Originally Posted by Stereo Steve:
“It's always been like this and it's deeply misleading. You click on 3G and they say 'Hey, look at our superb 2G coverage'. One might conclude that they are deeply embarrassed about their failure to roll out 3G and rightly so. You also can't zoom out very far and see the full scale of the data disaster. I know they are now putting things right pretty fast but the map is simply misleading and shouldn't be allowed. At least the 4G one doesn't do this, as you say.”
I totally agree with you there - if I want to look at 3G coverage, to see if there is coverage in an area (or not), then I don't want to be shown 2G coverage on the same map. If I'd have wanted 2G coverage (not that I would, as streaming media apps won't work on 2G) then I'd have clicked the 2G tab instead of the 3G one. Right?
I saw a
post in the other thread and it kinda made me laugh. The poster in that link also commented on the same thing, i.e. making 2G look like 3G - and the fact that you'd have to drive from Totnes to Torbay to get some 3G...
As many people are thinking, and have probably already commented on (in either this thread or one of the other threads), if Vod (and O2, to a point as well) had aggressively rolled out 3G2100 in the same way that 3 UK had rolled out 3G2100 (and then MBNL, when the mast share took place), then we wouldn't probably be discussing such coverage issues. It'd also be easier for Vod/O2 to upgrade - if the mast config allowed it, they could pipe 3G900 down the same ports as 2G900 (when they were allowed to launch 3G900), and if 3G2100 is already active then all they'd need to do is replace the antennas (so they are compatible with 4G800), keep 3G900 and 3G2100 and possibly upgrade the backhaul. That way, by using 3G900 and 3G2100 to their full potential, they could even shift the full amount of 2G900 (and 2G1800 for O2) over to 3G900 to help with capacity (and start a 2G switch off).
If 2G was switched off today, chances are there would be many areas left in the dark...