UK 4G coverage worse than in Romania and Peru I can attest to that as up here in Edinburgh 4G is patchy at best I recently travelled from one hospital on the outskirts of Edinburgh to another and I lost count where I lost 4G connection and I was hardly in rural Scotland. The UK is rated 54th in the world behind countries that until recently were in the dark ages, but yet again the UK goes from leader to has been because of under investment in the infrastructure. On reading the report from The National Infrastructure Commission it states: Government and Ofcom should develop a meaningful set of metrics to that represent the coverage people actually receive and use these to determine a mobile Universal Service Obligation so that consumers can access essential services where they are needed. Government and Ofcom should deliver this as a soon as is practical but no later than 2025. Surely we will, hopefully, moved on to 5G by then on infrastructure that probably will still not supply a reliable 4G to the population. Why do we in the UK continually put up with this type of constant underinvestment which we have seen with the railways, roads ETC ETC? https://www.theguardian.com/money/2...worse-than-in-romania-and-peru-watchdog-finds https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...ices-are-genuinely-available-where-they-are-n
Because we privatised it all, which resulted in the entirely unforeseeable consequence of its new corporate owners competing in a race to the bottom in cutting costs and investment while simultaneously increasing revenue by boosting prices. I mean, nobody could have predicted that happening, right? Completely unexpected.
4G, pfffft I can't get 3G at home. Which surprisingly doesn't bother me at all, I'm at home, I'll use the WiFi
Meh. We were at the top of the world, now it's India's and/or China's turn. Enjoy the downhill ride - I've accepted it.
What Gareth said, if you depend on the private sector for your infrastructure you end up with the cheapest not necessarily the best, being in public hands doesn't automatically change that but when something's owned by a country they tend to take a longer term view.
Well the UK has highest teenage birth rates in Western Europe but the No. 1 country with the highest teenage pregnancy in the world the United States of America with 52 per 1000 population we are a mere 30 per 1000.
I guess we can be world leaders in building public infrastructure and services with public funding, them selling that off at cut rates to private firms to run into the ground? We are remarkably proficient at keeping on doing it in the face of the obvious and repeated results.
Don't worry, budget cuts will soon make Teenage Pregnancy Great Again: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38250580
Actually that is not the case with me but opportunities do not present themselves very often if at all.
No that's not it. We privatised it in a way that means each element operates as an effective monopoly. Southern rail is crap, but there's no competition until the contract is handed to another, so nothing can be done by another interested party. That's not a problem with privatisation, it's a problem with the implementation. Why would the government do it any better? They don't handle anything else efficiently that's for sure.
Not sure what that has to do with the obvious under investment by the mobile providers and of course broadband providers. But I agree that nationalisation does not necessarily work. But on the other hand private companys are predominantly interested in profit now rather than ivesting in the future hence we get a crap service. I think there is scope for the government to take steps rather than relying on the toothless Of bodies which are worse than useless.
Isn't it a little difficult not to have a monopoly when it comes to infrastructure, it's not like there's room to run 3-4 railway tracks in the same place, or in this instance 3-4 wireless mobile antenna and the accompanying paraphernalia all in the same place. It would be highly inefficient were you to duplicate your infrastructure.
This is what is actually happeningn right now though. There are some regional mast-sharing agreements (e.g. EE and 3 share some stations) but in general for O2, 3, EE and Vodafone to have coverage of an area, that area needs 4 masts. It is indeed ridiculous, everyone is using standardised GSM.
