Re: 5G map

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 6:33:56 PM4/4/22

to

sms wrote:

> On Saturday, my niece was over and we did 4G versus 5G speed tests.
>
> I got 306 Mb/s on 4G LTE on an iPhone Xr on a Verizon-owned prepaid
> service (Total Wireless). My niece got 403 Mb/s on 5G on an iPhone 12
> Pro on Verizon postpaid. For all intents and purposes, that speed
> difference, on a phone would not be noticeable to the user.

Steve is a liar.

Steve lied about the FCC coverage maps for years and years.
And now Steve is lying about the comparison speeds.

Steve always makes up these numbers to suit his narrative.
Takes only 30 seconds for Steve to type in any number he wants to say.

It's what politicians like Steve do all day, every day.

What's insulting is Steve thinks we believe his brazen lies.
That means Steve considers us to stupid to realize he typed them in.

Why can't Steve spend the 30 seconds to post a screenshot of his results?
Like this: <https://i.postimg.cc/qR4BcjfM/speedtest19.jpg>

Those are my last 17 Ookla 5G & LTE T-Mobile speedtest results run
on the dates shown in that Ookla log which Steve has never shown us.

I hope I'm not the only one that is not as stupid as Steve thinks we are.
If so, I would ask others to ask Steve to simply post his Ookla logs.

Takes only 30 seconds.
--
The problem with consumate liars like Steve is that they lost their
credibililty by fabricating their test results for years on end.

badgolferman

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 7:04:49 PM4/4/22

to

I would have to agree with you.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 7:31:06 PM4/4/22

to

badgolferman wrote:

>>Takes only 30 seconds.
>
> I would have to agree with you.

What's revealing is that it's rare for either you or me to call someone a
liar (since we reserve those words for someone who does so repeatedly).

I know you, badgolferman, conscientiously posted your T-Mobile 5G test
results multiple times - both good and bad - as did I - so I know that you
know what I know which is often summarized on Usenet as the age-old saying:
"*pics or it didn't happen*"

You posted multiple pics of your speeds on your new iPhone.
I too posted mine (very many in fact - because speeds vary by a lot)
<https://i.postimg.cc/4dDhFK5F/speedtest01.jpg> *125Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/vT68k3BW/speedtest02.jpg> *181Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/pdXF4Mtz/speedtest03.jpg> *125Mbps* to *181Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/gcsyc4Vn/speedtest04.jpg> *82Mbps* & -88dBM
<https://i.postimg.cc/mggy315q/speedtest05.jpg> *254Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/43KvqkZQ/speedtest06.jpg> *255Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/zf9w1tGZ/speedtest07.jpg> *255Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/Bb3xjjFm/speedtest08.jpg> *255Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/GhZKX0vZ/speedtest09.jpg> *130Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/28yZdQJR/speedtest10.jpg> *81Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/ydnDcxy8/speedtest11.jpg> *79Mbps* to *81Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/5y063Jsq/speedtest12.jpg> *96Mbps* to *109Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/fbNyPmHb/speedtest13.jpg> *109Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/5tSyWyGS/speedtest14.jpg> *88Mbps* to *102Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/C5vgmtRd/speedtest15.jpg> *130Mbps* to *255Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/W3GgYJtZ/speedtest16.jpg> *125Mbps* to *181Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/nVs0Smw8/speedtest17.jpg> *54Mbps*
<https://i.postimg.cc/N0fx62rz/speedtest18.jpg> *60Mbps* & -85dBm

Notice I don't post just _one_ speed like Steve does, to prove a point.
I post many speeds, which vary by a lot, like it or not.

That's what they do.
All those speeds were taken at the same spot - and yet they vary.

By a lot.
With Steve, he types one number and claims that's all the time.

With Steve, the pics he posts are cherry-picked unattributed maps.
They don't even have a date on them (they could be ten years old).

And whenever he claims his T-Mobile vs Verizon speeds, it's always text.
While it takes 30 seconds to post text, it takes 30 seconds to post proof.

Here, for example, is a screenshot I made moments ago for another thread.
<https://i.postimg.cc/66L724vh/speedtest20.jpg> Meteor test log results

You can trust me because I'm not only credible (I don't care if T-Mobile or
Verizon or AT&T is "better" at any one spot - I just want to post the
facts), but also because I prove more than almost anyone, what I claim.
<https://i.postimg.cc/qR4BcjfM/speedtest19.jpg> Ookla test log results

Steve never does.
Steve is the consummate politician.

For years Steve lied about the FCC maps (which didn't show what he said).
Now he's lying about his differential speeds (which he simply typed up).

Takes 30 seconds for Steve to lie.
Takes 30 seconds for Steve to tell the truth.

It doesn't cost Steve any more effort to tell the truth than for him to lie.
And yet, lie he does.

That's fine, by the way.
He's allowed to lie to all of us all of the time.

But we don't have to believe him when he does.

Me? I don't care if T-Mobile is faster or slower than Verizon.
Nobody pays me to shill for either one of them.

I just care what is.
--
The problem with people like Steve who is a politician and a consummate
liar, is they forget not everyone is so stupid as to believe their lies.

sms

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 8:00:10 PM4/4/22

to

On 4/4/2022 4:04 PM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> I would have to agree with you.

LOL, are you that invested in your carrier that you are compelled to
agree with our pathological liar nymshifting troll? Very sad.

Here's an Ookla screenshot from 4/2: <https://i.imgur.com/qnPy2ss.png>
Here's an Ookla screenshot from 4/4: <https://i.imgur.com/ecWtkOC.png>

Please stick to facts.

nospam

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 8:04:12 PM4/4/22

to

In article <t2g0q9$m9t$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> LOL, are you that invested in your carrier

major projection from the resident verizon shill.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 8:15:25 PM4/4/22

to

sms wrote:

> Here's an Ookla screenshot from 4/2: <https://i.imgur.com/qnPy2ss.png>
> Here's an Ookla screenshot from 4/4: <https://i.imgur.com/ecWtkOC.png>

At least we were able to force Steve to act like an adult and post his
reports instead of just typing them in - which I consider a success.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 8:18:58 PM4/4/22

to

nospam wrote:

>> LOL, are you that invested in your carrier
>
> major projection from the resident verizon shill.

