Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Carrier Switching from AT&T to Tmobile

For those worried about the coverage T-Mobile is implementing a lifetime coverage guarentee with the new iPhones, details in the link below.

http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/news/company-news/lifetime-coverage-guarantee.htm

Basically if you aren't happy within the first month it's full reimbursement on everything. After that they will reimburse you for the month and one option is you keep making phone payments to t-mobile but they'll unlock the phone so you can use it somewhere else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0970373
I'd definitely give the service a try first.

I really wanted to switch and did a trial run. Unfortunately, I could only get a signal if I was near the window in my apartment's living room, but the real kicker was my office, which also had a very spotty signal (and I have a window). Additionally, our office has a weak wifi network so that wasn't an option. I simply could not accept having unreliable service for 8+ hours out of the day. Hopefully your coverage is better.
 
T-Mobile's announcement today only continues to show they're really the carrier to be on right now. Lots of innovation going on and I can't wait for what they'll do next.
 
BJB Productions said:
I find myself wavering at the 11th hour - still concerned about not having coverage when I really need it.
Click to expand...
I'm with you on the switch to TMobile don't abandon ship because of worries of no service in some areas. I am getting a cheap pay as you go phone that will cost 3 a month and you chan setup your phone to forward calls if your TMobile phone doesn't answer.

The company I'm looking at is H20 they use att network so you would have great coverage and they have 4 free phones.
 
codelode84 said:
I'm with you on the switch to TMobile don't abandon ship because of worries of no service in some areas. I am getting a cheap pay as you go phone that will cost 3 a month and you chan setup your phone to forward calls if your TMobile phone doesn't answer.

The company I'm looking at is H20 they use att network so you would have great coverage and they have 4 free phones.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll check that out. I'm feeling better now about the coverage situation.
 
BJB Productions said:
Thanks, I'll check that out. I'm feeling better now about the coverage situation.
Click to expand...
I am mainly using this during travels and will keep it in my car. I would check out the coverage area. I full expect T-Mobile's range to be better in the next few years b/c they are adding customers and will be willing to make more agreements in small areas for roaming. I will let you know I carried around two phones for a few days b/c I didn't want to risk my unlimited data plan if the service was crap and in cincinnati it was pretty decent. My building is notorious for not getting reception with the exception of AT&T and I was satisfied with the service. As for outside of my building T-Mobile was great. I am excited to make the switch and am getting 2 lines for 120 20 gb each line with the 10 gb data stash and the ability to tether with that. I couldn't do that at all before. I also will have Jump on Demand and have 5gb on my iPad for 10. Very excited to be changing tired of ATT while I was comparing them I got the famous you have reach 75% of your data limit and will be throttled when we are congested this made up my decision to go. Granted 2 days later T decided to raise the limit to 22 GB oh well. I priced the service i'm getting at Verizon and it would 350 buck and even more for the iPad, shows you how much this companies are ripping off new customers. I am tired of it. AT&T CEO going around ranting about how unlimited plan iPhones are hurting there business when they are what put them where they are today. I'm out!
 
I switched to Tmo and have terrible coverage in Ohio, especially with data. Tmo says I'm blanketed by their extended LTE at home, but it's terrible. It varies wildly by moving just a few feet. I was at a soccer field last night and had to walk around the field to find a data signal despite being full strength. I took a trip from Ohio to Florida earlier this month. Straight down I-75. Signal strength was terrible for large portiions. Good only when near Chattanooga, Atlanta, etc. It will vary by where you live, of course. My wife uses ATT and had great coverage on the Florida trip. I love Tmo's offerings and policies, though. It's really low risk since they guarantee coverage. Despite my personal experience, I would definitely give them a try. I just wante to give my honest experience. Not down on Tmo.
 
