pretty safe to say that NO carrier offers "true" coast
    to coast coverage with a continued flow of consistency in services at a
    reasonable price. As the GSM carriers continue to work together
    building the GSM network, we have the promise of at least hoping for
    that in the future, but it's not here yet. Beyond that as all carriers
    eventually move toward a CDMA like operating environment in the distant
    future we can continue to hope for even more integration.




    fedex <joeblow@joeblow.com> wrote in article
    <mfogb.24271$wC1.14758@bignews3.bellsouth.net>:
    > >

    > Dan, I think that you are "full of it".
    >

    <<snip>>

    [posted via phonescoop.com]
  18. fedex

    fedex Guest

    First - Dan you are correct - I made a personal attack and should not have -
    for that I apolgize (keeps trying to remember the mantra of 'think about if you
    would say what you post to someone in person' that I tell everyone to use in
    emails and posts; and then smacks own heads) - especially since deep down we
    are actually agreeing on everything.

    Second - You are right that Verizon has a lot of work to do - one reason why
    their coverage is so good in my area is that they simply bought out Cellular
    One who had built all of the infrastructure in TN, etc. (I am spoiled as far as
    coverage and have always appreciated it since I have heard lots of compalints
    from many clients/friends/enemies/aliens/etc over the years in their areas no
    matter who they have for service). I have always wondered if Verizon has had
    such problems with spectrum because they initially tried to build their network
    only off the groups they aquired and used lots of roaming agreements and analog
    instead of getting in the areas themselves in the beginning?

    Third - I fully agree that NO carrier has anywhere near the best everywhere. I
    have always told people that it comes down to personal opinion: find the
    carrier that offers you the best coverage, service, and price for you. I know
    people who are on all of the carriers around here (and my goodness we have 7 or
    8) and for each one who "loves" one carrier I now at least one who has had
    nothing but bad experiences with that same carrier - either coverage, customer
    service, etc. I have had pretty good experience with Verizon over the 11 years
    I have been with them - although customer service was way better when it was
    Cellular One and a litlle better when it was GTE Wireless - but have had pretty
    bad experiences with Cingular (decent coverage but horrible customer service),
    NexTel (great customer service but horrible coverage - get off the interstate
    more than one mile and coverage is gone - but PTT does kick but), Sprint
    (horrible coverage outside of metro areas, but very good customer service),
    Cricket (pretty crappy service even in metro areas - nice list of holes - and
    okay customer service but the cost is great, etc.

    hominid7@hotmail.com (Dan W.) wrote:
    >Thank you for the personal attack. I shall refrain from doing
    >likewise.
    >
    >In my initial post i allowed that verizon had very good coverage in
    >parts of the US, but i was rather responding to the notion that verizon
    >had the best coverage everywhere.
    >
    >In looking at Verizons own map i see terrific coverage in Tennessee, as
    >you stated, but i see almost none in Mississippi, S. Alabama, N.
    >Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma large chunks of Kentucky, all of west
    >Texas, and only limited coverage in the Midwest states of Nebraska,
    >Kansas, Missouri, and ever shrinking coverage in Oregon (I suspect the
    >shrinking coverage has to do with the recent mandate to provide more
    >accurate "coverage" maps instead of "rate" maps).
    >
    >Verizon has EXCELLENT coverage in the rockies, the South west, the north
    >east, and parts of the country south but still lacks native coverage in
    >the aforementioned areas.
    >
    >As for your suggestion that it does not matter whos tower you are
    >connecting to, well, thats true if all your wanting to do is make and
    >(hopefully) receive calls. However, again in my initial post i was
    >referring to "advanced" services such as data, voicemail notification,
    >text messaging, etc...
    >
    >Verizon has done a good job at putting together a network of their own
    >coverage as well as roaming coverage to give much of the public voice
    >coverage that generally works well where they travel, work and play.
    >However verizon has only recently made available maps that depict where
    >specific services are likely to work, and where their coverage is
    >through that of roaming agreements and analog towers.
    >
    >The reason Verizon does not have their own coverage in many areas, is
    >not from lack of effort, it is lack of spectrum that remains their
    >problem. Despite other posters rantings to the contrary, Verizon does
    >not own spectrum in many areas. They attempted, but through no fault of
    >their own, failed at getting the Nexwave spectrum deal to go through.
    >
    >It's ironic, Verizon has the deep pockets to build just about anything
    >anywhere, but it's struggling Sprint who owns spectrum EVERYWHERE
    >without the $ to put it to use. While Sprints coverage is still
    >lacking, it's growing and while their financial situation is troubled,
    >it's improving. Verizon is in no way in trouble though as their profits
    >continue to be strong and the "perception" that they are the "best"
    >carrier continues to remain as well.
    >
    >I have and continue to recommend Verizon to those people who live and/or
    >travel a great deal in areas with strong Verizon coverage. Generally
    >speaking where verizon has coverage, they do an excellent job at it.
    >
    >In deciding who is the "best" carrier, i make no accusations or
    >judgments. It's pretty safe to say that NO carrier offers "true" coast
    >to coast coverage with a continued flow of consistency in services at a
    >reasonable price. As the GSM carriers continue to work together
    >building the GSM network, we have the promise of at least hoping for
    >that in the future, but it's not here yet. Beyond that as all carriers
    >eventually move toward a CDMA like operating environment in the distant
    >future we can continue to hope for even more integration.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >fedex <joeblow@joeblow.com> wrote in article
    ><mfogb.24271$wC1.14758@bignews3.bellsouth.net>:
    >> >

    >> Dan, I think that you are "full of it".
    >>

    ><<snip>>
    >
    >[posted via phonescoop.com]
  19. Dan W.

    Dan W. Guest

    Thanks for the excellent and informative post FedEx.

    I'm jealous of the coverage you have over in Tennessee. All of the
    other states could only be so lucky! =)

    I use AT&T, not because i think they are the best, actually, i think
    they have a lot of areas they could improve in, but they give me good
    coverage where i go, and in a few specific instances offer coverage
    where other carriers dont, so i'm sticking with them. Needless to say i
    also get a discount through work, so that makes it more attractive (We
    also get a discount with Verizon and Sprint, but the AT&T deal works
    best for me-cause we get a phone purchase discount, and i tend to buy
    new phones all the time).

    In addition to my AT&T GSM phone, i also carry a pre-paid AT&T TDMA
    phone, as AT&T's GSM coverage is, well, a long way from being complete
    by any stretch of the mind, but i switched to GSM for the data and to
    help feed my ever growing addiction to buying the latest and greatest
    phones.

    "Verizon" is a relatively "new" company with relatively old roots. They
    are put together in my part of the country by the former GTE and
    PrimeCo. To their credit, they really had a mess of all kinds of
    companies they merged and aquired, and they managed to pull them all
    together into a working single entity in a relatively short amount of
    time. Not a small task at all.

    I'm not sure how the whole spectrum issue came into being, i suppose
    Sprint got to the table first, or perhaps the old sprint spectrum was
    wise in it's purchases. I dont think it's a question of "if" only
    "When" verizon will either make a bid for someone elses spectrum or
    perhaps just buy an existing company alltogether. AT&T just sold their
    interest in Dobson, so i'm curious what, if anything, that means...?

    Peace,

    Dan





    --
    Dan W.
    North Texas
    hominid7 "AT" hotmail "DOT" com





    [posted via phonescoop.com]

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?