Best news ever - mobile mast sharing

BunnyKillBot

BunnyKillBot

BunnyKillBot

Soldato
Joined
20 Jun 2010
Posts
3,251
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-swap-rival-networks-banish-poor-signals.html

Mobile phone black-spots will become a thing of the past under radical Government plans to make firms allow customers to swap freely between networks.
Culture Secretary Sajid Javid is understood to be discussing a system of ‘national roaming’ to eliminate poor signals that affect many parts of the country.
Click to expand...

This is quite literally one of the things i would have on my mythical manifesto as being essential to the furtherance of the country. In this day and age, its utterly ridiculous not being able to get a mobile signal in an area because only one company has a mast there.

What are the chances this is actually going to happen? So many barriers to change including resistant and greedy telecoms companies. Ah i dream!
 
would it end up like privatised rail? you buy a ticket/contract from "National Mobile" that can be used on any network, but that network might have special offers like Virgin's group save to make you want to specifically use their services?
 
So how would this work with the carriers having had to bid for the spectrums they run on? I.e. Vodafone paid the most for the best frequencies on 4g.
 
Trifid said:
So how would this work with the carriers having had to bid for the spectrums they run on? I.e. Vodafone paid the most for the best frequencies on 4g.
Click to expand...

You don't need 4G to make a phone call. If they just limited it to the basic GSM needed to at least make a call the companies could still compete for the best high speed internet spectrums.
 
This will be amazing if it happens. I live in rural oxfordshire where coverage from any one network is lacking to say the least. To be able to roam between networks will make a big difference for us.

Mobile data is the least of my worries, i'd just like to be able to make phone calls.
 
Terrible idea IMO. In theory for the consumer with poor coverage it's a good idea, but it rewards **** companies that didn't invest in their networks to get other companies to take the slack and using their capacity. That in turn would take up capacity from good networks and potentially clogging up their service and reducing the quality of service they already enjoy.
 
Bear - are you referring to "Three"? (The only network with notably less coverage than the others).
 
Best news ever would be Mila Kunis and Jennifer Lawerence turning up at my house wanting a threesome.

This news doesn't even come close.
 
Bear said:
Terrible idea IMO. In theory for the consumer with poor coverage it's a good idea, but it rewards **** companies that didn't invest in their networks to get other companies to take the slack and using their capacity. That in turn would take up capacity from good networks and potentially clogging up their service and reducing the quality of service they already enjoy.
Click to expand...

I would assume that the company who owns the mast will be able to charge the caller's provider. Providers with the best networks should be rewarded.
 
Jez said:
Bear - are you referring to "Three"? (The only network with notably less coverage than the others).
Click to expand...

I'm not singling any network out as I've only ever been on one network since I started owning a mobile about 18 years ago, but on the mobile part of the forum loads of people moaning about coverage.

I can also see operators potentially reducing the amount invested in coverage infrastructure if they think another operator would spend the money and they could hop onto the back of theirs.
 
Tunney said:
I would assume that the company who owns the mast will be able to charge the caller's provider. Providers with the best networks should be rewarded.
Click to expand...

That would be the only way I could see it working but it could still cause a reduction of quality of service for their core customers.
 
I think a nation wide 2G only network would be great for all kinds of people but the regulations would be a nightmare and the networks would not agree to it due to the technical difficulties involved
 
Bear said:
I'm not singling any network out as I've only ever been on one network since I started owning a mobile about 18 years ago, but on the mobile part of the forum loads of people moaning about coverage.

I can also see operators potentially reducing the amount invested in coverage infrastructure if they think another operator would spend the money and they could hop onto the back of theirs.
Click to expand...

The networks (bar Three, hence me bringing them up) are much of a muchness in terms of voice coverage, they all have weakspots and are all equally useless but in different areas.

The investment side of it would surely not be the issue which you think it would? I am not sure that outright coverage is really being improved upon these days anyway, the networks would still be free to fight the current battle for fast mobile data coverage.

Technically surely this isnt an issue, the issue would be financial rather than technical? Roaming itself isnt new, we do it every time we go to another country! :)
 
Would be useful as when I'm visiting my parents as the only signal you can get at their house is O2 as the nimby's around them have blocked all the applications for other companies to have masts in their of the rural town they live in.
 
Jez said:
Bear - are you referring to "Three"? (The only network with notably less coverage than the others).
Click to expand...

There are a lot of areas around here where I never used to get a signal with Orange, but now being on Three I get a signal almost everywhere and usually with high speed internet. Not that 4G, but miles faster than 3G. Cant remember what it's called, begins with H.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom