PCMag Crowns AT&T Fastest Mobile Network Overall
Snore
With only 30 cities and 6 rural areas tested, I'd say this test is rather pointless. Speeds alone in the major cities, sure, but only 6 rural areas & they say the "rural speeds and coverage have improved"?? I'd like to see a couple hundred rural cities.
While I don't live extremely rural, I do live in the Eastern Washington/Northern Idaho region and many of our towns, rural especially, in the inland northwest aren't even covered by native AT&T. T-mobile and Verizon are the best providers in this area yet with a "national article" like this, one might be led to believe that AT&T is a great choice based on speeds alone, however, those speeds are very limited in these northern states due to lack of coverage.
While I don't live extremely rural, I do live in the Eastern Washington/Northern Idaho region and many of our towns, rural especially, in the inland northwest aren't even covered by native AT&T. T-mobile and Verizon are the best providers in this area yet with a "national article" like this, one might be led to believe that AT&T is a great choice based on speeds alone, however, those speeds are very limited in these northern states due to lack of coverage.
...
Not to mention, basic coverage (i.e., talk & text) isn’t as good as Verizon or Sprint. Everyone seems to have forgotten why we all bought cellphones in the first place: to be able to make emergency calls in the middle of nowhere.
...
That is now what is failed to be addresed because data coverage is being so obsessed over. Basic network coverage should be prioritized then the corresponding data.
Plenty of instances where I needed to make a call and there was no service even with the big two carriers.
What good is LTE when there is no network service????
Plenty of instances where I needed to make a call and there was no service even with the big two carriers.
What good is LTE when there is no network service????
...
This forum is closed.
