I think we need more choices in the poll. My answer on a 1-5 scale (with 5 being the most satisfactory) would be 4, but since there are only three options available, I chose the middle one.
In Central California (Fresno/Clovis) my iPhone service has been great since 2G release. Before I got my 2G I had a BlackJack II on 3G and it was spotty. I really was hesitant going from the 2G to 3GS but I haven't had any issues with 3G, it's been adequately fast and available. On my last trip up to Oakland I had full 3G reception the entire way.
The only complaint I have is in Tahoe my sister and her husband, who have Verizon, were able to get service and I had to go find a spot to get reception. Not sure what that is about. They do live in Reno so maybe that affects it? Anyhow, if AT&T can get their mountain coverage improved it would be icing on the cake.
The phone is awesome, but the service sucks. I went from almost no dropped calls with Verizon to multiple a week with AT&t. Verizon clearly has better service, but AT&T has better phones and better customer service.
For the most part, I've been happy with the service, however at times, I've noticed that my signal strength drops for no apparent reason. That is I'm in a location that does have good coverage, but on any given day I'll get the dreaded searching and I'm unable to connect.
Dude.
I am getting it from http://www.verizonwireless.com/
I am talking about the touch pro 2
I see it is 299.00, but you get a 100.00 online discount making it 199.00. That is WITH a 2-year contract. One problem they are out of stock.
As for rate plans here you go:
individual rate plans
Where is your 29.99 plan?
As for data here you go:
PDA/Smartphone Data
So where you getting your info?
here in southern/central MA it seems like we got some upgrades about a month ago (850Mhz 3G). I have 3G wherever I go including my house finally (was EDGE only for a while), I get 5 bar service just about everywhere. 3G speeds range from 1.3-1.7+ Mbps in my town (Webster, MA) to 1.8-2.2+ Mbps in Worcester and parts close to it. Even areas like Brookfield which used to get craptacular service now get full 3G in most places.
I've rarely dropped a call, no worse than Verizon. In fact, around here AT&T's coverage is as good or better than Verizon. Speedwise it isn't even close, AT&T is about twice as fast as my friends verizon blackberry in the same areas.
No complaints, just wish sometimes, the towers were better, they seem to go down everytime there is a big wind storm.
California central valley here. Service is hit and miss, I had 13 dropped calls in one night. 3G speed is low. Once my contract is up I think I'll be looking at what Verizon and T-Mobile have to offer, which sucks as I've been with at&t for 13 years.
I think we need more choices in the poll. My answer on a 1-5 scale (with 5 being the most satisfactory) would be 4, but since there are only three options available, I chose the middle one.
I would love to know how you've come to the conclusion that San Fransisco has bad ATT service. I have not had a single problem in San Fransisco proper, north bay, South bay, or east bay areas. Marin County/San Rafael, no problem. Presidio/Fisherman's Wharf, no problem. Every so often I have to do work in Redwood City. No problem there. Hayward, full signal. Vallejo, and in fact, up the entire I-80 corridor home to Sacramento, not a problem.
So how does San Fransisco have bad ATT service?
back to the original question, no problems in Sacramento, my other home in Las Vegas, my SO's parent's place in Kingman, AZ, nor my parent's places in Oklahoma City and Omaha. My dad's farm in Hugo (near my grandparents) gets full bars.
BL.