Verizon coverage map - fact or fiction?

My wife and I have been out of contract with Verizon for some time.  We are currently shopping for a phone and a tablet.
One of our biggest concerns is signal reception: We head to a remote spot in eastern Washington state every weekend.  Our frustration with cell reception there has led us to installing a yagi antenna and Wilson signal booster.  This combination (with phone placed on the boosters "wire" antenna) allows us to go from zero signal to 1 bar voice service, and occasional 1G data.  These results are from an older HTC and Samsung smartphone.  Visitors with iPhones get mixed results.
The Verizon coverage map shows extended Digital Voice service at our exact location.  It also shows solid 3G coverage bordering 4G/lte at the same location. 
Sooo, my first question is:  What is the general concensus of the Verizon coverage map for rural locations?  It is marketing blather or does somebody actually test random spots and extrapolate a best guess for points in between?  Certainly Verizon's claims appear lame at our location.
My second question is:  From the set of available Verizon offerings right now, I had three phone options I liked; LG 3, Samsung S5, and Motorola MotoX (gen 2).  I have not been able to find any conclusive review of reception/antenna quality on these phones.  Can anybody point me at something that would help me decide between them?
Cheers

gwandsh wrote:
The Verizon coverage map shows extended Digital Voice service at our exact location.  It also shows solid 3G coverage bordering 4G/lte at the same location.
Sooo, my first question is:  What is the general concensus of the Verizon coverage map for rural locations?  It is marketing blather or does somebody actually test random spots and extrapolate a best guess for points in between?  Certainly Verizon's claims appear lame at our location.
A cell tower is capable of sending a signal a certain distance and that is largely what the coverage maps are based upon. With that said, there are many factors which will lower the coverage footprint of any single tower which are listed as a disclaimer on Verizon's coverage map.
"These Coverage Locator maps depict predicted and approximate wireless coverage. The coverage areas shown do not guarantee service availability, and may include locations with limited or no coverage. Even within a coverage area, there are many factors, including customer’s equipment, terrain, proximity to buildings, foliage, and weather that may impact service. Some of the Coverage Areas include networks run by other carriers, the coverage depicted is based on their information and public sources, and we cannot ensure its accuracy."
You say you are in an area of "extended Digital Voice". These are normally areas reception on networks run by other providers, with information about coverage provided by said provider. IF phone coverage is important to you, you should find a provider with better coverage in the area. If there are no providers which can do so, get a landline or stay away from those areas.
Cellular service is not and never has been advertised as an available service for all areas. The technology isn't currently capable of doing so. Cellular is a line of site technology with rises and falls in surface topography being major factors which would lead to less than ideal reception(if any) in any given location. People who regularly frequent areas with limited reception must learn to live without service or find another method to get it.

Similar Messages

  • Verizon Coverage Map

    Much of west Kentucky has been upgraded to 4G LTE, but nothing has changed on the map in nearly a month. In fact, the map will say 7/22 updated, then 6/27, etc. Not a big deal by any means. But, I was curious where the new areas were exactly. For a while, they were updating the map real good, but it's been weird for the last month. What's up VZW? Just curious.

    Take note, as of today, their 6/27/2013 map date. Out of date and not representative of what coverage is out there in this area. Again, just curious as to why all of the sudden. It was updated very well prior to late June.

  • Went with Verizon because the rep and Verizon's coverage map showed strong 4G LTE signal at my address. Got home and discovered that the signal is nowhere near what I was shown. People have said that they contacted Verizon and received signal boosters and

    Went with Verizon because the rep and Verizon's coverage map showed strong 4G LTE signal at my address. Got home and discovered that the signal is nowhere near what I was shown. People have said that they contacted Verizon and received signal boosters and I was wondering if anyone had knowledge of this?

        jslack73,
    Thank you so much for those details. I do see that the area should have pretty good coverage. Since you have been at home have you been able to remove the sim card for a good 10-15 seconds http://vz.to/1ys6Uj0? Also, please try resetting the network settings on the phone. You can do that by going into Settings, General, Reset, and Reset Network Settings. After this is complete you would need to re-add in your wi-fi passwords. Please keep us posted.
    KevinR_VZW
    Follow us on Twitter @VZWSupport

  • Differences display Macbook versus Macbook Pro - fact or fiction?

