Handsets "failing network testing" ?

long_b

Is this just retail shop guy making up a reason why an operator doesn't carry a particular model (N86 and Meteorin this case), or does it really happen ?

Why would a major handset "fail" a network test ?

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

FergalBoards.ie

The firmware on the phone has to negotiate a mixture of technological products that are all hazily in the consumer mind as "GSM".

It's a bit like Windows. You see Windows, the Intel processor sees Windows, but what Windows sees is "ahhh, what's that? It says it's a network card, but why is it doing this?"

The answer in the Windows space is that Windows tries desperately to keep everything running first, then tries to isolate any problems in such a way as the machine doesn't fall over.

Eventually, hopefully, the hardware manufacturer rolls out a driver update and everything works better.

It's pretty much the same with GSM networks. Any GSM phone will perform a minimum functionality (like Safe Mode on Windows). After that technologies must communicate with each other who they are and how they work.

It would be suicide for, say, Nokia, to release a handset that didn't work well with Vodfone in the UK. So before the handset is even launched they make sure it works well on major networks in major markets.

There are two problems in Ireland.
Our network operators delight in venting their independence on the consumer by designing networks their own way. It would probably be more realistic in terms of handset compatibility and other issues to basically clone a big network in a big market. This should be easy with globalization for networks like Vodafone/O2/Three...but, hey, that would be making globalization work rather than Irish management doing what they damn well please.

The other is that the testing process is very very slow in Ireland.
So even handsets that work perfectly don't have that fact established in good order.

After the initial rush to get a handset out and launched in UK/FR/DE, manufacturers will often polish up the firmware to make it more compatible with more networks. That's why sometimes handsets that fail are passed later.

Also sometimes minor network twiddles will make a handset work.

And some people suspect that sometimes it's just an excuse masking commercial/political reasons. That there are no major issues that couldn't be sorted without contacting the handset manufacturer or performing slight network twiddles, but it doesn't suit.

long_b

FergalBoards.ie wrote: »

The firmware on the phone has to negotiate a mixture of technological products that are all hazily in the consumer mind as "GSM".

It's a bit like Windows. You see Windows, the Intel processor sees Windows, but what Windows sees is "ahhh, what's that? It says it's a network card, but why is it doing this?"

The answer in the Windows space is that Windows tries desperately to keep everything running first, then tries to isolate any problems in such a way as the machine doesn't fall over.

Eventually, hopefully, the hardware manufacturer rolls out a driver update and everything works better.

It's pretty much the same with GSM networks. Any GSM phone will perform a minimum functionality (like Safe Mode on Windows). After that technologies must communicate with each other who they are and how they work.

It would be suicide for, say, Nokia, to release a handset that didn't work well with Vodfone in the UK. So before the handset is even launched they make sure it works well on major networks in major markets.

There are two problems in Ireland.
Our network operators delight in venting their independence on the consumer by designing networks their own way. It would probably be more realistic in terms of handset compatibility and other issues to basically clone a big network in a big market. This should be easy with globalization for networks like Vodafone/O2/Three...but, hey, that would be making globalization work rather than Irish management doing what they damn well please.

The other is that the testing process is very very slow in Ireland.
So even handsets that work perfectly don't have that fact established in good order.

After the initial rush to get a handset out and launched in UK/FR/DE, manufacturers will often polish up the firmware to make it more compatible with more networks. That's why sometimes handsets that fail are passed later.

Also sometimes minor network twiddles will make a handset work.

And some people suspect that sometimes it's just an excuse masking commercial/political reasons. That there are no major issues that couldn't be sorted without contacting the handset manufacturer or performing slight network twiddles, but it doesn't suit.

Thanks very much - most imformative !

Given the above, would you have any qualms buying a handset that hasn't "passed network testing" on Meteor but is available on O2 ?

chrislad

99 times out of a 100, you'll be fine. The only exception was, as far as I can recall, a few years ago, Vodafone had some new 3G Samsung handsets (ZV510 I think), that would not work on Meteor with the Vodafone firmware on them.

jimmycrackcorm

FergalBoards.ie wrote: »

It's a bit like Windows. You see Windows, the Intel processor sees Windows, but what Windows sees is "ahhh, what's that? It says it's a network card, but why is it doing this?"

The answer in the Windows space is that Windows tries desperately to keep everything running first, then tries to isolate any problems in such a way as the machine doesn't fall over.

Eventually, hopefully, the hardware manufacturer rolls out a driver update and everything works better.

It's nothing like that. It's a commercial decision. At this stage the GSM/3G hardware and firmware is pretty solid.

FergalBoards.ie

I wouldn't have any qualms, once you accept that the phone may barf slightly more on more complicated functions, like, say, - but only using this as an example - video calls, on the Meteor network.

The way these things work, in reality, is it would probably barf occasionally on O2 as well, but not enough to "fail". It's "bleeding edge" functionality typically causes this scenario.

So it would be a minor difference really.

As well as that the phone's routine software updates and the network's routine updates will make the phone more compatible too.

Let me emphasize, you will AT ALL TIMES, have basic GSM functionality. 2G, texting, WAP etc.

I would buy, and have bought, phones that fail network testing.

I have had no major issues. Some of the phones were known to crash a bit anyway, and probably crashed a bit more...but it's no big deal.

I doubt Meteor would publicly say btw that the phone FAILED network testing if there wasn't SOME issue. That would be a very foolish thing to say.

But often it would be minor.

Rsaeire

A prime example would be the Sony Ericsson W810i on Vodafone. As Vodafone couldn't get java games to function correctly, they didn't initially release the handset through their stores or online, CPW stocked the Vodafone version exclusively; I'm not sure how long this lasted.

keeluz

Sorry all, but I have to day that you're all way off the mark here.

Just because Nokia day a handset has passed their quality tests, this doesn't mean networks should pass them.

The networks are the one's who take it in the neck when handsets are faulty. Networks (some) do a massive amount of testing before releasing handsets, as they are the ones who will suffer if the handsets has faults.

We all remember handsets having inherent faults (some SE's spring to mind). We also know that manufacturers often release software updated to fix bugs (why are these needed if the handsets passed their quality tests)???

I think Meteor are right to test handsets and not release them if they feel their customer will not be happy with the experience (and possible move to another network).

Yet another case of people on this forum have stupid consprirancy theories about mobile networks. Childish to say the least.

Pineapple_Boi

any GSM phone should work on any GSM network, simple as. all the transceivers come from a few huge factories who make them for all the phones in the world and they are all tested to GSM standards before the manufacturer can sell them

sure 3 and the like tend to put a lot of firmware branding and other crapware on their phones to get a higher revenue per customer but really anything they say about 'network testing' is a complete and utter load of bollox

the phones are grand, maybe they won't load 3's planet 3 crapware or any of that but they definitely do work on the network. this is why we have standards - manufacturers make standard compliant handsets and operators build standard compliant networks.


just another scare tactic to put people off from buying an unlocked phone

FergalBoards.ie

We sure can also all remember examples of networks happily dishing out handsets that were very unstable, while failing handsets that worked reasonably well even when they failed tests.

Guess you don't remember that, huh?

The decision of a network to fail a handset is really based on whether they want to take the customer service calls that the "fit" of handset and network will produce.


There's no conspiracy theory.

If Meteor say it fails testing, I would feel there is at least some issue.

It may be one that's easily resolved, but they couldn't be bothered...or it could be that they bought some ludicrous system for some reason, the equivalent of a VIA processor in PCs. Technically nothing wrong with that, but you just know down the road it's going to cause hassle.

If it's a handset from a major manufacturer, however, you can be certain that it's not rubbish. It has some combination of features that on a reasonably configured network with reasonable marketing as to what to expect and reasonably skilled and trained service staff is a worthwhile product.

Once they put it on the network, they are, however, responsible for ensuring all the features work. Possibly with workarounds until some bugs get ironed out, nevertheless it is their responsibility.

If they don't, whether because they can't or won't be able to make it work, they have a service nightmare on their hands.

Saying otherwise is suggesting that Nokia or SE release handsets to major network in industrialized countries that are useless and the networks are happy with this situation.

Now that would be a conspiracy.

Pineapple_Boi

FergalBoards.ie wrote: »

It may be one that's easily resolved, but they couldn't be bothered...or it could be that they bought some ludicrous system for some reason, the equivalent of a VIA processor in PCs. Technically nothing wrong with that, but you just know down the road it's going to cause hassle.

My VIA processor has served me well for years. most of these non-notable handset manufacturers don't build the radio interface for the handsets themselves. they buy a single-chip transceiver unit and plonk that onto their phones. all these are tested, planet 3 might not work but good riddance to planet 3

FergalBoards.ie

Pineapple, that's not totally fair.

3 for example need branded software in order to make their Skype offer work properly.

I wish indeed there WAS a way around this, because I would dearly like to avail of this offer on an unlocked phone.

I can't, however. They are telling the truth. They ARE trying to save the consumer money by using their economies of scale, special relationship etc.

In other cases, it's a matter of someone in the company saying "we're not upgrading that software ahead of schedule because of the Nokia xxxx. If people are really interested in that functionality they can be the Blackberry xxx which we support".

Whether the reason for this is small/bad budgets, a poor decision in the first place by senior management, my pal Joey works for the software support contractor and it doesn't suit him...I don't know. Possibly a combination of all three.

No one is questioning the ability of these phones to provide basic GSM functionality. As you say, that's a given.

Edit: As for VIA processors. Glad it worked for you. I can give specific examples of USB interfaced hardware that only works on Intel. It's not the way the world should be, but it's the way the world is. Big business is supposed to be realistic and "real world" when they make decisions. For an individual consumer, VIA may be an excellent choice. Large companies though should be wary of nonstandard solutions.

Pineapple_Boi

FergalBoards.ie wrote: »

Pineapple, that's not totally fair.

3 for example need branded software in order to make their Skype offer work properly.

I wish indeed there WAS a way around this, because I would dearly like to avail of this offer on an unlocked phone.

I can't, however. They are telling the truth. They ARE trying to save the consumer money by using their economies of scale, special relationship etc.

In other cases, it's a matter of someone in the company saying "we're not upgrading that software ahead of schedule because of the Nokia xxxx. If people are really interested in that functionality they can be the Blackberry xxx which we support".

Whether the reason for this is small/bad budgets, a poor decision in the first place by senior management, my pal Joey works for the software support contractor and it doesn't suit him...I don't know. Possibly a combination of all three.

No one is questioning the ability of these phones to provide basic GSM functionality. As you say, that's a given.

i remember a thread from quite a while back that you could get skype to work by installing certificates on the phone. the application was just an ordinary symbian s60 thing

what we have seen in recent year is a trend towards the proprieterisation of phones. more tie-in between network and handset and a general shunning of unlocked/unbranded phones

this will be bad news for all of us in the long run. people buying into a more expensive network because they sell a particular model of phone with their branded firmware and sim lock is definitely not good

FergalBoards.ie

I largely agree with you Pineapple.

I just thought the reference to Three was a bit unfair. I try to be fair.

I have "previous" on this forum of looking for a solution to the Three firmware issue. Nothing I tried worked

It may have at some stage, or it may work on other phones.

I guess Three may be just being very awkward, but it's such a good deal that I could see that perhaps they set some kind of throttle or access some special ports or something like that with Skype to make it work.

I would have to work hard to ascribe a bad motive to Three globallyfor allowing free Skype calls, and in other markets they make their software available freely to people with unlocked handsets.

So I guess the most likely explanation is someone in Three Ireland decided to use a repurposed butter churn as an antenna to look after a buddy and that messes up the software used in other countries....and they don't have the resources to make the software available independently in a small market like Ireland.

I guess it's possible Three globally decided to gouge the Irish consumer, but I'd prefer to think that it was just local incompetence caused this situation.

I wholeheartedly agree with you in general though. Branded software is often just some way of a marketing guru tries to gouge extra money from you.

Not always though.
I can't bring it to mind right now, but even Vodafone, a network I don't really like...I remember vaguely coming across a reason for their modding software at one stage too.

It's not always a gouge.
Or maybe I'm just naieve!

