[ianch99]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

You don't seem to have a point. All you seem to be doing is making up irrelevant references to stuff you don't understand to try make it seem your personal experience disproves scientifically conducted nationwide tests. And looking mighty foolish in the process.


And they will. Perhaps I need to qualify every statement I make with "99.9% of the time".


And yet you continued arguing.


No you did not.


At no point does this statement contradict anything I've said.

Perhaps you're still failing to understand. I suppose I need to be 110% clear since you get confused by anything less. 3, EE, and MBNL are not the same thing. Network means different things in different contexts.

Network when referring to 3 is referring to 3 as mobile network operator. Network when referring to the RAN is referring to MBNL, the multiple operator RAN that 3 uses.


Lets put it this way.

1) I said 3 will have the same coverage as EE. I failed to qualify it with "99.9% of the time".

2) You said their coverage differed in your experience.

3) I pointed out they use the same network

4) You asked for proof they use the same network

5) I gave you proof they use the same network

6) You ignore that proof and change your stance to talking about mast sharing and speeds instead

7) I point out they are not mast sharing and 3 has the lowest speeds according to OFCOM

8) You quote unscientific foreign data that shows 3 to be 2nd in an arbitrary, undisclosed measure of performance

9) I link data showing 3 has the lowest speeds according to OFCOM

10) You start saying speed is irrelevant, and you don't believe OFCOM.

11) I say I'd rather believe OFCOM than your personal experience.

12) You start talking about "end user experience" of people you know.

In this time you've banged on about "coverage", then you banged on about speeds instead, then you bang on about backhaul and frequencies, now you're trying to twist the argument into your "observed user experience" which nobody ever cared about in the first place.


Given that you seem intent on clutching on every straw you can find...

Seems that every time I post proven, undeniable facts, you start brandishing "personal experience" about something different while completely and utterly failing to address the matter at hand.

The minute differences come from the fact that 0.1% of Orange's legacy network had not yet been integrated into the MBNL MORAN or shut off at the time those maps were generated. The goal was to have less than 0.05% left by the end of 2014, but around 0.02% of all Orange masts will never be upgraded. There are other factors as well but I'm not going to list all 500 different phenomena that affect network performance every day just to quench your ignorance.

Your bullying and arrogance is astounding

Maybe other users of this forum that use Three and an EE-based network can comment if they feel that they have 99.9% of the same coverage.

---------- Post added at 15:22 ---------- Previous post was at 15:21 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

It's like deja vu.

I see teacher's pet is back