Quite, how dare people post an opinion against that of Wavejock. The phrase venom is very over used now.
At least some here can appreciate that a company can be good in some ways and not in others, or do good things and things that are perceived as bad.
Yep. I'll be the first to admit EE are shocking at dispatching anything, horrible at letting customers know about local faults and down right stupid in how they set about (re)branded the network.
Ok my turn. I'm annoyed 3 haven't brought out the femto for all customers and seem to be inconsistently offering it - just put the bloody thing on sale. I'm annoyed my in building coverage isn't as good as I like at work. 1 bar and sometimes it drops to none, however everywhere else I go it isn't a problem.
This is the network I choose though because I literally couldn't put up with the poor 3G or the expensive or small data allowances offered by O2. I've tested and tried it and it very much didn't suit my needs as a data user who uses less calls and texts than 3G data.
Lets have some honesty instead of blindly shutting yourself off from any negative comment and constantly being a PR mouthpiece, leaving threads or talking of venom because you don't like people's opinions.
Earlier on this year, I left o2 after being with them and their previous incarnations since 1997.
Up until then, I loved o2.
Their customer services, their 2G coverage and the fact, I used to live in a mobile phone blackspot, and they were the only company that I got more than 1 bar of coverage.
I then moved to vofafone and Orange/EE.
Both of them lack the customer services of o2, but Vodafone's Sure Signal and Orange/EE's 3G/4G coverage, has blown everything out of the water.
Why is it, I only get 2G coverage in the centre of Manchester with o2, but I can get 3G/4G coverage in exactly the same place with Orange/EE.
As more and more people get smart phones, o2's lack of 3G is going to be a serious handicap.
Hopefully they can populate this with their venom rather than infecting other threads with it continually!
Well done to the OP for a worthwhile addition!
Oh I see, so everyone is ok to talk about any other network and its faults as long as they dont mention O2. Are you for real? How is someone having an opinion of their negative experience with O2 'venon'? There are plenty of threads and posts about; EE, three and vodafone and people contribute their negative experiences with them.
But as soon as someone mentions O2 being a bit rubbish you appear defending them like the poster has just insaulted your mum! You seem to spout the same old crap avoiding any direct questions about O2 and disappear.
I have moaned about the network I use - T mobile and also praised O2 for their customer service.
O2 good network spoilt by chronic lack of investment. I can only assume things will get worse. 3G roll out will stop completely in the not to distant future leaving a quarter built network as the concentrate on rolling out 4G at a snails pace. My only hope is that someone will take over and invest in the company before its too late. Hasta la vista Telefónica with any luck
They should have much better 3G coverage by the end of next year.. Vodafone deal should help them out greatly, already seeing heaps of local planning applications from them. Although not as many as MBNL or EE 2G Refresh.
Why is it, I only get 2G coverage in the centre of Manchester with o2, but I can get 3G/4G coverage in exactly the same place with Orange/EE.
As more and more people get smart phones, o2's lack of 3G is going to be a serious handicap.
Every network has black spots and its very unlikely O2 has any less coverage in such a key city as Manchester than any others. 25+ million customers choose to use O2 and their MVNOs and many of them have upgraded to smartphones. I find it absolutely unbelievable that such a large number of customers would accept a lesser user experience in such areas for any length of time. Sure a half dozen constantly bemoan O2 and criticise their 3G geographic coverage at every opportunity, some of the most vocal admit they don't even use the service but the fact is millions do every day and there is not a mass exodus because of coverage issues, quite the reverse as more customers have been joining O2 and it's partnership ventures.
Its never been in question that O2 don't have as much rural 3G coverage as others, that was their strategy and it appears to have annoyed some, however that seems to have been a winning strategy for O2 given the numbers they have attracted and held with above average prices. O2 have coverage where it matters and whilst there may be some small not spots in cities (like every network has - just read how many have been screaming for femotcells) its completely unbelievable that they don't cover cities like Newcastle and Manchester with 3G as some have previously stated.
