On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 18:00:11 -0800, sms wrote:

Those maps don't really show the coverage holes, nor are they
up-to-date. I.e. Verizon just put in a tower right next to Cupertino
City Hall (a fake tree) that has improved coverage.

I completly understand that the data I showed (which implied that the
coverage was about the same) could be bad data.

But you have to realize I've heard a lot of bs on the net where people who
have one brand think it's better than the other two brands (of anything),
even though they, themselves, have never even tested brand B or C. (It just
happened on the digital photo group, for example, where people said
"preview" was better at X than Paint.NET and then we find out that all
those people who said that had NEVER even used Paint.NET once in their
entire lives).

My point is that anyone who claims that cellular data sucks for one carrier
than the other generally has lousy data points since almost nobody (not
even me) carries three similar phones with them everywhere they go.

So if the OpenSignal coverage maps suck, the question simply becomes where
can we get good trustworthy coverage data for any particular USA area?

But the issue is not in urban and suburban areas, it's outside of those
areas. Vast areas of California with no T-Mobile coverage at all, and a
lot of those places are places that we like to go.

This may or may not be true.
My experience is with Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile, but while I have had all
three (and while I find them about the same in coverage where I live), I
had them sequentially, so the only real comparison was the last day with
the prior carrier and the first day with the next (which isn't all that
scientific).

What we really need is a *reliable* trustworthy coverage map.
Does that exist?

Where can we find it?