Skip to main content

Tom's Guide reviews US carriers, finds T-Mobile to be the best all-around

Our pals at Tom's Guide have spent countless hours researching and testing to see how the US carriers compare to each other. The findings reveal that T-Mobile is the best all-around carrier, with Verizon coming in a close second. When searching for a carrier, many people focus only on the service in their location, but the comparison goes far beyond that.

The team at Tom's Guide ranks all of the US carriers, including MVNOs, based on a number of other metrics. Those metrics include performance, plans, customer support, phone selection and special features. Each section was given a different point value, then the points were tallied for an overall total score.

T-Mobile ranked the highest overall, and scored the best when it came to plans and special features. Verizon ranked at the top for performance, and AT&T was found to offer the best phone selection and customer support. If you are interested in checking out all of the details, and exactly how each carrier performed and compared, be sure to hit the link below.

Check out the full carrier comparison from Tom's Guide

Jared started off writing about mobile phones back when BlackBerry ruled the market, and Windows Mobile was kinda cool. Now, with a family, mortgage and other responsibilities he has no choice but to look for the best deals, and he's here to share them with you.
  • Woah. TMo has actually expanded their coverage. I still have no desire to switch to them.
  • They haven't expanded their coverage in any meaningful way. Where they have service, its usually good. But the moment you leave a metro area...goodbye service.
  • They have expanded their coverage tremendously. Your experience doesn't speak for everyone. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Their coverage map speaks for itself. Let's not pretend for even a moment that they have ample coverage. Its the sole reason they remain a distant third or fourth place carrier behind ATT and Verizon. How can you be a viable choice for more people when you don't expand? People made fun of Verizon for expanding in rural areas, and guess what? They have millions of people covered that TMobile and Sprint don't. Coverage matters as much as data speeds. Having the fastest data in the world doesn't mean much when vast groups of people can't access it.
  • +1 Posted via the Android Central App
  • Easy solution, don't get T-Mobile. If you have service that you like then why even comment? Posted via the Android Central App
  • Because people always feel like they have to justify their purchases. It's why we have PC vs Mac and PS4 vs XBONE wars. People can't just say "This works for me, but I'm glad that works for you."
  • Well said!!! Posted via the Android Central App
  • A very intellectual and mature comment... Posted via the Android Central App
  • I believe it's a psychological thing. Mostly unconscious. There is some thing(s) they really don't like about their current service, perhaps they are locked in a contract even, and feel the need to bash or comment in a non constructive manner so it doesn't hurt so much. In other words, they are haters, lol
  • Rankings tend to have subjective component, but perhaps you shouldn't be calling them a distant third in a comment on an article placing them first. Posted via the Android Central App
  • He means they're a distant third in regards to # of subscribers. Posted via my Note 4 on Cricket
  • Actually, part of the problem is the accuracy of their map. In the past, they were building the map based on projections. Those projections, in turn, were based upon tower placement. Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, and the rest still construct their coverage maps like this. T-Mobile, on the other hand, has switched to an ACTUAL coverage map. They're using their own network to map their network, so to speak. Those lines are generated by users, not projections, and highlight areas where a certain amount of users actually get reliable, measurable service. That being said, the system isn't perfect because, if you've got extremely low use, then there isn't enough data to build the map. I've been in areas where their new map says there is no coverage at all, and my phone has worked fine (while camping, for example). If other carriers built their maps the same way (which is more honest, in my opinion), then they'd look a lot different than they currently do. The map isn't the whole story.
  • That's bullshit. Posted via the Android Central App
  • T-Mobile does cover vast groups of people. It's the rural coverage that doesn't. I'm not saying I wouldn't like better rural coverage, but your statement is either about rural coverage, or covering vast groups of people, not both. In Texas T-Mobile's rural coverage has greatly improved over the last year.
  • I have AT&T and I've never had problems with my coverage and I have no plans on dropping them. I dropped T-Mo two years ago because they didn't have much coverage at all. But I just looked at their coverage map today and they have 4G LTE coverage in areas where I would have loved to have that coverage two years ago. T-Mo's coverage expanded, but it's a little too late for me.
  • In 10 years they have had Zero expansion in the Midwest, KS, MO, IL. It's awful if you leave a major populous or leave a major highway, no signal.