I agree with nospam that nobody other than Steve _cares_ which carrier comes
out on top on any one metric, whether that's Lewis, nospam, me, or
badgolferman.

We aren't paid by any of the carriers to shill for them.
But Steve, the consummate politician, can't conceive of that kind of
impartial attitude.

Steve thinks that if we post T-Mobile results, we _must_ be "invested" in
that carrier.

Why?
I know why. So does nospam.

It's _Steve_ who is indelibly invested in his carrier.
I don't remember the details, but he garners money from his Verizon shills.

I don't know how (nor do I care), but for Steve to even think we're
"invested" in our carrier and therefore we'd stoop so low as to fabricate
the results (which is what Steve endlessly does), then that's just telling
us how _he_ thinks. Not us.

We didn't lie for years about the FCC maps.
Steve did.

Not us.

Alan

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 8:20:23 PM4/4/22

to

Just not moved enough to apologize for calling him a liar...

sms

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 8:25:08 PM4/4/22

to

Whatever. I understand how some people get very upset when confronted
with facts that they don't like.

nospam

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 8:26:41 PM4/4/22

to

In article <t2g292$d8g$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> I understand how some people get very upset when confronted
> with facts that they don't like.

that's because it keeps happening to you.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 10:30:02 PM4/4/22

to

sms wrote:

>>>> Here's an Ookla screenshot from 4/2: <https://i.imgur.com/qnPy2ss.png>
>>>> Here's an Ookla screenshot from 4/4: <https://i.imgur.com/ecWtkOC.png>
>>>
>>> At least we were able to force Steve to act like an adult and post his
>>> reports instead of just typing them in - which I consider a success.
>>
>> Just not moved enough to apologize for calling him a liar...
>
> Whatever. I understand how some people get very upset when confronted
> with facts that they don't like.

Steve,
I do not apologize for calling you a liar on the FCC coverage maps.

But I do openly apologize to you for saying you made up these figures:
306 Mbps down, upload 23.7 Mbps, Ping 13ms, Jitter 1.5ms
245 Mbps down, upload 35.1 Mbps, Ping 38ms, Jitter 1.6ms

I'll believe those figures (I didn't check if they're what you typed).
I don't really care about Verizon, T-Mobile or AT&T.

Why would I care about any carrier?
Nobody cares. Except you.

I am not beholden to _any_ narrative when it comes to the carriers.
I don't think anyone (other than you) is either.

If you prove your statements, I'm fine with them no matter what they are.
Simple.

Just prove what you say.
How hard is that?

Hank Rogers

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 10:38:22 PM4/4/22

to

Do you plan on providing proof along with everything you post in
the future?

That would go a long way to convince people you are an intelligent
adult. I look forward to it.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 4, 2022, 11:12:00 PM4/4/22

to

Hank Rogers wrote:

> Do you plan on providing proof along with everything you post in
> the future?
>
> That would go a long way to convince people you are an intelligent
> adult. I look forward to it.

Did you buy too many kindergarten arguments "Hank Rogers" this week?
What about these figures, "Hank Rogers" are you intimating isn't proof?

<https://i.postimg.cc/qR4BcjfM/speedtest19.jpg> Ookla test log results

<https://i.postimg.cc/66L724vh/speedtest20.jpg> Meteor test log results

People like this idiot "Hank Rogers" own the brain of kindergarten kids.
This "Hank" can't comprehend a word of what is listed above as proof.

sms

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 10:52:20 AM4/5/22

to

On 4/4/2022 7:38 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:

> That would go a long way to convince people you are an intelligent
> adult. I look forward to it.

Andy Burnelli/Arlen Holder/Dean Hoffman/more is wrong of course™.

We all hope that he can be educated and then convince people that he is
an intelligent adult. We are all looking forward to that eventuality.

The reality is that the choice of carrier matters a lot to most people.

In the early days of cellular too many people were naive about the
differences between carriers in terms of coverage and reliability and
often made their decision based solely on price and on what kind of free
or discounted phones the carrier was offering. Now consumers are wiser.
Many have experienced the big differences between carriers and are smart
enough to look at more than just price and free phones, and are less
likely to fall for false claims in marketing.

It's nice that the NAD has stepped in to try to get carriers to stop
false advertising, i.e.:
<https://www.phonearena.com/news/t-mobile-5g-home-internet-misleading-advertising_id139134>,
<https://bbbprograms.org/media-center/news/tmobile-most-reliable-5g-umlaut-claims>,
<https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/national-advertising-division-challenges-t-mobile-s-network-claims-siding-verizon>,
<https://www.nexttv.com/news/t-mobile-pulls-brady-stefani-ads>.

As we all know, the three U.S. networks were not created equal. AT&T and
Verizon, the two top-tier networks, evolved from legacy networks and
built out large networks, acquiring smaller regional and rural carriers
along the way. T-Mobile, the second tier network, was a PCS (1900 MHz
only) network with mainly urban coverage. AT&T and Verizon have
leveraged their coverage advantage of being in the game early before
cities and counties began regulating the placement of cell towers.

All three networks work acceptably in flat urban areas. While no carrier
has 100% geographic coverage if you plan to travel to more remote areas,
like National and State Parks, or if you’re going to drive through rural
areas, or if you’re visiting the outskirts of urban areas (often called
the “greenbelt” or “exurban”), then you’ll want the coverage of AT&T or
Verizon.

A PC Magazine article from 2021
<https://www.pcmag.com/news/fastest-mobile-networks-2021> summed it up
well: "And if you’re out in the countryside and don’t often head to the
city, T-Mobile might not be the best carrier for you. The carrier is
doing great in the nation’s biggest metro areas, but when we look at
small cities and areas away from interstate highways, especially in the
western US, it's clear that T-Mobile has to do more work to get better
coverage."

