Coverage Maps

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
H

HarrY

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
444
0
18,780
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

I stumbled across this cache while hunting for Cingular coverage maps.
It looks to be current and archived maps of the whole US. Sorry if
this is all old news but it was new to me. Hope this helps someone.


http://tinyurl.com/3udej
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <rqbt415s6v00bc26bhavngn516326rsmoa@4ax.com>,
Harry <harry@the.end> wrote:

> I stumbled across this cache while hunting for Cingular coverage maps.
> It looks to be current and archived maps of the whole US. Sorry if
> this is all old news but it was new to me. Hope this helps someone.
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3udej

Hardly a current one in there, they are all the very small scale drawn
by marketing worthless maps.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-440E54.16425102042005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <rqbt415s6v00bc26bhavngn516326rsmoa@4ax.com>,
> Harry <harry@the.end> wrote:
>
> > I stumbled across this cache while hunting for Cingular coverage maps.
> > It looks to be current and archived maps of the whole US. Sorry if
> > this is all old news but it was new to me. Hope this helps someone.
> >
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/3udej
>
> Hardly a current one in there, they are all the very small scale drawn
> by marketing worthless maps.

Really? By Marketing? Care to cite your source, or did you just tell
another lie?
 
J

Jer

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2004
777
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:

> "Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:jzwick3-440E54.16425102042005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
>
>>In article <rqbt415s6v00bc26bhavngn516326rsmoa@4ax.com>,
>> Harry <harry@the.end> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I stumbled across this cache while hunting for Cingular coverage maps.
>>>It looks to be current and archived maps of the whole US. Sorry if
>>>this is all old news but it was new to me. Hope this helps someone.
>>>
>>>
>>>http://tinyurl.com/3udej
>>
>>Hardly a current one in there, they are all the very small scale drawn
>>by marketing worthless maps.
>
>
> Really? By Marketing? Care to cite your source, or did you just tell
> another lie?
>
>

Well, every single map in any particular directory has the following
fine print at the bottom...

"This map reflects rate plan coverage for plans available after January
27, 2002. Map depicts an approximation of outdoor coverage. Map may
include areas served by unaffiliated carriers, and may depict their
licensed area rather than an approximation of the coverage there.
Actual coverage area may differ substantially from map graphics, and
coverage may be affected by such things as terrain, weather, foliage,
buildings and other construction, signal strength, customer equipment
and other factors. Cingular does not guarantee coverage. Charges will
be based on the location of the site receiving and transmitting the
call, not the location of the subscriber. Future coverage, if depicted
above, is based on current planning assumptions, but is subject to
change and may not be relied upon."


That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
worthless.


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
news:114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com...
> Scott Stephenson wrote:

>
>
> That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
> worthless.
>
>
> --

Really? I'm looking at a 10 year old map of my neighborhood. It shows my
house to be in exactly the right place. Its not worthless.

If coverage hasn't significantly changed in an area, why create a new map?
Some of the maps included in the link were as new as a month ago.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com>, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten>
wrote:

> Scott Stephenson wrote:
>
> > "Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> > news:jzwick3-440E54.16425102042005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> >
> >>In article <rqbt415s6v00bc26bhavngn516326rsmoa@4ax.com>,
> >> Harry <harry@the.end> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I stumbled across this cache while hunting for Cingular coverage maps.
> >>>It looks to be current and archived maps of the whole US. Sorry if
> >>>this is all old news but it was new to me. Hope this helps someone.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>http://tinyurl.com/3udej
> >>
> >>Hardly a current one in there, they are all the very small scale drawn
> >>by marketing worthless maps.
> >
> >
> > Really? By Marketing? Care to cite your source, or did you just tell
> > another lie?
> >
> >
>
> Well, every single map in any particular directory has the following
> fine print at the bottom...
>
> "This map reflects rate plan coverage for plans available after January
> 27, 2002. Map depicts an approximation of outdoor coverage. Map may
> include areas served by unaffiliated carriers, and may depict their
> licensed area rather than an approximation of the coverage there.
> Actual coverage area may differ substantially from map graphics, and
> coverage may be affected by such things as terrain, weather, foliage,
> buildings and other construction, signal strength, customer equipment
> and other factors. Cingular does not guarantee coverage. Charges will
> be based on the location of the site receiving and transmitting the
> call, not the location of the subscriber. Future coverage, if depicted
> above, is based on current planning assumptions, but is subject to
> change and may not be relied upon."
>
>
> That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
> worthless.

Thank you for proving Scott a worthless cellular shill.

