|
||||||||
EE 2G/3G/4G Discussion Thread (Part 2) |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1051 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 932
|
Quote:
Quote:
Or another Samsung, newer than the S4. That'll be what i'm doing when funds permit.
![]() Quote:
I have to say my s7 edge is fab and grabs a 4g signal where my iphone 6s plus didnt. It switches to 3G without hassle and ive never seen 2G on it yet.
Quote:
Have you tried 'blending' it? It's all the rage nowadays.
You would solve 2 problems. First you would possibly need a new phone which might actually work and secondly you wouldn't need to mention every frequency and every mobile technology 1000 times in every thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1052 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 932
|
Quote:
It's a niche feature that isn't even cross network and ordinary people barely notice it. As long as your voice is intelligible, the average person won't care. Cf. O2.
I'd go for: minor inconvenience. And we're talking years down the line. Not now. Non 4G devices are already obsolete. I'd ban them now to stop the ill informed buying them and then holding up progress in 5 years cos they were too stingy to buy a modern phone and too stupid to research their purchase properly ![]() Note to the terminally hard of thinking: I'm not being serious. ![]() I'd say: stop selling 2G only devices and do a 2G switch off, then use fill in masts to cover the gaps. Someone earlier on in this thread (or was it in the Vodafone one?) said that refarming Network Rail's 900 for 3G (in exchange for Tetra 400) would be impossible, and that it'd be cheaper to build a 99% geo 2600 network; if building a 4G2600 network is possible, then why not do the same for 3G2100? |
|
|
|
|
|
#1053 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Dumfries and Galloway
Posts: 60
|
Quote:
Well... Today, I thought I'd try something a bit different to normal...
Having heard that EE SIMs like to keep you on 3G/4G the longest, I thought I'd try setting the S4 to its default network mode (i.e. LTE/GSM auto) and see what happens. With poor network selection on my old Virgin SIM, would the S4 behave better on EE? The answer... yes and no. Went to Northampton earlier today, and the journey (approximately 20 miles) was interesting. I knew that the whole route was covered by 3G, though some areas were quite weak. (Don't know if CTIL would be any better, given the fact that they aren't usually the best in regards to 3G/4G, but that's an experiment for another time.) On the way to Northampton, the S4 was reasonable in network selection. Between Wellingborough and the outskirts of Northampton, it did flick quite often between 3G and 4G, due to them both being quite weak in areas. Once, near Earls Barton, it dropped from 3% 3G to 60% 2G - I suppose this may have been for call reliability? I know that calls wouldn't work on a -111dBm 3G signal. After a few seconds, it picked 3G back up again, at 17% strength. The rest of the way, once I'd reached the outskirts of Northampton, was all 4G. On the way back... slightly better. Stayed on 4G for longer, though at some points, 4G was quite weak (-120dBm). I assume that 3G was also weak there, so it hung on for 4G. It did drop to 3G, but when 3G was stronger. At no time on the return journey was I shunted down to GPRS/EDGE. So it seemed like the EE SIM did make a difference, and that the S4 picked the network type much more "smartly" - i.e. based on the signal strengths of other network types. So, for example, if you have a weak 4G signal, but a strong 3G one, the S4 usually goes to 3G - and if both 4G and 3G are weak, then what the phone does depends on how weak 3G/4G is, and how strong 2G is. There was a footnote to this, though... At my home location, my phone has always tended to go for 3G, as our local mast for 2G and 3G is only about 200m away. However, a semi-local mast has now gone 4G. Upstairs, in my bedroom (where my computer is located), I can get between 40% and 50% 4G signal - hence, the S4 is going for that instead of the 60% 3G signal. When I went downstairs though, it went from a weak (0 bar) 4G signal, to 4 bars of 2G?! Seriously, WHY? 3G is available downstairs at 2-3 bars strength (at least 25%, up to 42%). In the end, it did go to 3G, but that begs the question: why oh why oh why is this wacky phone jumping to 2G when 3G is available, and at quite a strong signal strength?! Looks like I'm going to have to stick to WCDMA only mode until either (a) EE's 4G is fully rolled out, so then I can use LTE Only mode when streaming (or risk the default mode), (b) I can find a way to change the internal thresholds at when the phone goes to 2G (instead of 3G), (c) I can find a way of having a mode that allows 3G and 4G, but ignoring 2G, or (d) the S4 finally bites the bullet in about 3 years time, and I upgrade to a VoLTE phone <- in this situation, LTE Only mode will suffice. Anyone have a clue why this S4 is doing this? Or, more to the point, does anyone have an idea on how to add/enable an "LTE/WCDMA" mode in this S4? |
|
|
|
|
#1054 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Cheshire/Shropshire Border
Posts: 589
|
Quote:
Well, let's just say that, because most of my calls were on the same network (from Virgin to Virgin, or from Virgin to EE), I could definitely tell the difference between good quality voice (3G) and poor quality voice (2G).
![]() I'd say: stop selling 2G only devices and do a 2G switch off, then use fill in masts to cover the gaps. Someone earlier on in this thread (or was it in the Vodafone one?) said that refarming Network Rail's 900 for 3G (in exchange for Tetra 400) would be impossible, and that it'd be cheaper to build a 99% geo 2600 network; if building a 4G2600 network is possible, then why not do the same for 3G2100? Sorry to be so blunt, but you don't seem to be getting the more gentle message put across by others. |
|
|
|
|
#1055 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Totnes, Devon
Posts: 6,687
|
I wish he would blend the bloody thing.
If everyone kept non-VoLTE phones for this long EE would be screwed. Get rid of the sodding thing already, you're holding up progress. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1056 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 720
|
Quote:
I wish he would blend the bloody thing.
If everyone kept non-VoLTE phones for this long EE would be screwed. Get rid of the sodding thing already, you're holding up progress. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1057 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Totnes, Devon
Posts: 6,687
|
Don't know what came over me then...
I had a sudden urge to lash out!! haha Right, I'm off to do some Tunein over 2G. Anyone know when the next LDV is going by?.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1058 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 1,259
|
I quite like my S4. It doesn't misbehave in the manner described, though. Not 100% on the VoLTE support, but it's a nice thought
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1059 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,373
|
Quote:
Don't know what came over me then...
I had a sudden urge to lash out!! haha Right, I'm off to do some Tunein over 2G. Anyone know when the next LDV is going by?..... ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1060 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,373
|
Quote:
FFS, you've got the skin of a rhino, or the intellect of a gnat. Either way, please stop banging on about the same thing over and over again. People who have genuinely insightful and interesting things to add to this thread seem to have pretty much given up posting recently, and I'd be amazed if this repetitive drivel didn't have something to do with it.
Sorry to be so blunt, but you don't seem to be getting the more gentle message put across by others. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1061 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,636
|
Quote:
Someone earlier on in this thread (or was it in the Vodafone one?) said that refarming Network Rail's 900 for 3G (in exchange for Tetra 400) would be impossible, and that it'd be cheaper to build a 99% geo 2600 network; if building a 4G2600 network is possible, then why not do the same for 3G2100?
4G800 will fill the gaps quite nicely. You really need to stop worrying about bloody 3G and just buy one of the many cheap VoLTE phones that will be out by the time the switchoff happens. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1062 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 23
|
Looks like they are adding VoLTE in the Rotherham area.
First time I have managed to start a call in 4g and handover from wifi calling. Exciting times. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1063 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 932
|
Quote:
I wish he would blend the bloody thing.
If everyone kept non-VoLTE phones for this long EE would be screwed. Get rid of the sodding thing already, you're holding up progress. ![]() Does the S4 even support Volte or not ? If it does, will there ever be a software update though? The blending is not going to happen though. Here's hoping that the S4 will last for another couple of years yet! Edit: I tried the experiment again to see if it was an anomaly or not. S4 booted to 4G immediately, went downstairs and dropped to 2G, amazing! 3G is there at a good signal strength! I've gone back to WCDMA only mode for reliability's sake. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1064 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
Hahaha
![]() Does the S4 even support Volte or not ? If it does, will there ever be a software update though? The blending is not going to happen though. Here's hoping that the S4 will last for another couple of years yet! Edit: I tried the experiment again to see if it was an anomaly or not. S4 booted to 4G immediately, went downstairs and dropped to 2G, amazing! 3G is there at a good signal strength! I've gone back to WCDMA only mode for reliability's sake. Also given that the S4 will likely not support Android N, I highly doubt that it would be safe to use, or even usable, next year - never mind in two years. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1065 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,373
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1066 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 1,259
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1067 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 787
|
Quote:
Well, let's just say that, because most of my calls were on the same network (from Virgin to Virgin, or from Virgin to EE), I could definitely tell the difference between good quality voice (3G) and poor quality voice (2G).
![]() I'd say: stop selling 2G only devices and do a 2G switch off, then use fill in masts to cover the gaps. Someone earlier on in this thread (or was it in the Vodafone one?) said that refarming Network Rail's 900 for 3G (in exchange for Tetra 400) would be impossible, and that it'd be cheaper to build a 99% geo 2600 network; if building a 4G2600 network is possible, then why not do the same for 3G2100? On the first point - why on earth would you build infill masts for an obsolete technology, when you can achieve greater coverage using the existing infrastructure and technically superior 4G? 2G's only bothering you because there is something wrong with your phone. Please just go and get a new one. On the second point: just because it would be hypothetically cheaper to build a nationwide 2600MHz network with an absurd number of masts rather than refarm GSM-R, doesn't make it any more feasible! Both of those options are off the table, and insanely expensive. One is cheaper, but still insanely expensive. Moox used it as an example to illustrate why it's a stupid idea to refarm GSM-R. That's all. Why don't you just change to 3 anyway? They have barely any 2G. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1068 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,010
|
GSM-R isn't going to change. It has cost a great deal of money to set up as is, and for the system to be effective for its intended us, everything is configured so trains will communicate to the right signaller, and in an emergency will send out the 'stop all trains' signal only to those that should be stopped.
