[davidlove]

A great weekend in deepest Kent set me thinking. My host was complaining that he was still on 56k dialup with no trigger set and no prospect of broadband for years, yet I had five solid 3G bars on my phone (Voda), better than in many parts of London.

So I was wowing him with streamed newsclips while he fumed over glacial page loading. Probably won't get invited again.

Makes me wonder if the basis for 3G rollout is really by population, as would be logical, or whether it's more random.

Ideas anyone?

[Jon3G]

I think most networks are targeting the areas that may need 3G in the first instance, but when a cell site needs maintaining i beleive the networks make a decision to upgrade or not in out of city areas.

This is just my idea and may not be the real reason, but of course the networks will have some sort of plan

[Ben]

O2 specifically took their GPRS data usage map, identified the areas of highest data consumption, and upgraded those areas to 3G. I'd strongly suspect the other networks have all done the same with varying degrees of conformity mixed with Jon3G's comment about upgrading cells as they need maintaining/upgrading naturally.

I feel for your host, davidlove - having no Broadband access in this day and age is just disgusting. Sounds like next time you stay you'll be taking a Vodafone 3G Datacard rather than a bottle of wine ;)

[Hands0n]

My experience of [3] 3G in Kent is nothing short of excellent. From day one the 3G coverage has been not too bad even with an NEC e606. I had a lay-off for almost a year before I ventured back into 3 territory. The network coverage seen with the e606 prompted me to buy a Motorola a835 which was even better, prompting me to go contract for a year with a Motorola e1000. I've held an uninterrupted voice conversation from Dover to Gravesend and data service (albeit to their portal) has been very fast and constant. Holes exist, but they do also in the other networks.

Perhaps all of 3's directors live in Kent?