[Everything Goes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jchamier

iPhones don't have an option for it at all. I assume because the US networks don't handle it (maybe CDMA can't). iMessage does it automatically so Apple know its useful.

Yet more reasons for people using WhatsApp and similar. The networks want to fight back with this RCS - Rich Communications thing, but I doubt that will take off now. WhatsApp / Facebook messenger and the others are too big.

You didn't read my reply to Gigabit

Like you say more people are using messaging Apps which give Read reports and Text Messages are on the decline.

[jchamier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Everything Goes

You didn't read my reply to Gigabit
Like you say more people are using messaging Apps which give Read reports and Text Messages are on the decline.

Yes, none of the Phase 2 GSM stuff that was introduced at launch with Orange and one2one seems evident at O2. Does the network still text to let you know you have voicemail? Orange and one2one had an indicator that lit on the display back in 1993/1994.

Lack of ability to invest was one reason BT sold the division, and is again why Telefonica is selling. I wonder if that network is cursed !!

[Everything Goes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jchamier

Yes, none of the Phase 2 GSM stuff that was introduced at launch with Orange and one2one seems evident at O2. Does the network still text to let you know you have voicemail? Orange and one2one had an indicator that lit on the display back in 1993/1994.

Lack of ability to invest was one reason BT sold the division, and is again why Telefonica is selling. I wonder if that network is cursed !!

BT were no doubt worried about Capital Expenditure on 3G roll out and Telefonica about 4G. The main problem for both owners is that the roll out had a time frame to be completed. Skin flint BT hate this sort of thing hence they sold it to Telefonica in 2005 after they bought that pricey 3G licence. Telefonica might have done ok but the financial crisis hit them hard. Wavejock always said O2 UK was the jewel in Telefonica's crown and would never be sold

[Chrysalis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by samuel79

This is why the UK no longer leads it terms of tech people seem to live in the past just like you if they tell you it ends on x date then you would simply need to buy a new device.

Dont say oh but why should I as thats not valid when things get to there end of life just like 2g has you simply buy a new one

Price is not valid either people would rather feed there habit instead of buying a new phone

A 10 carton pack of cigs is more expensive than a cheap 3G smartphone

I dont live in the past.

I just have common sense which says "newer is not always better"

4g is king for data, 2g is king for voice. 2g doesnt hinder 4g yet you want it gone.

[Chrysalis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jchamier

Only if you're an O2 customer. On EE and Three even in north east scotland all my voice calls are carried on 3G.

on three, I had 2 main issues.

battery drain (3g drains faster than 2g on idle and in call).
various areas I had no signal as was no 2g and 3g is weaker than 2g for coverage.

e.g. in the hospital I have no ability to make calls on three but do on ee and o2.

[Everything Goes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I dont live in the past.

I just have common sense which says "newer is not always better"

4g is king for data, 2g is king for voice. 2g doesnt hinder 4g yet you want it gone.

You better tell that to Three then

[jchamier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

on three, I had 2 main issues.

battery drain (3g drains faster than 2g on idle and in call).
various areas I had no signal as was no 2g and 3g is weaker than 2g for coverage.

e.g. in the hospital I have no ability to make calls on three but do on ee and o2.

I'd say those are local issues, so for your use 2G is important, but in my local hospital the 3 /MBNL antenna is on the roof, so its O2 and Vodafone that are less good

[Everything Goes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

on three, I had 2 main issues.

battery drain (3g drains faster than 2g on idle and in call).
various areas I had no signal as was no 2g and 3g is weaker than 2g for coverage.

e.g. in the hospital I have no ability to make calls on three but do on ee and o2.

Your problem isn't the technology ie 2G 3G 4G its the frequencies they typically use in this country.

In the next 2 to 3 years we will have great 4G coverage on all networks utilising 800MHz which gets round a lot of these issues. So yes newer technology can often be better than old technology.

PS switching data off on your phone will conserve battery life if that's important to you.

[jchamier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Everything Goes

Your problem isn't the technology ie 2G 3G 4G its the frequencies they typically use in this country.

Not quite that simple, frequencies help as does mast location. You can have indoors really good 3G at 2100mhz from EE/Three where a Vodafone 2G at 900mhz doesn't penetrate if the 2G mast is in the "wrong" location.

[Everything Goes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jchamier

Not quite that simple, frequencies help as does mast location. You can have indoors really good 3G at 2100mhz from EE/Three where a Vodafone 2G at 900mhz doesn't penetrate if the 2G mast is in the "wrong" location.

There will always be someone unhappy about the mast locations. Be it mobile phone users or NIMBY's. The forced improvements of not spots or partial not spots may help this in the next few years.

At my house I get a great signal on O2 its only 2G GPRS on 900MHz. Three and EE offer moderate 3G and Vodafone you need to stand up at the window or go outside to get 2G!

[Gigabit]

It's the only thing that Vodafone does better than O2. It tells me when a message has been delivered on my Android phone.

[lightspeed2398]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

2g doesnt hinder 4g yet you want it gone.

