On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:55:21 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <461dc9cb$0$27204$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Scott wrote:
>
>> Verizon is not the be-
>> all, end-all carrier. The fact is that nobody is. The quicker you accept
>> this fact, the easier it is to see the world in real terms.
>
>I have never stated that Verizon was the be-all, end-all, etc.

Now that's funny! LOL

>You said for every Sprint hole that there was a corresponding Verizon
>hole. If that were true, and the holes were of equal size, then Sprint
>would not be rated so poorly in comparison.

Differences in ratings are actually relatively small, on the order of
the sampling error, in addition to being based on badly flawed
methodology (e.g., lumping together of iDEN and CDMA2000, making the
result not meaningful for either).

>I can't use Sprint. There are large gaps in coverage in the city I live
>in, as well as surrounding cities, gaps that don't exist for Verizon.

You've made it clear that you only like Verizon. Fair enough. No
reason to constantly dis other carriers the way you do.

>The reasons are PCS versus Cellular bands, as well as fewer cell sites.

Those aren't real reasons.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>