  • That's extremely incorrect. My drive from stl to Springfield I have LTE way more then 2 or 3 years ago. As well as house springs area has greatly improved. The whole Jefferson county area is better. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Yeah it's pretty terrible unless you're in KC, Topeka, or Wichita. It's okay in Manhattan but drops off pretty quickly in nearly every direction from a reasonable size town.
  • Where did they expand, surely not the East, ie Penna. which mainly only has 2G with Tmobile. and surely not in any rural areas.
  • I travel a wide range and have not seen coverage increase at all. +++ Insert witty signature, watch as others not get it, profit +++
  • Their coverage has expanded greatly due to band 12. I get service in places now that we're dead zones in rural areas. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Band 2 primarily, and Band 12. I can drive from Dallas to New Orleans and have LTE 99% of the time, and I don't even have a Band 12 capable phone.
  • That's what Fi is there for. Works great for me. But then again, if I wasn't on Fi I'd be on T-Mobile. Conspiracy theory here. I wonder if Google plans to buy T-Mobile? It would be about $65B+/- but would give them everything they need for wireless coverage that they were pushing for. Posted via the Android Central App
  • What ever happened with Google having their own service. I would love to see this. Then providing this with G Fiber all under the Alphabet Corp. Not sure I would still leave ATT but that would be huge. Posted via the Android Central App
  • If Google bought T-Mobile, that would probably be the end of Android phones on the other carriers. If not end, it certainly wouldn't be good.
  • Why? +++ Insert witty signature, watch as others not get it, profit +++
  • Fi would be Great for Midwest, because Sprint has 50% more coverage than T-Mo, which is awful
  • No, they definitely have. I switched to them from AT&T a little over a year ago, and just in that time, their service is MUCH better, both in metro areas and outside of them. I travel pretty extensively throughout the US northeast, midwest and southeast, and that's been the case just about everywhere I go. Don't get me wrong, they still have a ton of work to do in rural areas especially, but they're improving at a pace that I'm satisfied with. Posted via the Android Central App
  • In my experience they absolutely have. I had family in rural Oklahoma. Christmas of 2013 I visited them, with T-Mobile, and had absolutely no service to speak of. Well, I had a smattering of 2G, but usually was lucky to even be able to place a phone call. June of this year I visited again. LTE nearly everywhere. So yes, they absolutely have expanded their coverage in a meaningful way.
  • Last year I drove from Austin to New Orleans and had 2G coverage in rural areas most of the way. This year I drove from Dallas (through Austin) to New Orleans and had fully usable LTE 99% of the way. And my phone isn't even capable of Band 12. Some places carriers are better than others. Blanket statements probably aren't warranted.
  • There we go, Tom has spoken... Tmo FTW! This is def bound to get a lot of haters salty Posted via the Android Central App
  • Nobody hates t-mobile.. Their coverage just sucks for most.. That's it.
  • Coverage - or the lack thereof - is far more important than a download speed. No coverage means zero download speed after all.
  • I had TMo not too long ago and their coverage was just OK in my area even though their maps said I was in a full LTE area.
  • It's missing network coverage. I don't think T-Mobile would be top carrier if it was in the chart
  • I think performance includes network coverage and speed. Posted via Galaxy S6
  • Their performance rating is based on download and upload speed, NOT coverage. Stupid.
    If you have no service you have no speed whatsoever!
  • Wow, you are really butthurt.
  • Relax man Posted via the Android Central App
  • I'm not sure how you omit coverage when comparing providers. If we get to a day when 100% of the country is covered by them all, then omit it, but it's hard to take them serious with out it. This is more of a "carriers ranked at my desk" than anything. Posted
  • Why? Do you travel all over the country that it matters? If the coverage works everywhere you normally go, what does it matter?
  • If your judging national companies, why would you not? I go to Wyoming and Nebraska for family half a dozen times a year, no coverage except partner coverage. I'm sure they judged performance on a national scale yes? I actually can't believe I had to answer that question.... Posted
  • They reviewed six cities where all carriers were available. The review was seemingly meant more as a "if coverage is equal, which is the best" type of deal. If you live in an area where there's no T-Mobile, then obviously you would take that out yourself and consider Verizon number one.
