iPhone/Smartphone stuff

[Heather Brodeur]

Ben Scott wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Labitt, Bruce
> <labittb1 at tycoelectronics.com> wrote:
>> If you are considering gsm networks, look at t-mobile.  Cheaper than
>> at&t (at least for what I need).
> 
>   This is something I don't understand.  A friend of mine gets his
> mobile phone through work.  It's some kind of BlackBerry.  His
> employer switched from AT&T to T-Mobile.  They're both GSM carriers,
> so I expected them to be about the same.  Yet he says he gets
> significantly worse coverage with T-Mobile than with AT&T.  Anyone
> know why that might be?  Something to do with roaming, perhaps?

Would it be too simplistic to say "you get what you pay for?" 
T-Mobile's focus is on urban areas, outside of that you're taking your 
chances.  AT&T has access to more towers, and therefore better coverage 
(I don't know if it's a matter of T-Mobile being unwilling to pay to 
access the towers or AT&T being unwilling to share.  I have been in 
several places with my AT&T phone with strong signal, standing next to 
my friend who's T-Mobile phone showed "SOS only."  The most memorable 
was a mile or two outside of Lake George village, one mile away from I-87.

As of a year ago, AT&T's coverage maps varied with which type of plan 
you had, so be careful when looking at coverage maps to be sure you have 
the right one.  When we switched from Verizon to AT&T last year, we got 
the AT&T phones on new numbers and compared signal strength for several 
weeks (we had a month to return the phones if we were unsatisfied). 
Coverage was comparable everywhere we went, which included going up 
RT89, across Vermont on RT4.  Either both carriers had coverage, or 
neither.  YMMV

-Heather