cindaddy said:
I switched to Tmo and have terrible coverage in Ohio, especially with data. Tmo says I'm blanketed by their extended LTE at home, but it's terrible. It varies wildly by moving just a few feet. I was at a soccer field last night and had to walk around the field to find a data signal despite being full strength. I took a trip from Ohio to Florida earlier this month. Straight down I-75. Signal strength was terrible for large portiions. Good only when near Chattanooga, Atlanta, etc. It will vary by where you live, of course. My wife uses ATT and had great coverage on the Florida trip. I love Tmo's offerings and policies, though. It's really low risk since they guarantee coverage. Despite my personal experience, I would definitely give them a try. I just wante to give my honest experience. Not down on Tmo.
Click to expand...
Cinddaddy if you have anything less than an iPhone 6s it won't matter the phone doesn't have their latest band. The key is the phone must have band 12. That is why I'm moving to them on a 6s plus.
 
codelode84 said:
Cinddaddy if you have anything less than an iPhone 6s it won't matter the phone doesn't have their latest band. The key is the phone must have band 12. That is why I'm moving to them on a 6s plus.
Click to expand...

There has been a lot of talk recently about this new band but as an FCC-licensed radio operator I would like to chime in:

Low frequency = better for open spaces i.e. fields, the sky, etc.

High frequency = better for buildings, mountains, places where you'd think it may be hard to find a signal.

This is why you see planes operating on VHF in the frequencies like 109-120MHz, etc., whereas cell phones can operate anywhere from 700MHz to I believe around 1-2GHz.

So, in summary, the introduction of a low frequency band into the 6s does NOT necessarily mean better reception.
 
DustinDev47 said:
There has been a lot of talk recently about this new band but as an FCC-licensed radio operator I would like to chime in:

Low frequency = better for open spaces i.e. fields, the sky, etc.

High frequency = better for buildings, mountains, places where you'd think it may be hard to find a signal.

This is why you see planes operating on VHF in the frequencies like 109-120MHz, etc., whereas cell phones can operate anywhere from 700MHz to I believe around 1-2GHz.

So, in summary, the introduction of a low frequency band into the 6s does NOT necessarily mean better reception.
Click to expand...
Straight from this article. http://www.techinsider.io/new-iphone-could-fix-problems-with-t-mobile-2015-9

Extended Range LTE "massively expands coverage and works four times better within buildings," John Legere, T-Mobile's CEO, said in a promotional video Thursday. T-Mobile says that the signal can also travel twice as far from cell towers which will mean better T-Mobile service outside of cities.
 
codelode84 said:
Straight from this article. http://www.techinsider.io/new-iphone-could-fix-problems-with-t-mobile-2015-9

Extended Range LTE "massively expands coverage and works four times better within buildings," John Legere, T-Mobile's CEO, said in a promotional video Thursday. T-Mobile says that the signal can also travel twice as far from cell towers which will mean better T-Mobile service outside of cities.
Click to expand...
You did one or both of these things:

1. You are not familiar with LTE so automatically assumed that I made an incorrect statement based on Legere's statement, when in fact, mine is completely in support of his, as LTE operates on UHF and above (700MHz and higher).

2. You didn't read/comprehend my post and simply threw an article at me.

Either way, thank you for confirming my point.
 
DustinDev47 said:
You did one or both of these things:

1. You are not familiar with LTE so automatically assumed that I made an incorrect statement based on Legere's statement, when in fact, mine is completely in support of his, as LTE operates on UHF and above (700MHz and higher).

2. You didn't read/comprehend my post and simply threw an article at me.

Either way, thank you for confirming my point.
Click to expand...


So, in summary, the introduction of a low frequency band into the 6s does NOT necessarily mean better reception.


It clearly say better reception in buildings. I don't think he would be saying it if it wasn't true. So you clearly didnt read what is said. It expands to say over a larger area.
 
codelode84 said:
So, in summary, the introduction of a low frequency band into the 6s does NOT necessarily mean better reception.


It clearly say better reception in buildings. I don't think he would be saying it if it wasn't true. So you clearly didnt read what is said. It expands to say over a larger area.
Click to expand...

You still don't get it. I stated SPECIFICALLY that there has been TALK about better reception as a result of the introduction of a low frequency band.

What you FAIL to understand:

It is not a low frequency band that Apple has introduced. It is a high frequency band. In fact, the technical term is "Ultra High Frequency" or "UHF."

Therefore, this TALK is incorrect and if you assume that a new band automatically means better reception, you are incorrect, too.
 
DustinDev47 said:
You still don't get it. I stated SPECIFICALLY that there has been TALK about better reception as a result of the introduction of a low frequency band.