It's by no means perfect, but there's simply no way the industry is going to ditch a system that runs nationally and is a safety critical operation. |
|
|
|
|
#1069 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 314
|
The 4G Calling forum post has updated again to add the following:
Brighton Coventry Crewe Kidderminster Langley Reading Worcester |
|
|
|
|
|
#1070 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 983
|
Quote:
The 4G Calling forum post has updated again to add the following:
Brighton Coventry Crewe Kidderminster Langley Reading Worcester |
|
|
|
|
|
#1071 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 873
|
Quote:
Over ⅓ of the country must be covered now, closer to ½?
Hoping my city is soon as since last week you're able to go from Wifi Calling to 4G, but you still cannot start a VoLTE call, even when on 4G and the Carrier changes to IMS Status in About (Settings) on iPhone. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1072 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 932
|
Quote:
Given that it's already a 3 year old device, I highly doubt that EE, Samsung, and Google will go through the crap required for VoLTE support in the OS - even if the hardware supports it.
Also given that the S4 will likely not support Android N, I highly doubt that it would be safe to use, or even usable, next year - never mind in two years. Believe it or not, my S4 is still on Android 4.2, because (when I bought it) Android 4.4 was out, and I didn't want to upgrade due to some of the issues with battery life and SD card support (notably apps on SD). If and when the app makers stop supporting Android 4.2, I'll upgrade the S4 to the latest supported version of Android, which is likely Android 5.0? So as for having it usable in a year or two - unless the app developers suddenly pull support for Android 4.2.x, of course the S4 will still be usable. I know of people that are still on Android 2.3 devices, and they still work (albeit slowly...). Quote:
I'm sure you're trolling me now....
Quote:
On the first point - why on earth would you build infill masts for an obsolete technology, when you can achieve greater coverage using the existing infrastructure and technically superior 4G? 2G's only bothering you because there is something wrong with your phone. Please just go and get a new one.
My reasoning for infill masts for 3G2100 was because, apart from coverage (and cell breathing), 3G does everything better than 2G for phones. It does phone calls at a high quality (particularly when you're ringing people from the same network, which I do); it sends texts just as reliably, and data is much faster. On a -109dBm 3G signal, I can get 2-3Mbps off most masts. On any type of 2G signal, the maximum I'll get (in real world terms) is 150kbps. And most 2G is still GPRS, which will barely get me 30kbps. Certainly not enough for what I need. Plus, if what has been discussed does go ahead, that 3G will be axed before 2G, then any device that doesn't support 4G will effectively turn into a data brick away from Wifi hotspots. Functionality that has worked for years (such as Tunein, Spotify, Youtube) will cease to function anymore. If you've got Snapchat, Google Hangouts (or similar) or voice/video calls over services such as Whatsapp, I'd be very surprised if they worked at all over 2G. App updates will struggle; what used to be a 1 minute task would turn into a 10-20 minute task. Even basic tasks such as web browsing will be very slow, particularly if the web site has any images. And that's not mentioning the fact that most older tablets (including some Kindle e-readers) do not support 4G (and some of those do not support GSM either), so you'd be effectively turning those devices into either Wi-Fi only devices (in which case, you'll have wasted your money by buying the 3G version), or devices that can't connect to the internet at all (if they have 3G but no wifi). Quote:
On the second point: just because it would be hypothetically cheaper to build a nationwide 2600MHz network with an absurd number of masts rather than refarm GSM-R, doesn't make it any more feasible! Both of those options are off the table, and insanely expensive. One is cheaper, but still insanely expensive. Moox used it as an example to illustrate why it's a stupid idea to refarm GSM-R. That's all. Aah okay, I get you now. I thought at first it might be feasible to convert GSM-R to 3G, obviously now I know that can't be done! Yeah, I should have twigged that 99% geo 2600 wasn't going to happen. 800 and 1800 would be better, and even so, is it actually feasible to make a network with 99% geo coverage? Probably not...Why don't you just change to 3 anyway? They have barely any 2G. I decided on EE because I know that EE's 3G is pretty reliable (Virgin used EE), plus it was more feasible in terms of value for money. I'm not going to go for a company that charges £30 a month for AYCE minutes/texts/data, when I can get 16GB data and AYCE mins/texts for £20 (during the promotion that happened); particularly since Three don't seem to have the 4G capacity on their network as of yet. EE's 4G is faster and more importantly, more masts are being activated. I can remember last time on Three 4G, whereby I tested the speed in Leicester and got about 3Mbps! In which case, 3G was faster. Overall, it made more sense to choose EE, and I suppose that (unless someone comes up with a way of making a WCDMA/LTE mode for the S4) I'll have to stick to WCDMA Only mode for reliability's sake, and switching up to 4G if I need faster speeds for anything. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1073 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 731
|
Ookla speed Test
Hi guys being new to EE, does Ookla Speed Test eat into your data or is it free. Am I getting confused with root metrics?
Thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
#1074 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 873
|
Quote:
Hi guys being new to EE, does Ookla Speed Test eat into your data or is it free. Am I getting confused with root metrics?
Thanks Ookla - uses allowance |
|
|
|
|
|
#1075 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 731
|
Quote:
Rootmetrics - free
Ookla - uses allowance |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 19:46.



.

