Mobile Working Experiences
The realities of remote working
Monday 29 October 2007, 1:13 PM
Mobile Coverage - a forgotten issue?
Should the mobile providers be investing so much in next generation networks, applications and services when many users are still left frustrated by the difficulties in getting basic voice coverage where they need it?
I believe most consumers are now savvy enough to realise that it is an empty promise to claim reach to 99.x% of the population when many users are still frustrated that they can't get reception in their own homes. A quick check on the geographical coverage maps hints at extent of the problem, large swathes of the UK remain mobile blackspots and real life experience suggest that even in urban areas coverage is very patchy. In my home, my wife can only get coverage if she goes into an upstairs bedroom or out into the garden - and this is a central London, N4 postcode - hardly rural Wales. As she works from home 1 day a week, it is hardly professional to start a business call where you can't be sure if the signal will hold up to complete the call...
10 years ago many of us would have probably shrugged our shoulders and accepted this - but a) mobile phones have long ceased being a novelty where we would forgive a few niggles, b) we are now using services (e.g. mobile internet) that rely on consistent coverage and c) the situation does not seem to have improved.
I may be overly cynical but I sense that the networks no longer feel it is worthwhile in investing in masts to improve basic GSM coverage. In remote, sparsely populated areas I accept the commercial realities of installing a mast to serve a very small population, but surely in urban areas there is a compelling argument to improve coverage and encourage people to make more and longer calls? Have they sunk too much cash into 3G networks? new mobile services? etc...
How many of you suffer coverage problems in places where you would expect to get reception? Do you feel network coverage has improved in recent years? Or are you happy to accept that mobile phone coverage will also be patchy in some areas?
I believe most consumers are now savvy enough to realise that it is an empty promise to claim reach to 99.x% of the population when many users are still frustrated that they can't get reception in their own homes. A quick check on the geographical coverage maps hints at extent of the problem, large swathes of the UK remain mobile blackspots and real life experience suggest that even in urban areas coverage is very patchy. In my home, my wife can only get coverage if she goes into an upstairs bedroom or out into the garden - and this is a central London, N4 postcode - hardly rural Wales. As she works from home 1 day a week, it is hardly professional to start a business call where you can't be sure if the signal will hold up to complete the call...
10 years ago many of us would have probably shrugged our shoulders and accepted this - but a) mobile phones have long ceased being a novelty where we would forgive a few niggles, b) we are now using services (e.g. mobile internet) that rely on consistent coverage and c) the situation does not seem to have improved.
I may be overly cynical but I sense that the networks no longer feel it is worthwhile in investing in masts to improve basic GSM coverage. In remote, sparsely populated areas I accept the commercial realities of installing a mast to serve a very small population, but surely in urban areas there is a compelling argument to improve coverage and encourage people to make more and longer calls? Have they sunk too much cash into 3G networks? new mobile services? etc...
How many of you suffer coverage problems in places where you would expect to get reception? Do you feel network coverage has improved in recent years? Or are you happy to accept that mobile phone coverage will also be patchy in some areas?
Friday 19 October 2007, 10:43 AM
Mobile Data Card - Watch those bills!
Being a big fan of my 3G USB data card - I was surprised recently when a friend recounted how his company had issued several of these cards to users, only to subsequenly recall all the cards and limit usage. Turns out the cards were too popular, 1 user had racked up a £4000 bill for 1 months usage of a card whilst working abroad. The user complained that he had not been warned of the costs of using the card, his employer complained that the network operator had done nothing to warn them of the very high usage levels being recorded, and the operator correctly maintained that bill was an accurate reflection of usage as per published rates.
The upshot of this was severely burnt fingers, the operator will get its £4k but the company has now switched to a competitor provider for data cards (although keeping its phones and BBs with the original provider).
So who is to blame? and how can these bill nightmares be avoided in the future?
Should users be more responsible when issued with the latest gizmos for connectivity? (this is not the first case I have heard of), should employers invest more time in training users on the costs of the equipment they are using (I have to admit I have no idea how much my company pays for the card I am currently using)? and should networks have more systems in place to flag up and alert bill payers when they see usage levels spiralling out of control? (similar to the credit card companies when they see a peak in spend)
I am not a fan of draconian usage 'bars' that prevent usage in certain countries - as a user it is a pain to have to remember to check whether a bar is in place and when you really need the service at 9pm in a foreign time zone it can be more than a little frustrating to find that no one can get the bar lifted!
Any similar stories of bills that you have received that have had a sting in the tail? or have you been on the end of a change in company usage policy as a result of high spend? or have you ever tried to negotiate a bill with an operator?
The upshot of this was severely burnt fingers, the operator will get its £4k but the company has now switched to a competitor provider for data cards (although keeping its phones and BBs with the original provider).
So who is to blame? and how can these bill nightmares be avoided in the future?
Should users be more responsible when issued with the latest gizmos for connectivity? (this is not the first case I have heard of), should employers invest more time in training users on the costs of the equipment they are using (I have to admit I have no idea how much my company pays for the card I am currently using)? and should networks have more systems in place to flag up and alert bill payers when they see usage levels spiralling out of control? (similar to the credit card companies when they see a peak in spend)
I am not a fan of draconian usage 'bars' that prevent usage in certain countries - as a user it is a pain to have to remember to check whether a bar is in place and when you really need the service at 9pm in a foreign time zone it can be more than a little frustrating to find that no one can get the bar lifted!
Any similar stories of bills that you have received that have had a sting in the tail? or have you been on the end of a change in company usage policy as a result of high spend? or have you ever tried to negotiate a bill with an operator?
Monday 8 October 2007, 1:23 PM
Further growth from RIM
RIM / Blackberry has just reported adding 1.45m subscribers to their base in the 2Q of 2007. They have also passed the milestone of 10m users worldwide.
Reports I saw at the end of last year had BB and Windows for Mobile neck and neck in terms of subscribers. Given the range of products launches from BB in 2nd half of 2006 and early 2007 I would guess they have beaten Microsoft in the first half of this year.
I would be interested to know how many of these sales are users switching to a single voice and email device, versus those people acquiring a BB purely for mobile email. I still find the 1st generation Pearl to be incredibly frustrating as a voice device - limited in-call functionality, poor audio quality and a frustrating UI for dialling...
Reports I saw at the end of last year had BB and Windows for Mobile neck and neck in terms of subscribers. Given the range of products launches from BB in 2nd half of 2006 and early 2007 I would guess they have beaten Microsoft in the first half of this year.
I would be interested to know how many of these sales are users switching to a single voice and email device, versus those people acquiring a BB purely for mobile email. I still find the 1st generation Pearl to be incredibly frustrating as a voice device - limited in-call functionality, poor audio quality and a frustrating UI for dialling...
