On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 15:39:56 GMT, DTC <no_spam@move_along_folks.foob>
wrote in <gxSMh.15570$tD2.10714@newsread1.news.pas.earthlin k.net>:

>SMS wrote:
> > In *all areas of the country* Verizon coverage was better than Cingular
> > service in the most extensive independent surveys.
>
>John Navas wrote:
>> My observations are based on numerous carefully-controlled tests of
>> multiple handsets throughout the *greater San Francisco Bay Area*.
>
>Apples to oranges

p.s. There are no "surveys" of _geographic coverage_ -- surveys rate
_subjective quality_ of service, not the amount of geographic coverage.
Is that what you meant by "apples to oranges"?

To compare geographic coverage, assuming you don't have access to
proprietary/non-public test data, you have to rely on comparisons of
published coverage maps, which is relatively crude. To its credit,
Cingular provides much better coverage map data than Verizon.

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