Major cities with poor O2 3G coverage? Who to believe? The few who make those claims or the satisfied millions who keep paying O2 to use their services? Difficult choice! Strange how the press have yet to pick up on the mass discontent of those millions in big cities living with poor smartphone performance on the O2 network!
Every network has black spots and its very unlikely O2 has any less coverage in such a key city as Manchester than any others. 25+ million customers choose to use O2 and their MVNOs and many of them have upgraded to smartphones. I find it absolutely unbelievable that such a large number of customers would accept a lesser user experience in such areas for any length of time. Sure a half dozen constantly bemoan O2 and criticise their 3G geographic coverage at every opportunity, some of the most vocal admit they don't even use the service but the fact is millions do every day and there is not a mass exodus because of coverage issues, quite the reverse as more customers have been joining O2 and it's partnership ventures.
Its never been in question that O2 don't have as much rural 3G coverage as others, that was their strategy and it appears to have annoyed some, however that seems to have been a winning strategy for O2 given the numbers they have attracted and held with above average prices. O2 have coverage where it matters and whilst there may be some small not spots in cities (like every network has - just read how many have been screaming for femotcells) its completely unbelievable that they don't cover cities like Newcastle and Manchester with 3G as some have previously stated.
Major cities with poor O2 3G coverage? Who to believe? The few who make those claims or the satisfied millions who keep paying O2 to use their services? Difficult choice! Strange how the press have yet to pick up on the mass discontent of those millions in big cities living with poor smartphone performance on the O2 network!
What a load of utter rubbish.
O2 has been bollocked by OFCOM several times for its serious lack of 3G.
Tell us, why is it that you dont even use O2 yet you seem to defend them to the hilt even though you know absolutely zip about them? Makes no sense at all.
O2 has been bollocked by OFCOM several times for its serious lack of 3G.
Not true....... just once as far as I know and they were very close to the coverage required. Since then O2 have exceeded licence requirements for coverage.
One does not have to have more than common sense to recognise success. Despite the constant repeat statements about coverage O2 grows and gets top ratings for customer satisfaction..... fact! It's easy to 'rubbish' anything it's just a bit harder to produce some factual evidence to support the assessment that O2 have made a significant strategic error developing their service to counter the growth and satisfaction they maintain.
I'm pretty sure the one-liner put downs of the company will continue and that's why a dedicated thread like this is ideal for the small band of O2 'haters' who habitually repost their negative statements and strive to make differences in opinion personal.
Not true....... just once as far as I know and they were very close to the coverage required. Since then O2 have exceeded licence requirements for coverage.
One does not have to have more than common sense to recognise success. Despite the constant repeat statements about coverage O2 grows and gets top ratings for customer satisfaction..... fact! It's easy to 'rubbish' anything it's just a bit harder to produce some factual evidence to support the assessment that O2 have made a significant strategic error developing their service to counter the growth and satisfaction they maintain.
I'm pretty sure the one-liner put downs of the company will continue and that's why a dedicated thread like this is ideal for the small band of O2 'haters' who habitually repost their negative statements and strive to make differences in opinion personal.
It is rubbish.
What you are spouting day after day is about customer service. Nothing to do with the network nor signal coverage. O2 is well known UK wide for having the worst signal on 3G. Why cant you accept that?
I wish you would also drop the 'band of o2 haters' like we are the ONLY ones in the UK who complain. Have you actually bothered to look past this forum and perhaps look at the o2 forums, giffgaff forum or the millions of other posts regarding this on various other forums? Im sure even you can use Google! If you bothered to you would see this is not an isolated case.
Considering o2 have the lowest amount of smartphone users out of any UK network, does that not tell you something?
Where are these millions of people across the UK who can't use their smartphones on O2's network?
There should be some evidence of their discontent if the issue is as bad as some here suggest! How come 1000s are not returning smartphones to O2 and being released from their contracts due to coverage unavailability? Why have the press not caught on to it? Why are O2's customer numbers also rising?
As for the penetration of smartphones per network - some evidence required to support the statement made.
They only have 8m phone contract customers. The rest are Pay as you go and broadband.
Really......