    "There is a substantial difference between the quality of the display of the Macbook and the quality of the display of the Macbook Pro (both: late 2008)."
    Is this fact or fiction?
    Please explain your answer as much as you can

    nba123 wrote:
    whatever I have will be with me for the next 4-5 years...should I go with the non-retina because of this?
    It doesn't directly follow that you should limit yourself to the non-Retina, because it depends on how much storage you need. If the amount you need in the next 5 years is within the Retina storage amounts you can afford, then of course the Retina would work fine. Now, to work out what you would need in the next 5 years...
    nba123 wrote:
    Also do you think I will need 256gb or 500gb? which is more likely for me?
    We can't guess that for you, because it depends on your individual storage habits. You said you would need to store "music, pictures and word/powerpoint documents." You would need to start with what you currently store, and then have an idea of how fast you accumulate them. The numbers can vary widely depending on how fast you grow your music and photo collections, and the sizes of the files. For example, a person using a DSLR camera shooting 24-megapixel raw files will have a photo collection that grows in size much faster than someone who only stores JPEG files from a camera phone.
    I wouldn't worry about Word or PowerPoint files as those tend to be quite small. What consumes disk space the fastest is digital media: Music, photos, and videos. Especially HD videos. You can store maybe 100 Word files in the space taken up by a single music CD. A single 5-minute HD video can use up the same space as over 1000 Word files.
    Also, you will want to leave at least 50GB unused so that the system has enough room to manage temporary files like virtual memory and temp files, some of which can be rather large. If after you run the numbers you will need over 200GB or so, then you should be looking at the 500GB to avoid space issues. For most users, 256GB of total disk space seems to be enough though.

  • Order of loading Master Data - Fact or Fiction

    I understand that for loading Master Data for InfoCube 0FIAA_C01 (or any other) you should load starting from the lowest level.
    That means for every characteristic in the cube you have to check and see if any of the InfoObjects have Master Data attributes, and if any of those attributes have attributes, and so on. This quickly becomes a multi-level structure.
    Part of the tree structure for 0FIAA_C01 would look like:
    0FIAA_C01                                     
    ..........0COMP_CODE                              
    ....................0CHRT_ACCTS                           
    ....................0C_CTR_AREA                             
    ..........0ASSET_AFAB                                
    ..........0ASSET                              
    ....................0ACTTYPE                        
    ....................0BUS_AREA 
    <snip>
    So does that mean that 0bus_area should be loaded first before 0asset?
    Is this fact or fiction?
    If its a fact I am wondering what tools SAP has for determining the order of loading Master Data.
    Discussion points and tools for facts awarded!
    Mike
    Edited by: Michael Hill on Feb 12, 2008 4:52 PM

    Hi,
    My master data loads are largely in the area of HR.
    The only order I follow while loading master data is for a particular infoobject with regard to text, attributes and hierarchy - The order being text>>attributes >>hirerachy.  Frankly, I have not checked doing it otherwise.
    Across different master data infoobjects I see no need to have any order atleast in HR.  Generally speaking a master data object has data that has an independant existence as extracted from R/3 or other sources and not derived from any other master data object in BW.
    Master data as its name implies should not have referential integrity checks with other master data. 
    It would be good to know if someone has real experience to the contrary.
    Mathew.

  • IPhone No Service?  But it says different on Coverage Map...

    What's Up,
    So, I recently made the big switch to at&t from T-Mobile to get the exciting iPhone 3G.
    I made sure that before I got the at&t service that I could get service in my new area, using the coverage map on the att.com website. It showed the strongest color of orange, and said that I would have the best signal...
    So, I take the phone home that day and I have absolutely no coverage. I wouldn't say it's completely dead, because in little spots in my home I can get about 1 to 2 bars, but those don't do any good because the phone call is just choppy.
    So, what gives? How is that possible to not have coverage when the map says I have the strongest of it all?
    Is there some preference or parameter in my iPhone I should tweak?
    Open to all suggestions.
    Thank you.

    I'm in the same boat... and I live 3-miles from closest 3G tower. If your referring to 3G coverage... your signal strength will be totally dependent on the number of user's on a particular tower? If the towers bandwidth is full, you will be sent to the next closet tower... EDGE not much better.
    I have endured 3G and EDGE signal strength (you can't go by the number of bars on your phone) ranging from No Svc to being max'd out. On avg, for what its worth, my 3G at home hangs around 2-3 bars and EDGE will be 2-5 bars. At midnight and on rare occasions I will see my 3G max out... bottom line, AT&T needs to bolster their bandwidth capabilities

  • Any chance you will EVER offer actual Verizon coverage in West Central Illinois?

