UK iPhone 4 Updates: O2 Axes Unlimited Data and Announces Upgrade Offer, T-Mobile and 3 On Board

[Spanky Deluxe]

The problem all networks around the world have is that 3G data usage went through the roof with the release of the iPhone. We're not talking a gradual increase that could be planned for, it just went ballistic almost overnight.

Honestly, I'm not that convinced of that. First the iPhone 2G was released. It sold many but not nearly as many as would have sold had it of been subsidised. That wasn't even ON a 3G network. O2 had about a year to gauge the network capacity needed for their 3G network and had loads of 2G stats to work with. IPhones have been on the O2 network for nearly three years now - three years of handset growth is not "almost overnight". They just haven't bothered spending enough on their infrastructure and haven't used enough foresight. They knew perfectly well when new Apple phones were going to come out months in advance.

 

[headfuzz]

The problem all networks around the world have is that 3G data usage went through the roof with the release of the iPhone. We're not talking a gradual increase that could be planned for, it just went ballistic almost overnight.

Honestly, I'm not that convinced of that. First the iPhone 2G was released. It sold many but not nearly as many as would have sold had it of been subsidised. That wasn't even ON a 3G network. O2 had about a year to gauge the network capacity needed for their 3G network and had loads of 2G stats to work with. IPhones have been on the O2 network for nearly three years now - three years of handset growth is not "almost overnight". They just haven't bothered spending enough on their infrastructure and haven't used enough foresight. They knew perfectly well when new Apple phones were going to come out months in advance.

^^^

This.

 

[wovel]

oh please, they are finite resources, data isn't.

lol what rubbish. data bandwidth is not limited unlike those you mentioned. It's because of the networks wanting to screw the customers and gain as much profit out of them as they can.

Bandwidth is in fact limited by the capacity of the network. Companies have to deal with the limits of spectrum and technology in certain areas. You both simply have no understanding whatsoever about wireless data networks.

No, it is not. Bandwidth is only limited by the amount of our money the carriers are willing to spend to improve it. Your thoughts on Data as a limited resource are pure 3rd grade nonsense.

It is very costly to add capacity to a wireless network. You are suggesting that the carriers should add this bandwidth, but not actually charge the people using the resource. I suppose they could just raise the price for everyone. It appears the absurd entitlement mentality is global.

When was the last time you paid for "fair usage" for your home internet connection? With your argument, the ISP's should also charge per MB of content.

It is several order of magnitude less expensive to deal with capacity issues on a wired or even fixed wireless network. Even with that, in many (perhaps most) parts of the world there are in fact caps on wired data usage.

 

[can7ona]

Just wanted to add a few thoughts that I haven't seen mentioned (much) in the previous 11 pages:

1) The "3%" (funny how Vodafone's problems also come from 3% of their users) aren't ruining it for everybody, they're simply using the unlimited service they paid for. It's the same argument as with ISPs and their FUPs.

2) Those of you looking at your current data usage might want to think how that will probably change with, for example, multi-tasking, iAds and better quality (bigger) YouTube etc. videos - plus the fact that the new iPhone can record in HD and encourages the videos to be posted online straight away means "normal" users could potentially end up using a lot more data than they currently use.

3) Using wi-fi at home isn't that great an option for everyone - I'm still with BT Broadband (not through choice) and frequently get my speeds throttled as I use quite a bit of data for personal use as well as for work (I've been working from home a lot more than I'd anticipated).

4) As others have said, o2 and all the other networks could have easily seen where data usage levels were going and made better plans - the whole 3G thing was a complete cockup from day one IIRC. It's also yet another example of the poor infrastructure aspirations of our communications/technology companies - look at the broadband/fibre optic roadmap compared to South Korea for example. I think Sir Dyson was talking earlier this week about how little we've invested in our technology industry in general in the UK.

 

[surferfromuk]

Kiss of death to Google Maps on the move!

 

[marksman]

No, it is not. Bandwidth is only limited by the amount of our money the carriers are willing to spend to improve it. Your thoughts on Data as a limited resource are pure 3rd grade nonsense.

