Re: Maps to Compare AT&T, T-Mobile, US Cellular, & Verizon Mobile Coverage and US State of the Mobile Union 1H 2021

sms <[email protected]> wrote:

> There are now three (at least) maps that let you quickly compare 
> coverage between networks.
> 
> FCC Map: 
> <https://fcc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6c1b2e73d9d749cdb7bc88a0d1bdd25b>
> 
> RootMetrics Map: <https://webcoveragemap.rootmetrics.com/en-US>
> 
> WhistleOut Map: <https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/Coverage>
> 
> US State of the Mobile Union 1H 2021; Carrier performance at national, 
> state, and metro levels: 
> <https://assets.ctfassets.net/ob7bbcsqy5m2/5RH6DcqWKrNjbfGDPkfWkb/677aec385a91e8f1859703242aff739e/RootMetrics_US_State-of-Mobile-Union-1H_2021-FINAL.pdf>
> 
> The coverage maps and analysis confirm my own experiences. Over the 
> years I've had cellular service from many different carriers: GTE 
> Mobilnet, Cellular One, AT&T (old), Pac Bell Wireless, Cingular, AT&T 
> (new), T-Mobile, Verizon, and several MVNOs or carrier-owned prepaid 
> services: Page Plus (Verizon), Consumer Cellular (AT&T), Cricket (AT&T), 
> and Total Wireless (Verizon).
> 
> Pac Bell Wireless was by far the worst. It was the first GSM network in 
> my area, and operated at 1900 MHz so in-building coverage was worse than 
> networks using 850 MHz bands. They offered very attractive pricing when 
> they launched, but were over-subscribed and unable to provide sufficient 
> capacity. Pac Bell Wireless was acquired by Cingular when SBC acquired 
> Pacific Bell, then sold to T-Mobile when Cingular bought AT&T.
> 
> T-Mobile was not good because of coverage issues in the western U.S., 
> and the maps and the Rootmetrics report confirm that these coverage 
> issues still exist outside of urban areas.
> 
> Consumer Cellular and Cricket, both on AT&T worked fine but Consumer 
> Cellular, at the time, had no data plans with a sufficient amount of 
> data for family plans. Now Consumer Cellular is very expensive for plans 
> with sufficient quantities of data, plus they now limit the number of 
> lines on an account to only three.
> 
> Cricket worked fine but at the time did not offer hotspot, and also they 
> throttled data to 8Mb/s. Cricket now offers unlimited, unthrottled, 
> data, and includes 15GB of hotspot data per line, but the price has gone 
> up to $33 per line on a four line plan (they originally offered 5 lines 
> for $100, ($20 per line)).
> 
> Iā€™m currently using Total Wireless with 100GB of shared data per month 
> on four lines, with 10GB of hotspot data per line, for a little under 
> $100 per month including taxes and fees. Downsides of Total Wireless are 
> a) no international roaming, not even to Canada and Mexico, b) no eSIM 
> support (most MVNOs lack eSIM support), and c) no Apple Watch support 
> (which requires eSIM support). Verizon is in the process of trying to 
> buy all the AmĆ©rica MĆ³vil brands in the U.S., including Total Wireless 
> <https://www.lightreading.com/ossbsscx/verizon-to-broaden-out-prepaid-offerings/d/d-id/772053>.

Those coverage maps are highly overzealous.  If they manage to get some
peak level anywhere within, say, a square mile, that's the coverage they
show for all of that area.  However, if you are in dip in geography,
along a river but the tower is atop a bluff on the other side, have
buildings or even lots of trees between you and the tower, you get
little or no signal.  So, in that great coverage area claimed by the
carriers, it is not consistent coverage throughout that area.

I had an app (can't remember its name) that stayed loaded in background
and would poll the signal strength between your phone and to whatever
tower it was currently connected.  It didn't just show the current
signal strength, but recorded it as you moved around.  It let you map
out what was the actual signal strength in the areas you travelled.  All
the carrier maps said I was in a red/excellent spot, but I knew better
due to the low signal strength I got, and the mapping app also showed
signal strength fell badly within a couple hundred feet around my house.
As I recall, the map data got uploaded and coalesced with that from
other users to provide a real map of coverage instead of relying on what
the carriers professed and were severely overgenerous in their ratings.

You can use some network apps, like Network Cell Info, to tell you what
is your current signal strength from the tower you are currently
connected along with other info, like the direction of the tower, and
its location on a map.  However, it just measures.  It doesn't record a
history of polling whatever tower you are connected for wherever you are
at the time (i.e., mapping signal strength).  I think the signal mapping
app that I used before was OpenSignal available at:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.staircase3.opensignal

I don't remember why I uninstall it, but I don't have it now.  I might
re-trial it again.  Ooh, I just checked my Apps Drawer, and OpenSignal
is still installed.  I have apps grouped together by function, so I'm
surprised OpenSignal wasn't in the Phone Tools folder.  It is now.  Yep,
their map shows I'm in a dead spot despite all the carriers showing I'm
in a red zone (high signal strength).  LIARS!

Because this app polls for what is your signal strength several times
per day (100 times) to record as you move around, it has to remain
loaded to do that function.  The data recording function requires you to
give permission for OpenSignal to upload the data, so they can comprise
a coverage map by multiple users of their app.

I think why I stopped using the app was because there just are not
enough users using the app.  Unless someone has the app, leaves it
running as they move around, and has data collection enabled in the app,
nothing gets recorded for that area.  I found several areas where there
too few or no users in an area, or didn't travel to an area, to provide
enough data to compile a coverage map.  Just because their map shows
poor or no coverage might not be due to the carriers, but to a lack of
participants collected the signal strength data.  Community driven data
collection isn't accurate unless there's sufficient community sending in
the data.