6 ms·
San Francisco, both AT&T and Verizon. It's terrible here.
by jblow 12y ago
San Francisco, both AT&T and Verizon. It's terrible here.
- gojomo 12y agoWith T-Mobile LTE in San Francisco, I get 20Mbps+ in a lot of locations, including about half my residence. (Unfortunately there are also a bunch of very-weak spots with low bandwidth and multi-second pings, and far more dead zones along highways in rural areas.)
- bicknergseng 12y agoAlso super happy with T-Mobile's speed- it's faster (bandwidth-wise) than my stupid U-verse. But the whole text message issue they have is driving me nuts to the point that I'll probably switch to another carrier with less available bandwidth just to get sms that works.
- gojomo 12y agoWhat's the SMS issue?
- r00fus 12y agoRural and T-Mobile just don't get along right now. A year ago, the entire I-5 corridor as I approached Oregon and through crater lake was invisible for data or calls (with a small band of I am, however, hopeful that T-Mobile has this in their sights [1]. They have done more to improve mobile user experience in the past 2 years than the rest of the networks for the past 10.
- kalleboo 12y agoSan Francisco has notoriously bad infrastructure due to all the NIMBYs blocking any kind of development. I don't think it's very representative.
- arjie 12y agoJust tested my T-mobile. 8 Mbps down, 9 Mbps up one block from 1 Post Plaza.
- cdysthe 12y agoI've got 15 down and 10 up in Rockport, MA