  • This is a pretty lame ass excuse, and I can't believe you didn't get called out on it yet. If they wanted to make Sprint look good they could have cherry picked 6 cities that have great Sprint service and skewed the numbers as well. Or they could have tested Verizon in Denver and they would have been last. Also, didn't somebody get busted for skewing speed test results by giving priority to that data? Posted
  • What are you talking about? You're proving my point exactly, so I'm not sure why you think I need to be "called out". That is exactly why I think they picked six cities where all the carriers had coverage so that it was equal and they could review everything else to see which carrier was best if all coverage was equal. It's not an "excuse", it's just my opinion on why I think they did it this way.
  • To get good speeds you need good coverage. No coverage, no speed. Simple as that. A test like this is only valid if you live in the 6 tested cities that were used - and if you place speed as the most important factor since more than half the total score is based solely on speed.
  • That was the point of the test. If coverage is equal, who is the best? If a carrier isn't in your town? Remove it from the list; it's not that complicated.
  • "Do you travel all over the country that it matters?" Yes. Posted via my HTC One (M7)
  • It appears they did omit coverage. They just tested the networks in 6 cities and only based it on speeds. So, they only test T-Mobile where T-Mobile has service. "Performance (50 Points): While many factors go into deciding which cell phone provider is best, performance remains the key consideration. That's why network performance, measured by speed, makes up more than half of our grade for wireless carriers.
    We based our rankings on our nationwide 4G tests, in which we traveled to six cities across the country to see how the carrier performed. We measured download and upload speeds at select locations in each city, using Ookla's app, and we also timed how fast we could download an app on each carrier's network.
    Verizon won our performance tests, with the best overall speeds. T-Mobile finished a close second, with AT&T and MetroPCS rounding out the top four. "
  • Yup, testing in just 6 cities invalidates their review IMO. They need a much, much larger sample size to properly test.
  • Pretty sure this review isn't going to go down in National History. We don't need a committee to oversee his results... Lol Posted via the Android Central App
  • That's not what we are saying. To say T-Mobile is the best carrier but ignoring it's pitiful coverage map is the issue. Yes, I understand this review/rating is more than just coverage. And I applaud T-Mobile for stirring up the mobile industry and helping get rid of 2-year contracts. I love that cell providers are now separating the handset cost from the service cost, but T-Mobile can't work for a lot of people due to its coverage. I'm glad it works for the millions it does, but there are millions more who it doesn't work for.
  • And that's the point of the review. It's a review of all the carriers assuming a person can get all of them if they want. If T-Mo isn't in your area, then remove it from the list and Verizon becomes number one.
  • Pitiful coverage? Lel kid get over yourself man. Quit hating so hard. It works for alot of people but not all of course. Jesus Christ man. I have metro and works where I need it so it's not pitiful to me it's awesome. Cry more Posted via the Android Central App
  • How am I hating? This is my experience in trying T-Mobile in 2 major cities in 2 different occasions recently. Their service did not work for me. I hated losing service every time I went into a building and when I traveled, I would most of the time be roaming on AT&T which only allows like 50MB of data.
  • looks like Legere's minions are out in force! down voting any comment that says anything less than complementary towards his network. It's quite laughable... but I will say, I'm still rooting for T-Mobile. Still not up to snuff for me, but it'll likely get there someday!
  • There are 19,000 cities of 10,000 people or more, so testing 6 cities is not very validating
  • Exactly.
    Plus, TMo for the most part uses a high-band frequency which has very poor building penetration. If you have no coverage, you have no speed at all.
  • They do VoLTE nation-wide. They have WiFi calling on every phone. You can make a WiFi call from your iPad or iMac even if your phone is off, something no carrier except T-Mobile is doing. They have great prices. They're more transparent. I don't discount coverage, and at times I wish I had a signal when I'm in the boonies and don't, but they're really my favorite carrier right now because they're shaking things up.
  • This should be no surprise to people who have at least tried T-mobile recently.
  • It's a surprise to me as I've tried T-Mobile recently, and it was not a good experience. but to each their own!
  • I have a coworker that just bought an iPhone via TMo and had no penetration into our office building when she was trying to download an app. I see ATT dropped to 3 even though they had the better c/s by a point. And then there's Sprint... Posted via the Android Central App
  • Here in Las Vegas it smokes now. I convinced my friend to stop paying so much for Verizon and move and now she can't stop reminding me how amazing the freedom and speed of t mobile is *in las vegas* results may vary elsewhere Posted via the Android Central App
  • Till you have to travel. That's the problem with people I know always run into. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Coming from someone who travels quite a bit (living in midwest, travel to east coast and the southwest for weeks at a time), T-Mobile is pretty decent. It's only when I find myself in the most "back-water" of locations that I struggle to get more than a bar or two (if any at all). At the same time, there aren't any other carriers in those areas *other than* Verizon. So it's more so that Verizon had the foundation and other carriers are still struggling to catch up.