You can see the vast differences in nationwide coverage here:
<https://i.imgur.com/irqFqyP.png (data is from
https://www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData/MobileMaps/mobile-map>). While these
are 4G maps, based on cell tower locations, 5G is a subset of 4G
coverage (except in the case of mmWave 5G-only small cells intended for
home broadband (AT&T and Verizon are putting in networks of streetlight
powered 5G cells).

You can also use the interactive map at
<https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/Coverage>. These are the
maps for each networks’ native coverage, and you can distinguish between
4G and 5G with the check boxes. If you look solely at 5G coverage,
T-Mobile has much more 5G coverage than AT&T or Verizon. If you look at
4G+5G coverage, T-Mobile has much less total coverage than AT&T or Verizon.

As I like to say, "Data Not Dogma." Helping people make good decisions
about which carrier to choose is reliant on independent data, not
marketing blurbs from a carrier.

Andy Burnelli/Arlen Holder/Dean Hoffman/more can learn more by studying
the following documents:
1. Prepaid Phone Service for Foreign Visitors to the United States
<https://tinyurl.com/us-prepaid-foreign>.
2. Coverage Differences Between AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon
<https://tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons/>

Lewis

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 11:22:13 AM4/5/22

to

In message <t2g0q9$m9t$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 4/4/2022 4:04 PM, badgolferman wrote:

> <snip>

>> I would have to agree with you.
> LOL, are you that invested in your carrier that you are compelled to
> agree with our pathological liar nymshifting troll? Very sad.

Coming from the fawning shill for Veriscum that is you, that is quite
rich. Has there ever been a discussion on any facet of cellular service
where you have not sucked VEriscums cock in appreciation for how
wonderful they are?

No, there is not. You constantly lie about cellular coverage and speeds
to shill your favored company.

> Please stick to facts.

You are devoid of the ability to even recognize facts.

--
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support
rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)

Lewis

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 11:25:41 AM4/5/22

to

In message <t2g292$d8g$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Whatever. I understand how some people get very upset when confronted
> with facts that they don't like.

Well of course you do, at it takes is looking in the mirror.

Although different people react differently, and not everyone is as
infantile as your method of ignoring all facts and making shit up
constantly like a 4yo.

--
Are you a lucky little lady in the city of light Or just another lost
angel?

nospam

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 11:38:32 AM4/5/22

to

In article <t2hl31$erf$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> The reality is that the choice of carrier matters a lot to most people.

actually, it doesn't, other than price. coverage is generally the same
for all three, except in remote areas few people visit.

> As we all know, the three U.S. networks were not created equal.

there you go being disingenuous again. the issue is not how they were
created 30+ years ago, but what they offer *today*.

>
> All three networks work acceptably in flat urban areas.

as well as not so flat areas.

> As I like to say, "Data Not Dogma."

you might say that but all you spew is dogma.

> Helping people make good decisions
> about which carrier to choose is reliant on independent data, not
> marketing blurbs from a carrier.

and not easily refuted claims from well known shills.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 12:28:58 PM4/5/22

to

Lewis wrote:

> You constantly lie about cellular coverage and speeds
> to shill your favored company.

The fact is that Lewis is correct that Steve shills incessantly.

>> Please stick to facts.
>
> You are devoid of the ability to even recognize facts.

Bear in mind Steve claimed for _years_ that the FCC maps showed 5G coverage.
And yet they don't.

The only conclusion one can make from that is one of two options below:
a. Steve was _ignorant_ that FCC maps can't possibly show what he claimed
b. Steve _knew_ the FCC maps didn't show _any_ 5G coverage (nor 3G)

Either way:
A. Steve is either rather stupid if it's (a) above.
B. Steve is a brazen pathological liar if it's (b) above.

Which is it?
Facts or dogma?

badgolferman

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 1:33:19 PM4/5/22

to

It’s nice to see Arlen, nospam, Lewis agreeing on something for once. It
took sms to make this possible!

sms

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 2:24:55 PM4/5/22

to

On 4/5/2022 10:33 AM, badgolferman wrote:

> It’s nice to see Arlen, nospam, Lewis agreeing on something for once. It
> took sms to make this possible!

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” ― Napoleon
Bonaparte

It's great to have three trolls all lying at the same time and being
unable to dispute any referenced facts!

Arlen/Andy Burnelli/Dean Hoffman/whatever/ is wrong of course™.

I never claimed that the FCC maps showed 5G coverage. What I did say is
that 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 are mmWave 5G cells used
to provide home broadband service.

I also pointed out the the Whistleout coverage map included the
capability to show 5G only, 4G only, and 5G + 4G coverage, which is very
useful if you want to see the difference between 4G and 5G coverage.

You can see one example of the difference in 5G and 4G service at
<https://i.imgur.com/dEuUkuJ.jpeg>. You can see that 5G coverage is a
subset of 4G coverage.

It's unclear what prompts Arlen/Andy Burnelli/Dean Hoffman/whatever/ to
misstate the facts. It's likely that the cause is the marketing campaign
by one carrier that correctly claims that they have more 5G coverage
than their competitors. But what that carrier leaves out is that their
_total_ coverage, is far less, and for most users what matters most is
total coverage, not the difference between 200 Mb/s 4G and 400 Mb/s 5G,
even if they're using home broadband service from their carrier.
Arlen/Andy Burnelli/Dean Hoffman/whatever/ likely feels bad about making
a poor purchasing decision, and rather than helping others to avoid the
same mistake, he wants others to follow him down the wrong path.

A 2021 PC Magazine article

<https://www.pcmag.com/news/fastest-mobile-networks-2021> summed it up
well: "And if you’re out in the countryside and don’t often head to the
city, T-Mobile might not be the best carrier for you. The carrier is
doing great in the nation’s biggest metro areas, but when we look at
small cities and areas away from interstate highways, especially in the
western US, it's clear that T-Mobile has to do more work to get better
coverage."

