A couple of years ago I got a "free" phone from my long time carrier.
The deal was every month, 1/24th credits would reduce the MSRP by 1/24th.

As long as I stayed on that carrier, the phone would eventually be free.
And so it was. Now it's all mine (and working just fine two years later).

But that phone under that contract was networked locked to that carrier.

After two years and a few months, I called the carrier back to ask if they
could give me the network unlock code. The carrier techs told me that they
automatically unlocked it for me when it went off the two-year contract.

I looked and lo and behold, it is network unlocked automatically.

Settings + Connections + More connection settings + Network unlock +
Network lock status = unlocked
"Your phone can be used with any compatible service provider."

This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier also
automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring it to zero.

Wolf Greenblatt wrote:

>A couple of years ago I got a "free" phone from my long time carrier.
>The deal was every month, 1/24th credits would reduce the MSRP by
>1/24th.
>
>As long as I stayed on that carrier, the phone would eventually be
>free. And so it was. Now it's all mine (and working just fine two
>years later).
>
>But that phone under that contract was networked locked to that
>carrier.
>
>After two years and a few months, I called the carrier back to ask if
>they could give me the network unlock code. The carrier techs told me
>that they automatically unlocked it for me when it went off the
>two-year contract.
>
>I looked and lo and behold, it is network unlocked automatically.
>
>Settings + Connections + More connection settings + Network unlock +
>Network lock status = unlocked
>"Your phone can be used with any compatible service provider."
>
>This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier
>also automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring
>it to zero.

On my iPhone 14 with T-Mobile it shows under Settings - General - About
- Carrier Lock.

My phone is locked because it's still being paid for, but my wife's
iPhone 12 was unlocked automatically.

On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 17:53:32 -0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote:

>>This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier
>>also automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring
>>it to zero.
>
> On my iPhone 14 with T-Mobile it shows under Settings - General - About
> - Carrier Lock.
>
> My phone is locked because it's still being paid for, but my wife's
> iPhone 12 was unlocked automatically.

Thanks. Mine was T-Mobile also. It's nice that they automatically unlock.
I wonder if the other two main USA carriers also automatically unlock too?

Am 14.07.23 um 20:12 schrieb Wolf Greenblatt:
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 17:53:32 -0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote:
>
>>> This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier
>>> also automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring
>>> it to zero.
>>
>> On my iPhone 14 with T-Mobile it shows under Settings - General - About
>> - Carrier Lock.
>>
>> My phone is locked because it's still being paid for, but my wife's
>> iPhone 12 was unlocked automatically.
>
> Thanks. Mine was T-Mobile also. It's nice that they automatically unlock.
> I wonder if the other two main USA carriers also automatically unlock too?

They will just because of the enormous hassle to do it individually.

--
Ut sementem feceris, ita metes (Cicero)

On 7/14/23 1:31 PM, Wolf Greenblatt wrote:
> A couple of years ago I got a "free" phone from my long time carrier.
> The deal was every month, 1/24th credits would reduce the MSRP by 1/24th.
>
> As long as I stayed on that carrier, the phone would eventually be free.
> And so it was. Now it's all mine (and working just fine two years later).
>
> But that phone under that contract was networked locked to that carrier.
>
> After two years and a few months, I called the carrier back to ask if they
> could give me the network unlock code. The carrier techs told me that they
> automatically unlocked it for me when it went off the two-year contract.
>
> I looked and lo and behold, it is network unlocked automatically.
>
> Settings + Connections + More connection settings + Network unlock +
> Network lock status = unlocked
> "Your phone can be used with any compatible service provider."
>
> This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier also
> automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring it to zero.

I buy my phones outright from my MVNO carrier-- Tracfone, which has been
owned by Verizon for a year or two.

Phones are locked to TF for 60 days of use at which time, they
automatically unlock with no initiation or input required from the customer.

SETTINGS Screen:
Day 59: "SIM locked to Tracfone"
Day 60: "No SIM restrictions"

--
I know things and I fix stuff

On 7/14/2023 10:53 AM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> On my iPhone 14 with T-Mobile it shows under Settings - General - About
> - Carrier Lock.
>
> My phone is locked because it's still being paid for, but my wife's
> iPhone 12 was unlocked automatically.