On EE at least I thought that they were having to completely reorganise their 1800mhz spectrum to give an extra 5mhz to 3. This is because of the 2g GSM technology which means that cells adjacent to each other can't be on the same frequency. In that way the continued existence of 2g means that a large proportion of the mobile phone spectrum is taken up for a service which only makes phone calls.

[japaul]

In some ways 2G and 4G coexist better than 3G and 4G.

e.g. Whilst data might be slow on 2G, at least if you come back into 4G coverage, newer phones can switch from 2G to 4G even if they are downloading/uploading data. If you are on 3G every phone is stuck there until the data transfer is stopped.

[Gigabit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by japaul

In some ways 2G and 4G coexist better than 3G and 4G.

e.g. Whilst data might be slow on 2G, at least if you come back into 4G coverage, newer phones can switch from 2G to 4G even if they are downloading/uploading data. If you are on 3G every phone is stuck there until the data transfer is stopped.

Why did they design 2G with that in-mind but not 3G? Madness!

[The Lord Lucan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lightspeed2398

On EE at least I thought that they were having to completely reorganise their 1800mhz spectrum to give an extra 5mhz to 3. This is because of the 2g GSM technology which means that cells adjacent to each other can't be on the same frequency. In that way the continued existence of 2g means that a large proportion of the mobile phone spectrum is taken up for a service which only makes phone calls.

Not really causing any issue.

[mrgs1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Everything Goes

There will always be someone unhappy about the mast locations. Be it mobile phone users or NIMBY's. The forced improvements of not spots or partial not spots may help this in the next few years.

At my house I get a great signal on O2 its only 2G GPRS on 900MHz. Three and EE offer moderate 3G and Vodafone you need to stand up at the window or go outside to get 2G!

Forced improvements of notspots we had an ee mast refused because microwave dishes were detrimental to AONB and height was too high! it was never built .

[Gigabit]

The issue around here is that mobiles only seem to work on low frequencies: EE and Three both have poor coverage whereas Vodafone and O2 both have good coverage.

It may only be GPRS/EDGE but when you often get no signal whatsoever on EE and Three, any signal is "good".

If EE and Three rolled out some low frequency spectrum around here, coverage would improve greatly. I think EE and Three would gain a good number of customers also.

I don't know that the situation is like in other rural areas but I would guess that people stay on O2 and Vodafone because the other networks don't work well at home.

[daclick]

What will happen to the o2 academies and the o2 arena?

[steven_good2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by daclick

What will happen to the o2 academies and the o2 arena?

I think they will do what they have done in Ireland and rebrand them to 3 arena and 3 academy if ofcom let the merger go ahead.

[1manonthebog]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigabit

The issue around here is that mobiles only seem to work on low frequencies: EE and Three both have poor coverage whereas Vodafone and O2 both have good coverage.

It may only be GPRS/EDGE but when you often get no signal whatsoever on EE and Three, any signal is "good".

If EE and Three rolled out some low frequency spectrum around here, coverage would improve greatly. I think EE and Three would gain a good number of customers also.

I don't know that the situation is like in other rural areas but I would guess that people stay on O2 and Vodafone because the other networks don't work well at home.

Very true around here. On O2 I can get a signal everywhere all be it 2G at times but as you say its better than no signal. When I was on EE I had a signal box at home as I had no coverage in a small village, I had excellent 4G at work in town.

[japaul]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigabit

Why did they design 2G with that in-mind but not 3G? Madness!

Really it's down to the fundamental difference in the way 2G works compared with 3G that makes it so much easier for phones to do it without having to get the network involved.

[bottleofbest]

Quote:

Originally Posted by steven_good2

I think they will do what they have done in Ireland and rebrand them to 3 arena and 3 academy if ofcom let the merger go ahead.

That's a shame really. It's so well known by everyone as the o2.

[WelshBluebird]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bottleofbest

That's a shame really. It's so well known by everyone as the o2.

In terms of the O2, I still know it as the Millennium Dome!
And the Academies have been rebranded before, its no big deal (they used to be Carling Academies not long ago).

[jchamier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WelshBluebird

In terms of the O2, I still know it as the Millennium Dome!
And the Academies have been rebranded before, its no big deal (they used to be Carling Academies not long ago).

round here its often someone says "I went to the O2 to see xyz" and someone replies "oh you mean the dome?"

There is the O2 shopping centre too - which I believe has nothing to do with the mobile phone company:
http://www.o2centre.co.uk/

[Richard_T]

I think there was a similar reaction in Ireland with Dublins O2 arena becoming the Three Arena, Dublin.
All it is is just a sponsorship name and people will soon get used to the change juts like the Nynex Arena> MEN arena, Phones 4U arena in Manchester and so on.
Hopefuly the merger wont have a detrimental effect on pricing or customer choice competition usualy seems to work better when theres a disruptive 'underdog' competitor in the market place such as Three in the UK, T mobile in the USA and so on.
As I see it this merger will be bad news for consumers, bad news for competition, bad news for staff at all levels with three and O2, and bad news for the high street with more empty premisses formerly occupied by Three and O2 stores.