THE MAPS are in large part, WORTHLESS
 
J

Jer

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2004
777
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Jack Zwick wrote:

> In article <114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com>, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Scott Stephenson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>news:jzwick3-440E54.16425102042005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article <rqbt415s6v00bc26bhavngn516326rsmoa@4ax.com>,
>>>>Harry <harry@the.end> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I stumbled across this cache while hunting for Cingular coverage maps.
>>>>>It looks to be current and archived maps of the whole US. Sorry if
>>>>>this is all old news but it was new to me. Hope this helps someone.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/3udej
>>>>
>>>>Hardly a current one in there, they are all the very small scale drawn
>>>>by marketing worthless maps.
>>>
>>>
>>>Really? By Marketing? Care to cite your source, or did you just tell
>>>another lie?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Well, every single map in any particular directory has the following
>>fine print at the bottom...
>>
>>"This map reflects rate plan coverage for plans available after January
>>27, 2002. Map depicts an approximation of outdoor coverage. Map may
>>include areas served by unaffiliated carriers, and may depict their
>>licensed area rather than an approximation of the coverage there.
>>Actual coverage area may differ substantially from map graphics, and
>>coverage may be affected by such things as terrain, weather, foliage,
>>buildings and other construction, signal strength, customer equipment
>>and other factors. Cingular does not guarantee coverage. Charges will
>>be based on the location of the site receiving and transmitting the
>>call, not the location of the subscriber. Future coverage, if depicted
>>above, is based on current planning assumptions, but is subject to
>>change and may not be relied upon."
>>
>>
>>That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
>>worthless.
>
>
> Thank you for proving Scott a worthless cellular shill.
>
> THE MAPS are in large part, WORTHLESS


I have to wonder if that directory is actually a boneyard which has yet
to meet Ms. Shredder.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-9F2821.04102403042005@news1.west.earthlink.net...

>
> Thank you for proving Scott a worthless cellular shill.

He did what? All I saw was a bunch of boilerplate terms and conditions. It
said nothing about Marketing creating the maps. You still lied.

>
> THE MAPS are in large part, WORTHLESS

Funny hearing that word come from your mouth- it perfectly describes most of
the lies and deceptions you frequenty post here and in other groups.
 
J

Jer

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2004
777
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:
> "Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
> news:114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Scott Stephenson wrote:
>
>
>>
>>That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
>>worthless.
>>
>>
>>--
>
>
> Really? I'm looking at a 10 year old map of my neighborhood. It shows my
> house to be in exactly the right place. Its not worthless.
>
> If coverage hasn't significantly changed in an area, why create a new map?
> Some of the maps included in the link were as new as a month ago.
>
>

Really? which one?

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
news:115010ldj2vov05@corp.supernews.com...
> Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > "Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
> > news:114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >>Scott Stephenson wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
> >>worthless.
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >
> >
> > Really? I'm looking at a 10 year old map of my neighborhood. It shows
my
> > house to be in exactly the right place. Its not worthless.
> >
> > If coverage hasn't significantly changed in an area, why create a new
map?
> > Some of the maps included in the link were as new as a month ago.
> >
> >
>
> Really? which one?
>

http://onlinestoreb.cingular.com/html/Maps/Northeast/NYC/region_nyc.htm
updated in Feb.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <115010ldj2vov05@corp.supernews.com>,
Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:

> Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > "Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
> > news:114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >>Scott Stephenson wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
> >>worthless.
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >
> >
> > Really? I'm looking at a 10 year old map of my neighborhood. It shows my
> > house to be in exactly the right place. Its not worthless.
> >
> > If coverage hasn't significantly changed in an area, why create a new map?
> > Some of the maps included in the link were as new as a month ago.
> >
> >
>
> Really? which one?

Age doesnt matter, a 1" = 50 miles scale makes the map worthless.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-70E47B.10043703042005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <115010ldj2vov05@corp.supernews.com>,
> Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:
>
> > Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > > "Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
> > > news:114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com...
> > >
> > >>Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old -
hence,
> > >>worthless.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>--
> > >
> > >
> > > Really? I'm looking at a 10 year old map of my neighborhood. It
shows my
> > > house to be in exactly the right place. Its not worthless.
> > >
> > > If coverage hasn't significantly changed in an area, why create a new
map?
> > > Some of the maps included in the link were as new as a month ago.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Really? which one?
>
> Age doesnt matter, a 1" = 50 miles scale makes the map worthless.

Really? You said Jer made me look like a shill about the maps, but all he
was talking about was the age. I see you still talk out of both sides of
your ass.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <114vt254jq6nda3@corp.supernews.com>,
Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:

> Jack Zwick wrote:
>
> > In article <114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com>, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Scott Stephenson wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:jzwick3-440E54.16425102042005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>In article <rqbt415s6v00bc26bhavngn516326rsmoa@4ax.com>,
> >>>>Harry <harry@the.end> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>I stumbled across this cache while hunting for Cingular coverage maps.
> >>>>>It looks to be current and archived maps of the whole US. Sorry if
> >>>>>this is all old news but it was new to me. Hope this helps someone.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>http://tinyurl.com/3udej
> >>>>
> >>>>Hardly a current one in there, they are all the very small scale drawn
> >>>>by marketing worthless maps.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Really? By Marketing? Care to cite your source, or did you just tell
> >>>another lie?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>Well, every single map in any particular directory has the following
> >>fine print at the bottom...
> >>
> >>"This map reflects rate plan coverage for plans available after January
> >>27, 2002. Map depicts an approximation of outdoor coverage. Map may
> >>include areas served by unaffiliated carriers, and may depict their
> >>licensed area rather than an approximation of the coverage there.
> >>Actual coverage area may differ substantially from map graphics, and
> >>coverage may be affected by such things as terrain, weather, foliage,
> >>buildings and other construction, signal strength, customer equipment
> >>and other factors. Cingular does not guarantee coverage. Charges will
> >>be based on the location of the site receiving and transmitting the
> >>call, not the location of the subscriber. Future coverage, if depicted
> >>above, is based on current planning assumptions, but is subject to
> >>change and may not be relied upon."
> >>
> >>
> >>That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
> >>worthless.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for proving Scott a worthless cellular shill.
> >
> > THE MAPS are in large part, WORTHLESS
>
>
> I have to wonder if that directory is actually a boneyard which has yet
> to meet Ms. Shredder.

