O2's AWFUL 3G network

jabbamk1 · 05-02-2014, 01:19

I haven't been proven wrong at all.

It's clear from the data that rootmetrics provides that EE and Three provide better service, coverage and calls/texts/data experience than O2.

I'm more inclined to trust root metrics over your opinion.

qasdfdsaq · 05-02-2014, 01:31

The Rootmetrics data you yourself linked to clearly showed both the claim I made that you quoted, and the data I collected to be correct, since it almost exactly matches.

Ironic you complain about me being argumentative while you again try to pick an argument when ultimately your only case was er... actually, I'd rather trust Rootmetrics over you when Rootmetrics actually agrees with me!

jabbamk1 · 05-02-2014, 01:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

actually, I'd rather trust Rootmetrics over you when Rootmetrics actually agrees with me!

Well you said that O2 was excellent and that EE and Three were slow and unreliable.

Root Metrics shows you to be incorrect on both counts.
As I said before, O2 comes bottom or second to bottom in every category. Significantly lower than EE and Three.

Root Metrics does not agree with your findings at all.

qasdfdsaq · 05-02-2014, 01:40

Once again changing your story after you've been proved wrong. And once again making up imaginary accusations.

You were quite clearly talking about coverage and signal strength.

I quite clearly said "personal experience" and "when I need them". Rootmetrics proves nothing in these respects.

Rootmetrics clearly proves O2 has better signal and fewer blackspots and weakspots in the city than EE

As for personal experience, you really want to make the absurd claim that a third party knows my personal experience better than myself?

jabbamk1 · 05-02-2014, 01:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

I quite clearly said "personal experience" and "when I need them". Rootmetrics proves nothing in these respects.

Ok so you are talking personal experience then...

But what Root Metrics says is that O2 is an inferior network across all categories compared to EE and Three. Why can't you believe that?

qasdfdsaq · 05-02-2014, 01:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabbamk1

Ok so you are talking personal experience then...

But what Root Metrics says is that O2 is an inferior network across all categories compared to EE and Three. Why can't you believe that?

Why do you always have to start an argument over what I never said and make up imaginary and absurd accusations about what I should or should not "believe"?

What I said was

1) In my personal experience EE and 3 are less reliable when I need them
2) Overall signal strength is better on O2 3G, with fewer weak/blackspots.

Rootmetrics proves nothing about the former and dubiously agrees with the latter.

Why do you have to attack my personal experience as if it's somehow wrong or invalid if it does not agree with Rootmetrics or "the average"?

jabbamk1 · 05-02-2014, 01:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Why do you always have to start an argument over what I never said and make up imaginary and absurd accusations about what I should or should not "believe"?

That's what you did to me in the other thread.

But anyway, All i'm saying is that Root Metrics state that O2 is inferior to Three and EE.
You then tried to disprove that but you can't.

Your opinion is your opinion. That's fine. But you said that root metrics don't cover coverage and signal strength etc... when it actually does and proves that O2 is the worst.

qasdfdsaq · 05-02-2014, 02:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabbamk1

That's what you did to me in the other thread.

Ignoring the fact that no, I didn't, I see you're resorting to childish justifications... "He did it to me so I have to do it back".

Grow up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabbamk1

Your opinion is your opinion. That's fine.

Glad you could finally accept the truth. Oh wait:

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabbamk1

But you said that root metrics don't cover coverage and signal strength etc... when it actually does and proves that O2 is the worst.

The coverage and signal strength images I posted clearly show EE is worse than O2.

Rootmetrics maps don't show accurate signal readings nor do they show 3G strength alone but even the combined rough signal strength proves you wrong - again.

So you can't claim my personal experience is incorrect - by definition the only person who knows my personal experience is me.

You can't disprove the data I collected, nor even disagree with it since you have none of your own.

You can't disprove the overall claim as Rootmetrics' data broadly agrees with mine, even though it is not specific or accurate enough to make a direct comparison.

What exactly are you arguing about again?

neo_wales · 05-02-2014, 16:07

O2 3G must have been upgraded near me a few months ago, get a good signal these days.

