In some rare cases, GSM signal will have better in building coverage based solely on the higher Mhz it operates at. Higher the Mhz, the more penetration it can get.
I'm not sure what brought on this thread of epic, homer-ism, fan-boy proportions on behalf of Verizon Wireless, but if it floats yer boat, go for it.
My one quibble is the info above. It is incorrect. And not that simple.
Just in terms of pure physics, your statement above is backwards. A higher frequency (MHz) radio signal will not penetrate a solid object as well as a lower frequency signal, all other things being equal. The 'other things being equal' part is the key here for purposes of cell phone reception conversations.
Both Verizon and AT&T in North America use 'dual-bands' throughout their networks. Basically, a higher frequency 'PCS' signal (1900MHz) and a lower frequency 'cellular' signal (850Mhz). The technology they use to provide service is different (GSM for AT&T vs CDMA for Verizon), but the frequencies are not.
The higher frequency 1900 MHz has a shorter, more compressed wavelength that does not travel as far distance-wise, and is more easily dispersed by obstacles like building walls. However, it has benefits like lower power requirements to transmit (leading to better battery life on the cell phone) and ability to carry traffic more efficiently in certain configurations.
Basically, quality of service is not about the signal frequency a cell network uses these days - it's about the network design, tuning and management relative to a given physical area and the user load.
That's why all the carriers vary so much across the country in terms of user experience. The local network dynamics and implementation have a HUGE impact on quality of service. Basically, if you are a cell customer of any company and your service stinks in your area, call them and complain. If enough people do in a given area, they have a reason to spend money to fix it.
That's why I don't have a horse in this race. I don't like VZ because of bad experiences with their customer service, and because they nickle and dime vs AT&T for me due to work discounts. On the other hand, while AT&T was solid in the places I went for many years, I have had call quality issues lately (probably due to Iphone data usage overloading the network). So, if it doesn't get better soon, I'll probably switch. If it gets better soon, I'll stay.
The decision is not based on 'Verizon rules and AT&T drools, man!' or vise-versa. It's good to have a competitive cellular industry in the US. The geographic distances in our country make it harder to deploy new tech as fast, and offer services as cheaply, as smaller areas like Europe and SE Asia. I wish things would roll out more quickly and service was cheaper, but it's still pretty impressive stuff even compared to a few years ago.