On Verizon-owned carriers, including Tracfone brands, the phones are
unlocked, paid-off or not, after 60 days. This is because of an
agreement between the FCC and Verizon. It used to be zero days but
Verizon got approval to change it to 60 because when they were selling
unlocked phones there was an issue with phones being stolen from stores
and warehouses.

However Verizon is a little shady with these unlocked phones, other than
iPhones and Pixels, and won't allow the unlocked phones to be activated
on their Visible service, though apparently they do work on Verizon
postpaid service.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On 7/14/2023 11:39 AM, Wade Garrett wrote:

<snip>

> I buy my phones outright from my MVNO carrier-- Tracfone, which has been
> owned by Verizon for a year or two.
>
> Phones are locked to TF for 60 days of use at which time, they
> automatically unlock with no initiation or input required from the
> customer.

One of the benefits of Verizon buying Tracfone was that Tracfone became
subject to the same unlocking requirements as Verizon. My iPhone Xr took
a year to be unlocked. My iPhone 11 took only 60 days.

Verizon has significantly worsened Tracfone's Total Wireless for new
customers, in terms of price. In November 2024 they could cancel the
plans of customers that were grandfathered in to the old plans. However
they do now offer Canada and Mexico roaming to those on the new plans.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On 2023-07-14 19:31, Wolf Greenblatt wrote:
> This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier also
> automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring it to zero.

I got a free phone recently, and they told me that it is never locked.
This is normal in Spain. It is a dual sim model, it would be absurd to
not be able to plug in a second sim from the start.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 7/14/2023 1:04 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2023-07-14 19:31, Wolf Greenblatt wrote:
>> This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier also
>> automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring it to
>> zero.
>
> I got a free phone recently, and they told me that it is never locked.
> This is normal in Spain. It is a dual sim model, it would be absurd to
> not be able to plug in a second sim from the start.

In the U.S., on AT&T and T-Mobile, you get bill credits every month that
offset the cost. If you leave before the phone is paid off then the
balance is due. The phone is locked until it is paid off.

On Verizon they have the same system but they have to unlock all phones
after 60 days. If you leave, the balance is still due but they'd have to
go to a collection agency if the customer didn't pay. But these deals
require a good credit score, someone with a FICO score under 740 is
unlikely to qualify for these deals.

Of course you're free to buy an unlocked phone at full price, but that
would be really stupid if you're on a high-cost postpaid carrier (and
you plan to stay there) because you're not going to get the hefty
monthly bill credits that come with taking the "free" or discounted
phone from them.

The prepaid carriers often offer some small discounts off of retail for
newer phones, but offer big discounts for older phones, I paid $149.99
for my iPhone 11, unlocked after 60 days, nine months later you can't
even buy a used one for that price. I could leave my prepaid carrier but
I have no plans to since it's still a good deal for the U.S. (4 lines
sharing 100GB of high speed data for $95). We never use even 1/3 that
amount of data.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On 2023-07-14 22:43, sms wrote:
> On 7/14/2023 1:04 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2023-07-14 19:31, Wolf Greenblatt wrote:
>>> This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier also
>>> automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring it to
>>> zero.
>>
>> I got a free phone recently, and they told me that it is never locked.
>> This is normal in Spain. It is a dual sim model, it would be absurd to
>> not be able to plug in a second sim from the start.
>
> In the U.S., on AT&T and T-Mobile, you get bill credits every month that
> offset the cost. If you leave before the phone is paid off then the
> balance is due. The phone is locked until it is paid off.

I keep the same monthly bill. The system is actually a zero-fee rental,
and you have to stay in the same company (Movistar aka Telefónica) for a
period of time. If you change company, the last receipt includes the
remainder fee of the rental. Ie, I pay nothing if I stay, but have to
pay if I leave.

It hasn't been the same system ever, and different companies have
different systems, but phones are all unlocked, I heard.

>
> On Verizon they have the same system but they have to unlock all phones
> after 60 days. If you leave, the balance is still due but they'd have to
> go to a collection agency if the customer didn't pay. But these deals
> require a good credit score, someone with a FICO score under 740 is
> unlikely to qualify for these deals.

There are no credit scores here :-)

The normal thing is, they just send the receipt to the bank, which
automatically pays. You can give instructions to not pay, but then you
can be in serious trouble.

