Originally Posted by moox:
“I think there is still quite a lot of "all mobile networks must be shit because I'm on O2 and they're shit", and "I didn't realise it could be any faster, I thought it was just because I am in a rural area".
(in fairness to O2, their 900MHz rural 3G network isn't that bad where it exists, I remembet getting some good speeds out of it. Compare that to Vodafone here, where the 3G coverage is recent and the performance is identical to GPRS)”
I think you're right. If people are used to having no 3G to stream Spotify on their daily commute, and they don't know that they could move for a better service, then they're not going to be unhappy are they? By that, I mean that's what they believe the service to be like across the board.
I used to be a bit like that. When Orange and T-Mobile merged, I was looking for info on when the companies would allow us to have access to the other's network. I came across this forum, and have since discovered that things are, in both a coverage sense and a technical/infrastructure sense, very different between the four main players (well, between MBNL and the other two).
I felt my experience on Orange (at the time) inproved dramatically when I was allowed access to T-Mobile's 3G network. It was at that point I realised that you shouldn't assume everything's the same on all the networks.
I suppose the only time you can assume that things are similar is between EE and Three, and even then you should only apply that rule to whenever you have 3G on your phone.
I really hope the Cornerstone project brings O2 and Vodafone up to scratch over the next couple of years.