Slashdot Asks: Which Wireless Carrier Do You Prefer?

Earlier this year, telecommunications giants like T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon and Sprint were battling to see who could release the best unlimited data plan(s). T-Mobile started the domino chain reaction with the launch of its "One" unlimited plan in August. But the competition became especially fierce in February when Verizon introduced unlimited data plans of their own, causing Sprint and AT&T to unveil new unlimited data plans that same week, both of which have their own restrictions and pricing. Each of the four major carriers have since continued to tweak their plans to ultimately undercut their competitors and retain as many customers are possible.

Given how almost everyone has a smartphone these days and the thirst for data has never been higher, we'd like to ask you about your current wireless carrier and plan. Which wireless carrier and plan do you have any why? Is there any one carrier or unlimited data plan that stands out from the others? T-Mobile, for example, recently announced that it added 1.1 million customers in Q1 2017, which means that it has added more than 1 million customers every quarter for the past four years. Have they managed to earn your business? MyRatePlan has a good breakdown of the current unlimited data plans on the market today.

Comments

AT&T

[slasher999]

AT&T customer here for several years. Evaluated all of the main carriers and a few mvno plays last year, including a trial with T-Mobile who came the closest in service quality. Ended up staying with AT&T.

Re: AT&T

[chipschap]

I went from Verizon to T-Mobile to Google Fi, which suits me well as a very low-end mobile data user (typically 500MB per month mobile and 25GB wifi). It would be a terrible choice for heavy mobile data users, though, as data is strictly pay as you go (a cent per megabyte). And what I do like is that they don't pack in every conceivable fee like some of the others. $20 per month, about $5 for data, and $5 in taxes and fees.

Re: AT&T

[Anonymous Coward]

AT&T and Verizon tend to flipflop in terms of which has better price offerings and which has bigger asshole policies and shitty customer service.
Coverage / signal reliability varies by specific location. Bandwidth during peak times also varies, load increases then they up backhaul bandwith and it gets better for a while.

So for me, Verizon is currently better where I am. Two years ago it was AT&T, and in a year they'll probably be better again.

But both of them still piss me off all the time. Better isn't usually the same as Good in this game.

Re: AT&T

[WaywardGeek]

Full disclosure: I work for Google. Regardless, Google Fi is a no-brainer, IMO. My wife and daughter do not agree, and have iPhones with Verison. We pay about $160/mo combined for their plans, while my son and I get by with typically $40/mo combined. My son and I have at least as good service as Verizon, because of the switching between Sprint and T-Mobile.

My daughter had to have an iPhone, and not an Android device, because her friends hang out on iMessage. Her Android messages were shown in the wrong color on iMessage, which offended some teens to the point of excluding her from conversations. So... I pay a $60/month premium so she can be the right color. Evil!

Re: AT&T

[schnell]

Coverage / signal reliability varies by specific location. Bandwidth during peak times also varies, load increases then they up backhaul bandwith and it gets better for a while.

Full disclosure: I work for one of the four big carriers. But this isn't a commercial for my unnamed employer, it's just a description of why they are different.

There is a fundamental strategy difference between AT&T/Verizon and Sprint/T-Mobile. The key, of course, is money. And as a customer, you do get what you pay for.

Did you know that in the US, almost 70% of the population lives in 3% of the landmass? (That sounds shocking until you think about Alaska, Montana, West Texas, Nevada and Wyoming.) It doesn't take (comparatively) that many towers to cover the 70%. But it takes a disproportionately higher number more to cover the next 10% of the population. And the next 10% after that take almost half again the number of towers. The expense gets higher and higher as you try to reach 99% of the population (which is contained in roughly 70% of the land area of the US).

If you have the money to buy the spectrum and build the towers, you can choose to cover as many people as possible (and the side benefit is that you provide better coverage for people who travel a lot, especially to rural areas). If you have the money, you can also spend the billions on spectrum needed for the capacity to support users in dense areas and the backhaul to go with it. AT&T and Verizon, because they have the big subscriber/revenue bases and the cost advantages of legacy ILEC backhaul facilities in collectively more than half the states, choose that path. But it all costs money to do that, and you as a consumer pay more for the coverage quality.

Sprint and T-Mobile don't have the big piles of money or the huge subscriber bases. The good news for them: like I said, it costs a lot less money in tower building to cover 70% of the US population, and if you have fewer subscribers then you don't have to shell out as much on spectrum and backhaul. They have chosen (probably wisely, given their bank accounts) to go for the low hanging fruit, which costs less money and they can price their service more aggressively because they aren't trying to spend the money to cover everybody. So their strategy works well for most people, although if it works TOO well, then they have to start shelling out money that they don't have for more spectrum. (Sprint already has more spectrum than they know what to do with, but most of it is high-band ex-Clearwire WiMax spectrum that is almost useless in dense urban areas with lots of buildings to penetrate.)

