Latest Root Metrics - Dire Vodafone results
![[Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/07b066fa3e9013f9d99830c7bd147146.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 16 Forum Member
The results are in ... and the Vodafone performance is dire which is unlikely to surprise any of us who work in the industry. Years of under investment and uncanny parallels to the performance of Voda Aus before they started spending money.
http://www.rootmetrics.com/rsr/uk
http://www.rootmetrics.com/rsr/uk
0
Comments
Seems EE won across the board with Three and O2 coming close to each other
It's no surpise to those of us who don't either. My third and final contract is finished with them soon thank God!
Rootmetrics is absolute bullshit at times.
paying a £72Bn dividend to shareholders which are mostly pension funds i.e. you and me. To put that into perspective, that's almost as much as the other 99 FTSE 100 companies will pay out this year - and all of it will be subject to tax.
Rootmetrics is absolute bullshit at times."
If that was really the case don't you think Vodafone would have changed their data policy / billing on root metrics speedtests a long time ago so they could "game" the results?
For someone who simply wants to call and text, these figures could be misleading: Three does very well for "reliability", but we all know that their 3g only network doesn't cover anywhere like the land mass of Voda's 2g offering - or with the same sort of building penetration.
I think Rootmetrics/the media need to present a greater distinction between the two when reporting these results.
Not that I'm defending Voda you understand: I'm a Three customer who is prepared to forgo some signal strength to enjoy fast, cheap data ;-)
Worst, uneducated (re testing method) comment ever. The tests are not even based on the ones we as ordinary users do via the app. It is only the ones their employee's do, on their own equipment, at the same time, on set routes, within a set area.
If anything because there is theoretically more people using the Rootmetrics app on Three & EE (because it's allowance exempt & that EE have the most customers so likely statistically more do use the app) it should actually add stress to the network and the professional testing should be slightly worse off due to it, not actually gain from it as you suggested so that logic is just daft.
since when did logic become important in a discussion on this forum? :-)
Ok.. Forgot. I'll switch off the Vulcan side of my brain. ;-)
The problem is Voda advertise as being good for data. In my office which is in a town centre, we only get 2G data by the window, and at most desks its voice only. All the competition does better.
Completely agree, it's frustrating, and the reason I left Voda for 3.
I'm arguing the results and reporting should make more of a distinction between raw coverage and data speeds.
Can you confirm that RootMetrics speed test data usage is exempt from allowances on Three?
I had a phone call from them this evening asking if I was happy with everything.
I told them that the town I work in in Derbyshire only has GPRS; he told me he expects Ashbourne to be 3G enabled in 2015!
Derby won't be 4G enabled until at least the end of the year whereas both Three, EE (and it appears o2 pretty soon) will allow their customers to access the LTE network.
Hmmm.
I agree that the RootMetrics results are suspect and it's not a properly scientific way to measure one operator against another. But, I would expect EE and Three to come out high up for data speeds, and EE for general coverage for voice (over Three which is obviously more limited with no 2G network).
So, the results are probably pretty accurate - but when one network is using the data to claim it's number one, and other networks are perhaps a little unfairly placed in last position, I do think it's a tad unfair.
If only Ofcom still did its own independent testing.
I agree, RootMetrics seem to rave on about EE and EE seem to rave on about RootMetrics, must be some money being exchanged!
I like what T-Mobile USA did and actually utilise SpeedTest.net stats. Whilst this doesn't showcase call drops and signal stats it does rake in much more data (I run loads of speedtests every month) that is likely to be more up-to-date.
If Ofcom did tests, there'd still be the underlying issue of out-of-date data (for example, I doubt Three allowed RootMetrics access to their 4G network whilst they were testing - even though the roll-out is rather small) and they may test one network at a time of day that isn't busy, and other network somewhere else at a time of day that is really congested. Sadly there' never going to be a perfect solution for rating the best network.
I would challenge people to go into areas that have been 4G enabled (on Vodafone) and measure the service then against the other operators. EE has been investing heavily in the 4G network yet seemingly neglecting its 3G/2G network for calls, its strange how one regularly hears of users having issues with dropped or failed calls on EE but not from O2 or Vodafone.
I have both Three and Vodafone for my two handsets, Three generally speaking is good but its signal is rather poor compared to that of Vodafone. I think when all is said and done the way Vodafone is rolling out its network will produce better results over the longer term.
I find Vodafone service great. Tbh. Good , deep blanket coverage for 2/3/4g within the Glasgow area. Good quality calls, fast data and good in building coverage.
When I as on EE I had good 4g speeds but terrible problems with voice. Lots and lots of dropped calls, many missed calls.
I'm in a very built up area, with a big business park (housing EE's HQ!) and a university. Yet, while Vodafone has given us 4G it clearly has many old sites that are only 2G and 3G, and with a pathetic backhaul connection serving them.
Hence speed tests of 700+ms and speeds of 0.02Mbps. Yet, clearly if I used a 4G enabled site, I'd expect speeds to be very decent.
Just as Three is enabling a number of sites as 4G but still having 3G in-between, even 4G covered areas still have huge gaps, and the speed drop is even more significant.
Fall back to 3G on Three and you're probably still going to have pretty impressive speeds. Most of the 3G network has DC-HSPA for one, and the backhaul has been upgraded near constantly to cope with demand.
Fall back to 3G on Vodafone and, well, you may as well as give up. It's not much better than 2G in any area with a high level of users. As Hatfield has the business park, lots of residents, a university and the A1(M) motorway, it's next to useless.
However, I only speak for where I'm using my devices and doing tests. I have no doubt that if you're in an area without such high levels of usage, you might still find Vodafone to be usable.
I am also talking solely about data here, not voice quality or reliability. Again, I'd expect all of the networks with good 2G coverage to provide a reliable voice service. If they can't do that, God help us all!
There is. No, if the data is scientifically collected that isn't an issue.
Epitiro's measurement platform (which OFCOM used last time) measures all networks at the same time in the same location. There's a set of locations, all with static probes, all simultaneously connected to each network. On drive/mobile tests they'll carry four handsets, again each connected to a different network, and testing at the same time.