Google cant find any decent digital zoomable maps like TMobile now has.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

> Age doesnt matter, a 1" = 50 miles scale makes the map worthless.

Did you not post earlier in this thread, "Hardly a current one in there"?

It appeared that age DID matter to you.
 
J

Jer

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2004
777
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Scott Stephenson wrote:
> "Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
> news:115010ldj2vov05@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Scott Stephenson wrote:
>>
>>>"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
>>>news:114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Scott Stephenson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old - hence,
>>>>worthless.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>
>>>
>>>Really? I'm looking at a 10 year old map of my neighborhood. It shows
>
> my
>
>>>house to be in exactly the right place. Its not worthless.
>>>
>>>If coverage hasn't significantly changed in an area, why create a new
>
> map?
>
>>>Some of the maps included in the link were as new as a month ago.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Really? which one?
>>
>
>
> http://onlinestoreb.cingular.com/html/Maps/Northeast/NYC/region_nyc.htm
> updated in Feb.
>
>

Oh, okay... the link above isn't one of those I flipped through, but
nonetheless... the Feb date isn't mentioned on the map itself (nor any
others for that matter). Technically, that Feb date is associated with
when that html and .gif image were placed into that directory, and in
fact, may be related to when the files were created (relevant) - or may
simply reflect when those files were copied from some other system (not
relevant) - there's no way for any of us to know or verify the relevancy
of the dates we see on this particular system. This system is a
Solaris-based server running Apache server code, and the only clues we
have is Cingular web monkeys ought to tighten up their server rules and
disallow viewable access to these server directories.

--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
news:1150kuhcqh7bg1f@corp.supernews.com...
> Scott Stephenson wrote:
> > "Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
> > news:115010ldj2vov05@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >>Scott Stephenson wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
> >>>news:114ugnal5q9513@corp.supernews.com...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Scott Stephenson wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>That, and all the maps I looked at are already three years old -
hence,
> >>>>worthless.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>--
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Really? I'm looking at a 10 year old map of my neighborhood. It shows
> >
> > my
> >
> >>>house to be in exactly the right place. Its not worthless.
> >>>
> >>>If coverage hasn't significantly changed in an area, why create a new
> >
> > map?
> >
> >>>Some of the maps included in the link were as new as a month ago.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>Really? which one?
> >>
> >
> >
> > http://onlinestoreb.cingular.com/html/Maps/Northeast/NYC/region_nyc.htm
> > updated in Feb.
> >
> >
>
> Oh, okay... the link above isn't one of those I flipped through, but
> nonetheless... the Feb date isn't mentioned on the map itself (nor any
> others for that matter).

And the dates on the maps could be the initial date of creation and not take
updates into account.

>Technically, that Feb date is associated with
> when that html and .gif image were placed into that directory, and in
> fact, may be related to when the files were created (relevant) - or may
> simply reflect when those files were copied from some other system (not
> relevant) - there's no way for any of us to know or verify the relevancy
> of the dates we see on this particular system.

Same with the date on the map- it is most likely coded in and has been
overlooked during updates.

>This system is a
> Solaris-based server running Apache server code, and the only clues we
> have is Cingular web monkeys ought to tighten up their server rules and
> disallow viewable access to these server directories.

Agreed.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <42500998.7090803@example.net>,
Tropical Haven <user@example.net> wrote:

> > Age doesnt matter, a 1" = 50 miles scale makes the map worthless.
>
> Did you not post earlier in this thread, "Hardly a current one in there"?
>
> It appeared that age DID matter to you.

No matter they're WORTHLESS.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-412587.12410903042005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <42500998.7090803@example.net>,
> Tropical Haven <user@example.net> wrote:
>
> > > Age doesnt matter, a 1" = 50 miles scale makes the map worthless.
> >
> > Did you not post earlier in this thread, "Hardly a current one in
there"?
> >
> > It appeared that age DID matter to you.
>
> No matter they're WORTHLESS.

On the contrary- I found great value in them. But, unlike you, my brain is
capable of functioning at higher than a third grade level and I understand
the technology being discussed, along with the given challenges to providing
great detail on coverage maps. Of course, you will continue to claim that
the sky is falling, so there is no need to try and explain something so
basic to you- I wouldn't want to be responsible for the death of the few
remaining brain cells you have left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom