This seems like a strange move for Vodafone who, some will argue, could have used the money spent on developing this product on improving their signal strength. I would also question the usefulness of a device that boosts signal strength for mobile phone but requires a fixed phone line. I would have thought that those with a home phone would be less likely to be concerned by lack of a mobile phone signal.
Having said that those in rural areas who struggle to maintain phone signal might be very interested in this product. Those who like to keep their home phone line free of business calls could also benefit from the increases in mobile signal strength. Any opposition is likely to come from those who feel that signal strength improvements should be paid for entirely by their operator.
1 comment:
"Any opposition is likely to come from those who feel that signal strength improvements should be paid for entirely by their operator."
Exactly, why should we the customer have to pay to improve a service we are already paying for and cannot receive.
My family and I have recently moved to a property that has great signal outside the rear and front of the house but cannot receive a signal from any provider within any room inside the house.
I'm using UMA to connect my mobile to the Orange phone service over my broadband and they provide this for free which in my opinion they should be! You could also go one step further and argue with the mobile providers who offer this service to provide compensation for the bandwidth being consumed by their service over your internet connection that may have monthly download limits etc imposed by the ISP providing you with the service.
My wife's phone contract is with Vodafone but after reading this we will be transferring her number across to Orange.
T-Mobile are also providing a free UMA service in the US and are currently conducting a pilot of the scheme here in the UK.
Post a Comment