You can see a comparison of nationwide 4G+5G at
<https://i.imgur.com/vPcBgF5.png>. But it's also helpful to zoom into
the areas that you're most interested in. You can see a compendium of
4G+5G coverage comparisons for areas I’ve experienced at
<https://tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons>.

nospam

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 3:35:27 PM4/5/22

to

In article <t2hugt$6tm$1...@dont-email.me>, badgolferman

<REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> You constantly lie about cellular coverage and speeds
> >> to shill your favored company.
> >
> > The fact is that Lewis is correct that Steve shills incessantly.
> >
> >>> Please stick to facts.
> >>
> >> You are devoid of the ability to even recognize facts.
> >
> > Bear in mind Steve claimed for _years_ that the FCC maps showed 5G coverage.
> > And yet they don't.
> >
> > The only conclusion one can make from that is one of two options below:
> > a. Steve was _ignorant_ that FCC maps can't possibly show what he claimed
> > b. Steve _knew_ the FCC maps didn't show _any_ 5G coverage (nor 3G)
> >
> > Either way:
> > A. Steve is either rather stupid if it's (a) above.
> > B. Steve is a brazen pathological liar if it's (b) above.
> >
> > Which is it?
> > Facts or dogma?
> >
>

> It零 nice to see Arlen, nospam, Lewis agreeing on something for once. It

> took sms to make this possible!

always looking at the bright side :)

nospam

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 3:35:29 PM4/5/22

to

In article <t2i1hm$cth$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> It's great to have three trolls all lying at the same time and being
> unable to dispute any referenced facts!

more bullshit. those whom you are calling trolls are *not* lying and
they have repeatedly disputed your bullshit many times over, with
multiple references, not that any were needed since it's clear your
'facts' were fabricated and/or cherry-picked to further your shilling.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 6:41:53 PM4/5/22

to

nospam wrote:

>> It¹s nice to see Arlen, nospam, Lewis agreeing on something for once. It

>> took sms to make this possible!
>
> always looking at the bright side :)

Most of the time I don't even LOOK at who is posting.
I respond to the data.

If what the person says is sensible, I will agree with it.
If what the person says is idiotic, I'll let him know he's an idiot.

Hence, the only reason you don't see me congratulating Jolly Roger or Lewis
a lot for acting like adults, is that they don't do it all that much.

Nothing more complex than that.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 6:42:05 PM4/5/22

to

nospam wrote:

>> It's great to have three trolls all lying at the same time and being
>> unable to dispute any referenced facts!
>
> more bullshit. those whom you are calling trolls are *not* lying and
> they have repeatedly disputed your bullshit many times over, with
> multiple references, not that any were needed since it's clear your
> 'facts' were fabricated and/or cherry-picked to further your shilling.

I have to agree with nospam that Steve has been spewing dogma and not facts
for _years_ now, where the result is always that he claims Verizon has
coverage in all the cherry picked places he claims nobody else has.

Steve even claimed at one point that Verizon had coverage where _nobody_ had
that coverage (as the tower in that location by his own admission wasn't
owned or leased by _any_ of the three major carriers in the USA).

Essentially, Steve is always spewing dogma and not facts where his dogma we
can predict years in advance is that Verizon is great and T-Mobile sucks.

BTW, none of us except Steve even _care_ about any given carrier.
The carriers don't pay us to shill for them.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 6:43:45 PM4/5/22

to

badgolferman wrote:

> It's nice to see Arlen, nospam, Lewis agreeing on something for once. It
> took sms to make this possible!

I respond to what people say.
*Hence I agree with _anyone_ who has a valid point which is based on facts.*

Hell, if Snit, Alan Baker or Alan Browne or even Jolly Roger or Lewis or
nospam or Joerg or Your Name wrote a valid point, I'd agree with them.

I'm a mirror of your posts.
a. If you say stupid things, I'll let you know you said stupid things.
b. If you have an adult viewpoint, I will treat you as an adult.

My responses aren't as complicated as you seem to be thinking they are.
Say something sensible and I'll agree with it.
--
So far the only ones I plonk are those like Alan Baker, Snit & Rod Speed who
_never_ have any viewpoint that is worth an adult wasting their time upon.

Alan

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 6:46:07 PM4/5/22

to

On 2022-04-05 3:43 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> badgolferman wrote:
>
>> It's nice to see Arlen, nospam, Lewis agreeing on something for once. It
>> took sms to make this possible!
>
> I respond to what people say.
> *Hence I agree with _anyone_ who has a valid point which is based on
> facts.*
>
> Hell, if Snit, Alan Baker or Alan Browne or even Jolly Roger or Lewis or
> nospam or Joerg or Your Name wrote a valid point, I'd agree with them.

No.

You'd put them in your killfile.

Hank Rogers

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 6:53:30 PM4/5/22

to

Andy Burnelli wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>>> It零 nice to see Arlen, nospam, Lewis agreeing on something for

Hell, I believe you are the only adult here.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 9:55:59 PM4/5/22

to

sms wrote:

> We all hope that he can be educated

Heh heh heh... educated...

I'm the one who told Steve that his FCC maps are calculated from what the
carriers give the government - and - _none_ of that information is 5G.

Methinks Steve hates me simply because I uncovered his FCC map lies.

Hank Rogers

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 10:50:13 PM4/5/22

to

Nah. He's jealous of all yer books.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 5, 2022, 11:51:28 PM4/5/22

to

nospam wrote:

>> The reality is that the choice of carrier matters a lot to most people.
>
> actually, it doesn't, other than price. coverage is generally the same
> for all three, except in remote areas few people visit.

While Steve claims that the carrier matters to most people but they are
commodities like it or not. Their differentiation is like that between
McDonalds and Burger King. They're all essentially the same to most of us.

It's Verizon that is special to Steve for reasons unknown to the rest of us.
He has a hatred for T-Mobile that spans over the years something fierce.

>> All three networks work acceptably in flat urban areas.
>
> as well as not so flat areas.

As well as the mountain areas Steve claims has no T-Mobile service.
And yet it does.

