4 ms·

Is this why mobile phone data access is so shit in london?

by teddyuk 11y ago

wumbernang 11y ago
Upvote for funny. Its pretty ok on O2 4G for me. Everything else seems congested.
- Mikushi 11y ago
  Same experience, on 3G with Three it's shody at best, but with EE 4G I get 30 to 40Mbps
  - Silhouette 11y ago
    We have noticed a very striking degradation in performance of all our 3G connections (multiple work and personal ones, on multiple mobile networks) in recent years, with a particularly obvious drop around the time 4G became a big deal. It could just be coincidental of course, because obviously in terms of radio signals they shouldn't interfere. However, our more cynical parts can't help wondering whether resources previously used to support 3G networks are being redirected over time towards the new and more profitable 4G services, leaving those still using the same 3G at the same price with fewer stations to connect with, less regular maintenance, etc.
    - benashford 11y ago
      I noticed something similar, but note OFCOM is allowing operators to use any part of their allocations for 4G services. I'm wondering if they're reusing some of their 2G and 3G bandwidth for 4G services.
      - Silhouette 11y ago
        The standard PR seems to be that network operators claim they aren't doing this and continue to develop their 2G and 3G capacity in parallel, with any degradations in performance being due to supporting increased loads and therefore contention on those 2G and 3G networks. Meanwhile, just about everybody who actually uses mobile networks seems to tell roughly the same story that I did before, and there seem to have been occasional more rigorous/scientific surveys that showed a definite, measurable drop in service quality on 2G and 3G over the relevant time period.
    - renaudg 11y ago
      How is that bad, and how is 4G more profitable ? At least on Three, it doesn't come at extra cost to the customer, and I'm more than happy for capacity to be repurposed towards it.
      - Silhouette 11y ago
        How is that bad How is it bad that people are paying for services on multi-year contracts and the quality has dropped in the middle of that period to a level where it is literally unusable in many cases? I'd say it's "complete failure to provide the fundamental part of the contracted services" bad. how is 4G more profitable ? Aside from everyone having to buy an entire new generation of devices to use it? As for plan pricing, I can't tell you, because the sites of several of the mobile operators are now so bad that I literally can't find any information about pricing on them after the five minutes I've just spent looking. I'm more than happy for capacity to be repurposed towards it. Well, I'm happy that you're happy, but that repurposing still screws everyone who doesn't have the option to switch over right now so they get a worse service than before even though they're still paying for it and (short of actual legal action) probably still locked into their contracts.
vidarh 11y ago
If they instead provided better data access, 99% of London commuters would happily sign on to full surveillance and agree to hand over their first born.

Is this why mobile phone data access is so shit in london?

by teddyuk 11y ago

Is this why mobile phone data access is so shit in london?

wumbernang 11y ago

Upvote for funny. Its pretty ok on O2 4G for me. Everything else seems congested.

Mikushi 11y ago
Same experience, on 3G with Three it's shody at best, but with EE 4G I get 30 to 40Mbps
- Silhouette 11y ago
  We have noticed a very striking degradation in performance of all our 3G connections (multiple work and personal ones, on multiple mobile networks) in recent years, with a particularly obvious drop around the time 4G became a big deal. It could just be coincidental of course, because obviously in terms of radio signals they shouldn't interfere. However, our more cynical parts can't help wondering whether resources previously used to support 3G networks are being redirected over time towards the new and more profitable 4G services, leaving those still using the same 3G at the same price with fewer stations to connect with, less regular maintenance, etc.
  - benashford 11y ago
    I noticed something similar, but note OFCOM is allowing operators to use any part of their allocations for 4G services. I'm wondering if they're reusing some of their 2G and 3G bandwidth for 4G services.
    - Silhouette 11y ago
      The standard PR seems to be that network operators claim they aren't doing this and continue to develop their 2G and 3G capacity in parallel, with any degradations in performance being due to supporting increased loads and therefore contention on those 2G and 3G networks. Meanwhile, just about everybody who actually uses mobile networks seems to tell roughly the same story that I did before, and there seem to have been occasional more rigorous/scientific surveys that showed a definite, measurable drop in service quality on 2G and 3G over the relevant time period.
  - renaudg 11y ago
    How is that bad, and how is 4G more profitable ? At least on Three, it doesn't come at extra cost to the customer, and I'm more than happy for capacity to be repurposed towards it.
    - Silhouette 11y ago
      How is that bad How is it bad that people are paying for services on multi-year contracts and the quality has dropped in the middle of that period to a level where it is literally unusable in many cases? I'd say it's "complete failure to provide the fundamental part of the contracted services" bad. how is 4G more profitable ? Aside from everyone having to buy an entire new generation of devices to use it? As for plan pricing, I can't tell you, because the sites of several of the mobile operators are now so bad that I literally can't find any information about pricing on them after the five minutes I've just spent looking. I'm more than happy for capacity to be repurposed towards it. Well, I'm happy that you're happy, but that repurposing still screws everyone who doesn't have the option to switch over right now so they get a worse service than before even though they're still paying for it and (short of actual legal action) probably still locked into their contracts.

vidarh 11y ago

If they instead provided better data access, 99% of London commuters would happily sign on to full surveillance and agree to hand over their first born.