That's quite a statement coming from you, considering that in the past you've made elitist and even mildly racist statements by claiming that T-Mobile specifically targets their coverage to lower income population centers, and that only those who live in the "ghetto" should even consider them. Are you sure you're willing to lower yourself to such a degree if you were to switch?
You're wasting your breath with folks like AutoUnion and BiggAW. We can talk until we're blue in the face about how T-Mobile works great for us, or how their favorite carrier hasn't worked for us. If it doesn't work on one specific street in Boston they'll still insinuate that we're somehow inferior to them and therefore our experiences are less valid than theirs.
Case in point:
This, despite the fact that in this very thread I've cited my own example. I guess somehow the $145/month I had been paying to AT&T for over 5 years was somehow less green or something.
For those who haven't kept up, my house is a black hole for AT&T. My wife and I were unable to make calls without the use of a microcell, and were lied to for over two years about their plans to build a new tower nearby. Since switching to T-Mobile in October we haven't had a single dropped call and we can count on one hand the number of times we haven't had at least HSPA+ service. And before anyone claims that we fall into that group that never travels or leaves home, this includes travel all around the Houston area, Atlanta, Baltimore, Charlotte, Chicago, Colorado Springs, Denver, and Detroit. I'd say that's pretty darn good for a network that's supposedly far inferior.
I know what you are saying... using cellphone carrier as a status symbol is childish. I enjoy the back and forth between AutoUnion34. He has some valid points and some generalizations. But he is now starting to see the goodness in T-Mobile... hence his comment above.