For instance, you can get listed in a list of people that don't pay, and
that is a serious hurdle for anything bank related, or contracting phone
service with another company. Or contracting water, gas, electricity,
whatever.

> Of course you're free to buy an unlocked phone at full price, but that
> would be really stupid if you're on a high-cost postpaid carrier (and
> you plan to stay there) because you're not going to get the hefty
> monthly bill credits that come with taking the "free" or discounted
> phone from them.
>
> The prepaid carriers often offer some small discounts off of retail for
> newer phones, but offer big discounts for older phones, I paid $149.99
> for my iPhone 11, unlocked after 60 days, nine months later you can't
> even buy a used one for that price. I could leave my prepaid carrier but
> I have no plans to since it's still a good deal for the U.S. (4 lines
> sharing 100GB of high speed data for $95). We never use even 1/3 that
> amount of data.
>

--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article <u8s86d$3v1e$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> On Verizon-owned carriers, including Tracfone brands, the phones are
> unlocked, paid-off or not, after 60 days. This is because of an
> agreement between the FCC and Verizon. It used to be zero days but
> Verizon got approval to change it to 60 because when they were selling
> unlocked phones there was an issue with phones being stolen from stores
> and warehouses.

that's quite the bit of revisionist history.

the fact is that verizon illegally paid off ajit pai, then the chairman
of the fcc, to not prosecute them for deliberately violating fcc
regulations. pai used to work for verizon.

they could do what other carriers do: in the event of a theft, the
phones are flagged as stolen. once blacklisted, they can't be
activated. problem solved.

In article <u8s9o7$43vc$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Verizon has significantly worsened

true. t-mobile is now #1, and verizon is literally in last place.

<https://9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2023/07/opensignal-repor
t-q2-2023.png>

<https://9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2023/07/opensignal-cover
age-5g_availability-5g.png>

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <u8s9o7$43vc$1@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Verizon has significantly worsened
>
> true. t-mobile is now #1, and verizon is literally in last place.
>
> <https://9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2023/07/opensignal-repor
> t-q2-2023.png>
>
> <https://9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2023/07/opensignal-cover
> age-5g_availability-5g.png>
>

Well, I guess Verizon’s reputation was not all it was cracked up to be! How
long before sms admits T-Mobile is the best like the rest of us have been
saying for a while?

On 7/14/2023 5:08 PM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> Well, I guess Verizon’s reputation was not all it was cracked up to be! How
> long before sms admits T-Mobile is the best like the rest of us have been
> saying for a while?

Don't worry too much!

The J.D. Power 2023 U.S. Wireless Network Quality
Performance Study
<https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2023-us-wireless-network-quality-performance-study-volume-1>
shows:
1. Verizon Wireless ranks highest in the Mid-Atlantic, North Central,
Southeast and West regions.
2. Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile rank highest in a tie in the Northeast
region.
3. AT&T ranks highest in the Southwest region.

Nothing surprising. In the densely populated northeast area T-Mobile
does well, in other areas not so well.

Currently (as of April 2023), the geographic coverage of the three
national carriers is as follows:
1. Verizon: 70%
2. AT&T: 68%
3. T-Mobile: 62%

See <https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/t-mobile-coverage-map>

As the article accurately states "Where the network suffers is in rural
areas. As T-Mobile's coverage map shows, the eastern half of the U.S.
enjoys robust network coverage, with just a couple of lighter coverage
pockets along the Appalachians. But once you reach the middle of the
country, significant coverage gaps begin to pop up, extending all the
way to the West Coast."

T-Mobile is not very usable in the western U.S. once you leave the urban
core area. Even in the Bay Area, where I live, when you go to the more
rural parts of the Bay Area Counties, you'll have coverage only on
Verizon, as the FCC maps show. See <https://imgur.com/QOqnAVP>. Yosemite
West: <https://imgur.com/9zJhPUq>. Central Yosemite:
<https://i.imgur.com/PuBGHCq.png>. Santa Clara/Santa Cruz greenbelt:
<<https://i.imgur.com/1w58JJA.png/>.

