AT&T Coverage
People who complain, complain about the quality of coverage and how they will go from full bars to nothing in a second. It's not the number of towers people complain about, it's the quality of the towers.
Sigma1570 said:
Your argument is slightly flawed in that their coverage footprint doesn't cover 99% of the continental United States. It covers 97% of the US population which as we know is usually concentrated in certain areas. The issues we see in my region is that the coverage is fine in populated areas but rural areas and many popular vacation destinations have no coverage especially when you get off the beaten path. That has led many people to go with Verizon who has a larger coverage footprint in my state.
I agree with the 97% figure-- a typo on my part. Here's the thing though: it doesn't really matter WHERE the coverage is if the numbers aren't there to back it up. In other words, we may argue t ...
(continues)
jrfdsf said:
I agree with the 97% figure-- a typo on my part. Here's the thing though: it doesn't really matter WHERE the coverage is if the numbers aren't there to back it up. In other words, we may argue that Verizon covers rural areas better than AT&T, but there is a deficit elsewhere, otherwise Verizon would have the greater numbers. The last time I checked, Verizon is below the 300 million mark. What that means then is that some of the more heavily populated areas take the hit for a Verizon customer.
In fact, in spite of having the largest native network footprint, VZW is actually in third place in terms of overall coverage.
THE COVERAGE BREAKDOWN:
#1. SPRINT (native coverage p ...
(continues)
I cant believe I waited do long to switch.
And who said they were slow in Alabama. 🤣 🤣