EE - 4G
- Thread starter rscosworth
- Start date
You can't even buy a 4g contract yet let alone an unlimited one, afaik.
Ah she ain't even bothered anyway. Trying to explain to her now what it all means but it goes straight over her head. She just wants her iPhone 5.
But yes I'm guessing the rep gave her the same crap he gave me. He said T-mobile is switching to EE at the end of the month and I would be silly to leave them as they have the rights to the whole 4G network and that it will be unlimited.
Infact he compared it to me like this:
"if you was to leave and go else where it would be like selling your Rolls Royce and buying a Renault Clio"
They are telling customers it is truely unlimited, how is this aloud? When infact it isn't unlimited?
I can't wait for him to ring me back on Friday now. What a complete utter **** stain.
No they're not forcing anyone but with the big push they were giving it showing all the promo videos of how you could stream HD content without having to wait as long, they built up excitement and expectations. People genuinely want the speed benefits of 4G. However to then come out with a 500MB allowance at £36 a month is ridiculous because with things being faster people will start doing more.
But they're not using their advantage are they? If they had offered more reasonable data allowances then I bet they would have got a lot of people swapping over to their network which in turn means more profit. It's a shame that they've gone with the alternate plan of charging as high as they want because they know a percentage of the population will pay it regardless. Just feels very short sighted to me.
Poor comparison IMO, analogue TV was pretty awful quality wise
digital TV is so much clearer. Whereas 3G is not too bad really, it certainly isn't as bad as analogue TV in comparison to digital.[EDIT]What I mean is going from 3G to 4G is not like analogue TV to digital TV because analogue really was so poor, it would be more like 2G to 4G
Last edited:
3G is fine. When moving into are new home we had to wait 2 month for a engineer to come out and install broadband.
We used my iPhone 4s as a modem for the whole house, tv, iPad, laptops, ps3 and the Xbox 360 and 3G coped with everything fine. I was downloading files at 450kbps through 3G and never had any trouble with using so much data.
I don't see why it needs to be any better? Reason why I am happy to stay 3G in the first place even before I found out about the unlimited 4G hype crap not being true.
We used my iPhone 4s as a modem for the whole house, tv, iPad, laptops, ps3 and the Xbox 360 and 3G coped with everything fine. I was downloading files at 450kbps through 3G and never had any trouble with using so much data.
I don't see why it needs to be any better? Reason why I am happy to stay 3G in the first place even before I found out about the unlimited 4G hype crap not being true.
"640K of memory is enough for anyone."
The additional speed is very welcome for browsing (and that includes some video streaming).
You chosing not to accept the conditions, doesnt make it pointless for others.
640k what are you on about.
3G offer speeds more than adequate for webrowsing and even streaming.
It does make it pointless for everyone, other than those who have their fingers in their ears, or who are on a stupidly expensive deal ATM and unwilling to shop around.
The deals from EE are terriable and pointless.
Stream HD films. Yeah how am I going to do that EE with those data limits.
3G offer speeds more than adequate for webrowsing and even streaming.
It does make it pointless for everyone, other than those who have their fingers in their ears, or who are on a stupidly expensive deal ATM and unwilling to shop around.
The deals from EE are terriable and pointless.
Stream HD films. Yeah how am I going to do that EE with those data limits.
Famous quote from Bill Gates. Often used as an ironic counterargument to the argument that "this device is fast/powerful/large enough for anyone's needs".
... Ironically, there is no hard evidence that he ever actually made that statement, but it's forever attached to him in the eyes of popular culture.
The Register has done an article on why there's no unlimited tariff, and why they expect the other networks will do the same, worth a read:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/25/ee_4g_pricing/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/25/ee_4g_pricing/
That only explains why it's expensive(and everyone kew it would be expensive), doesn't explain the silly low caps.
They could still easily offer 20/50/100 or unlimited GB and still charge more.
It also doesn't explain the lack of pay as you go data once you exceed the limit.
4g with those limits is just pointless. Anything worthy of those speeds will eat those limits up in a matter of hours.
They could still easily offer 20/50/100 or unlimited GB and still charge more.