That differs from what has been stated in their latest results:
"O2 said smartphone penetration increased off the back of its On & On offer, with almost 89% of contract handset sales in the yeat to date being smartphones. Its contract base increased by 206,000 customers to 11.6 million and contract customers now account for 52% of its base, an all-time high."
That differs from what has been stated in their latest results:
"O2 said smartphone penetration increased off the back of its On & On offer, with almost 89% of contract handset sales in the yeat to date being smartphones. Its contract base increased by 206,000 customers to 11.6 million and contract customers now account for 52% of its base, an all-time high."
A contract is a contract whether it is SIM only or with a device as the customer has made a commitment. They have 11.6 millon which is significantly more than the 8 milion stated.
52% contact ratio is reletavely high and it's likely most of these will now be smartphone users.
It would be interesting to see some evidence to confirm the proportion of SIM only contract customers on the network currently.
They should have much better 3G coverage by the end of next year.. Vodafone deal should help them out greatly, already seeing heaps of local planning applications from them. Although not as many as MBNL or EE 2G Refresh.
Given Vodafone's coverage isn't that great I don't have high hopes
Always found it ironic that Vodafone bought the largest amount of 3G spectrum but have failed to do that much with it.
I hate people who don't even know what network they are complaining about. It is not 02 or o2. In fact it is not O2 either as the two should be subscript but at least that is the closest we can get.
As for O2 - they are OK where I live but I don't use them currently. I am using Vodaphone at the moment and I am happy.
I hate people who don't even know what network they are complaining about. It is not 02 or o2. In fact it is not O2 either as the two should be subscript but at least that is the closest we can get.
As for O2 - they are OK where I live but I don't use them currently. I am using Vodaphone at the moment and I am happy.
I hate people who don't even know what network they're using
I hate people who don't even know what network they are complaining about. It is not 02 or o2. In fact it is not O2 either as the two should be subscript but at least that is the closest we can get.
Given Vodafone's coverage isn't that great I don't have high hopes
Always found it ironic that Vodafone bought the largest amount of 3G spectrum but have failed to do that much with it.
Vodafone didn't buy the largest amount of 3G spectrum in the auction as it was reserved for a new entrant which was Hutchison 3G UK. (See Here). http://www.prattfamily.demon.co.uk/mikep/frequency.htm They have always had the largest amount of 3G spectrum at 2100MHz. Vodafone may have more now with the addition of re-farming 900MHz but only slightly more. O2 UK have always had the least amount of 2100MHz spectrum which perhaps explains why they have invested less in it but have been rolling out 900MHz 3G coverage quickly.
Can't say I have heard too many complaints about Vodafone's 3G coverage as they had the greatest coverage in the UK for a while until 3 joined with T-Mobile to create MBNL and ramped up coverage using combined sites and extending 3G to sites which previously only had GSM 1800Mhz. Vodafone has been adding 900MHz UMTS coverage over the last few months as well as HSPA+ and have a good reputation for data services. I have used them for over five years as my primary network with little to complain about.
Vodafone didn't buy the largest amount of 3G spectrum in the auction as it was reserved for a new entrant which was Hutchison 3G UK. (See Here). http://www.prattfamily.demon.co.uk/mikep/frequency.htm They have always had the largest amount of 3G spectrum at 2100MHz. Vodafone may have more now with the addition of re-farming 900MHz but only slightly more. O2 UK have always had the least amount of 2100MHz spectrum which perhaps explains why they have invested less in it but have been rolling out 900MHz 3G coverage quickly.
Can't say I have heard too many complaints about Vodafone's 3G coverage as they had the greatest coverage in the UK for a while until 3 joined with T-Mobile to create MBNL and ramped up coverage using combined sites and extending 3G to sites which previously only had GSM 1800Mhz. Vodafone has been adding 900MHz UMTS coverage over the last few months as well as HSPA+ and have a good reputation for data services. I have used them for over five years as my primary network with little to complain about.