What really hurt T-Mobile in my area is when their roaming agreement
with AT&T expired. It used to be that T-Mobile had a bunch of AT&T
roaming in the more remote reaches of my area, but that is all gone now.
Ironically, Sprint had good coverage because they had off-network
roaming on Verizon, at least for voice and SMS, but once T-Mobile bought
them that of course all went away.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On Sat, 15 Jul 2023 00:08:00 -0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote:

> Well, I guess Verizon’s reputation was not all it was cracked up to be! How
> long before sms admits T-Mobile is the best like the rest of us have been
> saying for a while?

The funny thing is that nobody really cares who is better when they're all
about the same given the coverage in the entire country matters overall;
but what matters most to almost all of us is the coverage at our homes
(and perhaps places of work - which are much more often in urban areas).

Only that one guy cares to shill for Verizon to the point that he makes up
numbers and figures which aren't even close to make Verizon win out.

He doesn't even use Verizon. He uses an MVNO who piggybacks off Verizon.
And then he complains about the phones he gets for free. And the service.

Nobody else does that.
Just him.

Everyone else just reads the news where we're happy to see that the three
carriers in the USA are competing with each other to provide us services.

On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 18:49:35 -0700, sms wrote:
> T-Mobile is not very usable in the western U.S. once you leave the urban
> core area. Even in the Bay Area, where I live, when you go to the more
> rural parts of the Bay Area Counties, you'll have coverage only on
> Verizon, as the FCC maps show. See <https://imgur.com/QOqnAVP>. Yosemite
> West: <https://imgur.com/9zJhPUq>. Central Yosemite:
> <https://i.imgur.com/PuBGHCq.png>. Santa Clara/Santa Cruz greenbelt:
> <<https://i.imgur.com/1w58JJA.png/>.

Where is the FCC source description of what those calculations truly show?
Last I looked, FCC maps didn't even show 5G coverage - they were only 4G.

Worse, FCC maps are only a rough calculation - based *only* on nominal
tower specs (provided one way _to_ the FCC _by_ the carriers themselves).

As such, the data you rely on most is actually the worst data out there.
The best data are the real-world tests by the various reporting outfits.

None of which show anything like the bogus numbers you are showing to us.
Where is the FCC description of what those coverage maps you provided show?

On 2023-07-14 13:31, Wolf Greenblatt wrote:

> This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier also
> automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring it to zero.

The real question is, when the 24 month term was up, did they reduce the
monthly charge accordingly?

--
“If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything."
-Ronald Coase

On 2023-07-14 23:33, quicksilver wrote:
> The funny thing is that nobody really cares who is better when they're all
> about the same given the coverage in the entire country matters overall;
> but what matters most to almost all of us is the coverage at our homes
> (and perhaps places of work - which are much more often in urban areas).

We had wicked weather on Thursday and a rare power failure. (That's two
this year after several years of 0 power failures). (Our powerlines are
underground, so it has to be a larger failure before it affects us).

How wicked? Tornadoes in Quebec. That's how wicked. (not unheard of,
but rare).

Last power failure I could tether my iPhone to my computer and get
decent data rates to check on things.

This power failure: nothing. Not even web pages on my iPhone. The
power utility app would not connect to the utility server.

The phone (voice) worked fine. Just no data.

3 bars / LTE.

It could be their backhaul service was affected by the storm, but I
thought the voice and data backhauls are common.

--
“If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything."
-Ronald Coase

On Sat, 15 Jul 2023 11:33:17 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

>> This is my first "free" phone so I'm just wondering if your carrier also
>> automatically unlocks your phone at the time the credits bring it to zero.
>
> The real question is, when the 24 month term was up, did they reduce the
> monthly charge accordingly?

No. They reduced the monthly credit (not monthly charge), to zero.

The way it works with this major USA carrier is very simple.
1. Assume the family plan you're on is set to $100 a month (for example).
2. You have to pay government fees of around 20% so that's $120/month.
3. You don't pay any more than that with or without the "free" phone.

So nothing changes the day after the free phone 2-year contract expires.
But there are some details involved.

1. This carrier has no contract, so you can drop the service at any time.
2. The service essentially includes unlimited everything (text,calls,data).
3. There are government fees on the service of about 20% or thereabouts.

1. They activate a SIM card when you ask them to (usually over the air).
2. That SIM card lasts for the life of the service (assuming a phone fit).
3. They don't care in the least what phone you put that SIM card into.