-ajm- · 05-02-2014, 16:11

Voda got better at home.
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/i/756085878

Adamuk · 05-02-2014, 16:44

I got my fastest speedtest on EE 3G today -

http://tinypic.com/r/kcm2xe/8

I'm quite impressed!

jonmorris · 05-02-2014, 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adamuk

I got my fastest speedtest on EE 3G today -

http://tinypic.com/r/kcm2xe/8

I'm quite impressed!

Yeah. I have to say that where EE has upgraded its network, it's offering the same exceptional 3G speeds as Three.

RAN Man · 05-02-2014, 17:20

The best ( or indeed worst) network, as measured over a large area will never be the best (or worst) network for everyone. That would be down to the performance of each network in a relatively small number of locations specific to that user (house/work/pub etc).

The best network will, on average, be the best for the most people. It's not financially viable for one network to be the best for everyone, as you'd need to be on all the same sites, with at least the same spectrum set as every operator in the market. That's part of the reason why all networks will have their promoters/detractors. As such, if someone expresses an opinion that, for them, such and such a network is better for them, (caveating that a lot of people extrapolate their own experience on a handful of sites, up to the rest of the network on thousands of sites) then it's entirely possible, regardless of what the wider perception/measurements might be.

dazpot · 05-02-2014, 17:35

I've been with o2 for years and they are excellent

lost boy · 05-02-2014, 17:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonmorris

Yeah, Three's lack of 2G is a problem if you rely on being always in contact for voice calling.. but on the flip side, O2 and Vodafone relies far too much on 2G which is fine for voice but useless for data. I'm a data user and maybe make or receive no more than 2-3 calls per day!

I mean, 2G would be okay if you got EDGE and it worked well, but the problem with Vodafone, O2 and even EE before it upgrades some of its old legacy Orange sites, is the backhaul is/was so crap that you end up with speeds of 0.01Mbps and similar. Not really usable even for just getting new emails or doing some simple web browsing.

There's more to it than mere coverage, as it's about capacity - and I think Vodafone and O2 have each exceeded capacity and need to do a LOT of work to fix things. As it adds 4G, I hope it will improve as EE clearly has. Now I can travel around and get speeds on a par with Three on 3G, which is a MASSIVE improvement.

The same can't be said for O2 yet.

I tend to agree - particularly with the BIB. I'm not too fussed about the 2G argument though, although I accept that'll probably be because I'm in an area bathed in Three's 3G.

Just for example, here:

Three have 14 (yes, 14) masts, all 3G.

O2 have (according to their own map) 3 masts covering the same area; 2 of them have 3G900, 1 of them has 3G2100, 1 of them has 2G (EDGE) on 1800 and all 3 of them have 2G (GPRS) on 900.

Now, which of those provides resilient high speed data services and crystal clear calls? While the other provides low data speeds and low quality dropped-every-10-minutes-or-so calls...

Not to do O2 down completely here, there are some positives to them; when you can connect to a usable data signal (invariably not the maxed out 3G900), the speeds may be low, but they'll be steady. Additionally, on the rare occasion a Three blackspot is encountered, O2's 2G signal is all that'll be left. It's just a shame about everything else.

As for the other 2 (while I'm going on):

Vodafone's 2G is great, if I didn't want data I'd be on it without a thought. Before someone throws Rootmetrics at me - yes yes, I know, but here Vodafone's 2G signal is very strong and holds up well (in fact, as a big power cut here a few weeks back showed, Vodafone's masts have exactly 1 hour and 45 minutes power backup so their service stayed on - the rest have none).

EE, well, at the end of this month it'll be a year since their "optimisation" here was complete - the network (both 2G and 3G) is still up the wazoo.

jchamier · 05-02-2014, 19:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonmorris

Yeah. I have to say that where EE has upgraded its network, it's offering the same exceptional 3G speeds as Three.

T-mobile often was before the EE/orange merger. Probably due to the MBNL shared sites with 3

jonmorris · 05-02-2014, 20:19

Yeah, definitely. I had a few T-Mobile web n walk SIMs and it was always good. Shame we didn't really have devices to fully take advantage of it!