Vodafone have:
2 X 14.8MHz (Paired) at 2100MHz (29.6MHz)
2 X17.4MHz (Paired) at 900MHz (34.8MHz)
(Total 64.4MHz)
Three have:
2 X 14.6MHz (Paired) at 2100MHz (29.2MHz)
5.1MHz (unpaired) at 2100MHz (5.1MHz)
O2 UK have always had the least amount of 2100MHz spectrum which perhaps explains why they have invested less in it but have been rolling out 900MHz 3G coverage quickly.
PMSL
Seriously?!
They have the same amount of 3G spectrum that T-Mobile and Orange
So what was their excuse for having great 3G coverage
Comments
Yep. I'll be the first to admit EE are shocking at dispatching anything, horrible at letting customers know about local faults and down right stupid in how they set about (re)branded the network.
This is the network I choose though because I literally couldn't put up with the poor 3G or the expensive or small data allowances offered by O2. I've tested and tried it and it very much didn't suit my needs as a data user who uses less calls and texts than 3G data.
Lets have some honesty instead of blindly shutting yourself off from any negative comment and constantly being a PR mouthpiece, leaving threads or talking of venom because you don't like people's opinions.
Up until then, I loved o2.
Their customer services, their 2G coverage and the fact, I used to live in a mobile phone blackspot, and they were the only company that I got more than 1 bar of coverage.
I then moved to vofafone and Orange/EE.
Both of them lack the customer services of o2, but Vodafone's Sure Signal and Orange/EE's 3G/4G coverage, has blown everything out of the water.
Why is it, I only get 2G coverage in the centre of Manchester with o2, but I can get 3G/4G coverage in exactly the same place with Orange/EE.
As more and more people get smart phones, o2's lack of 3G is going to be a serious handicap.
Oh I see, so everyone is ok to talk about any other network and its faults as long as they dont mention O2. Are you for real? How is someone having an opinion of their negative experience with O2 'venon'? There are plenty of threads and posts about; EE, three and vodafone and people contribute their negative experiences with them.
But as soon as someone mentions O2 being a bit rubbish you appear defending them like the poster has just insaulted your mum! You seem to spout the same old crap avoiding any direct questions about O2 and disappear.
I have moaned about the network I use - T mobile and also praised O2 for their customer service.
You really are a strange person :rolleyes:
Every network has black spots and its very unlikely O2 has any less coverage in such a key city as Manchester than any others. 25+ million customers choose to use O2 and their MVNOs and many of them have upgraded to smartphones. I find it absolutely unbelievable that such a large number of customers would accept a lesser user experience in such areas for any length of time. Sure a half dozen constantly bemoan O2 and criticise their 3G geographic coverage at every opportunity, some of the most vocal admit they don't even use the service but the fact is millions do every day and there is not a mass exodus because of coverage issues, quite the reverse as more customers have been joining O2 and it's partnership ventures.
Its never been in question that O2 don't have as much rural 3G coverage as others, that was their strategy and it appears to have annoyed some, however that seems to have been a winning strategy for O2 given the numbers they have attracted and held with above average prices. O2 have coverage where it matters and whilst there may be some small not spots in cities (like every network has - just read how many have been screaming for femotcells) its completely unbelievable that they don't cover cities like Newcastle and Manchester with 3G as some have previously stated.
Major cities with poor O2 3G coverage? Who to believe? The few who make those claims or the satisfied millions who keep paying O2 to use their services? Difficult choice! Strange how the press have yet to pick up on the mass discontent of those millions in big cities living with poor smartphone performance on the O2 network!
What a load of utter rubbish.
O2 has been bollocked by OFCOM several times for its serious lack of 3G.
Tell us, why is it that you dont even use O2 yet you seem to defend them to the hilt even though you know absolutely zip about them? Makes no sense at all.
Not true....... just once as far as I know and they were very close to the coverage required. Since then O2 have exceeded licence requirements for coverage.
One does not have to have more than common sense to recognise success. Despite the constant repeat statements about coverage O2 grows and gets top ratings for customer satisfaction..... fact! It's easy to 'rubbish' anything it's just a bit harder to produce some factual evidence to support the assessment that O2 have made a significant strategic error developing their service to counter the growth and satisfaction they maintain.
