O2 Apologizes for Wireless Network Performance Issues in London

[mattster16]

I disagree with Verizon having the same issues as AT&T reckless2k2. WHen AT&T merged with Cingular, AT&T got the customers (much to my chagrin since I hated AT&T and loved Cingular) and Verizon bought the towers. By doing so Verizon got a broader network while AT&T got more customers than it could handle. Now bring in a device that access wireless networks heavily and we've seen AT&Ts network breaking under the strain.

Is that really true? Verizon took all Cingulars GSM towers and integrated them into their CDMA network? AT&T bought Cingular for the customers and not any infrastructure? I highly doubt that...

 

[mattster16]

The advantage of that (and the reason Verizon did it) is you would NOT get dropped voice calls because of too many data users.

So no, the boat would look different 🙂

Except you could still get crappy data service because of too many data users.

I also don't think Verizon did it to protect their network, they just didn't have the technology in place to support simulataneous voice/data and probably didn't want to spend the $$$ to implement it.

 

[Ubuntu]

very true..

and this apology - why is it only London specific? It was down in many other parts of the UK - i was affected for a few days re: data until someone turned the green light back on! 😛

Were you getting call issues as well? Using the phone in london was a huge challenge, I gave up in the end and resorted to my cheap Lebara nokia that I use for calling abroad. Atleast that worked. It might have been because Londoners were at times getting no usage, whatsoever.

 

[drlunanerd]

Were you getting call issues as well? Using the phone in london was a huge challenge, I gave up in the end and resorted to my cheap Lebara nokia that I use for calling abroad. Atleast that worked. It might have been because Londoners were at times getting no usage, whatsoever.

A friend of mine had an iPhone 3G on O2 in London and kept missing or dropping important calls while his wife was pregnant due to O2's poor 3G network. Kept having to turn 3G off so he just went back to his iPhone 2G for better call reliability. This is one example of many I know of.

 

[jmmo20]

Carriers need to come out with tiered pricing, such as:
$15 for 1 GB
$30 for 5 GB
$60 for 10 GB

And so on. To make it easier to sell to the public, offer an option below the cost of existing data plans.

I just don't see how unlimited data makes sense, when you're looking at the big picture.

I think here in Spain we have the best compromise between the two: unlimited data and "tiered" plans.

We do have unlimited data, but we pay for a certain amount of data at top 3G speeds.

15 eur = 200mb
25 eur = 1gb
40 eur = 3gb

if you go over your data allowance, you still have unlimited data, but speed drops from 3G speeds to 128kbps.. very slow but usable.

more importantly, Movistar seems not to have strict thresholds, only when you go over 50% of your data allowance for 2 months in a row, your speed starts to be limited down. i.e. you use 200mb every month but once you go over and use 500mb. Most likely, your conection won't be speed-capped unless you go over your 200mb for more than 1 month in a row.

I pay for 1gb.. and normally use 1.2 or 1.3 everymonth and have never had any caps.

 

[Nero3000]

O2's coverage is getting better, i now get reasonable coverage at work (Liverpool Street) and i can surf the internet at London Bridge now compared to a month ago where that was impossible.

Keep up the improvements!

 

[zenjabba]

Ruh roh!

Can any network handle Steve's baby?

Telstra in Australia, no problems at all with the iPhone.

 

[lilo777]

Telstra in Australia, no problems at all with the iPhone.

How many iPhones does your provider service? 100? Be careful there. You might be one new iPhone subscriber away from crippling your network. 😉

 

[rnizlek]

You know what I don't understand? That people are sold "unlimited data", and when people start taking advantage of that unlimited data, some people/operators start whining that they should pay more or that they should cut back on their data-usage.

Which part of "unlimited data" do you NOT understand?

Look, you're making a valid argument. The carriers advertised something unlimited that wasn't. It shouldn't have happened, I agree. But now that we're here, now that we're up against capacity constraints, where do we go from here? The way forward isn't continuing to offer this.

My problem is less with your position than with the outcry that AT&T gets when they suggest capping data usage. The problem here is that the public is putting pressure on carriers to offer something unlimited that's not unlimited.

 

[rnizlek]

[Duplicate post]

 

[2contagious]

I noticed this when I moved from Lyon (France) to London. In Lyon, my iPhone (first generation) worked perfectly.. never had any problems, but in London, my iPhone 3G fails to accept calls or make calls from time to time.. and sometimes SMS arrive hours after I have sent them / other people have sent them to me 🙁

 

[Matt-M]

You think there are no big cities with high population density in Canada?

Not my point at all!

Yes, you have cities. I have been to Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver on several occasions. None of these are NYC in terms of density, and you have multiple iPhone carriers.

