On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:39:28 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <45cfd361$0$27239$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article <pt4vs2leubcod0vpkvvf0khd4qkg4m0715@4ax.com>,
>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Steven Scharf (aka SMS) repeatedly claims (trolls)
>>
>> And John Navas never trolls, does he.
>>
>> Nice editorializing, there. Nice high road you've taken.
>
>Oh jeez, what did he say now? I kill-filed him to resist the temptation
>to reply, but you don't have to snip everything he wrote!
>
>I could easily list 20 places in the SF Bay Area where there is only
>AMPS coverage...

Except they don't exist according to Verizon.

>There's a reason why Verizon beat the other carries by a significant
>margin in the latest Consumer Reports survey. Part of it was due to
>their better digital network, but part was due to the AMPS coverage
>provided out of the urban core.

No evidence at all of that.

>It was huge sample size, and the results
>are indisputable.

On the contrary -- Consumer Reports suffers from a self-selected sample
of a non-representative universe. It also suffers from serious
screwups, like the recent car seat debacle. And it just rated McDonalds
coffee as better than Starbucks -- LOL!
<http://www.amonline.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=18130>

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