1. To keep you on their service they try to lock you into a "free" phone.
2. That "free" phone is "almost free" in that you have to pay tax on MSRP.
3. So if it's a $240 phone at 10% sales tax, you have to pay $24 for it.

1. They ship you that phone and you put your old SIM card into that phone.
2. You can even move that SIM card from phone to phone if you want to.
3. Nothing changes in your normal service charges of, say, $100 + $20 fees.

The only thing that changes is the "liability" on your bill.

1. When you activate it, they add the MSRP cost liability onto your bill.
2. Each month they reduce that MSRP liability by 1/24th, or by $10.
3. After one year, your liability is 1/2 the MSRP, or $120 on your bill.

If you leave the carrier at that one year point, you owe them $120.
But if you wait out the two years, you don't owe them anything.

It's pretty simple but that's the detailed answer to your question.
There is no change in what you pay - only what your liability is.

Given no phone sells for the MSRP, that $240 phone probably could have been
purchased at Amazon for $200, so you paid a little bit more for that free
phone in the lack of any discounts off of MSRP (and in extra sales tax).

There are some people like badgolferman who said they have iPhones from the
same carrier. While you'll always get a free Android phone from that USA
carrier, you'll rarely get a free iPhone so he likely had an additional
trade-in credit and likely an additional charge as they only give you the
iPhone for something like 1/2 half or 3/4 the price of the Apple MSRP.

You can ask him what the details are, but I'm sure he paid that extra cost
for the iPhone in 1/24th monthly increments, which themselves went to zero
at the 24th month concurrent with the 1/24th credits which also zeroed out.

It's all honest and up front and simple basic arithmetic math, where nobody
is locked into anything - if they break the deal - they just pay the
remainder off of whatever their liability was at the time they left.

I do not think there is an option to return the phone, but they do back it
up with a warranty both from the carrier and from the manufacturer.

On 7/14/2023 8:44 PM, pickles wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 18:49:35 -0700, sms wrote:
>> T-Mobile is not very usable in the western U.S. once you leave the urban
>> core area. Even in the Bay Area, where I live, when you go to the more
>> rural parts of the Bay Area Counties, you'll have coverage only on
>> Verizon, as the FCC maps show. See <https://imgur.com/QOqnAVP>. Yosemite
>> West: <https://imgur.com/9zJhPUq>. Central Yosemite:
>> <https://i.imgur.com/PuBGHCq.png>. Santa Clara/Santa Cruz greenbelt:
>> <<https://i.imgur.com/1w58JJA.png/>.
>
> Where is the FCC source description of what those calculations truly show?
> Last I looked, FCC maps didn't even show 5G coverage - they were only 4G.

That is correct. However you are highly unlikely to find any area, on
any carrier, that is 5G only, so the FCC map shows total coverage,
5G+4G. You can use the Whistleout maps to confirm this since they let
you show 4G, 5G or both. It is true that a lot more of T-Mobile's
network supports 5G, though interestingly, in some of the parts of Santa
Clara and Santa Cruz counties that we frequent, T-Mobile is 4G only, see
<https://i.imgur.com/1YcKfQv.jpeg>.

We all know how T-Mobile kept advertising that they had more 5G on their
network than AT&T an Verizon. That's wonderful for them, but it does
nothing in terms of geographic coverage, it just means that you'd get
slightly higher speeds in some areas but the LTE speeds on AT&T and
Verizon were about the same as the low-band 5G speeds on T-Mobile so
even the speed advantage was minimal and would never be noticed by a
phone user unless they were downloading some enormous files.

You really want to look at the big picture and rely on impartial data
conducted by entities that are not being commissioned by the carrier to
come up with some weird metric that proves something that no one cares
about. The FCC data, Whistleout maps, and the J.D. Power studies are
accurate and trustworthy.

However what the FCC maps do not show is off-network roaming. T-Mobile
may have the least coverage geographically, but they partially make up
for this with some limited off-network roaming, usually on smaller
carriers. I.e., in Alaska, unlike AT&T and Verizon, T-Mobile has no
native network, but they allow their subscribers to roam onto other
networks (but T-Mobile MVNOs cannot roam, except for Google-Fi). Verizon
also has some off-network roaming in Alaska, in addition to their own
4G/5G network.