    I live less than an hour north of Downtown St. Louis in west central Illinois and have been a loyal Verizon customer since the Ameritech days... (over 20 years.  We moved here knowing that "big red" would take care of us and it is frustrating to not be able to get the full benefit of my smart phone since there is absolutely NO Verizon coverage in our area and the best data we can hope for is 1x extended coverage for about a 30 mile radius.  I wish Verizon were more forthcoming about their expansion plans, or lack of plans so I could decide what to do accordingly.

    If there isn't coverage within 30 miles of you then it will probably be  a LONG time if ever before you get coverage as it make sense for Verizon to cover the areas nearest current coverage first. You could check local zoning records and see if Verizon has applied for any permits. If not then it's probably best to go with another carrier since it could take a year or even 2 to build a tower once a permit is applied for.

  • Slow burn vs Fast burn (which is better quality) fact or fiction

    Ok again I would like to know the official answer to this question because from the response last time, I'm not really confidence with the answer.
    IS IT FACT THAT IF YOU USE WAV BURNER AND BURN AT A SLOWER SPEED COMPARED TO FASTER SPEED THE QUALITY BECOMES BETTER BY PROOF?
    IF THIS FACT OR FICTION.
    SOMEONE PLEASE PROVIDE SOME LONG YEARS EXPERIENCE PROOF.

    Sorry, can't wait until someone clocks what I've said, 'cos I might be going out soon, so thought I'd write it up first...
    The difference between the HHB and the Mac burner is... nothing much. The actual tray and laser workings are probably the same in both units. The extra dosh for the HHB covers the casing, functionality and the convertors - it's basically a hardware version of WaveBurner, and we all know hardware versions cost more than software versions.
    Therefore, in my alleged test there should only be one of the four that shows any difference, and that's the real time recording via analogue. The other three, all remaining in the digital domain, irrespective of speed, should give the same results, because data is encoded in the same way, no matter how you do it. It would be interesting to see if there is any difference, but I doubt the equipment I've got would be sensitive enough to monitor it (or would allow me to zoom in and see the difference enough to post here). With that in mind, the human ear isn't going to hear it.
    The only REAL difference the speed option gives you is reliability of burning. The faster you get, the more prone it is of making an error in the burning process, but this can sometimes come down to the quality of the disc itself. Not all discs are the same, as I guess most people have realised to their horror at some point (data).
    Just a final note. I'm working with a voice-over artist for TV and radio, and the stations are happy to receive the files as MP3's via email. Who'd have thought that would happen when MP3 came out?!? Just goes to show people are putting a perspective on the quality standard for final use. But I'm still sending AIFF files though, MP3 makes me shudder as an original! And here we are worrying about CD quality...

  • Reporting poor to no Verizon coverage

    Since Verizon makes it extremely difficult to report poor coverage, I figured I would just place the area here in hopes of an agent reading and reporting the problem.
    There is little to no Verizon coverage of all types (4g/3g/2g) over pretty much the entire campus of the University of California, Riverside, and yes, including outside of classrooms/buildings.  The address of this campus is located at 900 University Ave, Riverside, CA 92507.  There are some spots on campus where there is absolutely zero coverage, including voice calls.  It seems that this is known by Verizon, as I have seen coverage problem reports dating back to 2009 regarding this area in these forums.  Certainly Verizon can do something to remedy this.  It would be nice to actually be able to USE my phone outside of the wifi connections within the buildings.  And no, my Samsung Galaxy S3 is not the problem, as it works perfectly fine in areas outside of the campus "dead zone".
    Let's go Verizon.  You have the highest rated customer satisfaction of any other mobile phone provider.  Let's keep it that way and fix densely populated area dead zones.

    Plopping a tower somewhere is not an easy task anymore with the NIMBY crowd. It can takes years, Not one or two, but many years and sometimes the companies just have to chalk it up as a lost cause.
    It Could be zoning issues there, or any number of issues that precludes VZW from adding more service towers. Even the Pres of the school could be supported heavily by ATT or another cell company and they simply refuse to allow VZW to play

  • I do not get the signal that is advertised or stated by your coverage maps, or sales people.  I am getting sick and tired of the Verizon run-around.  My next step is to submit a formal complaint to the FCC and my state Better Business Bureau.  I will also

    Verizon service is rapidly declining.  In addition, the provided service is not as advertised.  This is fraud by any standard.