I was replying to the person that said he has no problems with congestion in Canada. My point being; that is no surprise.

 

[Nuvi]

I just don't understand this attitude. Everyone acts like data costs nothing to transmit and that the infrastructure to improve the network and handle higher capacities costs nothing.

This is why laptop data plans have ALWAYS had limits - because the potential to move large amounts of data was always greater.

Network strain is not a problem that's going to dissipate - you are absolutely right. The question is, then, who should pay for increased capacity? Should we all pay equally, or should people who use more capacity pay more? I think the latter makes more sense. Pay for what you use. I'm not saying that carriers should cancel unlimited data contracts, but they should stop offering to activate new ones and not renew contracts on existing ones.

I use around ~500 MB/month in data. I spend much of my day on WiFi at my house and my office. I generally don't transfer videos or large files across the cellular network, and rarely stream audio. Why should I pay the same amount as someone who does all these things.

Carriers need to come out with tiered pricing, such as:
$15 for 1 GB
$30 for 5 GB
$60 for 10 GB

And so on. To make it easier to sell to the public, offer an option below the cost of existing data plans.

I just don't see how unlimited data makes sense, when you're looking at the big picture.

Maybe unlimited data is problem in US and UK but Europe in general has MUCH BETTER AND MODERN network so there isn't problems. Regarding your laptop data plan statement it sounds idiotic from my very European standpoint. We have had unlimited data plans for ages and they are much cheaper then in states. Also you can tether what ever you wan't, you can use mobile data all you like with your laptop and what ever... and yes, the data just flows without problems. So stop complaining and finding silly excuses for service providers.

 

[MorphingDragon]

I think here in Spain we have the best compromise between the two: unlimited data and "tiered" plans.

We do have unlimited data, but we pay for a certain amount of data at top 3G speeds.

15 eur = 200mb
25 eur = 1gb
40 eur = 3gb

if you go over your data allowance, you still have unlimited data, but speed drops from 3G speeds to 128kbps.. very slow but usable.

more importantly, Movistar seems not to have strict thresholds, only when you go over 50% of your data allowance for 2 months in a row, your speed starts to be limited down. i.e. you use 200mb every month but once you go over and use 500mb. Most likely, your conection won't be speed-capped unless you go over your 200mb for more than 1 month in a row.

I pay for 1gb.. and normally use 1.2 or 1.3 everymonth and have never had any caps.

I think youre trying to explain Databanking in the last bit.

 

[JadedBen]

At least you city boys get an occasional 3G reception with O2, i live out in the arse-end/ country side part of Essex and have never seen a 3G reception at home or the villages around me (regardless of network), so have to travel well out before i get 3G.

But my phone reception on O2 is nearly always perfect as we have an O2 aerial in my town. Don't understand why it doesn't put out a 3G signal though? lol

 

[MecPro]

lol, o2 are terrible. The thing that made me so annoyed was when I was in the Piccadilly Circus area of London, I had a full 3G signal, and I tried to use Google Maps and got the "Could not activate cellular something". It drove me CRAZY that in the middle of London, I couldn't get a proper wireless signal.

o2 are awful, absolutely terrible.

Edit* I can't get a signal at my work place in Wimbledon, nor in Wimbledon train station, or London Bridge train station

 

[evilguy]

Verizon puts voice and 3G data on different carriers.

The disadvantage of that is that it doesn't natively support simultaneous 3G voice and data.

The advantage of that (and the reason Verizon did it) is you would NOT get dropped voice calls because of too many data users.

So no, the boat would look different 🙂

Actually that is kinda how networks operators around the world configure their GSM/WCDMA networks.

In my country 3G phones uses the WCDMA network for both data and voice. If a specific cell is overloaded with data and you have to make a voice call, the call is transfered back to the GSM network - its called a load based scenario in network terms.

 

[salmacis3]

No offense, but Canada has less than the population of California spread out over an area 140,000 square miles larger than the U.S. That's 1/10th the population density of the U.S., and only 1/75th that of the U.K. With four separate carriers, it's the last place where there'd be any potential for network congestion. OK, maybe Greenland is the last place, but Canada is right up there. 🙂

No offense, but that argument is rubbish. As you've pointed out, the population density of the UK is *much* higher than that of the United States. Does that mean there are no network problems in the States? Of course not. What matters is *local* population density. Canada's major cities are no less dense than equivalently sized US ones.

 

[0dev]

This is not just a London problem, I know people way outside of London also having these problems.

They've also not been fixed because I had it happen to me yesterday.

Glad to see they're admitting it's crap and actually trying to do something though. I have noticed it get faster and a little more stable recently, but still far from reliable.

