Yes I have looked at Lycamobile but I fear they might go the same way as ovivo and samba.
While nothing is impossible, you are hardly comparing like for like.
Ovivo had somewhere between 50 and 70 thousand subscribers and couldn't even get a few hundred thousand pounds in conventional investment. I don't think Samba even had that many subscribers.
Lyca has 30 million subscribers (1.2 million in the UK) and an annual turnover of around a billion US dollars.
While nothing is impossible, you are hardly comparing like for like.
Ovivo had somewhere between 50 and 70 thousand subscribers and couldn't even get a few hundred thousand pounds in conventional investment. I don't think Samba even had that many subscribers.
Lyca has 30 million subscribers (1.2 million in the UK) and an annual turnover of around a billion US dollars.
Also the Conservative party's biggest corporate donor!
That is slow as hell, a 1mb photo would take 31s to load!?!?!
And just how often and why would you be viewing 1MB photos on your phone? (I assume you mean 1MB because 1mb would take 0.000004 milliseconds) 1MB photos are typically 2-4x higher than the resolution of your entire phone screen.
On the other hand a Facebook photo is typically 0.05MB.
While not a massive amount, each link would take 4.5s and completely ruins the flow
Nomatter how fast the 3G connection a BBC page typically takes 3-4 seconds to load anyway. It takes 1-3 seconds to initialize a 3G connection to begin with (sometimes even over 10 seconds) then 50-150ms latency means loading the initial page takes about half a second and then, only then, can it even try start loading pictures and stylesheets, which takes another half second or so. With the typically small sizes of mobile web pages download speed is largely irrelevant as most of it is latency.
After all, many websites (including BBC News) barely take 1 or 2 seconds longer to load on EDGE than it does on 21 Mbps+ 3G.
Three one plan? Shame it's quite expensive these days.
£15 isn't it? or £20? I think it's quite reasonable, you get what you pay for really. That includes free 0800 numbers, Like Home, unlimited data and tethering on the Sim only plans + free 4G. I wouldn't really call that quite expensive.
£15 isn't it? or £20? I think it's quite reasonable, you get what you pay for really. That includes free 0800 numbers, Like Home, unlimited data and tethering on the Sim only plans + free 4G. I wouldn't really call that quite expensive.
256Kbps is not unusable at all. The only thing that's really unusable on it is real-time video streaming and large file downloads
For everything else it's quite acceptable if not particularly superb.
Are you for real? just downloading an average size smartphone app or game, which would take a few seconds on a decent 3G connection the likes of which I get could take an age when capped to 256Kbps.
Updating the Metro Newspaper app's daily newspaper, downloading a podcast using BeyondPod. Grabbing an offline map section from google maps, or doing Skype video would be poor quality.
This kind of cap severely impacts the user experience on smartphone and I think you're living in a dream world.
And I thought Three's plan to cap 4G speeds at 50Mbps was a bit killjoy... Giffgaff must be in real trouble if they are having to consider this idea knowing how there are competitors at that price point who can easily give more for your money without caps or limits.
If one takes the time to read the article that GiffGaff posted via the link it goes into reasonable detail about how such a change would affect customers. Its open for discussion as a proposal on how to deliver the best quality of service to as many users as possible and if adopted won't take effect for several months. Plenty of time for those using the service to make known their opinions. GiuffGaff are not aribitarily imposing a speed restriction but soliciting opinions and providing some useful information about why they are considering the option and what it means in real terms for the tasks customers use the service for. Compare that with the application of heavy traffic management with no offer of consideration for existing customers opinions! The other important factor is that the proposal is to address demand at peak hours and is not a blanket speed cap.
This looks like an honest approach to educate customers and involve them in the difficult process of deciding how the expanding demand for mobile data can be managed for the benefit of the majority who use smart phones for browsing and low volume data tasks. Its very likely that this issue will become a priority for others and it will be interesting to see how the operators address data demand in the coming months.
And I thought Three's plan to cap 4G speeds at 50Mbps was a bit killjoy... Giffgaff must be in real trouble if they are having to consider this idea knowing how there are competitors at that price point who can easily give more for your money without caps or limits.
Well 3 also cost more, and own their own network.
I've said this many times before... you get what you pay for. GiffGaff is a bargain basement, cheap, value network. Anyone expecting exceptional service or performance while paying the least is deluded.
