4 ms·

Are there any accurate tools out there for comparing networks? I used to have Sprint, but switched to Verizon in 2013 because they had poor coverage in the Twi

Are there any accurate tools out there for comparing networks? I used to have Sprint, but switched to Verizon in 2013 because they had poor coverage in the Twin Cities, and no coverage in outstate Minnesota. Now I want to switch back because of cost, but I'd like to get an accurate idea of the coverage.

rz2k 11y ago
I'm not sure how accurate the data are, but take a look at opensignal.com.
- flyinghamster 11y ago
  Sensorly and CellMapper are also useful (and CellMapper makes an effort to pinpoint towers). Of course, since they use crowdsourced data, they depend on people actually running their respective apps, so the lack of indicated coverage doesn't necessarily mean there's no coverage at a given location.
- MrApathy 11y ago
  Their coverage maps offer a good indication as to what to expect in a general area, but they lack the precision necessary to perform due diligence before making a switch. I work in Manhattan, where I've twice had the misfortune of occupying a cubicle in the exact center of a building. Both T-Mobile and AT&T report full coverage for the entire area, but the many micro dead spots in homes and offices can be a real problem. T-Mobile in particular licenses spectrum that can't penetrate walls as well as some other parts of the spectrum. I'm sure there's a startup for providing user sourced coverage data at a very granular level, though it would be difficult to deal with the constant changes the carriers are making to their networks.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    Do you have a phone that'll use WiFi for cellular? Most office buildings are effectively faraday cages. On T-Mobile, my phone will route SMS and calls from my iPhone over whatever WiFi network I'm on, so network quality in dense areas becomes less of a concern for me (except when I'm mobile; but then, I'm out in the open, so signal quality is better).
  - jcampbell1 11y ago
    T-Mobile has LTE band 12, so if you have a iPhone 6S it may work better now. The 700Mhz frequency is a good addition for T-Mobile, as their biggest problem in my opinion is a lack of coverage when traveling. It also penetrates walls very well.
exhilaration 11y ago
This problem - anxiety about switching to a mobile carrier with unknown coverage - is an opportunity waiting to be exploited. Imagine Sprint or T-Mobile sending someone to your home and walking around with you so that you could see exactly what kind of coverage you'll get with them. The ads practically write themselves: "Here at Sprint we're so confident our network is better that we'll send someone to your house and show you! Call today!"
- criley2 11y ago
  This seems like a good Uber-style model for Sprint to play with. Hiring up thousands of full timers for this purpose might be simply too expensive for a company that hemorrhages money regularly. But what if Sprint had an app where its customers could apply to become Network Advocates and after passing some requirements, could get forwarded requests to demonstrate network and modern device. In return, they'd receive like $10 or a credit on their bill. It could be a way for a savvy young consumer to basically get free Sprint service in exchange for the powerful new advertising.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    http://opensignal.com/ http://opensignal.com/
  - untog 11y ago
    And a potential public relations nightmare. They'd have to thoroughly vet anyone that is going to be walking through someone's front door in their name. Honestly, probably easier to just send a SIM card to people with $5 credit on it.
hibikir 11y ago
The one real option is to ask people that work with you, to see how it all works out for them. For instance, I used to work at a place where all carriers claimed to have good coverage, while in practice, everyone at the office had AT&T: The reason? The building was built in such a way that nobody really had good coverage. What AT&T did was install repeaters INSIDE THE BUILDING, to get a decent connection, and with that, they got easily 2000 subscribers. Similar things can happen with cable too: A lot of people in my hometown rave about Charter's speeds, but in my subdivision, nobody uses them: There is packet loss, outages... so the entire neighborhood ends up with UVerse, which, while far slower and more expensive, it actually works.

rz2k 11y ago

I'm not sure how accurate the data are, but take a look at opensignal.com.

flyinghamster 11y ago
Sensorly and CellMapper are also useful (and CellMapper makes an effort to pinpoint towers). Of course, since they use crowdsourced data, they depend on people actually running their respective apps, so the lack of indicated coverage doesn't necessarily mean there's no coverage at a given location.
MrApathy 11y ago
Their coverage maps offer a good indication as to what to expect in a general area, but they lack the precision necessary to perform due diligence before making a switch. I work in Manhattan, where I've twice had the misfortune of occupying a cubicle in the exact center of a building. Both T-Mobile and AT&T report full coverage for the entire area, but the many micro dead spots in homes and offices can be a real problem. T-Mobile in particular licenses spectrum that can't penetrate walls as well as some other parts of the spectrum. I'm sure there's a startup for providing user sourced coverage data at a very granular level, though it would be difficult to deal with the constant changes the carriers are making to their networks.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  Do you have a phone that'll use WiFi for cellular? Most office buildings are effectively faraday cages. On T-Mobile, my phone will route SMS and calls from my iPhone over whatever WiFi network I'm on, so network quality in dense areas becomes less of a concern for me (except when I'm mobile; but then, I'm out in the open, so signal quality is better).
- jcampbell1 11y ago
  T-Mobile has LTE band 12, so if you have a iPhone 6S it may work better now. The 700Mhz frequency is a good addition for T-Mobile, as their biggest problem in my opinion is a lack of coverage when traveling. It also penetrates walls very well.

exhilaration 11y ago

This problem - anxiety about switching to a mobile carrier with unknown coverage - is an opportunity waiting to be exploited. Imagine Sprint or T-Mobile sending someone to your home and walking around with you so that you could see exactly what kind of coverage you'll get with them. The ads practically write themselves: "Here at Sprint we're so confident our network is better that we'll send someone to your house and show you! Call today!"

criley2 11y ago
This seems like a good Uber-style model for Sprint to play with. Hiring up thousands of full timers for this purpose might be simply too expensive for a company that hemorrhages money regularly. But what if Sprint had an app where its customers could apply to become Network Advocates and after passing some requirements, could get forwarded requests to demonstrate network and modern device. In return, they'd receive like $10 or a credit on their bill. It could be a way for a savvy young consumer to basically get free Sprint service in exchange for the powerful new advertising.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  http://opensignal.com/ http://opensignal.com/
- untog 11y ago
  And a potential public relations nightmare. They'd have to thoroughly vet anyone that is going to be walking through someone's front door in their name. Honestly, probably easier to just send a SIM card to people with $5 credit on it.

hibikir 11y ago

The one real option is to ask people that work with you, to see how it all works out for them. For instance, I used to work at a place where all carriers claimed to have good coverage, while in practice, everyone at the office had AT&T: The reason? The building was built in such a way that nobody really had good coverage. What AT&T did was install repeaters INSIDE THE BUILDING, to get a decent connection, and with that, they got easily 2000 subscribers. Similar things can happen with cable too: A lot of people in my hometown rave about Charter's speeds, but in my subdivision, nobody uses them: There is packet loss, outages... so the entire neighborhood ends up with UVerse, which, while far slower and more expensive, it actually works.