>> As I like to say, "Data Not Dogma."
>
> you might say that but all you spew is dogma.

I have to agree with nospam that all Steve spews is dogma.
Not data.

Steve lied to us for years about the FCC coverage maps for example.

>> Helping people make good decisions
>> about which carrier to choose is reliant on independent data, not
>> marketing blurbs from a carrier.
>
> and not easily refuted claims from well known shills.

It's odd how desperate Steve is to shill for Verizon.
The rest of us don't care to shill for any carrier.

sms

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 12:12:38 AM4/6/22

to

LOL, well I still have some of college textbooks, is that important?

And of course my references to the FCC maps were spot-on. I even added a
section in my document <https://tinyurl.com/us-prepaid-foreign> to
explain it since "Andy Burnelli/Dean Hoffman/Arlen Holder" is unclear on
how 5G is a subset of 4G:

"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 are mmWave 5G cells used

to provide home broadband service. You can see one example of the

difference in 5G and 4G service at <https://i.imgur.com/dEuUkuJ.jpeg>."

Hopefully Andy Burnelli/Dean Hoffman/Arlen Holder will choose to educate
himself on this issue.

badgolferman

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 6:10:19 AM4/6/22

to

Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com> wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>>> The reality is that the choice of carrier matters a lot to most people.
>>
>> actually, it doesn't, other than price. coverage is generally the same
>> for all three, except in remote areas few people visit.
>
> While Steve claims that the carrier matters to most people but they are
> commodities like it or not. Their differentiation is like that between
> McDonalds and Burger King. They're all essentially the same to most of us.
>
> It's Verizon that is special to Steve for reasons unknown to the rest of us.
> He has a hatred for T-Mobile that spans over the years something fierce.
>

I care about the best value over all and that has been T-Mobile for me over
the past five years or so. I used to have Verizon prior to T-Mobile, but
with four lines and limited data allowance the monthly bill was too much.
That’s when I started to look into T-Mobile even though it had a reputation
for spotty coverage in my area. I made the switch anyway and have been
pleased with the improvements which have occurred over the past 2-3 years.
My bill has remained the same over that period except when I’ve made
changes or gotten phones from them.

Another factor to consider is customer support. Verizon customer support
was extremely frustrating for me. I have been very pleased anytime I’ve
gone to the T-Mobile store or had to call them. When I complained about
signal strength in my house they gave me a mini tower no charge. Verizon
refused to do that in the past and I was forced to buy one on eBay. I can
say my experiences are night and day between the two carriers, and remember
that I still carry a Verizon work phone so it’s not experiences from the
past only.

A few years ago I was so pleased with T-Mobile and believed in their
direction. I bought their stock. Unfortunately I sold it after a year and
wish I had kept it.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 11:41:06 AM4/6/22

to

sms wrote:

> well I still have some of college textbooks, is that important?

While the iKooks self esteem is wrapped up in their iToys, mine is
intertwined with my education, where, like Steve, I'm also an EE.

I consider that Steve is also has an EE among his degrees, so I would
_expect_ Steve to be able to show his textbooks - where if Steve does _not)_
have _this_ textbook, then I'd wonder about Steve's claim to be an EE.
<https://i.postimg.cc/6qdCpK0Y/books11.jpg>

I wouldn't expect Steve to have any of these as they're specialty items
specifically for those who worked in the Silicon Valley startup world.
<https://i.postimg.cc/CKKrrJQK/books04.jpg>

However I would expect Steve to have studied the basics like these show.
<https://i.postimg.cc/RVQPMjrF/books05.jpg>

Where one of my specialties is given away by these classes I took that Steve
probably wouldn't have a clue about (but that's OK as EE is a big field).
<https://i.postimg.cc/s2SGzC8H/books07.jpg>

The difference between someone like me and the iKooks is that the iKooks
couldn't comprehend even a _single page_ of these books, since none of them
own the necessary IQ and certainly none of them have ever been to college.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Dzzkq69w/books02.jpg>
--
I used to wonder why the iKooks say what no educated adult would say,
but then I realized all the iKooks have the confluence of three things:
1. Not one of the iKooks owns an IQ that even _approaches_ average
2. As a result, none of the iKooks has _any_ education above high school
3. All of the iKooks have such low self esteem that they pine for Apple
to give them something (anything) they can be "proud of" owning.

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 11:41:24 AM4/6/22

to

badgolferman wrote:

> I care about the best value over all and that has been T-Mobile for me over
> the past five years or so. I used to have Verizon prior to T-Mobile, but
> with four lines and limited data allowance the monthly bill was too much.

Hi badgolferman,

I love that you posted a human interest explanation, as that helps flesh out
that you're a normal person with reasonable and rather sensible
expectations.

Like badgolferman has done himself, I've had all the other carriers also,
where what I loved about T-Mobile years ago was they allowed me the freedom
to NOT have a contract (unlike Verizon) at a time when Verizon enforced it,
and they allowed me the freedom to NOT have cellular data (unlike AT&T) at a
time when AT&T enforced it (I even complained to the FCC about that).

Those are the main reasons I left Verizon and AT&T since the company paid
all my bills so I didn't care about price, where it was just a bonus that
T-Mobile gives me a $25/month/phone unlimited-everything plan (plus $4 in
fees).

Unlimited data
Unlimited SMS/MMS
Unlimited USA phone calls

The coverage?
About the same.

Yes. Steve. About the same.

In the same Santa Cruz mountains that you constantly say has no coverage.

<https://i.postimg.cc/qR4BcjfM/speedtest19.jpg> Ookla test log results

> That's when I started to look into T-Mobile even though it had a reputation
> for spotty coverage in my area. I made the switch anyway and have been
> pleased with the improvements which have occurred over the past 2-3 years.

I enjoyed that human interest explanation, which makes you more human since
all your expectations and decisions are that of a logically rational person.

Like you, T-Mobile was my _last_ choice since I started with Verizon in the
analog phone days and since the company paid my entire bill no matter what
was on it. I switched off of Verizon only becuase they upped my 2-year
contract when I had a defective Kyocera replaced under their own replacment
plan, and I was so livid I told them I'd drop them two years later.

And I did.

Then, when I moved to AT&T, while I didn't care about price since the
company paid for my phones and accessories and all my bills, I was happy to
find out that AT&T was cheaper than Verizon with about the same coverage.

Later, when I retired, AT&T allowed me a no data plan on my Blackberry
(which the company let me keep even though they paid for it), but when the
clit died on that Blackerry, AT&T would not all a new "smart" phone to have
no data. Like Apple, AT&T lied by saying it was for my protection, which I
complained about to the FCC and the instant my AT&T contract expired, I
moved to T-Mobile.

At that time, the iPhone was still on AT&T so I had to jailbreak it to give
one of my kids the iPhone she pined for (she's _still_ an iPhone user!)
where again, I found that T-Mobile was a bit cheaper than was AT&T for the
same service.

What I loved about T-Mobile at that time was:
a. They didn't have contracts
b. They allowed you to use any phone you wanted to use
c. They had pretty good prices
d. And they waived every fee I ever asked them to waive (which is plenty)

The coverage?
About the same.

> My bill has remained the same over that period except when I've made
> changes or gotten phones from them.

Yup. This is my experience also. You think in rational logic like I do.

I changed my plan from a $60 for four phones to $100 in order to get data &
European phone calls, but it has remained at that $100 ever since (even as
I've had plenty of phones in between).

I even added two iPads which have SIM cards for free for life (although
Apple kills iPads so the real threat to "life" is Apple and not T-Mobile).
<https://i.postimg.cc/nhpbcP50/tmopromo04.jpg> Two iPads with free SIMs

Most recently they gave me four phones, three of which were free and one of
which (the iPhone) was half price, all with tradeins although the iPhone
tradein was of an already used phone while the others were in the junk box.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg> $15 iPhone, $0 Android phone

> Another factor to consider is customer support. Verizon customer support
> was extremely frustrating for me. I have been very pleased anytime I've
> gone to the T-Mobile store or had to call them.

Again it's nice that you speak as a human to a human (and not as an iKook to
the world), where this is how our experiences may have differed. I, for one,
had no problem with the typical support by _any_ of the three carriers.

I do love that we ALWAYS get a human being when we say "representative" on
T-Mobile and without any wait, but maybe Verizon & AT&T do that too?

Dunno as I rarely call Verizon or AT&T except to weasel a free repeater or
femto cell (which I've done for neighbors) out of them since signal strength
used to be a problem up here in the mountains before 5G arrived.

> When I complained about
> signal strength in my house they gave me a mini tower no charge.

Yup. Same with me. At the time (before the advent of 5G), T-Mobile offered:
a. Either a free cellular repeater, or
b. A free wi-fi-capable router, or
c. A free femtocell (attached to your router)

I took them up on the cellular repeater and on the femtocell (usually they
don't give you more than one but I have a big house so they let me do that).

> Verizon
> refused to do that in the past and I was forced to buy one on eBay.

Yup. I had to argue with Verizon and AT&T in the past to get them to give it
to people for free. It was a hassle compared to T-Mobile.

However... even today, T-Mobile now charges $25 to get the femtocell (they
no longer give you the other stuff). I got one just last year for a neighbor
and I reported it here, where I had to talk to a supervisor for my neighbor.

In the end, T-Mobile credited her account the $25 and then charged her
credit card the $25, so she got it for free. But bear in mind they do charge
now $25 for the femtocell, but you can talk them out of it like I did.

> I can
> say my experiences are night and day between the two carriers, and remember
> that I still carry a Verizon work phone so it's not experiences from the
> past only.

That's good since I only compare Verizon & AT&T to T-Mobile when I hike with
neighbors, all of whom are on the major carriers (I don't know _anyone_ who
plays the crazy MVNO games that Steve plays all the time where I don't
begrudge Steve saving the money except that he shills for Verizon without
even paying for Verizon).

Do you think that's a big disingenuous on Steve's part?

> A few years ago I was so pleased with T-Mobile and believed in their
> direction. I bought their stock. Unfortunately I sold it after a year and
> wish I had kept it.

Heh heh heh... I did the same with Apple stock!

I sold it just as Steve Jobs was coming back because I didn't think he could
bring Apple out of the brink of bankruptcy. Heh heh heh... mea culpa.

In summary, my experience has been similar to yours, where I thank you for
NOT acting like the iKooks do, which is that they defend Apple to the death,
no matter what.

badgolferman

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 12:49:41 PM4/6/22

to

Andy Burnelli wrote:

>I love that you posted a human interest explanation, as that helps
>flesh out that you're a normal person with reasonable and rather
>sensible expectations.

I find that talking about my own experiences is received by others
better than when I talk about my opinion of them.

sms

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 5:37:52 PM4/6/22

to

On 4/6/2022 3:10 AM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> I care about the best value over all and that has been T-Mobile for me over
> the past five years or so.

Yes, it’s true that for postpaid service T-Mobile is typically less
expensive than AT&T or Verizon. T-Mobile also bundles in taxes and fees
in their advertised prices which can make a very big difference in some
places with very high tax rates.

OTOH, AT&T and Verizon have prepaid options, both ones they operate and
MVNOs, that are less costly. T-Mobile MVNOs should be avoided because
the lack of included roaming makes their coverage much worse than what
you get on T-Mobile proper. For example, the entire state of Alaska has
no service on T-Mobile MVNOs like Mint.

Personally, I did have four lines of T-Mobile for a while when I wanted
their included international roaming SMS, 20 cent per minute voice
calls, and low-speed international data, for a trip to England and
Ireland. The voice and SMS worked well in Europe but the data was too
slow to be useful. When we returned to California it was clear that we
could not continue with T-Mobile. We had two children away at college,
and the route to visit them in San Diego and Santa Cruz lacked T-Mobile
coverage in several areas.