I always advise people in my area to be very careful when choosing a
carrier or MVNO, especially if they ever travel outside the urban core
area. I can't tell you how many times I've been in a National Park and
been asked to make a call for someone who has no coverage. In one case,
last year in Zion National Park, I told one party that I would make the
call but if the party they were calling, elsewhere in the park, was also
on T-Mobile then the call would not go through, which it did not. OTOH,
I know that there are some people that don't ever leave the urban core
of cities and don't care about rural coverage.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

sms wrote on 15.07.2023 20:54

> However what the FCC maps do not show is off-network roaming. T-Mobile
> may have the least coverage geographically, but they partially make up
> for this with some limited off-network roaming, usually on smaller
> carriers. I.e., in Alaska, unlike AT&T and Verizon, T-Mobile has no
> native network, but they allow their subscribers to roam onto other
> networks (but T-Mobile MVNOs cannot roam, except for Google-Fi). Verizon
> also has some off-network roaming in Alaska, in addition to their own
> 4G/5G network.

It seems T-Mobile has _both_ its normal towers, but everyone else's too.

You may not know that T-Mobile offers free unlimited roaming in the USA.
Yet you "say" that this roaming doesn't add much to T-Mobile's coverage.

And then you try to back it up by saying Alaska has lousy roaming coverage.
Nobody but you and the six other people who live in Alaska care about that.

What cites do you base you statement on about T-Mobile's roaming in the
states that have more than six people - in places people actually live?

On 7/15/2023 1:11 PM, pickles wrote:
> sms wrote on 15.07.2023 20:54
>
>> However what the FCC maps do not show is off-network roaming. T-Mobile
>> may have the least coverage geographically, but they partially make up
>> for this with some limited off-network roaming, usually on smaller
>> carriers. I.e., in Alaska, unlike AT&T and Verizon, T-Mobile has no
>> native network, but they allow their subscribers to roam onto other
>> networks (but T-Mobile MVNOs cannot roam, except for Google-Fi). Verizon
>> also has some off-network roaming in Alaska, in addition to their own
>> 4G/5G network.
>
> It seems T-Mobile has _both_ its normal towers, but everyone else's too.

Unfortunately that is not the case. Roaming is limited to a small number
of rural carriers and a very small amount of roaming on the other two
nationwide carriers.

The reason is that T-Mobile must pay significant roaming fees to AT&T
and Verizon, despite their complaint to the FCC about excessive roaming
costs. "T-Mobile proposed four "benchmarks" that it said the FCC should
consider in assessing the commercial reasonableness of data roaming
deals: retail rates, international roaming rates, MVNO/resale rates, and
roaming rates charged by other providers."

AT&T and Verizon have the position that they spent a considerable amount
of money building out their rural network to benefit their own
subscribers and that they should not be required to provide this
coverage at low cost to a direct competitor that chooses not to spend
the money to build out their own network. They further argued that
T-Mobile is a direct competitor while international carriers roaming in
the U.S., MVNOs, and that data rates that they charge their own
customers are not relevant to what they charge T-Mobile since those
other entities are not direct competitors..
> You may not know that T-Mobile offers free unlimited roaming in the USA.
> Yet you "say" that this roaming doesn't add much to T-Mobile's coverage.

LOL, yes, the roaming that is available is unlimited (well not really
for high speed data), but it is not unlimited on the whole network of
all carriers.

> And then you try to back it up by saying Alaska has lousy roaming coverage.
> Nobody but you and the six other people who live in Alaska care about that.

Alaska is a tourist destination. Pre-pandemic it was over 2.25 million
visitors per year, more than 3x the population that lives there. Still
small compared to the lower 48, because it's expensive and because the
tourist season is only about six months long.

> What cites do you base you statement on about T-Mobile's roaming in the
> states that have more than six people - in places people actually live?

This demonstrates your fundamental misunderstanding of the importance of
coverage. It's not only coverage where you live that's important, it's
coverage where you travel to, and through, that's most important.

Where you live, you of course don't sign up for a service with no
coverage; well I shouldn't say that, there is one person that posts on
Usenet that signed up for T-Mobile even though there is no coverage at
his house and he has to use a micro-cell connected to his home internet,
or Wi-Fi calling to use his phone! This is the ultimate in cluelessness!