What you FAIL to understand:

It is not a low frequency band that Apple has introduced. It is a high frequency band. In fact, the technical term is "Ultra High Frequency" or "UHF."

Therefore, this TALK is incorrect and if you assume that a new band automatically means better reception, you are incorrect, too.
Click to expand...
Read the specs of the new iPhone it has added band 12 which is low frequency. I checked this with my iPad Air which didn't have it compared to a new Samsung that did. The service was night and day. The iPhone extended range chip is even better than the one in the Samsung I tested. I tested this real world and it is true. This is the only reason I switched.
 
codelode84 said:
Read the specs of the new iPhone it has added band 12 which is low frequency. I checked this with my iPad Air which didn't have it compared to a new Samsung that did. The service was night and day. The iPhone extended range chip is even better than the one in the Samsung I tested. I tested this real world and it is true. This is the only reason I switched.
Click to expand...
700+MHz is NOT low frequency.
 
Just to add, I'm actually using a G4 that I won in a contest. It has the new band, so my earlier comments reflect the use of Band 12. I was aware of this. I don't see a huge improvement. I have an iPhone 6 as well, but was not using it the last two months. My wife was using it on ATT.
 
cindaddy said:
Just to add, I'm actually using a G4 that I won in a contest. It has the new band, so my earlier comments reflect the use of Band 12. I was aware of this. I don't see a huge improvement. I have an iPhone 6 as well, but was not using it the last two months.
Click to expand...

That sucks do you know if they rolled out the new band 12 in your area or not?

I was getting download speeds on my iPad of 5-10 mbps and on the Samsung edge I was getting speeds of as high as 65 Mbps.
 
codelode84 said:
That sucks do you know if they rolled out the new band 12 in your area or not?

I was getting download speeds on my iPad of 5-10 mbps and on the Samsung edge I was getting speeds of as high as 65 Mbps.
Click to expand...

Not conclusively, but the coverage map shows extended LTE in my area. I can't confirm the band. Again, only speaking of my personal experience. Sounds like your experience is better. I'm still on Tmo. Still experimenting.
 
cindaddy said:
Not conclusively, but the coverage map shows extended LTE in my area. I can't confirm the band. Again, only speaking of my personal experience. Sounds like your experience is better. I'm still on Tmo. Still experimenting.
Click to expand...
Yeah to be honors I know I am giving up something switching to tmobile but I happy with capable service. I'm just sick of att and verizon. If a enough people leave these heartless profit hungry companies then maybe they will care more.

If it wasn't for TMobile and sprint I would hate to see what rates would be like here. Just think for me as a new customer to get the package I have a TMobile for 120 would be 350 at Verizon. The amount of data these companies give you is a joke with these Lear jet phones we have today and then charging you 30 a month for unlimited text really? So although I'm glad they have better service now than in the past it is also the principle.
 
codelode84 said:
Yeah to be honors I know I am giving up something switching to tmobile but I happy with capable service. I'm just sick of att and verizon. If a enough people leave these heartless profit hungry companies then maybe they will care more.

If it wasn't for TMobile and sprint I would hate to see what rates would be like here. Just think for me as a new customer to get the package I have a TMobile for 120 would be 350 at Verizon. The amount of data these companies give you is a joke with these Lear jet phones we have today and then charging you 30 a month for unlimited text really? So although I'm glad they have better service now than in the past it is also the principle.
Click to expand...

Right. Tmo is improving all the time. I still have ATT for my wife on an unlimited plan for $66/month which Tmo can't beat. In my area, she has better service. However, I can live with it for the rate I'm getting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: codelode84
codelode84 said:
That is fine and all but you implied that service wouldn't be better. So are you agreeing that the band 12 will help data coverage or not?
Click to expand...

I am agreeing. What I'm trying to clarify is that band 12 is NOT low frequency.

CEmajr said:
Actually 700 MHz IS low band frequency for cellular signals.
Click to expand...

Cellular or not, it is not TECHNICALLY a low frequency band. NOT. It is, yes, LOWER, than 800, 1.2GHz, etc., but it is not low frequency. It is UHF - which stands for Ultra High Frequency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back