So the bottom line is:

• Live in an urban area and spend most of your time there? T-Mobile or Sprint are likely to meet your needs.
• Live in a suburban/rural area, travel much and/or want to make sure you've got connectivity wherever you go? Verizon or AT&T are probably a better choice.

Re: AT&T

[ausekilis]

If teenagers were offended by the color of a text message, maybe your daughter shouldn't be considering them friends. Anybody that petty doesn't deserve the attention.

Re: AT&T

[nine-times]

To offer a mild defense of Apple, there's a reason they make messages a different color if you're using a non-Apple phone:

Their iMessage app debuted at a time when carriers generally still charged for SMS messages. If a blue message came in, it meant that it was going over iMessage, which meant that it was a free message. If it was green, it was SMS, and therefore it would be charged as an SMS message according to your carrier's plan. You definitely wanted to have a way to know the difference.

It's less important now that carriers are generally offering unlimited SMS messages, so you could argue that they could drop the distinction. However, there still may be places or situations where people are charged for SMS, even if only when doing international texting, so it's not completely meaningless. Also, iMessage still provides some different features, such as providing read-receipts (if you allow that) and being encrypted, so someone might care about knowing which messages are going over which service.

Re: AT&T

[DuckDodgers]

Teenagers, boys or girls, aren't the most rational creatures. Convincing his daughter she needs new friends is probably as impossible as convincing her existing friends that excluding someone for using Android is absurd.

I'm having the same problem with my own teenage kids. We live in a moderately wealthy area, and more than half their classmates have iPhones. My kids are excluded from a lot of the social activity due to their Android devices. One is tolerating it well, the other isn't. No matter how much he hears weird old dad claim that having a recent i-whatever to communicate with the cool kids is pointless and feeds into the Apple advertising machine, he doesn't believe it.

Keeping the subject matter relevant to geeks

[redmid17]

It's not as if there is a website that does yearly reviews of things like this: http://www.consumerreports.org...

Re:Keeping the subject matter relevant to geeks

[Anonymous Coward]

They all suck.

No data, pay as you go only.

[Tyr07]

I have wifi in enough places if I actually need data, and otherwise I'm out and about, and don't need it.

I refuse to deal with contracts, locking me into shitty deals when better ones come out, their prices are over the top for data as is, always has been.

They keep trying to add more value but take more dollars while as employers they keep trying to add more value but not pay more. People are trying to minimize the money you get constantly while trying to maximize what they take from you.

Their only luck when it comes to me is that in todays day and age everyone has to have a phone, and a landline is just as expensive (as intended).

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Project Fi

[DiSKiLLeR]

I use Google Project Fi. Just because.

Re:Project Fi

[chmod a x mojo]

Same here, no regrets.

I get coverage from T-Mobile, Sprint, and U.S. Cellular, so you really have to be in the middle of bum fuck nowhere to not have anything.

The only downside would be to people who are heavy mobile data users, as it is strictly pay for what you use on data. With WIFI being everywhere I only use a small amount of mobile data these days, so paying ~$24-25/ month for phone + data is pretty sweet, especially after years and years with VZW and USC.

Re:Project Fi

[binarybum]

Hey, have you ever even been to Bum Fuck, Nowhere you insensitive clod?
      Project Fi works fine here, especially in our city center (central Bum Fuck). Perhaps you were on the very outskirts of Bum Fuck, or maybe in our sister city Western Bumble Fuck, Nowhere when you had reception issues.
     

Ting

[msk]

https://ting.com/

Verizon

[mtmiller100]

Over the years, I've been with T-Mobile, AT&T, and lastly, Verizon, whom I've been with for 10 years. All three of them excelled at charging an arm and a leg, and were never shy about letting me know all the new ways I can go into debt with them (I politely declined all of these "wonderful" opportunities)... but Verizon, despite costing the most by a hair, had the best coverage and reliability. I've been letting them pound me in the rear end, sans lube, for 10 years, and unless I move, I see this relationship continuing.

This question is very subjective...