It also doesn't explain the lack of pay as you go data once you exceed the limit.
4g with those limits is just pointless. Anything worthy of those speeds will eat those limits up in a matter of hours.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 10,142
- Location
- Europe
Why can they do an unlimited tariff in the states, but not in the UK? They already have all the experience and know-how
Wouldn't comparing US 4G network running costs vs UK 4G running costs be largely irrelevant?
I can't see any mention in the article about how much easier it is to cover a location like the UK at a far more reasonable price because it's a smaller country with a higher density population?
I can't see any mention in the article about how much easier it is to cover a location like the UK at a far more reasonable price because it's a smaller country with a higher density population?
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 10,142
- Location
- Europe
One would expect the network to cost more in the US. Tariffs do. But then you've got T-mob offering completely unlimited 4G in the US, when the cost of running their network there should be significantly higher than it is in the UK.
From that article I think it does - it is all about the revenue, the smaller the cap, the more people will go over it and the more revenue generated. The Telco's are hitting back, you want a fast network, you have one now, but if you want to use it, then you will have to pay...
They are in for the long haul, if sign up rates are low, they can afford to sit it out as content becomes more data intensive and everything moves to the cloud, eventually we will all cough up for faster data because we will have no choice if we want to use the services we want on a mobile device.
The only risk for them is if 4G becomes as congested as 3G, as people won't put up with that if they are paying more for a faster service..
No it doesn't you can still have low caps at cheap prices. That article does not explain why there's no large caps at all.
The risk is that their Facebook page gets totally trashed, oh wait already happened, big backlash already happened.
What should off happened is people signing up. For two years. Instead most of us will wait for ~8 months and get a far better deal and won't be paying EE for two years without a get out clause.
The risk is that their Facebook page gets totally trashed, oh wait already happened, big backlash already happened.
What should off happened is people signing up. For two years. Instead most of us will wait for ~8 months and get a far better deal and won't be paying EE for two years without a get out clause.
Though the article doesn't explicitly state it, I believe the issue is this:
The capacity taken up by voice is fairly flat (i.e. it's not really growing; people aren't making noticeably more calls), whereas the capacity taken up by data is growing rapidly. The networks are constantly expanding their infrastructure in order to accommodate the growing demand for data.
So far this trend has not been truly reflected in pricing - the biggest cost to the end-user has been the call-time, rather than data. With 4G the data demand is expected to accelerate further, and so networks are moving to a data-defined pricing, which more accurately reflects the strain placed on their network.
In principle I don't have any issue with this pricing model - in fact I see it as inevitable. My issue is with the data-pricing levels that EE are offering. On a 4G connection, 8Gb/month should (in my eyes) be a mid-level contract - not one costing £56/month and only available when you buy a handset at the same time(!). I'd like to see plans going up to (say) 32Gb/month - in this way the service could be used for the purpose it was intended (high-bandwidth media consumption like HD streaming).
The capacity taken up by voice is fairly flat (i.e. it's not really growing; people aren't making noticeably more calls), whereas the capacity taken up by data is growing rapidly. The networks are constantly expanding their infrastructure in order to accommodate the growing demand for data.
So far this trend has not been truly reflected in pricing - the biggest cost to the end-user has been the call-time, rather than data. With 4G the data demand is expected to accelerate further, and so networks are moving to a data-defined pricing, which more accurately reflects the strain placed on their network.
In principle I don't have any issue with this pricing model - in fact I see it as inevitable. My issue is with the data-pricing levels that EE are offering. On a 4G connection, 8Gb/month should (in my eyes) be a mid-level contract - not one costing £56/month and only available when you buy a handset at the same time(!). I'd like to see plans going up to (say) 32Gb/month - in this way the service could be used for the purpose it was intended (high-bandwidth media consumption like HD streaming).
I have a total unlimited tariff, unless i've been lied to. I was told explicitly by the woman at the desk. and by the woman on the phone that my Tmobile Full Monty plan is unlimited. I even asked if I download 10 gig would I incur a fair usage policy, and they said no. This month I have download over 8gig and have been for a few months.
I have not been charged so far.
I have not been charged so far.