Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99
Let me try and explain my point:
|
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99
3. You said "they'll have the same 3G coverage as 3"
|
And they will. Perhaps I need to qualify every statement I make with "99.9% of the time".
Quote:
|
7. You said "Your experience doesn't override the fact they use the same network"
|
And yet you continued arguing.
Quote:
|
8. I gave you a clear example on how there coverage can be drastically different
|
No you did not.
Quote:
|
9. Even though you state that "they'll have the same 3G coverage as 3", "for the record they use the same frequency bands, the same backhaul networks, and the same network management" and "they use the same network", you contradicted yourself by then saying "OFCOM's tests show 3 to be the slowest network in the UK"
|
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.
Quote:
|
I have not changed my story at all. I really don't know what your problem is with someone disagreeing with you.
|
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.
Quote:
|
if you go to the OFCOM 3G coverage map and toggle between EE and Three why do you get different coverage in Wales, the South West. Northern England, Scotland, Northen Ireland, etc. for example?
|
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.
Join CF
You are here: 