Oafley Jones

Pineapple_Boi wrote: »

any GSM phone should work on any GSM network, simple as. all the transceivers come from a few huge factories who make them for all the phones in the world and they are all tested to GSM standards before the manufacturer can sell them

sure 3 and the like tend to put a lot of firmware branding and other crapware on their phones to get a higher revenue per customer but really anything they say about 'network testing' is a complete and utter load of bollox

the phones are grand, maybe they won't load 3's planet 3 crapware or any of that but they definitely do work on the network. this is why we have standards - manufacturers make standard compliant handsets and operators build standard compliant networks.


just another scare tactic to put people off from buying an unlocked phone

+1

Network Testing can also be code for we need time to shovel older phone models into the Irish Market as they're no longer going to sell in larger markets such as Britain.

FergalBoards.ie

Trust me guys, I'm all in favor of the consumer demanding global standards.

But I really do think Meteor would be mad to say that if there was not SOME issue. They might laugh at the anger of the Irish consumer but laughing at the legal dept of Nokia, SE etc would sure sober up the party.

Now, a call to make sure that these networks DO comply with modern standards, that would be good.

What we have right now is a vicious circle, not a virtuous one.

Irish consumers are too forgiving of being handed out the slops of the technology table. The networks don't suffer because what they lose in revenue from people using advanced features, they make up by selling cast off handsets and on a personal level for management, lack of accountability for their decisions.

Walkman

Networks do text handsets and there handsets do sometimes fail handset testing. Can't remember the model number (a samsung) but 3 were supposed to take it in but didn't as it would not go back onto their 3g network when it was on 2g. Also the Nokia 6600 fold and slide kept dropping off their 3g network onto 2g when in full 3g coverage so they didn't take these in either. All networks are concerned with user experience that is why they test the handsets and if they fail they don't stock it.

keeluz

Oafley Jones wrote: »

+1

Network Testing can also be code for we need time to shovel older phone models into the Irish Market as they're no longer going to sell in larger markets such as Britain.

You really don't have a clue what you're on about.

Just because the handset might make voice call on the GSM network, this doesn't mean that that the network is happy with the full functionality of the handset (battery performance, radio sensitivity, software stabilty, 2G/3G handover, etc, etc)

Meteor has nothing to do with any network in the UK, yet this thread with people wondering why they claim to test handsets.

Grow up and stop trying to be a smartarse!

FergalBoards.ie

He said it CAN ALSO be code for..

He never said Meteor had anything to do with a UK network.

I assume, as obviously did most people, he means that manufacturers will make sweeter deals on handsets that the UK networks no longer want, or want badly.

Are you saying that Meteor is the sole guardian of consumer interests on things like battery life over and above Voda UK, Three in Austria?

Grow up!

It's to do with some mismatch between the network and the phone's operation.

Tom Dunne

Ok guys, keep it civil.

keeluz

FergalBoards.ie wrote: »

He said it CAN ALSO be code for..

He never said Meteor had anything to do with a UK network.

I assume, as obviously did most people, he means that manufacturers will make sweeter deals on handsets that the UK networks no longer want, or want badly.

Are you saying that Meteor is the sole guardian of consumer interests on things like battery life over and above Voda UK, Three in Austria?

Grow up!

It's to do with some mismatch between the network and the phone's operation.

Sorry, but you're simply wrong and you don't understand what is involved here.

To summarise, the question is, do we believe operators test handsets in the interest of customer experience before offering them to customers, or is this all a smokescreen for not wanting to release handsets?

Rsaeire

keeluz wrote: »

Sorry, but you're simply wrong and you don't understand what is involved here.

To summarise, the question is, do we believe operators test handsets in the interest of customer experience before offering them to customers, or is this all a smokescreen for not wanting to release handsets?

It can be both. If you ring a network's customer care team and ask them about the release of a particular handset, can you guarantee that they haven't been told that to say that it hasn't past testing and therefore the network isn't going to carry it? I'm not saying this is an everyday occurrence or even something that is done regularly, but you can't categorically state that it has never or will never been done by any Irish mobile network.

Kensington

keeluz wrote: »

Sorry, but you're simply wrong and you don't understand what is involved here.

To summarise, the question is, do we believe operators test handsets in the interest of customer experience before offering them to customers, or is this all a smokescreen for not wanting to release handsets?

I have bought three seperate handsets, through Meteor, in the past two years and they have ALL had major functionality issues. Clearly, there is something fundamentally wrong with their "testing", if the purpose of testing is purely to weed out unstable handsets...