As someone who has owned ISPs and managed global network operations, I would say you have no idea what you are talking about.

All bandwidth has a cost associated with it. Don't be calling people 3rd graders, when you speak so ignorantly.

You obviously have no idea how bandwidth even works, or how interconnects work or anything else. There is nothing free about bandwidth, and cellular bandwidth is even more costly because it is real physical limitations that make it much more scarce than hardwired data.

 

[headfuzz]

It is very costly to add capacity to a wireless network. You are suggesting that the carriers should add this bandwidth, but not actually charge the people using the resource.

It is very costly yet is factored into every single network provider's business plan several years if not a decade in advance, so how does paying more for less when the rollout of increased capacity has already been accounted for work exactly?

Your argument alludes to network providers costing their infrastructure on a yearly basis and suddenly having to deal with a massive increase in bandwidth usage which is frankly ludicrous.

When extortionate 3G licencing nearly crippled the telecoms industry in Europe cutbacks were made across the board to cover the cost without risking passing on the exorbitant cost to the consumer - I know this first hand because my job at Ericsson got axed as a result.

The advent of 3G was the biggest leap forward in mobile telecoms since the switch from analogue to digital. Yet it was rolled out relatively well with new handsets gradually being produced to adopt the new capabilities of the 3G networks.

This is not a new technology rollout for the networks. This is a single new handset using existing network technologies, just as every single other smartphone on the market does.

Any increased bandwidth usage by a single model on existing networks should have been factored into capacity planning by the network providers at very least a year ago.

The issue here has nothing to do with unavailability of bandwidth; if that was the case O2 would not simultaneously be offering Android handsets on cheaper tariffs with unlimited data packages.

 

[ibosie]

I wonder if O2 will provision the iPhones's micro SIM with the APN and username which allows the current iPhone to bypass image optimisation? If the new pricing structure is fairer for both sides we should have the option to browse the web without this heavy image degradation and utilise the data allowance as we see fit. On the iPad the web looks terrible on O2. When I tried to discuss this on O2 customer forums my account became 'inactive' so I posted on Ronan Dunne's (CEO) blog and the post was quickly removed. I sent his office an email and didn't get a reply.

 

[rscott4563]

As someone who has owned ISPs and managed global network operations, I would say you have no idea what you are talking about.

All bandwidth has a cost associated with it. Don't be calling people 3rd graders, when you speak so ignorantly.

You obviously have no idea how bandwidth even works, or how interconnects work or anything else. There is nothing free about bandwidth, and cellular bandwidth is even more costly because it is real physical limitations that make it much more scarce than hardwired data.

As you seem to have quite a lot of personal knowledge of the subject I was hoping you could explain it a little to the unenlightened.

I think we all realise that the cost of building a network and capacity is very high in the outset but this isn't an argument about that, this is specifically about the apparent cost incurred through the use of that existing network and it's capacity.

Could you explain then what exactly the costs are that the network provider is incurring due to the use of it's network and bandwidth? For example how does it cost the provider more if I use 1GB of data in a month as opposed to 500MB?? I was under the impression it was no different to a mobile phone call, the cost of setting up the network is high but once it's in place there is no inherent cost to the network provider for an actual call being made (other than things such as cross network termination and initiation charges which don't even apply to data)?

Thanks

Ryan

 

[smogit]

I think we all realise that the cost of building a network and capacity is very high in the outset but this isn't an argument about that, this is specifically about the apparent cost incurred through the use of that existing network and it's capacity.

Could you explain then what exactly the costs are that the network provider is incurring due to the use of it's network and bandwidth? For example how does it cost the provider more if I use 1GB of data in a month as opposed to 500MB??

There are two costs incurred here.

The first is the running cost. The more traffic a mast has (data+calls) the more electricity it uses, so every call incurs a very real and direct cost. The mast also uses a connection back to a data centre somewhere, and from there a connection to the internet (for data) or to other providers (for calls), both incur connection or termination fees, either on a per call/megabyte basis or on a time basis (based on average usage - so less calls/data less cost). These connections also use more electricity when running your call or data connection compared to being idle.