I'm pretty sure the one-liner put downs of the company will continue and that's why a dedicated thread like this is ideal for the small band of O2 'haters' who habitually repost their negative statements and strive to make differences in opinion personal.
It is rubbish.
What you are spouting day after day is about customer service. Nothing to do with the network nor signal coverage. O2 is well known UK wide for having the worst signal on 3G. Why cant you accept that?
I wish you would also drop the 'band of o2 haters' like we are the ONLY ones in the UK who complain. Have you actually bothered to look past this forum and perhaps look at the o2 forums, giffgaff forum or the millions of other posts regarding this on various other forums? Im sure even you can use Google! If you bothered to you would see this is not an isolated case.
Considering o2 have the lowest amount of smartphone users out of any UK network, does that not tell you something?
There should be some evidence of their discontent if the issue is as bad as some here suggest! How come 1000s are not returning smartphones to O2 and being released from their contracts due to coverage unavailability? Why have the press not caught on to it? Why are O2's customer numbers also rising?
As for the penetration of smartphones per network - some evidence required to support the statement made.
They only have 7-8m phone contract customers. The rest are Pay as you go and broadband.
Really......
That differs from what has been stated in their latest results:
"O2 said smartphone penetration increased off the back of its On & On offer, with almost 89% of contract handset sales in the yeat to date being smartphones. Its contract base increased by 206,000 customers to 11.6 million and contract customers now account for 52% of its base, an all-time high."
http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/News/23162/smartphones_drive_customers_contract_high.aspx
Phone contract, not incl sim only.
52% contact ratio is reletavely high and it's likely most of these will now be smartphone users.
It would be interesting to see some evidence to confirm the proportion of SIM only contract customers on the network currently.
Given Vodafone's coverage isn't that great I don't have high hopes
Always found it ironic that Vodafone bought the largest amount of 3G spectrum but have failed to do that much with it.
As for O2 - they are OK where I live but I don't use them currently. I am using Vodaphone at the moment and I am happy.
I hate people who don't even know what network they're using
Vodafone;)
O₂
Happy now?
Get it right.. It's "vodafone UK"
Hate how it looks on the iPhone.. Why can't they use a capital letter!!!
Lol yeah vodafone UK, always annoyed me that has, what's wrong with Vodafone UK, its like O2 in Germany, it's o2-de just awful lol should be O2-DE
Vodafone didn't buy the largest amount of 3G spectrum in the auction as it was reserved for a new entrant which was Hutchison 3G UK. (See Here). http://www.prattfamily.demon.co.uk/mikep/frequency.htm They have always had the largest amount of 3G spectrum at 2100MHz. Vodafone may have more now with the addition of re-farming 900MHz but only slightly more. O2 UK have always had the least amount of 2100MHz spectrum which perhaps explains why they have invested less in it but have been rolling out 900MHz 3G coverage quickly.
Can't say I have heard too many complaints about Vodafone's 3G coverage as they had the greatest coverage in the UK for a while until 3 joined with T-Mobile to create MBNL and ramped up coverage using combined sites and extending 3G to sites which previously only had GSM 1800Mhz. Vodafone has been adding 900MHz UMTS coverage over the last few months as well as HSPA+ and have a good reputation for data services. I have used them for over five years as my primary network with little to complain about.
Vodafone have:
2 X 14.8MHz (Paired) at 2100MHz (29.6MHz)
2 X17.4MHz (Paired) at 900MHz (34.8MHz)
(Total 64.4MHz)
Three have:
2 X 14.6MHz (Paired) at 2100MHz (29.2MHz)
5.1MHz (unpaired) at 2100MHz (5.1MHz)
(Total 34.3MHz)
The winner is Vodafone by a clear margin
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/spectrumlib/annexes/annex6.pdf
PMSL
Seriously?!
They have the same amount of 3G spectrum that T-Mobile and Orange
So what was their excuse for having great 3G coverage
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/spectrumlib/annexes/annex6.pdf