NEWS: UK "Mobile call quality is 'poor'"

><http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3210082.stm>
>
> Mobile phone users have a raw deal with call quality, a report says.
> A more expensive handset does not guarantee better quality either because
> it depends on your network, say voice quality experts Psytechnics.
>
> Calls on eight handsets across the five networks were tested, and no
> network performed very well.

This is not possible. All those complainers here with Euro-envy tell
us Europe's wireless system is so advanced and wonderful, while we're
in the stone age with a mess of standards, poor coverage, and no
strong government direction forcing us to conform. It just can't be!

Also, I agree strongly with this comment in the article (its poor
grammar notwithstanding):

"The results question whether handset manufacturers are trading in
features like cameras and expensive smart phone technology for voice
quality. "

The SE T300 being a good example. I'm sticking with a Moto P280 for
now.

Doug

"Doug" <pub-rz@socal.rr.comXXX> wrote in message
news:nfnepvci5jiup27kojeo2ht9ta8hem2mj5@4ax.com...
| ><http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3210082.stm>
| >
| > Mobile phone users have a raw deal with call quality, a report says.
| > A more expensive handset does not guarantee better quality either
because
| > it depends on your network, say voice quality experts Psytechnics.
| >
| > Calls on eight handsets across the five networks were tested, and no
| > network performed very well.
|
| This is not possible. All those complainers here with Euro-envy tell
| us Europe's wireless system is so advanced and wonderful, while we're
| in the stone age with a mess of standards, poor coverage, and no
| strong government direction forcing us to conform. It just can't be!
|
| Also, I agree strongly with this comment in the article (its poor
| grammar notwithstanding):
|
| "The results question whether handset manufacturers are trading in
| features like cameras and expensive smart phone technology for voice
| quality. "
|
| The SE T300 being a good example. I'm sticking with a Moto P280 for
| now.
|
| Doug
|

You're right here, Doug. I've been to the UK and Ireland three times since
June 2002. Haven't had one dropped call on T-Mobile UK (One-2-One) and O2
(BTCellnet), using my Moto V60G. Made 3 to 5 two-to-five minute calls per
day over a period of 1 month in England (London, Birmingham, Coventry, Bath,
Brighton) and Dublin, Ireland; then a few days in Edinburgh, Scotland where
had no dropped calls, excellent signal quality, and then 10 days in London.
Never, Never had that dropped call that I always wanted so that I could
trash talk their networks. Damn did they do a fine job. Well I have 2 weeks
this december to see if i can figure out what those pesky brits are whining
about.

I think its the typical British mentality of being gloomy all the time
(How's the weather? F***ing dreadful, innit mate?) and expecting nothing but
top-notch service. Here in USA we accept bullcrap as part of life and get on
with it, and the Brits still hate us but love to come to the USA for cheap
shopping trips and mickey mouse.

I've been to England four times since August of 2002. I'm on Orange and
have better reception than in the US. The fact that the non-CDMA carrers
(leave Nextel aside, I've read conflicting reports on them) are migrating to
GSM is evidence that they regard GSM as solid competition for CDMA. Europe
no longer mandates the use of GSM and WCDMA is being used in some places
now.

An overpriced gadget ridden phone can exist on any technology. I think one
place that Europe (and even Canada) got it right was permitting nationwide
networks in the first place, rather than treating mobile technology like
commercial broadcast and going market-by-market.


Stu
"Andy M --Tampa Bay--" <nospamandym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:SCJlb.22943$Go5.346510@twister.tampabay.rr.co m...
> "Doug" <pub-rz@socal.rr.comXXX> wrote in message
> news:nfnepvci5jiup27kojeo2ht9ta8hem2mj5@4ax.com...
> | ><http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3210082.stm>
> | >
> | > Mobile phone users have a raw deal with call quality, a report says.
> | > A more expensive handset does not guarantee better quality either
> because
> | > it depends on your network, say voice quality experts Psytechnics.
> | >
> | > Calls on eight handsets across the five networks were tested, and no
> | > network performed very well.
> |
> | This is not possible. All those complainers here with Euro-envy tell
> | us Europe's wireless system is so advanced and wonderful, while we're
> | in the stone age with a mess of standards, poor coverage, and no
> | strong government direction forcing us to conform. It just can't be!
> |
> | Also, I agree strongly with this comment in the article (its poor
> | grammar notwithstanding):
> |
> | "The results question whether handset manufacturers are trading in
> | features like cameras and expensive smart phone technology for voice
> | quality. "
> |
> | The SE T300 being a good example. I'm sticking with a Moto P280 for
> | now.
> |
> | Doug
> |
>
> You're right here, Doug. I've been to the UK and Ireland three times since
> June 2002. Haven't had one dropped call on T-Mobile UK (One-2-One) and O2
> (BTCellnet), using my Moto V60G. Made 3 to 5 two-to-five minute calls per
> day over a period of 1 month in England (London, Birmingham, Coventry,
Bath,
> Brighton) and Dublin, Ireland; then a few days in Edinburgh, Scotland
where
> had no dropped calls, excellent signal quality, and then 10 days in
London.
> Never, Never had that dropped call that I always wanted so that I could
> trash talk their networks. Damn did they do a fine job. Well I have 2
weeks
> this december to see if i can figure out what those pesky brits are
whining
> about.
>
> I think its the typical British mentality of being gloomy all the time
> (How's the weather? F***ing dreadful, innit mate?) and expecting nothing
but
> top-notch service. Here in USA we accept bullcrap as part of life and get
on
> with it, and the Brits still hate us but love to come to the USA for cheap
> shopping trips and mickey mouse.
>
>