The second is more complex - network saturation. If unlimited customers use too much data, make too many calls, the company cannot sell that capacity to somebody else, ie the mast is so busy it can not take any additional traffic (calls+data). So lets say you pay £20pm for an unlimited data service, somebody else pays £10GB, which customer would O2 make more from if the network is saturated? Even if everybody is on an unlimited service then, this also limits the number of customers, as if service is poor some customers will leave. O2s argument appears to be that customers who use more than 500MB are saturating towers in some locations, hence the measures being taken.

 

[smogit]

The issue here has nothing to do with unavailability of bandwidth; if that was the case O2 would not simultaneously be offering Android handsets on cheaper tariffs with unlimited data packages.

The wording on the O2 website is about smartphone tariffs, so I would expect that very shortly we will be seeing the same terms applied to Android as well.

All our smartphone tariffs for iPhone include Visual Voicemail, up to 1GB of UK data and unlimited Wi-Fi.

Pay Monthly smartphone tariff table

 

[Nevis8]

It's overall a very disappointing package. I can understand why O2 feels that it has to cap data, in the long term it may be beneficial for everybody, but the 50% decrease in the number of minutes for the same money is very puzzling. This has nothing to do with "fairness" or "choice", its just a commercial decision that has penalised your customers. Withdrawing "free" MMS is also a retrograde step - do iPhone users really want unlimited texts instead ? - I don't think so.
This will make me delay my purchase of a new iPhone on June24th. I'll hang on to my Simplicity account for now, and wait until all the providers have announced their rates. going with O2 used to be an easy choice, they have now shot themselves in the foot and handed the other networks a chance to recruit O2 customers.

 

[mrochester]

The second is more complex - network saturation. If unlimited customers use too much data, make too many calls, the company cannot sell that capacity to somebody else, ie the mast is so busy it can not take any additional traffic (calls+data). So lets say you pay £20pm for an unlimited data service, somebody else pays £10GB, which customer would O2 make more from if the network is saturated? Even if everybody is on an unlimited service then, this also limits the number of customers, as if service is poor some customers will leave. O2s argument appears to be that customers who use more than 500MB are saturating towers in some locations, hence the measures being taken.

This is also my very basic understanding of it. Every mobile phone mast has a limited capacity. If you limit data you might get 1000 people using 10mb each. If you have unlimited data, you might get 100 people using 100mb each since they have no reason to curb or monitor that usage. The resource isn't unlimited as it's dictated by how many people you can squash onto one mast. You can see network congestion at play when you're phone has full signal, but you can't receive any calls or texts (this happened a lot to me on O2 in central Newcastle, especially around rush hour).

The solution is to put up extra masts, so that more customers can be served in a given area. However, this is expensive, and I believe that the networks need planning permission to be able to erect them. You also have crazy loons who campaign and protest against plans to put up mobile phone masts near schools, hospitals, churches etc etc etc. It's really easy to appreciate how difficult it could be for mobile phone companies to increase capacity to meet demand when so many obstacles are thrown in their way. I guess if they can't put extra masts up fast enough to meet demand, they have to put limits on the use so that everyone gets a fair chance.

 

[headfuzz]

The issue here has nothing to do with unavailability of bandwidth; if that was the case O2 would not simultaneously be offering Android handsets on cheaper tariffs with unlimited data packages.

The wording on the O2 website is about smartphone tariffs, so I would expect that very shortly we will be seeing the same terms applied to Android as well.

I agree the wording is ambiguous, but if it were a shift in corporate policy it would apply to all relevant tariffs at the same time, not just iPhone tariffs which have just had their pricing structure changed.

A bus company putting its fares up doesn't put them up for teenagers one day then wait 3 months before putting them up for adults and children. They all get announced a month or two prior to implementation and go up at the same time.

And if on the off chance what you suggest is the case, then it's a monumental marketing f**k up by O2 the net result of which will drive iPhone customers away immediately prior to a huge product launch for the product.

You really think the O2 Board would let that fly? Adverse iPhone marketing actively pushing away swathes of customers for their biggest selling smartphone, particularly now they've lost the exclusivity contract?