    They have what is called heat maps which give a reasonable indication of QOS quality of service. I am also beset by reception problems. well I have bad news for you any type of wireless service is predicated of "best effort" meaning they try best to deliver service to as many paid subscribers in service area. They figure their statistics based of how many service workers great  ok and lastly outliers like me and you. You raise a case to state regulator or local that you feel your community has been targeted by bias in heat maps & why it should be fixed. It might work or might not. A better effort is to take your case to FCC. If you can prove there is favoritism in delivery of service to your community then they will deal with verizon but the FCC isn't going to pay much attention if your a crank and keep pestering them . My angle has been to keep plugging away at it explain business reasons of why they need to extend service but being respectful to Verizon. Keeping pressure on them maybe even helping them if local community is biased against adding cell tower or other Red tape . Give them benefit of doubt too they may be hampered by community or local state justification that just wont grant any service improvements.

  • Why does Verizon hide the fact on their network an iPhone cannot deliver simultaneous voice and data

    For me the breaking point was when the local Corporate Store clerk lied to be about their return policy.  He even documented the information he gave me and that didn't matter to management or corporate.  I made a decision to switch to the iPhone and was specifically told I had 30 days to evaluate weather I could make the transition from android to iOS.  If I couldn’t for any reason, I could just return the phone and pay the $35 restocking fee and we were then free to choose from one of the many androids.
    After weeks of challenges and countless hours spent with first tier then second tier then a product specialist we all came to the documented conclusion that the iPhone, on Verizons network could not support data and voice at the same time... Every other smart phone on Verizons network could and always has... the IPhone on ATT's network can support both voice and data at once... but Not On Verizons network...
    Each tech I spoke with seemed shocked and in utter disbelief that this could be so. They blamed ATT for harboring special privileges hold over from their exclusive relationship with Apple.  Which is not true.  Then they blamed Apple for delivering handicapped phones to Verizon on purpose. Well, with an Apple Product Manager on the phone listening in on a Verizon Tech giving me this among other excuses why I could not be on the phone and using google at the same time,  the Apple Rep finally jumped in and very politely cleared up any miss information the Verizon tier 2 support rep was fumbling out.
    So after I had done everything in my power to make the phone work the way I had understood it would.  And had every reason to believe it would.  As did every Verizon rep I spoke with at first until they did a little research and found Verizon had deliberately been hiding this fact from customers.  So I conceded to go back to the Android world for now and let Verizon sort out this glaring deficit hopefully in the near future…  Though every support rep concluded that there was no mention of this being fixed or even a problem so not to hold my breath…
    I couldn’t have been more shocked or infuriated when I went to exchange the “still in the plastic mint condition iPhone” I was told I had to have brought it back in the first 14 days… I pleaded and argued, even directed the manager to the notes entered in verizon’s own support documentation regarding my case and he said “well I see here where you were told that but that rep was wrong”.   That may be so but I based my entire testing and evaluation timeline based on the dates the rep clearly and admittedly told me!   The store manager said there was nothing he could do. 
    Now I mentioned I’m a Network Solutions Provider and being able to be on the phone doing a support call and using my cellular internet at the same time are an absolute must for me to be able to preform my job.  Every Verizon smart phone I have ever owned had been able to do this.  Now I am told I am STUCK in a two year contract with an inadequate  device that I cannot exchange and therefore functionally useless to me. 
    Verizon corporate nor the store manager cared one bit about my position.  They stood behind a little register tape that by signing my credit card receipt I now owed them two more years of my life and now they could care less weather I had a functioning solution or that I had been a loyal customer for over 17 years. Or that I had brought entire small business offices to them for cell services. Just stood there and held a copy of my receipt and said, well  you signed it so here is what it will cost ya to get out of it! 
    He got out a calculator and started running numbers for what I would have to pay to fix this situation… What I would have to pay to even leave Verizon and go get cell service from someone else.  It felt dirty … seedy… like being at some 3rd world used car lot where some shyster had gotten someone wrapped up in a contract and now was going to squeeze the life out of a customer even though they couldn’t’ even deliver the service they implied you were going to get in the first place. 
    In 30 years of being a small business owner I have never encountered an organization that had less integrity or more unscrupulous business practices… 
    I see post after post of Verizon  Customer Support  reps answering threads… funny I haven’t found one where a user honestly thanks the rep for actually helping them out…….  Please Verizon Customer Support, show me you actually can look at a situation and see an equitable solution where a Customer and the Share Holders can both win…..