It's like in the old days when people on £2 or even free 8Mb ADSL packages complained about their speeds dropping to 128Kbps at peak times. Well what do you expect? If it was possible to provide the same level of service at £2 that other companies charge £20 for, the latter would go out of business pretty fast.
It's the same with GiffGaff. If you want unlimited for £10... don't expect the best at the same time. They're simply capitalizing on the fact that most people buy unlimited packages to avoid bill shock, even though they only use a relatively minuscule amount of data.
And I thought Three's plan to cap 4G speeds at 50Mbps was a bit killjoy... Giffgaff must be in real trouble if they are having to consider this idea knowing how there are competitors at that price point who can easily give more for your money without caps or limits.
Yes but with Giff Gaff you get a bundled AOL Dial Up installation CD with a 24 hour FREE trial!
Compare that with the application of heavy traffic management with no offer of consideration for existing customers opinions
What do you call the peak time performance of giffgaff data ?
Having been a customer of giffgaff for some time I don't see that much evidence of those options actually changing anything.
Since Oct/Nov last year there were several consolations/feedback discussion about 4G launch in March. The overwhelming feedback from existing customers was more 4G data at a reasonable price. What was the result ?
I've said this many times before... you get what you pay for. GiffGaff is a bargain basement, cheap, value network. Anyone expecting exceptional service or performance while paying the least is deluded.
It's like in the old days when people on £2 or even free 8Mb ADSL packages complained about their speeds dropping to 128Kbps at peak times. Well what do you expect? If it was possible to provide the same level of service at £2 that other companies charge £20 for, the latter would go out of business pretty fast.
It's the same with GiffGaff. If you want unlimited for £10... don't expect the best at the same time. They're simply capitalizing on the fact that most people buy unlimited packages to avoid bill shock, even though they only use a relatively minuscule amount of data.
Thats rediculous!
If I pay for a service I should get it and just because I pay at the lower end doesnt mean I should EXPECT drops.
If they cant provide it then sell me 2mbps, im already taking a hit on speed for the cost reduction.
I've said this many times before... you get what you pay for. GiffGaff is a bargain basement, cheap, value network. Anyone expecting exceptional service or performance while paying the least is deluded.
It's like in the old days when people on £2 or even free 8Mb ADSL packages complained about their speeds dropping to 128Kbps at peak times. Well what do you expect? If it was possible to provide the same level of service at £2 that other companies charge £20 for, the latter would go out of business pretty fast.
It's the same with GiffGaff. If you want unlimited for £10... don't expect the best at the same time. They're simply capitalizing on the fact that most people buy unlimited packages to avoid bill shock, even though they only use a relatively minuscule amount of data.
And yet as mentioned earlier in this thread, Lycamobile can offer the same "unlimited" (4G up to 10GB usage if I recall then 2G speeds) package for the same price with more minutes and unlimited texts using the same network. Fifty less minutes with Three for 90p more a month. Giffgaff's offerings once capped are going to fall behind the other operators very quickly.
Although I can't see the appetite for everyone to bite the bullet and pay what EE charges for 4G - up to £75 a month and still capped. If data charges were to go skywards in that direction, I'd expect a lot of people to go WiFi-only or even dump their smartphones.
And yet as mentioned earlier in this thread, Lycamobile can offer the same "unlimited" (4G up to 10GB usage if I recall then 2G speeds) package for the same price with more minutes and unlimited texts using the same network. Fifty less minutes with Three for 90p more a month. Giffgaff's offerings once capped are going to fall behind the other operators very quickly.
Although I can't see the appetite for everyone to bite the bullet and pay what EE charges for 4G - up to £75 a month and still capped. If data charges were to go skywards in that direction, I'd expect a lot of people to go WiFi-only or even dump their smartphones.
LycaMobile can't deliver as I have bought their UK12 package and they can't deliver 4G on most popular handsets. LycaMobile are aware of the issue but have no solution. They are actually making a false claim in their advertising and that needs to be challenged so others won't get charged for a servive they know they can't deliver.
LycaMobile can't deliver as I have bought their UK12 package and they can't deliver 4G on most popular handsets. LycaMobile are aware of the issue but have no solution. They are actually making a false claim in their advertising and that needs to be challenged so others won't get charged for a servive they know they can't deliver.