In fact, before Three's One Plan I'd have wholeheartedly recommended T - Mobile over much anything else.

Three · 05-02-2014, 20:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by lost boy

(in fact, as a big power cut here a few weeks back showed, Vodafone's masts have exactly 1 hour and 45 minutes power backup so their service stayed on - the rest have none).

Someone may know about this. I thought all O2 masts had UPS after some sort of deal was struck between them and the government?

moox · 05-02-2014, 20:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Three

Someone may know about this. I thought all O2 masts had UPS after some sort of deal was struck between them and the government?

I'm speculating but are you confusing it with (what used to be called) O2 Airwave, which was an entirely separate TETRA network for the emergency services? It would obviously need to have better standby power arrangements.

It was sold off by O2 a while ago, and like most essential infrastructure, is now owned by a foreign bank.

jchamier · 05-02-2014, 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonmorris

Yeah, definitely. I had a few T-Mobile web n walk SIMs and it was always good. Shame we didn't really have devices to fully take advantage of it! In fact, before Three's One Plan I'd have wholeheartedly recommended T - Mobile over much anything else.

Yes, I was T-Mob for ages, with the MDA Vario II and III. 1.8megabit was the highest speed I remember.

vastly better than Orange's 3G dialup speeds.

I was one of the many 12+ year Orange customers who moved to T-Mobile and was reading MoDaCo.com regularly. Then iPhone 3GS arrived, so moved to O2, and then when 18months up, moved back. Couldn't move fast enough. Voice quality on O2 was shockingly bad :-/

Had Three MiFi for a long time though, killed that when I moved to 4G EE last year.

qasdfdsaq · 05-02-2014, 23:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAN Man

The best ( or indeed worst) network, as measured over a large area will never be the best (or worst) network for everyone. That would be down to the performance of each network in a relatively small number of locations specific to that user (house/work/pub etc).

The best network will, on average, be the best for the most people. It's not financially viable for one network to be the best for everyone, as you'd need to be on all the same sites, with at least the same spectrum set as every operator in the market. That's part of the reason why all networks will have their promoters/detractors. As such, if someone expresses an opinion that, for them, such and such a network is better for them, (caveating that a lot of people extrapolate their own experience on a handful of sites, up to the rest of the network on thousands of sites) then it's entirely possible, regardless of what the wider perception/measurements might be.

Spot on, as usual

WebGeek · 06-02-2014, 20:09

They all vary tbh, I don't think you can say 1 network is better than the other as some excel in some cities where others dont and vice versa.

I was on Vodafone - lightening in some areas, rubbish in others. Now on 02 and it's same story. Swings and roundabouts.

moox · 06-02-2014, 20:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by WebGeek

They all vary tbh, I don't think you can say 1 network is better than the other as some excel in some cities where others dont and vice versa.

I was on Vodafone - lightening in some areas, rubbish in others. Now on 02 and it's same story. Swings and roundabouts.

You've been with two networks that are well known for splotchy performance, now try EE or 3 and notice how things are a lot more consistent.

qasdfdsaq · 07-02-2014, 00:55

Or inconsistent.

My EE 4G phone just spent most of the day on EDGE at home today.

Kim_x · 07-02-2014, 01:02

It is. They have literally conformed to the bare legal minimum as far as not raising their prices is concerned. Never heard of another network doing this before.

3G used to be better than it is now. I think it was about March 2012 that I noticed it going downhill. 2G was always slow but now it literally does nothing.

I am on giffgaff (O2) because many networks don't have a signal for calls or texts in my house. I'm just glad I don't pay O2 prices for the service. Unless I know I'll regularly be going more than 10 miles from my house, I have a 250mb package. The reception in my area isn't there to even get through that in a month!

05-02-2014, 01:19	#26
jabbamk1 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: London, UK Posts: 8,759	I haven't been proven wrong at all. It's clear from the data that rootmetrics provides that EE and Three provide better service, coverage and calls/texts/data experience than O2. I'm more inclined to trust root metrics over your opinion.

05-02-2014, 01:31	#27
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	The Rootmetrics data you yourself linked to clearly showed both the claim I made that you quoted, and the data I collected to be correct, since it almost exactly matches. Ironic you complain about me being argumentative while you again try to pick an argument when ultimately your only case was er... actually, I'd rather trust Rootmetrics over you when Rootmetrics actually agrees with me!

05-02-2014, 01:37	#28
jabbamk1 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: London, UK Posts: 8,759	Quote: Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq actually, I'd rather trust Rootmetrics over you when Rootmetrics actually agrees with me! Well you said that O2 was excellent and that EE and Three were slow and unreliable. Root Metrics shows you to be incorrect on both counts. As I said before, O2 comes bottom or second to bottom in every category. Significantly lower than EE and Three. Root Metrics does not agree with your findings at all.

05-02-2014, 01:40	#29
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Once again changing your story after you've been proved wrong. And once again making up imaginary accusations. You were quite clearly talking about coverage and signal strength. I quite clearly said "personal experience" and "when I need them". Rootmetrics proves nothing in these respects. Rootmetrics clearly proves O2 has better signal and fewer blackspots and weakspots in the city than EE As for personal experience, you really want to make the absurd claim that a third party knows my personal experience better than myself?

05-02-2014, 01:42	#30
jabbamk1 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: London, UK Posts: 8,759	Quote: Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq I quite clearly said "personal experience" and "when I need them". Rootmetrics proves nothing in these respects. Ok so you are talking personal experience then... But what Root Metrics says is that O2 is an inferior network across all categories compared to EE and Three. Why can't you believe that?

05-02-2014, 01:43	#31
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Quote: Originally Posted by jabbamk1 Ok so you are talking personal experience then... But what Root Metrics says is that O2 is an inferior network across all categories compared to EE and Three. Why can't you believe that? Why do you always have to start an argument over what I never said and make up imaginary and absurd accusations about what I should or should not "believe"? What I said was 1) In my personal experience EE and 3 are less reliable when I need them 2) Overall signal strength is better on O2 3G, with fewer weak/blackspots. Rootmetrics proves nothing about the former and dubiously agrees with the latter. Why do you have to attack my personal experience as if it's somehow wrong or invalid if it does not agree with Rootmetrics or "the average"?

05-02-2014, 01:50	#32
jabbamk1 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: London, UK Posts: 8,759	Quote: Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq Why do you always have to start an argument over what I never said and make up imaginary and absurd accusations about what I should or should not "believe"? That's what you did to me in the other thread. But anyway, All i'm saying is that Root Metrics state that O2 is inferior to Three and EE. You then tried to disprove that but you can't. Your opinion is your opinion. That's fine. But you said that root metrics don't cover coverage and signal strength etc... when it actually does and proves that O2 is the worst.

05-02-2014, 02:00	#33
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Quote: Originally Posted by jabbamk1 That's what you did to me in the other thread. Ignoring the fact that no, I didn't, I see you're resorting to childish justifications... "He did it to me so I have to do it back". Grow up. Quote: Originally Posted by jabbamk1 Your opinion is your opinion. That's fine. Glad you could finally accept the truth. Oh wait: Quote: Originally Posted by jabbamk1 But you said that root metrics don't cover coverage and signal strength etc... when it actually does and proves that O2 is the worst. The coverage and signal strength images I posted clearly show EE is worse than O2. Rootmetrics maps don't show accurate signal readings nor do they show 3G strength alone but even the combined rough signal strength proves you wrong - again. So you can't claim my personal experience is incorrect - by definition the only person who knows my personal experience is me. You can't disprove the data I collected, nor even disagree with it since you have none of your own. You can't disprove the overall claim as Rootmetrics' data broadly agrees with mine, even though it is not specific or accurate enough to make a direct comparison. What exactly are you arguing about again?

05-02-2014, 16:07	#34
neo_wales Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: South Wales/Gran Canaria Posts: 8,297	O2 3G must have been upgraded near me a few months ago, get a good signal these days.

05-02-2014, 16:11	#35
-ajm- Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Hedge End, Southampton, Hants. Posts: 2,814	Voda got better at home. http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/i/756085878

05-02-2014, 16:44	#36
Adamuk Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 130	I got my fastest speedtest on EE 3G today - http://tinypic.com/r/kcm2xe/8 I'm quite impressed!