Some people insist that even though they have no T-Mobile coverage at
home that it doesn’t matter because T-Mobile provided them with a free
micro-cell that hooks up to their broadband data. Of course these days,
with Wi-Fi calling, there’s not much need for separate microcells.

I certainly understand the appeal of paying less for a product or
service, but I’m reminded of the quote: “There is hardly anything in the
world that someone cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper,
and the people who consider price alone are that person's lawful prey.”
― Author Unknown

Andy Burnelli

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 6:50:29 PM4/6/22

to

sms wrote:

> Personally, I did have four lines of T-Mobile for a while when I wanted
> their included international roaming SMS, 20 cent per minute voice
> calls, and low-speed international data, for a trip to England and
> Ireland. The voice and SMS worked well in Europe but the data was too
> slow to be useful.

I find that, at least in Munchen where I go a few times a year to visit
relatives, the T-Mobile 20 cent voice _and_ free roaming data work fine.

The only problem is they don't give the unlimited free roaming data on the
iPads.

Maybe Steve is camping in the alps where he finds the lack of signal?

BTW T-Mobile will only give the free unlimited European data for my
smartphones. I can't complain though as my iPad T-Mobile SIMs are free for
life on the iPads (where Apple is a far greater threat to the life of the
iPad than anything else is).

nospam

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 6:53:33 PM4/6/22

to

In article <t2l17e$u65$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> OTOH, AT&T and Verizon have prepaid options, both ones they operate and
> MVNOs, that are less costly.

t-mobile has prepaid options.

> T-Mobile MVNOs should be avoided because
> the lack of included roaming makes their coverage much worse than what
> you get on T-Mobile proper.

nonsense. you've clearly never used a t-mobile mvno.

> For example, the entire state of Alaska has
> no service on T-Mobile MVNOs like Mint.

that is also wrong. t-mobile customers can use their phones in alaska
without issue.

RJH

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 6:58:03 PM4/6/22

to

On 6 Apr 2022 at 10:37:48 PM, sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> The voice and SMS worked well in Europe but the data was too
> slow to be useful.

Since there aren't any TMobile, AT&T or Verizon towers in Europe, why would
the speed you get on any one USA carrier be any different when all of those
USA carriers would be roaming on local telecoms when you're in Europe?

Cheers, Rob

sms

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 7:43:17 PM4/6/22

to

There actually are T-Mobile towers in three countries in Europe
(Germany, Netherlands, and Czech Republic), but that's beside the point.

The problem with the included international roaming data on T-Mobile
U.S.A. is throttled to 128 Kb/sec. Fast enough to do e-mail, but not
very useful for web browsing or to use GPS mapping functions.

After experiencing the nearly unusable 128 Kb/s roaming data, the next
two trips we made to Europe I bought local SIM cards that included high
speed data. With EU rules, those worked in all EU and EEA countries.
Sadly, with Brexit, the SIM cards sold by UK carriers like Vodafone,
have been greatly worsened. I did the same thing on two trips to China
in 2018 and 2019.

On the trips to Italy and China I was traveling with others and some of
them were just sure that their included T-Mobile international data
would eliminate the need for buying a local SIM card. They were wrong. I
set up a hotspot and let them tether into my phone. For $15 per month
they could upgrade from 128 Kb/s to 256 Kb/s. If they wanted high speed
data it was $5/day for 512MB, 5GB/10 days for $35, or 15GB/30 days for
$50. This is way more expensive than buying a local SIM card. The
Vodafone card that I bought in 2019 was £1 per day for 500MB of high
speed data (plus unlimited talk and SMS).

nospam

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 8:15:29 PM4/6/22

to

In article <t2l8ik$7it$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> The problem with the included international roaming data on T-Mobile
> U.S.A. is throttled to 128 Kb/sec. Fast enough to do e-mail, but not
> very useful for web browsing or to use GPS mapping functions.

t-mobile international roaming is *free*.

RJH

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 8:48:52 PM4/6/22

to

On 7 Apr 2022 at 12:43:14 AM, sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> The problem with the included international roaming data on T-Mobile
> U.S.A. is throttled to 128 Kb/sec.

Where does it say that and where does it say that Verizon & AT&T aren't?

Cheers, Rob

nospam

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 9:03:47 PM4/6/22

to

In article <t2lcdh$15g7$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, RJH <patch...@gmx.com>

wrote:

> > The problem with the included international roaming data on T-Mobile
> > U.S.A. is throttled to 128 Kb/sec.
>
> Where does it say that and where does it say that Verizon & AT&T aren't?

<https://www.t-mobile.com/support/coverage/international-roaming-service
s>
€ Magenta, ONE Plan, and Simple Choice plans give you unlimited 2G
data and texting in more than 210 countries and destinations at no
extra charge, while voice calls are $0.25/minute. (Look up calling
and messaging rates.)

unlimited *2g* speeds. keep in mind that it's *free*.

in the fine print, at the bottom:
Standard speeds approx. 128 Kbps

sms

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 10:14:37 PM4/6/22

to

From <https://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/roaming>: "When you travel
abroad in 210+ countries and destinations you will have unlimited data
at up to 128 kbps"

AT&T and Verizon require the purchase of international plans, see
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UylOYNj75fuyDte8kFsejz5lFoKnrcI09ehLmrqeWOs/>

AT&T has the best deal for high-speed data since they provide unlimited
high-speed data, the first line is $10 per day and additional lines are
$5 per day, with a 10 day cap after which there are no additional
charges (in the same billing period).

If your phone supports eSIM then it's a better deal to buy an
international data plan and use a VOIP provider for voice calls. For
example, for $18 you can buy 5GB for 21 days in Europe
<https://esimdb.com/region/europe/globalesim>. If you want to buy data
for only one country then US Mobile is $10 for 5GB for 30 days, $18 for
10GB for 30 days
<https://www.usmobile.com/international-roaming-phone-plans>.

RJH

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 11:32:53 PM4/6/22

to

On 7 Apr 2022 at 3:14:32 AM, sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> AT&T and Verizon require the purchase of international plans,

How much does TMobile charge for that same fast data as Verizon & AT&T?