    Well if this information was as ubiquitous on the web as you suggest, I am puzzled why it took three weeks of troubleshooting with many levels of Verizon support before we collectively concluded this was the situation...
    Regarding Reading what I sign... Thanks for that advice though in this situation I was handed a stylus and told to sign a Signature Pad at the check out counter... ONLY AFTER I signed (for the purchase only)  was I presented with this return policy conveniently nested in a 3 foot long reciept consisting of paragraphs of Helvitica 6 type set info...   I made the assumption that the sales person could correctly  answer a direct question regarding the policy I  inadvertently signed for when authorizing the credit card charge...   Even more concerning is that when by my actions and constant communications with Verizon, my intent was clearly based on the information I had gotten from the sales rep.  and if I was given misinformation it would seem Verizon could show some integrity and support the situation with some equitable solution rather than hiding behind contracts collected from sales staff who do not tell customers the truth..... 
    >> Minor edit <<
    Message was edited by: Verizon Moderator

  • Error while mapping fact table to LOWEST LEVEL

    Hi
    While Iam mapping my fact table using cwm2_olap_table_map, map_facttbl_levelkey , Iam mentioning it has the lowest level of dimension table , it is throwing error . Will it only work for ET not for LOWEST LEVEL?. Infact Iam not storing the embedded total any where in my fact tables .
    Can anyone help me in mapping the lowest level of dimension to fact table????

    Hi
    Are you sure you are using the correct mapping tools. It sounds as if you have a relational schema which reauires a CWM mapping procedure? To map a relational schema it is best to use OEM which has wizards to guide you through the mapping process.
    CWM2 metadata is used to map 9iR2 Analytical Workspace objects. These typically involve fully summarised variables within the AW.
    Hope this helps
    Keith Laker
    Product Manager
    Oracle Business Intelligence Beans

  • Mapping facts/cubes and dimensions

    I am currently trialling OWB 9.0.3 before we decide whether to use it to build a data warehouse.
    I have been impressed so far and we will probably make a decision soon.
    One thing I am not sure how to do is mapping a fact/cube with foreign keys to dimensions.
    I have been doing this by creating a join which joins each row of the fact/cube with the corresponding row in the dimension, but whilst on the oracle warehouse builder: implementation course the tutor said you wouldn't normally do it this way.
    Anyway if you can give me an idea of how you join the dimensions to the fact/cube I would be grateful
    Thanks
    Nina

    Nina,
    In the star schema implementation, cubes are joined to the lowest level of each dimension. OWB lets you define foreign keys to each dimension when you create or edit your cube.
    If you'd like to see a short (10 minutes) online demo on this, it's called "Dimensional Design" http://otn.oracle.com/products/warehouse/htdocs/OTN_demo.html
    Last point, I am surprised you are trying OWB 9.0.3 - this is a very old (July 2002) release. Please download the latest OWB 9.2 from http://otn.oracle.com/software/products/warehouse/index.html
    Nikolai

  • Verizon coverage

    I was an Alltel customer for over 5 years and had no problem with reception where I live.  I went with Alltel because they have the best coverage in Wisconsin and in my 54180 zip code area.  After Verizon acquired Alltel I thought the service would get better.  Instead it is worse.  I have dropped calls all the time, 25% of my text message time out, and calls come to my phone without ringing and go to voicemail.  How can this be? 

    Looking at your PRL and SID, you must no longer have an Alltel account.
    What I would do is call and ask for the Hybrid PRL to be pushed through. If the area has not been combined yet, the hybrid PRL would look for Alltel towers first and then the Verizon towers 2nd.Right now it is the opposite (VZW 1st, Alltel 2nd)
    If not any better, you can call in and have the PRL switched back.

  • Verizon Coverage Locator hasn't worked for 3+ weeks

    Anyone know what's up with the coverage locator?  If you trying to enter an address, pan, zoom or switch coverage types, absolutely nothing happens.  It's been like this for over three weeks now.
    I travel and work full-time and rely on that map to direct me to where I may have coverage (even if the coverage is greatly exaggerated, at least I know which places to avoid for sure!). I've had friends check as well, so it's not just my browsers.  You would think someone would have noticed this and fixed it by now.

    Thank you. I was just accused of being like bad rep at VZW, so this is nice to see! hahahahaha
    Anyways, the locator used to work with Chrome, so I am not sure what has happened.

Maybe you are looking for