If they had implemented a policy shift across the smartphone range I would still be disappointed but not nearly as much as I am now with them.

With the prospect for paying more for less I feel like a second class citizen in O2's eyes. Which is really bad seeing as I've been with them for 10 years

 

[Nevis8]

The wording on the O2 website is about smartphone tariffs, so I would expect that very shortly we will be seeing the same terms applied to Android as well.

O2 is advertising the new Dell Streak with unlimited data, even on its cheapest plan on the website.

Seems odd to be doing this 13 days before the iPhone goes on sale with capped plans.

Looks like the iPhone will be the first new model to be crippled with this new deal.

 

[headfuzz]

O2 is advertising the new Dell Streak with unlimited data, even on its cheapest plan on the website.

Seems odd to be doing this 13 days before the iPhone goes on sale with capped plans.

Looks like the iPhone will be the first new model to be crippled with this new deal.

^^^

Case in point.

 

[Alienrat]

I'm on Three. Service has been perfect where I am in West Yorkshire/Lancashire border. They cover more area around here than any other network which is tricky since it's all steep sided valleys and Pennine moors.

I look at the O2 deals, especially on iPhones, and think people are nuts.

I was on three with a nokia e73. Service was great, availability was great, price was fantastic (£25 - 750min, unlimited data, tether if you want).
I really wanted an iPhone so I went to o2, paying £10 more for 150 mins less.
If it wasn't that I would have stayed with them (I didn't have much of a difficulty leaving either).

Now when I look at o2, it is not their data I object to as much as their price, the £35/600 plan is now only 24 months, there is no way I am having a 24 month contract, and it is £40 on 18 months. And it is not like I am getting the phone free, so I think this time I will wait until my contract is up and go back to three, I found them a lot better.

 

[Journojulz]

O2 is advertising the new Dell Streak with unlimited data, even on its cheapest plan on the website.

"*Unlimited
UK data usage only. Excessive usage policy and terms apply. View details"
http://shop.o2.co.uk/tariffSmallPrint

Can't seem to find WHAT the 'excessive usage' policy is for 'the streak'.

Seems to differ from mobile to mobile.

If it is totally unlimited - you can be sure this will be reigned in as soon as enough people actually start USING it.

I would interpret data usage caps as a compliment - like the odds at a bookies.

 

[gnasher729]

Could you explain then what exactly the costs are that the network provider is incurring due to the use of it's network and bandwidth? For example how does it cost the provider more if I use 1GB of data in a month as opposed to 500MB?? I was under the impression it was no different to a mobile phone call, the cost of setting up the network is high but once it's in place there is no inherent cost to the network provider for an actual call being made (other than things such as cross network termination and initiation charges which don't even apply to data)?

The cost of you using 1 GB instead of 500 MB is minimal. However, once the network reaches its limit, new very expensive hardware has to be added. So your use of 1 GB costs maybe ten pence, but when 1000 people use 1 GB instead of 500 MB and bandwidth limits are reached, O2 has the choice to make everyone unhappy because the connections get slow, or spend a million pound for new hardware. (These are not the actual numbers, but I guess you get the picture).

It's like a bus going from A to B. It costs almost nothing if you hop on the bus as long as there are empty seats. But once the bus is full, the bus company has to add another bus at very high cost.

So lets say the bus company finds out that its customers go on the bus for 50 miles a month on the average. And they figure that actually taking the payments from customers for every ride costs time and money. So they offer an unlimited plan, where you pay a fixed fee per month for unlimited usage. Everyone is happy, you don't need cash to get on the bus, queues are shorter because you just get on, everything is fine. Then some kids figure out that they can drive up and down on the bus all day long for the same fee. And they say "I paid for unlimited, I should get unlimited" when actually they are paying for the average use of 50 miles a month. And suddenly when you try to get on the bus, you see it is full with idiots who go up and down the same road and never get off the bus, because they can. So you complain and the bus company has to add more buses.