Cheers, Rob

RJH

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 11:44:05 PM4/6/22

to

On 7 Apr 2022 at 2:03:44 AM, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> unlimited *2g* speeds. keep in mind that it's *free*.

Thank you for those figures.

It's not fair for him to say bad things about one carrier whose unlimited
data is free while the other carriers charge $10 a day for faster data.

How much is the same slow data on those other carriers (AT&T & Verizon)?

Cheers, Rob

nospam

unread,

Apr 6, 2022, 11:56:08 PM4/6/22

to

In article <t2lmm3$5dd$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, RJH <patch...@gmx.com>

wrote:

>
> > unlimited *2g* speeds. keep in mind that it's *free*.
>
> Thank you for those figures.
>
> It's not fair for him to say bad things about one carrier whose unlimited
> data is free while the other carriers charge $10 a day for faster data.
>
> How much is the same slow data on those other carriers (AT&T & Verizon)?

they only offer fast data for a fee.

t-mobile offers free 2g as well as faster options for a fee.

sms

unread,

Apr 7, 2022, 9:28:34 AM4/7/22

to

No included slow data on AT&T or Verizon.

"Free" is not the really the right adjective. "Included" is the right
adjective.

It is true that T-Mobile tries to compensate for their other issues by
including extras. Besides the included international SMS and 2G data,
you also get basic Netflix and "T-Mobile Tuesday" giveaways and
discounts which in the past have included discounted movie tickets, free
Taco Bell tacos, free blankets, free bento boxes, a free Burger King
Whopper, etc. (see <https://www.tmonews.com/tag/t-mobile-tuesdays> for a
list of past deals).

It's not unfair to point out the fact that the 2G data is so slow that
it's not much benefit when traveling, and I've personally experienced
this on T-Mobile, as well as having been on two trips where I ended up
letting others tether to my phone's hotspot which provided high speed
data because they could not use the low-speed data for applications like
Facebook or for sending photos.

128 Kb/s or 256 Kb/s might have been fine when all people did was send
e-mail, but if you want to web browse, use a navigation application that
depends on data, or send photos, then it would not be practical.

Experienced travelers, paying for their own service, will buy a prepaid
SIM card for the country or region they are visiting. This has become
much easier and more practical, as well as less expensive, with the
advent of eSIMs since there's no need to search for a prepaid SIM card
when you arrive in a country or order one online from Amazon where the
cost will be much higher. These are data-only cards but with the advent
of VOIP this is not a big deal. What you want to do, before you leave on
a trip, is to forward your native mobile number to your Google Voice
number. You can also receive SMS on your Google Voice number, but you
can't send SMS to foreign numbers using Google Voice. However this is of
little consequence in most countries since SMS is not widely used,
people use WhatsApp (Europe, India, Central and South America) or WeChat
(China), or Line (Taiwan), or Viber.

Since all recent vintage iPhones support eSIMs, it's easy to try it out.
For Android phones that lack eSIM support you can add eSIM support for
less than $25 (2 eSIM profiles) <https://esim.me/>.

nospam

unread,

Apr 7, 2022, 9:57:00 AM4/7/22

to

In article <t2mou0$ks5$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> It is true that T-Mobile tries to compensate for their other issues by
> including extras.

that is not true. t-mobie is not compensating for anything. they simply
have a better and more competitive product.

> It's not unfair to point out the fact that the 2G data is so slow that
> it's not much benefit when traveling,

it's perfectly fine for messaging, checking the weather, etc., the
types of things people actually do when traveling.

more bandwidth intensive tasks can be done via wifi.

Lewis

unread,

Apr 7, 2022, 2:19:47 PM4/7/22

to

And in Canada. And in Mexico. And in Norway. And the UK.

--
'Why are our people going out there?' said Mr Boggis of the Thieves'
Guild. 'Because they are showing a brisk pioneering spirit and
seeking wealth and... additional wealth in a new land,' said Lord
Vetinari. 'What's in it for the Klatchians?' said Lord Downey.
'Oh, they've gone out there because they are a bunch of
unprincipled opportunists always ready to grab something for
nothing,' said Lord Vetinari. [...] The Patrician looked down
again at his notes. 'Oh, I do beg your pardon,' he said. 'I seem
to have read those last two sentences in the wrong order.

Lewis

unread,

Apr 7, 2022, 2:23:25 PM4/7/22

to

In message <t2lmm3$5dd$1...@gioia.aioe.org> RJH <patch...@gmx.com> wrote:
> On 7 Apr 2022 at 2:03:44 AM, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> unlimited *2g* speeds. keep in mind that it's *free*.

> Thank you for those figures.

> It's not fair for him to say bad things about one carrier whose unlimited
> data is free while the other carriers charge $10 a day for faster data.

He's a very shitty troll.

> How much is the same slow data on those other carriers (AT&T & Verizon)?

They do not offer anything but their $10/day extortion rate.

--
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

Lewis

unread,

Apr 7, 2022, 6:53:51 PM4/7/22

to

In message <t2mou0$ks5$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> It is true that T-Mobile tries to compensate for their other issues

You are such a fucking shill. T-mobile is not "compensating" for
anything. They have better service, better prices, and better base
features than the competition, and this makes you angry because you have
decided to firmly affix your mouth to verizon's cock,

> It's not unfair to point out the fact that the 2G data is so slow that
> it's not much benefit when traveling

Total horseshit. It means I get iMessages from my family members, for
one, and that is HUGE when traveling. In fact, it is easily the most
important data use when traveling, assuming you have friends and/or
family who want to communicate with you.

Maybe that's you're problem. Are you lonely? Is that why you send all
your time lying and trolling?

--
It was all very well going about pure logic and how the universe was
ruled by logic and the harmony of numbers, but the plain fact was
that the disc was manifestly traversing space on the back of a
giant turtle and the gods had a habit of going round to atheists'
houses and smashing their windows.