That's your personal experience. Which isn't fact.
Based on what you say, then I can say the same thing about Thine Wonk's experience on 4G with Giff Gaff.
A personal experience does not mean it's the same for everyone. If Lyca Mobile were indeed false advertising then this would have been taken to court.
Exactly, O2 initially couldn't sell 4G plans on the iPhone 5S because if the Apple carrier settings, they continued to advertise 4G. It isn't a breach as far as the ASA are concerned, it's a technical issues between Lyca and some Samsung models, in fact it isn't even unique to Lyca as other people on other networks have had the same difficulties.
Fact is LycaMobile have refunded my £12 for their UK12 package back to my credit because they cannot support my handset a Samsung Galaxy S4 with 4G. I expect the usual individuals who stalk and attempt to discredit anything posted to do their usual nasty stuff but my experience with LycaMobile is 100% accurate and my advice to others is to beware of the claims LycaMobile make presently as there is plenty of evidence to I support what I have reported. Search LycaMobile on here to gather opinions from those who have paid money for the advertised 4G service.
Who is being nasty? we're just explaining that most handsets do not have an issue, it seems to be certain Samsung handsets, and that your situation isn't unique, giving you an example of a previous case when O2 launched 4G and couldn't offer the iPhone 5S for a while, and they continued to advertise 4G. Technical issues will crop up, but Lyca can support 4G on a range of handsets, other networks have had the same issue with some handsets.
Fact is LycaMobile have refunded my £12 for their UK12 package back to my credit because they cannot support my handset a Samsung Galaxy S4 with 4G. I expect the usual individuals who stalk and attempt to discredit anything posted to do their usual nasty stuff but my experience with LycaMobile is 100% accurate and my advice to others is to beware of the claims LycaMobile make presently as there is plenty of evidence to I support what I have reported. Search LycaMobile on here to gather opinions from those who have paid money for the advertised 4G service.
And if you search Lyca on here you find nothing but good reviews apart from your posts.
The fact is Lyca Mobile can deliver their service just fine. In fact when I asked you if you thought Lyca were being truthful about saying their 4G service only worked on a Galaxy S3 you told me that you never said you believed them, you were only repeating what you were told. It's fairly obvious (and i'm sure you'll agree) that both the Galaxy S3 and Galaxy S4 support 4G (providing you have the right version) so i'm sure you'll agree Lyca told you the wrong information. Yet you're posting it like it's fact.
Aye....... O2''s fault...... What a surprise......
Seriously......
I'll leave this for now...
There are others who have a similar experience to mine with Lyca but I guess the attempt to discredit is a higher priority than than reading what has been happening. Waste of time repeating what is happening for some!
Comments
While nothing is impossible, you are hardly comparing like for like.
Ovivo had somewhere between 50 and 70 thousand subscribers and couldn't even get a few hundred thousand pounds in conventional investment. I don't think Samba even had that many subscribers.
Lyca has 30 million subscribers (1.2 million in the UK) and an annual turnover of around a billion US dollars.
Also the Conservative party's biggest corporate donor!
I'm not going to talk politics on here but that has certainly put paid to any chance of me joining Lyca.
Sadly Virgin Mobile isn't an option because EEs coverage in one place I want to use my phone is non existant.
Three one plan? Shame it's quite expensive these days.
Not really. It's slower than even first-generation CS 3G data from 2003.
And just how often and why would you be viewing 1MB photos on your phone? (I assume you mean 1MB because 1mb would take 0.000004 milliseconds) 1MB photos are typically 2-4x higher than the resolution of your entire phone screen.
On the other hand a Facebook photo is typically 0.05MB.
Nomatter how fast the 3G connection a BBC page typically takes 3-4 seconds to load anyway. It takes 1-3 seconds to initialize a 3G connection to begin with (sometimes even over 10 seconds) then 50-150ms latency means loading the initial page takes about half a second and then, only then, can it even try start loading pictures and stylesheets, which takes another half second or so. With the typically small sizes of mobile web pages download speed is largely irrelevant as most of it is latency.
After all, many websites (including BBC News) barely take 1 or 2 seconds longer to load on EDGE than it does on 21 Mbps+ 3G.