  • I think TMo is making good strides. I'm almost incline to switch but after seeing what my coworker went through makes me hesitant. Posted via the Android Central App
  • I think TMo just needs more time. Like you said, they're making good strides. For some, they're just not *there* yet. That's fine. Comparing them to how they were a few years ago to how they are now is apple vs oranges. That's a good thing. When I'm visiting family, I get a bit frustrated that I get next to zero service (solution is simply to use an old phone on Straight Talk/Cricket temporarily since they have service in the area through ATT or Sprint). Alas, I knew when I moved to TMo that I lived in a city - and that's why I can't complain (I knew and accepted the risks).
  • The iPhone 6 doesn't have Band 12, which is T-Mobile's low frequency in many places. The iPhone 6s does, however.
  • Maybe that explains it. I know her signal was straight crap. Posted via the Android Central App
  • I don't know how it's possible for Verizon to get a 17 out of 20 for plans while the lower-priced MVNOs are in the 9-13 range. Verizon has nothing that can compete with Cricket's pricing scheme, for example. Certainly not enough to merit a 4-point gap.
  • Agreed. Unless coverage accounts for like 15 of those points or something.
  • Yeah, they knocked Straight Talk because they didn't offer a plan for lower usage which doesn't make sense when you consider that 1-3 GB plans with other providers cost as much as what Straight Talk charges for 5GB.
  • I have att personally and its OK but I feel I pay to much thanks to the weird access fees where its 25 a month for less then 10 gigs and 15 a month for 10 or more gigs and like 45 if you're on contract... It's all so weird Posted via the Android Central App
  • I use T-MO in Phoenix and it's great. I will admit that Verizon has better overall coverage in the rural areas but I'm not willing to pay their prices. T-MO is the least restrictive and easiest to work with also. T-MO is like the rebel child and for $45. per month, unlimited business plan that I have i couldn't ask for more. You've got to like their CEO. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Cue the haters and the lovers.
  • -This is so off its not even funny. Straight Talk has the exact same performance limits as Cricket. (I have used both)
    -Where is the comparison on pricing?
    -Cricket/Straight Talk have 10 times the phone selection of sprint and verizon because you can use ANY unlocked phone. Hello? Thank you toms for doing nothing but giving more publicity to expensive carriers when customers have cheaper options.
  • Unlocked phones does not equate to phone sold in store. Lol. But cricket is horrible service. It deserves to be the bottom of the barrel. Posted via the Android Central App
  • It doesn't matter. It should get additional points for being byod. As they should for pricing. Please tell me how cricket is worse than straight talk? There is absolutely nothing wrong with cricket unless you are a person that needs constant help and if you don't care if you download max is 8 Mbps. There are a lot of people where most of of their heavy usage is done at home/work where they are on wifi.
  • If that's the case then that should be added to ATT METROPCS TMo all others. That's why they are unlocked phones to use with any carrier and those two will still be at the bottom. I'm using an unlocked ZenFone 2 on ATT right now... Cricket has some of the WORST dropped calls, reception, and coverage. Have you ever had to deal with their C/S. Echo in calls, and the stores are the worse people to have dealt with. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Thats why I said "Cricket/Straight Talk have 10 times the phone selection of sprint and verizon" The cdma carriers should have been docked for not being as byod friendly. Times are changing and this article isnt recognizing it. Tmobile and ATT may have been on top still but verizon and sprint should be getting hit hard for being cdma
  • Dude calm down. Lol unlocked phones don't mean shit. Just because its usable does not guarantee the bands are available for use on the phone. You can have an unlocked phone and only get 2g coverage which ain't shit and results in poor performance. But I like how you said "There's nothing wrong with Cricket unless..." Posted via the Android Central App
  • Since when wasnt I calm? Dont use that as ammo. Yeah I stated the cons just like every other carrier has cons. Why are you using bands as the argument? You read the description about the phone you are buying when you buy it..? Also you are lying on 2G network speeds. Cricket is faster than 3G and even HSPA+
  • Wow man you completely missed the point about unlocked phones. Carriers cannot guarantee unlocked phones will work with bands provided by the phone. If a phone does not have the 3G/LTE bands it will only work on 2G. I never said anything about Cricket not having 3G/LTE. Phones sold by carriers are guaranteed to work completely on their network and able to use all functions of their network and features. Cricket went downhill after ATT acquisition of them even moreso than before. And the calm down comment came from your original no shit reply before you edited it. ;-) Posted via the Android Central App
  • You miss where carriers sell phones that don't have all thier own bands. There is absolutely no difference. Everyone needs to do thier homework when buying a phone. Posted via the Android Central App
  • But is guaranteed to work along with the network's feature. There's a difference. Posted via the Android Central App
  • I had read that when at&t bought cricket it got a higher priority and faster speeds than other prepaid third party carriers. Both still are slower than base at&t and take a back seat during network congestion.
  • Exactly. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Keep in mind that this isn't a *definite* statement; it's a review that categorizes carriers by the experience they had. You can't really consider BYOP as "phone selection" as it's not part of the scheme offered by the carrier. That category is limited to the phones that the carrier, themselves, offer to their end-users. Take in consideration that majority of those who move to any carrier will try to purchase a new phone to go with the plan (even, say, Cricket/Straight Talk - you bought a phone, just not through either of them). I do get what you mean because I wandered on the Nexus 4/5 between low-end carriers for a while (it was nice not having to say "Oh, you mean this phone i spent $300 on isn't compatible with your network? Okay, I'll spend another $400 on a flagship that will be outdated in a few months with a SoC slightly better than the one I have now.."). It's more so that, as people tend to get a new phone when moving carriers (TMO/ATT/Verizon/Sprint all try to convince you to do so anyways) .. and the phones they offer is what's being categorized/rated.
  • T-mobile shows coverage in southern NJ. Drive along route 70 and 72 and find me coverage. If they have it like the y claim I would switch but others who have T-mobile have no reception in southern NJ.
    I take the maps from carriers w a grain of salt. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Im in central jerz and Tmo rocks, NJ is the most densly populated state in the country, if like to believe Tmo will get better coverage down in southern jerz soon enough Posted via the Android Central App
  • I grew up in central Jersey. It's by manahawkin that's horrible coverage Posted via the Android Central App
  • My hat goes off to T-Mobile. I've done business with all four major carriers and a couple prepaid carriers and T-Mobile is by far the best. I just got my wife to ditch at&t and switch to magenta. So far she loves their prices, coverage and great customer service. Posted via Note 5/AC App...
  • How did cricket score so low? It's works great and coverage is great too. My mother in law has it, no complaints at all.
  • you can read the actual source article to see why carriers/MVNO's their rating:,review-3066.html This is suprising to me since Straight Talk also runs on AT&T (Unless they were using T-Mo's ST service?) and is supposed to get better service than other MVNOs since AT&T owns them.
    "It's all about the network performance: Cricket not only delivered the worst speeds of any carrier we tested, it was also well off the pace of its parent network AT&T. It's a shame, because the prepaid carrier has a stellar offer for families, with escalating discounts on multiple lines, and solid customer service. But Cricket's network speed is just too slow to recommend it as a wireless provider."
  • Cricket and Straight Talk are exactly the same when it comes to network speeds. The difference between cricket and att is you lose roaming/8 Mbps speed cap/and more latency. Cricket is perfectly fine if you are not hungry for super fast speeds when you are not on wifi
  • good to know. I knew about the cap, but I assumed ST's speeds were still lower than that cap. Is ST still being picky about throttling like they were a few years ago? The thing that has always kept me from them is the horror stories I read about people getting throttled long before using the cap they impose.
  • I switched to cricket from ST a few months ago but was never getting throttled early with ST. I see no reason to use straight talk over cricket tho.
    With Cricket you get an app that shows exactly how much data you have used with a progress bar and exact dates/times of when you used said data. Once the progress bar is full you start getting throttled.
  • yeah, I would much prefer that system over the guessing game that ST looks to employ. Good to know these points, thanks for the answers.
  • No Problem
  • Capped speeds are what hurt Cricket in THIS test.
    Turns out this "Carrier review" is based mostly on network speeds in only 6 cities. Of course a capped carrier will then suffer. In other words, this "review' is extremely flawed. It doesn't even consider coverage in its performance category. No coverage equals exactly zero speeds!
