Getting a fast car is great. You can beat people off the lights and smile as they stuggle to keep up.
Trouble is, in the long run, you’re going to run out of fuel quicker and that guy you accelerated away from will end up driving past as you’re filling up at the pumps.
Data limits, like a petrol tank, don’t seem to be big enough for those speedy 4G users. However, EE are pushing hard with their “Superfast 4G” network. That 4G network is new and it’s already getting another turbo installed, with 20Mbps coming soon.
There’s an issue though, and it’s not just a problem confined to the mobile networks. Across the connected world we’re seeing a tricky balance between speed, capping, traffic shaping and port blocking. “Unlimited” doesn’t always mean “Unlimited” and advertisers are finding new ways to say that something is unrestricted, even when it’s not. Not really.
So, just recently, we asked you three simple questions…
Which is the most important to you when choosing a network?
We had 135 responses to this one and there’s three major factors that stand out. The question allowed multiple responses, but coverage, data allowance and price were hugely important. Strangely, despite the push by EE to include unlimited text and call allowances, they’re hardly of importance to you when choosing a network. For our readers at least, it’s all about how much data you get, how good the coverage is and the overall price of the plan.
Data speed was important too, but there’s more of that to come.
Do you feel that 3G speeds are sufficient or do you want more?
So, do our readers need 4G speeds? Well, 128 of you responded to this one and 80% said that 3G speeds were sufficient for them. The rest wanted a little more, but it seems that the existing 3G networks are meeting the needs of many.
Should networks concentrate on enhancing existing 2G / 3G coverage before pushing out 4G?
Here’s the results after 120 of you voted on this one and the results mirror the responses of the previous question. It seems that 3G speeds are fine, but you’d like the coverage to be improved still further..
We’d like to thank everyone who voted. From our brief survey it seems that our visitors want a healthy data allowance, good coverage and good 3G data speeds – not necessarily 4G speeds – at a good price.
“Superfast” speeds are a “nice to have”, but it sends that, fir the rest of us, “Prettyfast” is good enough.
I missed this one, but the sentiment echoes my own feeling on the subject, something that i have been “banging on about” since the launch of EE and their miserably inadequate data allowances. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that 500MB at [even initial] LTE speeds is a derisory amount (not wishing to make this an EE bashing moment). It is utterly pointless marketing all those wonderful things to be done with LTE, like watching uninterrupted movies and the like, when doing so will eat your allowance in one single event. While more data can be had, it can only be done so for an eye-watering price. Yet 3G delivers more than sufficient for all of the promoted activities on LTE, barring coverage and capacity. An we all know that none of the UK mobile operators got that right, ever!
I agree. I suppose that the operators have to do these things in such a way that maximises profit, yet give them at least a facade of value for money. EE are obviously trying to make the most money out of their 4G, so they are keeping data limits down, minimising use of the leased lines they inevitably have to pay BT and the like for, and giving them enough in the pot to compete when the rest catch up.
I don’t think they actually care that their 4G take-up is relatively low at the moment – in fact I get the impression that it is this way intentionally (their target is only 1 million customers by the end of the year, or so I read). They appear to be concentrating on their infrastructure and expanding it at a manageable rate.
Obviously, this isn’t much good for the type of person who’d actually be interested in 4G speeds, because you burn through data. And I think this is where the balance has to be struck. If they indeed have such a low take-up, surely this is the time to be a little more liberal with the data?
I think this is why the survey shows that people are happy with 3G speeds, at least on this site, because most people believe even most current 3G data allowances to be a bit on the stingy side. Then LTE comes along with a bit more speed, a bit less latency, but still mean data allowances and higher prices – err, yeah, I’ll stick with 3G thanks. I mean, there are still a considerable number of places where I can’t get 3G, let alone 4G, so having 4G will make hardly any difference to the vast majority of people, and therefore nobody will want to pay the premium for it aside from the very casual user.
What the prof and Hands0n said.
Speed is good, but cost, coverage and the allowance are far more important.
I’d rather have a reliable, unlimited 4meg connection than a flaky 20meg connection with a 1gig limit.