[sudden.zero]

...it really depends on so many variables that there is no accurate answer. For example I am currently a T-Mobile customer, and have been for several years. Their service, for me, was very good until about four years ago. Then about four years ago my usage, and coverage area changed. I used to use my service mainly in major metropolitan areas, and T-Mobile is great in those types of areas. However, the minute you are anywhere out of the ordinary T-Mobile's service goes down the toilet. Four years ago a couple of things changed for me: My parents retired, and became part owners of a resort. I also bought a boat around the same time. These details are important because whenever I am on my boat or at the resort I have no service. This brings me to my next point which is anytime I see someone using their phone at the resort or on the water I ask them what carrier they use. The answer is almost always Verizon, and if it is not it's AT&T. Not a single person has ever answered that question with T-Mobile or Sprint. Nor has anyone ever said Cricket, Boost, Freedom Pop, etc. Just my opinion whatever that's worth.

Especially when

[s.petry]

You travel overseas. AT&T makes this very simple and has deals with local phone companies in ever country I, and people I know, have traveled. It took all of 2 minutes to enable, and while perhaps a few bucks more than some of the other methods required nothing extra. No hardware swapping, no hassle.

Prices have come down recently, which made me happy. Price was my only knock against AT&T, and I have been a customer since the iPhone 3 which had no choice but AT&T.

T-Mobile, despite issues

[Octorian]

Unfortunately, we only have 4 real options in the US. Everyone else is just piggybacking on one of them.

I like to be able to use whatever phone I want, gotten from anywhere, without needing to buy it through my carrier, and which I can keep updated without needing to crack it.
That means I refuse to use a carrier with a sufficiently proprietary network technology that enables them to be assholes about devices. This excludes Verizon and Sprint right off the bat.

So my only real options are AT&T or T-Mobile. Since T-Mobile has gone out of their way to be the least-jerk'ish mobile carrier in the US, while AT&T generally hasn't, I've basically stuck with T-Mobile. Sure, their coverage may not always be the best, but it does keep improving. And if I ever actually want to travel, I don't need to worry about having to shut off my phone to not be totally gouged on the bill.

Re:T-Mo

[magarity]

I have to travel internationally every couple of years and the TMo international is no joke. Upon landing in Beijing you get a 'Welcome to China' text and service includes unlimited pokey 2G data speed data that goes straight through TMo's US servers so the websites blocked normally in China work just fine. Coverage is most excellent; pretty much any city or town, just not out in the countryside.

TMO and Xfinity WiFi

[grumling]

T-Mobile is pretty good in my area, they really got good after the AT&T deal fell through and they picked up extra spectrum. But I also take advantage of the Xfinity wifi hotspots I get through Comcast, which are great when they work and save a lot of data on the LTE side. And they were the first US company to do wifi calling and are pretty good at it. I have an iPad and iPhone 7 that both have the latest LTE radios to get the 700 MHz band. Pricing isn't too bad either, I get a discount through work on an unlimited talk/text plan with 6 GB/month of data on each device, with rollover that lasts for (I think) a year.

Carrier comparison

[SteveWoz]

Many who comment here will have a reason that they chose one carrier over one other carrier. They may have switched carriers. I always found that the latest carrier plan was better than the competition, and that it would go back and forth or be too confusing to come up with one clear answer. I actually have iPhones and aPhones on 5 carriers. I also travel the world quite a bit. Domestically, all the carriers are good for most unless you live in an area not covered by some. I remember times when Verizon was faster but now it seems that AT&T is faster for me, most of the time. I remember when you could buy international data from Verizon that covered 200 countries, while the AT&T list was only about 50 countries. That affected me in places like Russia and South Africa, back then. T-Mobile has incredible data plans for here and away but they don't seem as fast as claimed unless I'm in the store. Sprint has gone far out of their way to help me with issues, including a stolen phone number. Right now I believe that the best carrier I have, for my own needs, is Google Project Fi because the plan works in over 100 countries. You can even order a free data-only SIM for free, without even a shipping charge, to use it on iPads and the like. I would never say that anyone's choice of plan is bad in any way though.

Virgin Mobile

[Snotnose]

$35/month, good signal in my apartment, good signal all around town.

Some 15 years ago I drove from San Diego to Oklahoma with my sister. She had Verizon. She had signal between cities when I had nothing. Then again, she was paying twice what I was. When I got close to a city I got a signal.

Few years ago I drove from San Diego to Salt Lake City, then to Montana. Never had an issue with signal strength.

Re:I hate them all

[whoever57]

Cellular is a God damned natural resource (Radio Waves) and we gave it away to businesses

They may have ben given away in the beginning, but since 1994, spectrum licenses have been auctioned

Short answer....

[LVSlushdat]

In my case its Ting, an MVNO that operates on both the Sprint and Tmobile infrastructure.. I buy my own phones, currently a Nexus 4, and refuse to do contracts.. With Ting, you only pay for what you *actually* use. My only nit with them (and its not just them) is their data usage prices are a bit steep.. For instance, my phone bill for TWO phones this month was $21.. It was that low as wife's phone was turned off most of the month, and I only used less than 100Mb of data.. On average, in normal months, the bill for two phones is between $35-$45.... Can't beat that with a stick...

Re:T-Mo

[gweilo8888]

Project Fi is also limited to just a couple of handsets, and *far* more expensive unless you don't use much data.

In the pacific northwest, Verizon.

[eggman9713]

I've been with AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile in the pacific northwest (Washington, Oregon mostly) for the last several years. During that time I have traveled both to the more metropolitan western Oregon and Washington, as well as the more rural eastern sides of the states. AT&T is pretty good around major metros and most semi-rural areas. T-mobile is very spotty outside of the metros and most major interstates, and many rural areas of eastern Washington and Oregon they have zero coverage at all. I've never used Sprint in this area but I don't know anyone who even has Sprint so that should tell you something. Verizon seems to have the best overall coverage in the pacific northwest, especially the more rural areas. Even when really out in the middle of nowhere they always seem to have some coverage to at least get a call out if nothing else. I can't speak for Idaho as I have not traveled in that area in several years. All of the major companies are awful in terms of pricing and customer service when you have a problem, but the best of all of the evils seems to be Verizon in my experience in this region of the US.

T-Mobile

[erp_consultant]

I was with AT&T for 12 years but they finally nickel and dimed me off their customer list. First, they were charging me for text messages when everyone else includes them. Then they started playing games with the grandfathered "unlimited" plan I had. Twice they raised the price by $10/month. That was the final straw.

I went from paying about $145/month (and that included a 22% discount from a former employer) for two lines to $100/month for 3 lines with T-Mobile. The third line was a promotion so I put a chip in the wife's iPad and she's happy as a clam. No contract. Unlimited data, voice and text. No charge for tethering. Unlimited calling to Canada and Mexico. Pretty sweet deal.

As near as I can tell, the coverage is just as good as it was before. Maybe better in some places. I think there was a time when AT&T and Verizon could legitimately say they had better networks. But I think the gap has closed considerably. It all comes down to where you live and the coverage in your neighborhood. Now it's just a race to the bottom.

Re:T-Mo

[bgarcia]

You should seriously look into upgrading to the T-Mobile One plan.

Features: Unlimited calls, texts, and unlimited 4G data! Also, 10GB high-speed tethering for each line (3G tethering when exceeded). Unlimited texts & 3G data internationally, Unlimited calls to/from Canada & Mexico. Free use of GoGo Wifi on domestic flights.

I have 7 lines for $220. This includes all taxes.
Additionally, for each line that uses less than 2GB of data in a month, they refund you $10!!!
My bill this past month was $170 for 7 lines.

Annoying

[Thyamine]

As someone who's company has paid for his phone/plan for the last 15 years, we are in the middle of having our numbers released and will be in charge of selecting our own provider and coverage plans. We've had Verizon for years, and I haven't had any complaints with coverage (mostly suburban/metro area), although I'm probably in that low-hanging fruit area where everyone has coverage.

For me now, the biggest interest is in unlimited data, tethering/hotspot usage, and how much I get before I get dropped to lower speeds, although 10 GB for hotspots seems a default. AT&T slows speeds after 22GB of data; T-Mobile seems like they don't except if you fall into the >30GB a month and there is congestion (take that as you will). My new vehicle has a built in hotspot (cool or a WTF, I'm not sure yet), but I'm stuck with AT&T if I want to put it on a plan. So far T-Mobile seems to be the most cost effective, but as others have mentioned, rural coverage will be lacking. Right now, I expect I'll be negotiating with T-Mobile to see what my wife and I can get. If that is enough savings, I may then look at a separate plan for the vehicle to help offset coverage when I travel (I travel a good bit for work).

You need a matrix just to try and keep track of what you need/where, and how to connect to avoid issues or using the 'wrong' data.

Re:T-Mobile == Carrier From Hell

[Mr.Radar]

T-Mobile hasn't had contracts since 2013 so your story is at least a few years old. Over the past few years they've completely revamped their network and rolled out lots of new coverage (mostly by acquiring "low-band" spectrum that lets them cover 4x the area per tower of their previous "mid-band" spectrum). They've also rolled out wifi calling (which lets you make and receive calls and texts over wifi) and "CellSpot" units that let you use your home internet to provide cell coverage at your house if you're in a complete dead zone.