  • I'm sorry, but I do not believe this data. Maybe this reflects areas away from me more or something I guess. No way does TMO beat AT&T here in AZ or any place in California I regularly travel. I am a federal employee and go all over the Western US, and Pacific. I never lose my service with AT&T. I have co-workers that are on both Verizon and TMO that have crap service in comparison. Verizon is better a lot of the time, but the plans and other parts are not even close over the other guys from my personal experiences.
  • Lol VZW Moto X 2014/2013 DE
  • Add coverage and they're suddenly at #3
  • Seems like they only tested coverage in the city? Not very conclusive.
  • T-Mobile GSM FTW
  • T-mobile works just as good as Verizon where I live. If it didn't say t-mobile on my screen I wouldn't of known I switched from Verizon....that and t-mobile customer service and plans are better than Verizon s are. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Gotta call bullshit on this. It doesn't take coverage into account which, for many people, is the most important factor.
  • As a T-Mo customer, I can agree with this. I mean they're not perfect, but they're expanding coverage faster than anyone else, their plans are less expensive, and the customer service has been great thus far.
  • Without carrier aggregation device Sprint's results are not indicative of real world. Every device released this year supports it. Expect 70%+ performance gain with it enabled.
  • I switched to T-mobile for 3 months In the Nashville area and ended up having to go crawling back to AT&T. I had to switch back due to poor building penetration and a lot of dead spots in the surrounding towns like Nolensville and Gallatin. I only got one bar of edge coverage inside my home. A half mile down my street was full 4G LTE. T-mobile has excellent plans, perks, and prices. I was quite excited to join the T-mobile. Unfortunately in my specific area/use case it wasn't acceptable service. I sincerely hope to go back to t-mobile when the coverage expands more .
  • Flawed.
    Coverage is WAY more important than outright speed. 50 percent of their performance rating is based on speed! If you have no coverage it doesn't matter how fast the speeds are. Duh.
  • I'm in west Chicago suburbs and T-Mo is as good as AT&T outside, but pretty bad in buildings. Not an uncommon story. And my understanding is that band 12 is not imminent in this area. But if you can live with this inconvenience, the package and perks they provide is very good for the money.
  • I have t mobile and i agree with this. Also like what other people have already said is that the coverage is a down side but i have seen some improvement in that feild. Other than that i haven't seen anything else bad with it. The speeds in metro areas are very fast. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Sniff....bull....a...a...shi....achoo! Posted via the Android Central App
  • They need to compete with sprint they would have a way better chance competing against Verizon wireless and AT&T they can forget about it not even close no where near it. Posted via the Android Central App
  • T-Mobile is far better at what they do than you are at the English language.
  • T-Mobile is OK where I live, but if I go within three miles of the border (with Mexico) it thinks I'm in Mexico (a problem confirmed by TMo).
    Plus, there's very little coverage outside of the small cities in my area.
    Nevertheless, it has the best prepaid price for me. Verizon was my first smartphone provider, but after 18 months I somehow lost coverage at work so I early terminated. After having AT&T, Sprint, and Straight Talk, I'll stay on TMo. Posted via the Android Central App
  • I just gotin on Tmob's 4 lines for 120 10 GB and so far I am loving it. And now my Teen has enough data. kept going over her 5GB..and me and the wife can Talk all we want( i like to talk..hate texting). Got rid of my Voip phone and went all cell. Thanks Tmo. Besides that my wife at work has the best coverage when compared to others who have sprint/verizon/ att.
  • I agree.
  • bahaha Tmobile beats in performance? WHERE???? Sure not the Rural areas or cross country. Verizon USE to have great performance until their towers went to h*ll and they won't bother fixing or updating them.
  • Apparently coverage was not a consideration. Posted via the Android Central App
  • I'm in St. Louis and I can say that T-mobile coverage is lousy. I bought a new Sim card from them and drove all over the bistate areas and also tried in various houses and buildings and right now is the absolute worst service of the big 4 Until T-mobile gets their own towers up or at least invest in piggybacking on the existing ones coverage will be limited at best. Posted via the Android Central App
  • Agreed. I live in St. Louis as well and the coverage map that claim to have is wrong. Had touse a cellspot and Tmobile router for wi-fi calling just to use service at my home. Posted via The Next Big Thing. My Samsung Galaxy Note 5!
  • Interesting guide.