05-02-2014, 16:49	#37
jonmorris Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: a land filled with trolls Posts: 12,014	Quote: Originally Posted by Adamuk I got my fastest speedtest on EE 3G today - http://tinypic.com/r/kcm2xe/8 I'm quite impressed! Yeah. I have to say that where EE has upgraded its network, it's offering the same exceptional 3G speeds as Three.

05-02-2014, 17:20	#38
RAN Man Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 249	The best ( or indeed worst) network, as measured over a large area will never be the best (or worst) network for everyone. That would be down to the performance of each network in a relatively small number of locations specific to that user (house/work/pub etc). The best network will, on average, be the best for the most people. It's not financially viable for one network to be the best for everyone, as you'd need to be on all the same sites, with at least the same spectrum set as every operator in the market. That's part of the reason why all networks will have their promoters/detractors. As such, if someone expresses an opinion that, for them, such and such a network is better for them, (caveating that a lot of people extrapolate their own experience on a handful of sites, up to the rest of the network on thousands of sites) then it's entirely possible, regardless of what the wider perception/measurements might be.

05-02-2014, 17:35	#39
dazpot Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Newcastle upon Tyne Posts: 428	I've been with o2 for years and they are excellent

05-02-2014, 17:51	#40
lost boy Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Norfolkland Posts: 1,787	Quote: Originally Posted by jonmorris Yeah, Three's lack of 2G is a problem if you rely on being always in contact for voice calling.. but on the flip side, O2 and Vodafone relies far too much on 2G which is fine for voice but useless for data. I'm a data user and maybe make or receive no more than 2-3 calls per day! I mean, 2G would be okay if you got EDGE and it worked well, but the problem with Vodafone, O2 and even EE before it upgrades some of its old legacy Orange sites, is the backhaul is/was so crap that you end up with speeds of 0.01Mbps and similar. Not really usable even for just getting new emails or doing some simple web browsing. There's more to it than mere coverage, as it's about capacity - and I think Vodafone and O2 have each exceeded capacity and need to do a LOT of work to fix things. As it adds 4G, I hope it will improve as EE clearly has. Now I can travel around and get speeds on a par with Three on 3G, which is a MASSIVE improvement. The same can't be said for O2 yet. I tend to agree - particularly with the BIB. I'm not too fussed about the 2G argument though, although I accept that'll probably be because I'm in an area bathed in Three's 3G. Just for example, here: Three have 14 (yes, 14) masts, all 3G. O2 have (according to their own map) 3 masts covering the same area; 2 of them have 3G900, 1 of them has 3G2100, 1 of them has 2G (EDGE) on 1800 and all 3 of them have 2G (GPRS) on 900. Now, which of those provides resilient high speed data services and crystal clear calls? While the other provides low data speeds and low quality dropped-every-10-minutes-or-so calls... Not to do O2 down completely here, there are some positives to them; when you can connect to a usable data signal (invariably not the maxed out 3G900), the speeds may be low, but they'll be steady. Additionally, on the rare occasion a Three blackspot is encountered, O2's 2G signal is all that'll be left. It's just a shame about everything else. As for the other 2 (while I'm going on): Vodafone's 2G is great, if I didn't want data I'd be on it without a thought. Before someone throws Rootmetrics at me - yes yes, I know, but here Vodafone's 2G signal is very strong and holds up well (in fact, as a big power cut here a few weeks back showed, Vodafone's masts have exactly 1 hour and 45 minutes power backup so their service stayed on - the rest have none). EE, well, at the end of this month it'll be a year since their "optimisation" here was complete - the network (both 2G and 3G) is still up the wazoo.

05-02-2014, 19:50	#41
jchamier Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: This forum Posts: 3,389	Quote: Originally Posted by jonmorris Yeah. I have to say that where EE has upgraded its network, it's offering the same exceptional 3G speeds as Three. T-mobile often was before the EE/orange merger. Probably due to the MBNL shared sites with 3

05-02-2014, 20:19	#42
jonmorris Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: a land filled with trolls Posts: 12,014	Yeah, definitely. I had a few T-Mobile web n walk SIMs and it was always good. Shame we didn't really have devices to fully take advantage of it! In fact, before Three's One Plan I'd have wholeheartedly recommended T - Mobile over much anything else.