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On Sat, 15 Jul 2023 14:14:00 -0700, sms wrote:
> Unfortunately that is not the case. Roaming is limited to a small number
> of rural carriers and a very small amount of roaming on the other two
> nationwide carriers.

You are good at blowing the smoke but you didn't answer the question

The only logical assumption that can be made in light of the fact none of
your statements about T-Mobile roaming were backed up, is you don't know.

And that's OK that everything you claim is your opinion alone.
Just say so.

It's clear you like Verizon.
And it's just as clear you hate T-Mobile.

With a passion.
And that's OK.

You're allowed to express your opinion without any backing whatsoever.
Just say it's your opinion and just say you have no facts to back it up.

If you did have facts, you wouldn't have blown all that smoke.
You would have provided the facts. And you didn't.

Despite the lack of facts, you're still welcome to love Verizon.
And despite the lack of facts, you're still welcome to hate T-Mobile.

Just say that you have no facts whatsoever that back up your claims.

On 7/15/2023 6:25 PM, pickles wrote:

<snip>

> Just say that you have no facts whatsoever that back up your claims.

You can begin your education about coverage differences between AT&T,
T-Mobile, and Verizon at
<docs.google.com/document/d/1JLtqrZTpy33AxsVSJlUjSsoZHSZxSDO8l1B3fIytHlw>

Here is an excerpt from that excellent Google Doc document:

_Checking Network Coverage—Use the Tools from the FCC and WhistleOut_
Prior to signing up for service, tourists should ensure that the network
that they choose will provide coverage in the areas that they plan to
visit. The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) has a nice tool that
compares the coverage of the different networks. Go to
<https://www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData/MobileMaps/mobile-map>. You can check
the various boxes for the different networks and see how much more of
rural areas are covered by AT&T and Verizon versus T-Mobile. You can
also use the interactive map at
<https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/Coverage>.

What's really important is for people to check the coverage maps for
places that they are likely to travel to, or pass through, and not rely
on anecdotal reports since there are too many individuals giving out
false information.

Note that while the FCC maps reflect 4G LTE coverage, 5G coverage is
essentially identical. No carrier has been installing 5G only cells,
except in the case of mmWave 5G, and mmWave has very limited reach. If
you go to the carrier’s coverage maps you’ll see that 5G coverage is
always a subset of 4G LTE coverage.

It often upsets T-Mobile aficionados when vast differences in rural
coverage are shown, but I feel that it's important to be honest about
the differences in networks since it's a matter of both convenience as
well as a matter of safety.

_What About “Free Roaming” ot “Wait, Don’t I Get Unlimited Roaming on
Every Network in the U.S.?”_
Some carriers (well one carrier!) advertise “free roaming,” attempting
to allay potential customers’ concerns about the lack of native coverage
in many areas by implying that customers can roam onto whatever network
is available in a specific area. This is highly misleading. When a
carrier touts "free roaming" it doesn't mean "free roaming on every
other carrier, everywhere, no matter what" (except for emergency 911
service). The usual case is that roaming is only available on small
rural carriers and not on any other of the three nationwide networks,
though there are some minor exceptions.

You can look at the carrier's maps and they'll explicitly show where
roaming is available. For example, in the Death Valley Area, all the
carriers roam onto Commnet, see the T-Mobile map at
<https://i.imgur.com/Ew4qf8I.jpeg/>, but MVNOs usually won’t roam even
if their maps show roaming.

Be especially careful about MVNOs because they will often have huge
areas of no coverage because of a lack of roaming. For example, compare
T-Mobile in Alaska (all roaming) with a T-Mobile MVNO in Alaska (no
coverage at all).

In California, there are only two very small areas where T-Mobile has
any roaming: in the far north there's a little roaming on U.S. Cellular
and in Death Valley there's roaming on Commnet. There is no longer any
roaming on AT&T or Verizon. If you are in an area where AT&T and/or
Verizon are the only carriers then you will not have any coverage on
T-Mobile. Nor will AT&T or Verizon roam onto each other, or onto T-Mobile.

The problem for T-Mobile is that their native coverage is very small in
rural areas but they usually only roam onto small rural carriers and not
AT&T or Verizon. You can see some examples of the vast coverage
differences in the maps below (all taken from the FCC maps).