 

[jimmy83]

Good news from O2 though (I've just been on the phone to them) - if you're on the original "iPhone Simplicity 20" tariff (£20/m, 600 mins, 1200 texts, unlimited 3G data and wifi) they are not changing or restricting existing tariffs.

Just waiting now for PAYG prices to be released...

That's good to hear, just have to wait to hear what the PAYG price is for the handset.

 

[Alienrat]

So lets say the bus company finds out that its customers go on the bus for 50 miles a month on the average. And they figure that actually taking the payments from customers for every ride costs time and money. So they offer an unlimited plan, where you pay a fixed fee per month for unlimited usage. Everyone is happy, you don't need cash to get on the bus, queues are shorter because you just get on, everything is fine. Then some kids figure out that they can drive up and down on the bus all day long for the same fee. And they say "I paid for unlimited, I should get unlimited" when actually they are paying for the average use of 50 miles a month. And suddenly when you try to get on the bus, you see it is full with idiots who go up and down the same road and never get off the bus, because they can. So you complain and the bus company has to add more buses.

And the bus company learns that there is a dictionary full of words, and that actually the word they were using 'unlimited' actually means without limits which they never meant in the first place, so the poor company has to actually look back in the dictionary for a word they meant and define what its limits are, as it should have actually done in the first place. Then it occurs to the company that they are still monitoring exactly how many times everyone was in the bus already, so it is easy to do.

 

[natator]

unlocked

Hi guys,

maybe a basic question. I have a business connection from vodafone.. and I can use any phone with it. Can i just buy an iPhone from the Apple store and use it on my vodafone ?
From what I understand iphone is unlocked in uk.. so it should be possible, right ?

Cheers
Nat

 

[mrochester]

Hi guys,

maybe a basic question. I have a business connection from vodafone.. and I can use any phone with it. Can i just buy an iPhone from the Apple store and use it on my vodafone ?
From what I understand iphone is unlocked in uk.. so it should be possible, right ?

Cheers
Nat

The iPhone isn't unlocked in the UK. It's locked to whichever network you buy it for, and it's up to the network what their individual unlocking policy is.

 

[OllyW]

Hi guys,

maybe a basic question. I have a business connection from vodafone.. and I can use any phone with it. Can i just buy an iPhone from the Apple store and use it on my vodafone ?
From what I understand iphone is unlocked in uk.. so it should be possible, right ?

Cheers
Nat

No, currently the iPhone is network locked when you buy it.

O2 and Orange allow you to unlock, but you need to register and activate the phone with them first. I'm not sure about Vodafone's policy, you'll need to ask.

 

[NightFox]

It's like a bus going from A to B. It costs almost nothing if you hop on the bus as long as there are empty seats. But once the bus is full, the bus company has to add another bus at very high cost.

So lets say the bus company finds out that its customers go on the bus for 50 miles a month on the average. And they figure that actually taking the payments from customers for every ride costs time and money. So they offer an unlimited plan, where you pay a fixed fee per month for unlimited usage. Everyone is happy, you don't need cash to get on the bus, queues are shorter because you just get on, everything is fine. Then some kids figure out that they can drive up and down on the bus all day long for the same fee. And they say "I paid for unlimited, I should get unlimited" when actually they are paying for the average use of 50 miles a month. And suddenly when you try to get on the bus, you see it is full with idiots who go up and down the same road and never get off the bus, because they can. So you complain and the bus company has to add more buses.

Good analogy!

And the bus company learns that there is a dictionary full of words, and that actually the word they were using 'unlimited' actually means without limits which they never meant in the first place, so the poor company has to actually look back in the dictionary for a word they meant and define what its limits are, as it should have actually done in the first place. Then it occurs to the company that they are still monitoring exactly how many times everyone was in the bus already, so it is easy to do.

But force the bus company to define an actual limit (cap) and everyone loses the flexibility they enjoyed before. OK, a fair usage policy without a defined cap may not be as transparent as some people like, but unless you're one of those people likely to be considered an extreme user, the discretion it allows is actually to your benefit. Maybe one odd day you do need to travel on the bus all day long.

Unlimited could also be interpreted as 'without a defined limit' at a stretch