64Kbps is enough to stream radio reliably. Not exceptionally high quality, but most internet radio stations were 64-96Kbps in the early days.
£15 isn't it? or £20? I think it's quite reasonable, you get what you pay for really. That includes free 0800 numbers, Like Home, unlimited data and tethering on the Sim only plans + free 4G. I wouldn't really call that quite expensive.
I have it at £15pm over 12.
20 now or 23 for monthly. No 0800 though.
It's not bad but its no longer a beast deal.
Are you for real? just downloading an average size smartphone app or game, which would take a few seconds on a decent 3G connection the likes of which I get could take an age when capped to 256Kbps.
Updating the Metro Newspaper app's daily newspaper, downloading a podcast using BeyondPod. Grabbing an offline map section from google maps, or doing Skype video would be poor quality.
This kind of cap severely impacts the user experience on smartphone and I think you're living in a dream world.
This looks like an honest approach to educate customers and involve them in the difficult process of deciding how the expanding demand for mobile data can be managed for the benefit of the majority who use smart phones for browsing and low volume data tasks. Its very likely that this issue will become a priority for others and it will be interesting to see how the operators address data demand in the coming months.
I've said this many times before... you get what you pay for. GiffGaff is a bargain basement, cheap, value network. Anyone expecting exceptional service or performance while paying the least is deluded.
It's like in the old days when people on £2 or even free 8Mb ADSL packages complained about their speeds dropping to 128Kbps at peak times. Well what do you expect? If it was possible to provide the same level of service at £2 that other companies charge £20 for, the latter would go out of business pretty fast.
It's the same with GiffGaff. If you want unlimited for £10... don't expect the best at the same time. They're simply capitalizing on the fact that most people buy unlimited packages to avoid bill shock, even though they only use a relatively minuscule amount of data.
Yes but with Giff Gaff you get a bundled AOL Dial Up installation CD with a 24 hour FREE trial!
Again no coverage where my parents live. Despite being a village of 6k plus people its only covered by O2 and Vodafone and even then only 2g
What do you call the peak time performance of giffgaff data ?
Having been a customer of giffgaff for some time I don't see that much evidence of those options actually changing anything.
Since Oct/Nov last year there were several consolations/feedback discussion about 4G launch in March. The overwhelming feedback from existing customers was more 4G data at a reasonable price. What was the result ?
It's a nice marketing concept but that's it IMO.
Thats rediculous!
If I pay for a service I should get it and just because I pay at the lower end doesnt mean I should EXPECT drops.
If they cant provide it then sell me 2mbps, im already taking a hit on speed for the cost reduction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHW1ho8L7V8
They are also advertising the following popular sites for use on your new Samsung S5.
wap.bbc.co.uk
wap.google.com
http://www.48months.ie/boiler-plate/about-us
Although I can't see the appetite for everyone to bite the bullet and pay what EE charges for 4G - up to £75 a month and still capped. If data charges were to go skywards in that direction, I'd expect a lot of people to go WiFi-only or even dump their smartphones.
LycaMobile can't deliver as I have bought their UK12 package and they can't deliver 4G on most popular handsets. LycaMobile are aware of the issue but have no solution. They are actually making a false claim in their advertising and that needs to be challenged so others won't get charged for a servive they know they can't deliver.
That's your personal experience. Which isn't fact.
Based on what you say, then I can say the same thing about Thine Wonk's experience on 4G with Giff Gaff.
A personal experience does not mean it's the same for everyone. If Lyca Mobile were indeed false advertising then this would have been taken to court.
And if you search Lyca on here you find nothing but good reviews apart from your posts.
The fact is Lyca Mobile can deliver their service just fine. In fact when I asked you if you thought Lyca were being truthful about saying their 4G service only worked on a Galaxy S3 you told me that you never said you believed them, you were only repeating what you were told. It's fairly obvious (and i'm sure you'll agree) that both the Galaxy S3 and Galaxy S4 support 4G (providing you have the right version) so i'm sure you'll agree Lyca told you the wrong information. Yet you're posting it like it's fact.
Seriously......
I'll leave this for now...
There are others who have a similar experience to mine with Lyca but I guess the attempt to discredit is a higher priority than than reading what has been happening. Waste of time repeating what is happening for some!