  • You're telling me that Cricket who uses AT&T (or Tmo) towers has a performance rating of 25 while AT&T and Tmo are in the mid 40's. That makes no sense. I understand that Cricket throttles the speed but that doesn't account to the 20 point drop.
  • Oh, and there's no way Cricket or StraightTalk should have customer service ratings that high. Just a terrible graph all around.
  • "The team at Tom's Guide ranks all of the US carriers, including MVNOs," It didn't rank all US Carriers, only the big 4 plus the major MVNOs. There are many other smaller MVNOs. not included. Their plans can be a perfect fit for some situations but I would love to see this type of comparison between them.
  • Tom's guide is full of it...really..Tmobile. You gotta look at it from the whole perspective of national coverage, 4g, and customer. Of course some areas are going to perform better than others. The numbers speak for themselves...plain and simple. Posted via the Android Central App
  • This has no rating for coverage areas! We don't all live in New York. There are many places where I live that Verizon is the ONLY thing that works.
  • It clearly states they intentionally left out coverage because it's not just about coverage: "For most people, picking a wireless carrier comes down to one simple question: Who provides the best coverage in my area? That's certainly a key consideration for choosing your cell phone service provider — but it's not the only thing to think about. When it comes to picking the best wireless carrier, the cost of cell phone plans and the quality of customer service are some of the other factors you should consider along with network performance." Don't like it? Then move on and read a different review that does include coverage.
  • I need and use 30GB of shared data on 3 lines @$160 a month on At&t...Does tmo offer that?
    What really cracks me is Verizon's data sizes...the extra large is 10GB...I consider that the small size. I would be willing to try a t mo sim to try it out...but I need a serious amount of data to get by. Posted via Serenity
  • T-Mobile has unlimited data, so...yeah, you can use as much as you like.
  • Does providing timely software updates come under customer service or is that under special features?
  • Straight talk should be -23 in customer support Posted via the Android Central App
  • TMobile has a great deal in many respects especially in term of coverage.
  • Tmobile is greatttttttttttt
  • T-Mobile will not block harassing phone messages from 1-314-274-9678. T-Mobile told me that my plan did not include being able to block unwanted phone calls.
  • T-Mobile has expanded A LOT between 2014 and 2015 and they still are. Pretty soon, their coverage will be almost/just as good as At&t's. But until then, they are the absolute best option if you live anywhere within their coverage zone. They have so many more benefits and deals than Verizon does and their 4G LTE and HSPA+ networks are just as fast or maybe even faster than Verizon's. I can't wait to see what's in store for the Un-Carrier in 2016/17.
  • About the coverage? I will be in manhattan december/january and will use a 30day plan... but I don´t know which carrier have the best coverage. Somebody can tell me about the experiences of coverage in manhattan, please? =)
  • After seeing the ads that they had expanded their coverage area we decided to switch to T-Mobile. I decided to keep my phone and purchased 4 new phone for the family after the agent double checked that we were in the 4G LTE coverage, when we got within 3 miles of the house the phone coverage dropped to ZERO. I called in and they were polite and said since we had just activated the one phone and it was the same day we would not have a charge...and if we sent everything back we would get a refund of charges paid up front. We did receive the refund BUT have since received bills for the last two month in a row......each time were were assured that the account was no at zero and nothing was due. Today I got a call from a collection agency stating that they just got my file from T-Mobile two days ago. When I was told 2 weeks ago and 6 weeks ago that te account was closed with a zero balance....The 4 new phone were never activated. I spoke with six different people today ..each stating that the account is Zero balance and that I would need to wait for the next billing cycle for the reversal to take effect. They saw that the phone never were used. The problem is I have been told this for two months and it never gets handled...each person I speak with fro some reason can not send me anything to back up the no balance-nothing due. Sales department tells you what you want to hear to get the sale ....DO NOT TRUST their map on web site for coverage area either....then when you have an issue billing department tells you what you want to hear to get you off the phone. Mike
    Kansas City Area
  • T Mobile is the worst! The customer service people tell you anything you want to hear. We signed up for a family plan, paid up front IN FULL and several hours later, my husband's phone service was completely cut off. I called the store manager in Deerfield Beach and she said our account balance was zero and everything was ok. Well, it wasn't. It goes on and on. To make a long story short, we went over to the Verizon store and signed up. Everything is working just fine. AND, we got a better deal with nicer phones. T Mobile is all flash and no substance. Don't waste your time there.