If these problems are not fixed by the time I upgrade to whatever iPhone comes out next, I will be getting it on another network.

 

[evilguy]

They do but the problem is there is a lack of data to look at. The data demand on phones has exploded over the last few years and there was no real way to plan for it. The networks have to plan there expansions years in advance and it takes years to put in fixes.

That is not correct. If you need to upgrade your network it can be done in months - NOT YEARS - if you are willing to pay for it. New cell-sites can take years, but network capacity upgrades only takes months.

Telenor in Denmark only has 3.6 mbit WCDMA in the larger Danish cities and covers the rest of the country with GSM basestations. Telenor has just ordered a total network upgrade of their entire WCDMA and GSM network. All existing GSM and WCDMA basestationens will be upgraded to Nokia flexstations with 21 Mbit WCDMA and all the new basestations will be LTE ready. Telenors entire network is being upgraded in just under 10 months.
Starent takes care of the back-bone network.

Before august 2010 all Telenor base-stations will be WCDMA with 21 mbit thous giving Telenor nationwide WCDMA service - from downtown Copenhagen to even the smalles islands or smalles towns with a population of less than 50 people.

A telco can roll-out an entire network upgrade within one year if they are willing to pay for it.

Further more all WCDMA operators have the option to expand capacity using different carriers. Here in Denmark all operators have 3 carriers at their disposal - a single cell-site can potentially handle provide 3 x 21 Mbit WCDMA.

 

[evilguy]

Someone should post a poll on the iphone blog... I've yet to see that done regarding monthly data use. I personally average ~350MB/month on ATT.
.

I can't find the link but a study in Denmark showed that the average iPhone user uses less than one GB per month. That can be compared with the average data used by internet users with a 3G USB dongle.

The average Danish internet user with a 3G USB dongle uses around 8 GB per month.

It really makes you think - Are Iphone users really to blame for network congestion???

 

[evilguy]

No offense, but Canada has less than the population of California spread out over an area 140,000 square miles larger than the U.S. That's 1/10th the population density of the U.S., and only 1/75th that of the U.K. With four separate carriers, it's the last place where there'd be any potential for network congestion. OK, maybe Greenland is the last place, but Canada is right up there. 🙂

Fun fact of the day: Tele Greenland is currently upgrading all their basestations with WCDMA from Nokia Siemens Networks.

All villages in Greenland with more than 100 citizens have access to PSTN, ADSL, GSM and very soon also WCDMA 3G services.

Tele Greenland has a 1600 km long radiolink-chain to support all of services. The chain consists of 36 link-stations with a capacity of 7 x 155 mbit.

And what has this to do with 02 and AT&T network issues? A hunter can sit on the ice in north-west Greenland 10 km from the nearest village and still watch YouTube on his Cellphone.
The same is difficult to do in downtown London, San Fransisco or NewYork - BECAUSE THE TELEPHONE COMPANIES DO NOT SPEND ENOUGH MONEY UPGRADING THEIR NETWORKS!

 

[DiamondMac]

Heavy data users need to pay for what they use, electricity, water, most other things we use, we pay for what we use.

If they are promised unlimited, they should be able to use an unlimited amount

If not, they shouldn't be told unlimited

 

[giffut]

I just don't understand this attitude. Everyone acts like data costs nothing to transmit and that the infrastructure to improve the network and handle higher capacities costs nothing.

Well, it´s not about the attitude, but about the promisses the companies had made: They advertise and specifiy unlimited data access for a fixed sum of money. If they do so, they must deliver it, independant from one consuming just 1GB of traffic, and another one doing 10GB so. I don´t need to care baout technical details, I want what I ordered, nothing else.

If they want fixed traffic limits, they need to advertise them accordingly. But it´s plain stupid and not right to blame the customer for using what he paid for.

PS

Here, in Germany, we have squarefeets of fineprint specifying the contract details. So the advertisment reads "unlimited access" for US$50,- e.g., but an abnoxious footnote gives you the meager details.

You may summon it: It´s false advertisement. They want to hide contract details from the customer. They want him to sign a contract under false pretense, plain simple.

 

[evilguy]

I just threw those figures out, I have no sense in what the data should cost. The cell phone companies should have an idea of what data actually costs and charge accordingly with their profit margin built in.

Here are some real examples from Denmark. We do not have unlimited plans and the examples are from different danish Telcos:

1 GB data with 1024 kbit/sek - 10$ per month
10 GB data with 7.2 mbit/s - 30$ per month
20 GB data with 7.2 mbit/s - 60$ per month
20 GB data with 21 mbit/s - 100 $ per month

Data spend over the allowed limited is aprox. 0.06 $ per MB.