In reply to a post by pcoventry76:

Thanks for putting my mind at rest. I am with 3 and always will be so happy to wait for them.

I think the agreement with EE for the transfer of spectrum last year sounds 3 can start using in Sept 2013. They might use their new spectrum earlier - but yours (and my) iPhone 5's can't use that.

Edited by deleted (Fri 22-Feb-13 18:42:19)

But it is within ASA power to ask them to stop, particularly if they consider it misleading.

Advert talks of HSDPA as Ultrafast and they then advertise a Samsung Galaxy SIII Ultrafast model, which turns out to be the LTE model.

Does not the normal SIII do HSDPA?

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

But it is within ASA power to ask them to stop, particularly if they consider it misleading.

Agreed - but I don't think its misleading.

I actually think the government are silly for using terms such as "superfast" and "ultrafast" and should stick to real facts, such as "speeds faster than 40megabit/sec" or similar. That would solve the whole problem.

Advert talks of HSDPA as Ultrafast and they then advertise a Samsung Galaxy SIII Ultrafast model, which turns out to be the LTE model.

Three's entire website says Ultrafast and then has rings around DC-HSPA and LTE, the HSPA+ is shown as current speeds that are NOT ultrafast.

See here, direct link to the picture:
http://www.three.co.uk/ThreePortal/Satellite?blobcol...

Which is on this page:
http://www.three.co.uk/Discover/Built_for_internetting

The HSPA+ speeds are upto 14megabit (ie, iPhone 4s) and upto 21megabit (everything else). The DC-HSPA speeds are upto 42megabit, and the LTE speeds are anything above this upto 100megabit.
(HSDPA as you write is the old 1.8meg spec, long since superseded).

Does not the normal SIII do HSDPA?

I believe the LTE S3 is the model I9305 and the non LTE version is the I9300.

The I9305 does do DC-HSPA 42megabit spec. The standard I9300 does NOT do DC-HSPA 42megabit, it stops at the 21megabit speed of HSPA+. So in this case Three are being consistent.

To be fair to Three they've been selling the 21megabit spec HSPA+ for 2 years, on over 90% of their coverage, when the competition (esp O2 and Vodafone) have been living with the 7meg spec.

Android phones can download a useful app with a desktop widget that shows you the protocol in use over the connection, I have a Nexus 4 purely for this and WiFi scanning as I prefer my iPhone 5 for everyday use.

Data from GSM Arena's comparison tool:
http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=5001&i...

NB: I'm NOT a three customer, I have a T-Mobile SIM only contract on an unlocked iPhone 5, and my office gives me a Vodafone service which I have in my old iPhone 4.

(Edit - added links to Three's site)

Edited by jchamier (Fri 22-Feb-13 19:45:43)

Acronym overload from my side.

So because its mobile they can advertise alongside superfast Infinity at up to 76 Mbps, with their ultrafast at 14 Mbps. I assume that is what 14 MB per second.

No scope for confusion at all I guess then.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Acronym overload from my side.

Sadly the mobile industry has more acronyms than the wired industry

But the networks don't invent these, their either ETSI or the 3GPP organisations. As always with technical terms they are quite similar in naming and quite different in how they work.

So because its mobile they can advertise alongside superfast Infinity at up to 76 Mbps, with their ultrafast at 14 Mbps. I assume that is what 14 MB per second. No scope for confusion at all I guess then.

Of course no confusion, one is using wires and one using wireless. The courts in this country assume people have a modicum of common sense and can distinguish between. I wouldn't compare mobile services that I can walk down the road using with my FTTC that is physically installed in my flat, or my mate's Virgin Media coax.

No different to N wireless saying "300 megabit" on the box and running slower than 100megabit ethernet - no?

Yes, they're using the "marketing department" lazyness in MB meaning megabit/sec - or Mbps as you write. (I try to always write megabit/sec in full to solve this in my posts, but I suspect I forget a lot).

Not really. Looking at the EU site and searching for "ultrafast" sees some mention of 100mbit/sec speeds, some of 50mbit/sec speeds and some of 24mbit/sec speeds.

There's no such thing as an 'acceptable definition', and I'll be damned if some (supra)govermental organisations suddenly can dictate what it is.

In reply to a post by mr_mojo:

There's no such thing as an 'acceptable definition', and I'll be damned if some (supra)govermental organisations suddenly can dictate what it is.

I agree.

I note the word 'ultrafast' doesn't even appear in the online OED:
http://oxforddictionaries.com/spellcheck/english/?q=...

nor in Chambers online:
http://www.chambers.co.uk/search.php?query=ultrafast...

Perhaps because its a contraction of two words and should be spelt ULTRA and FAST separately.

OED says of Ultra = "an extremist"
OED says of Fast = "taking place at high speed; taking a short time"

So I don't think MrSaffron's attempt to define the word usage to meet some UK qango (BDUK) requirement is going to fly. At least not in this thread

Could you please tell me the name of that Android app?