In fact T-Mobile complained to the FCC that AT&T and Verizon were
gouging for roaming services while AT&T and Verizon insisted that since
they incurred the capital expenditures of providing more ubiquitous
coverage that they should be able to charge a lot for it. T-Mobile was
especially upset that AT&T and Verizon were charging T-Mobile more than
AT&T’s and Verizon’s MVNOs were being charged; AT&T and Verizon argued
that their MVNOs were not using roaming simply to fill in gaps in
coverage in areas that would be expensive to expand coverage to (see
<https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/at-t-verizon-challenge-fcc-s-data-roaming-ruling-sided-t-mobile/>.

Also understand that roaming data is often very limited because of the
high cost to the carrier. T-Mobile limits roaming data to 200MB per
month for postpaid accounts created after 11/15/2015 and less for older
accounts (see
<https://www.t-mobile.com/support/coverage/domestic-roaming-data/>).
200MB is very little data if you’re doing things like GPS navigation or
sending or receiving photos or video. While roaming is nice to have, you
really want a network with the most native coverage.

In the early days of mobile service in the U.S. there was a lot more
roaming between top tier carriers. Sprint roamed extensively on Verizon
and T-Mobile roamed extensively on AT&T. But this roaming was very
costly for Sprint and T-Mobile and roaming was limited in quantity and
eventually roaming agreements ended. When Sprint was acquired by
T-Mobile, all of the roaming that Sprint did on Verizon went away and
Sprint customers lost a great deal of geographic coverage that was not
replaced by T-Mobile.

_What About 5G? The FCC Maps Show Only 4G_
5G coverage is virtually always a subset of 4G coverage, at least for
mobile phones. 5G equipment is added to existing 4G cells to provide
more capacity and higher speeds. The exception is mmWave 5G cells used
to provide home broadband service (Verizon and AT&T are especially
active in this arena). mmWave 5G is very short range and cells are
usually placed on streetlight poles. You can see an example of the
difference in 5G and 4G service, on T-Mobile, for the Santa Cruz
Mountains in California, at <https://i.imgur.com/dEuUkuJ.jpeg>.

_What do Independent Studies Show?_
The J.D. Power 2023 U.S. Wireless Network Quality
Performance Study
<https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2023-us-wireless-network-quality-performance-study-volume-1>
shows:
1. Verizon Wireless ranks highest in the Mid-Atlantic, North Central,
Southeast and West regions.
2. Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile rank highest in a tie in the Northeast
region.
3. AT&T ranks highest in the Southwest region.

Nothing surprising. In the densely populated northeast area T-Mobile
does well, in other areas not so well.

Currently (as of April 2023), the geographic coverage of the three
national carriers is as follows:
1. Verizon: 70%
2. AT&T: 68%
3. T-Mobile: 62%

See <https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/t-mobile-coverage-map>

As the article accurately states "Where the network suffers is in rural
areas. As T-Mobile's coverage map shows, the eastern half of the U.S.
enjoys robust network coverage, with just a couple of lighter coverage
pockets along the Appalachians. But once you reach the middle of the
country, significant coverage gaps begin to pop up, extending all the
way to the West Coast."

T-Mobile is not very usable in the western U.S. once you leave the urban
core area. Even in the Bay Area, where I live, when you go to the more
rural parts of the Bay Area Counties, you'll have coverage only on
Verizon, as the FCC maps show. See <https://imgur.com/QOqnAVP>. Yosemite
West: <https://imgur.com/9zJhPUq>. Central Yosemite:
<https://i.imgur.com/PuBGHCq.png>. Santa Clara/Santa Cruz greenbelt:
<<https://i.imgur.com/1w58JJA.png/>.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

In article <u8vllc$lsk1$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> You can begin your education about coverage differences between AT&T,
> T-Mobile, and Verizon at
> <docs.google.com/docu

> Here is an excerpt from that excellent Google Doc document:

calling a document *you* wrote 'excellent' is the pinnacle of conceit.

>
> Note that while the FCC maps reflect 4G LTE coverage, 5G coverage is
> essentially identical.

nope, due to propagation differences.

>
> It often upsets T-Mobile aficionados when vast differences in rural
> coverage are shown, but I feel that it's important to be honest about
> the differences in networks since it's a matter of both convenience as
> well as a matter of safety.

being honest is something you are incapable of doing.