05-02-2014, 20:44	#43
Three Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Manchester Posts: 1,114	Quote: Originally Posted by lost boy (in fact, as a big power cut here a few weeks back showed, Vodafone's masts have exactly 1 hour and 45 minutes power backup so their service stayed on - the rest have none). Someone may know about this. I thought all O2 masts had UPS after some sort of deal was struck between them and the government?

05-02-2014, 20:50	#44
moox Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 14,641	Quote: Originally Posted by Three Someone may know about this. I thought all O2 masts had UPS after some sort of deal was struck between them and the government? I'm speculating but are you confusing it with (what used to be called) O2 Airwave, which was an entirely separate TETRA network for the emergency services? It would obviously need to have better standby power arrangements. It was sold off by O2 a while ago, and like most essential infrastructure, is now owned by a foreign bank.

05-02-2014, 21:50	#45
jchamier Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: This forum Posts: 3,389	Quote: Originally Posted by jonmorris Yeah, definitely. I had a few T-Mobile web n walk SIMs and it was always good. Shame we didn't really have devices to fully take advantage of it! In fact, before Three's One Plan I'd have wholeheartedly recommended T - Mobile over much anything else. Yes, I was T-Mob for ages, with the MDA Vario II and III. 1.8megabit was the highest speed I remember. vastly better than Orange's 3G dialup speeds. I was one of the many 12+ year Orange customers who moved to T-Mobile and was reading MoDaCo.com regularly. Then iPhone 3GS arrived, so moved to O2, and then when 18months up, moved back. Couldn't move fast enough. Voice quality on O2 was shockingly bad :-/ Had Three MiFi for a long time though, killed that when I moved to 4G EE last year.

DS Forums

O2's AWFUL 3G network

05-02-2014, 23:27	#46
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Quote: Originally Posted by RAN Man The best ( or indeed worst) network, as measured over a large area will never be the best (or worst) network for everyone. That would be down to the performance of each network in a relatively small number of locations specific to that user (house/work/pub etc). The best network will, on average, be the best for the most people. It's not financially viable for one network to be the best for everyone, as you'd need to be on all the same sites, with at least the same spectrum set as every operator in the market. That's part of the reason why all networks will have their promoters/detractors. As such, if someone expresses an opinion that, for them, such and such a network is better for them, (caveating that a lot of people extrapolate their own experience on a handful of sites, up to the rest of the network on thousands of sites) then it's entirely possible, regardless of what the wider perception/measurements might be. Spot on, as usual

06-02-2014, 20:09	#47
WebGeek Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 36	They all vary tbh, I don't think you can say 1 network is better than the other as some excel in some cities where others dont and vice versa. I was on Vodafone - lightening in some areas, rubbish in others. Now on 02 and it's same story. Swings and roundabouts.

06-02-2014, 20:15	#48
moox Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 14,641	Quote: Originally Posted by WebGeek They all vary tbh, I don't think you can say 1 network is better than the other as some excel in some cities where others dont and vice versa. I was on Vodafone - lightening in some areas, rubbish in others. Now on 02 and it's same story. Swings and roundabouts. You've been with two networks that are well known for splotchy performance, now try EE or 3 and notice how things are a lot more consistent.

07-02-2014, 00:55	#49
qasdfdsaq Inactive Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,286	Or inconsistent. My EE 4G phone just spent most of the day on EDGE at home today.

07-02-2014, 01:02	#50
Kim_x Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 3,444	It is. They have literally conformed to the bare legal minimum as far as not raising their prices is concerned. Never heard of another network doing this before. 3G used to be better than it is now. I think it was about March 2012 that I noticed it going downhill. 2G was always slow but now it literally does nothing. I am on giffgaff (O2) because many networks don't have a signal for calls or texts in my house. I'm just glad I don't pay O2 prices for the service. Unless I know I'll regularly be going more than 10 miles from my house, I have a 250mb package. The reception in my area isn't there to even get through that in a month!