XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android   
   From: nospam@nospam.invalid   
      
   In article , JF Mezei   
    wrote:   
      
   >   
   > > nope. one of my phones is on t-mobile and i know quite well what their   
   > > coverage is and how it's changed over the years.   
   >   
   > And what percehtage of their alleged coverage area in all fo continental   
   > USA have you walked through to verifty their coverage?   
      
   enough areas to see that it's improved over the years.   
      
      
   > > sprint and verizon also bled customers. once it was possible to   
   > > jailbreak/unlock an iphone, t-mobile started supporting it.   
   >   
   > Until Apple added 3G on 1700, a jailbroken or unlocked iPhone would only   
   > get 2G on T-Mobile since the only common frequency was 2G on 1900.   
   > Uploading a picture to post on Twitter would time out because Twitter   
   > servers never assumed it could take so long to upload a picture.   
      
   i used to use an iphone 3g on t-mobile. cellular was slow and coverage   
   was somewhat spotty, but wifi was fast and most of the time i was on   
   wifi. phone calls and texting was unaffected by it being non-aws.   
      
   > > in any event, what matters is t-mobile's coverage *today*, not what it   
   > > used to be ten year ago.   
   >   
   > On the surface, a perfectly correct statement.   
      
   more than just the surface.   
      
   > But today's coverage has   
   > been impacted by T-Mobile's history.  So it is wrong to ignore that   
   > hostiry because as a newbie carrier, it stated with urban coverage in a   
   > limited number of cities, and going from that to being considered a   
   > nationwide carrier takes a long time and a lot of investment. And   
   > T-Mobile hasn't had the time to do that yet.   
      
   except they did do that.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)