22 posts / 0 new
Last post
theflyingwasp's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: 26/02/2013 - 21:33
Posts: 639
Giffgaff - good or bad?

I'm sick of paying for phones ,I'm buying the iPhone 5s pay as you but it's the sim that's the problem .i want the cheapest sim possible 100 minutes and 250 texts will do me but it's the data that's the problem ,you can get sims with 100mb of data a month but it's not enough and the sims that give you 250mb a month are £20+ 

giffgaff are doing a sim for £7.50 but I've never heard of them? 200mins unlimited texts and 250mb a month.

bigboss's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 37 min ago
Joined: 25/03/2009 - 21:40
Posts: 12732
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

Giffgaff is excellent; my entire family is on it since 3 years. O2 owns it and it has own awards. So far, there have been 2 outages when O2 network was down. There have been discussions on Giffgaff on this forum in the past.

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/networks-and-contracts/giff-gaff-vs-three-for-an-iphone

You can even look at Tesco mobile, which also uses O2 network, and offers 4G.

bigboss's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 37 min ago
Joined: 25/03/2009 - 21:40
Posts: 12732
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

Whichever network you choose, be it Giffgaff, Tesco mobile, Vodafone etc. go through Quidco for cashback. For example, you'll get £5 cashback from Giffgaff, or £130 cashback from Vodafone on a 12-month SIM-only plan etc.

http://www.quidco.com/search/retailers/?search=Mobile&sort_by=relevance

Crocodile's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 33 min ago
Joined: 15/01/2009 - 10:44
Posts: 771
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

O2 don't own Giffgaff, they simply provide the network.

First thing the OP needs to do is ascertain which network provides the best coverage where he will use the phone. And not by the largely useless online checkers but by picking up free SIMS & checking for himself. Especially if, as it appears, data coverage is important.

The three best deals I know of at the moment are Giffgaff (O2), Ovivo (Vodafone) & Three's 321. Our family is on Giffgaff for the free calls/texts between Giffgaff users.

MajorFubar's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 59 min ago
Joined: 03/03/2010 - 00:01
Posts: 3437
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

theflyingwasp wrote:
100 minutes and 250 texts will do me but it's the data that's the problem

Fully agree there. Seems quite hard to find a plan which is geared more towards data than texts and minutes. I think if just one of the major networks came out with 'data only' or at least 'data biased' plans in a big way, I'm sure it would be immensely popular, particularly with owners of tablets and ipods.

I mean who realistically sends (eg) 5000+ texts a month? It's just numbers on paper to impress the gullible, and the providers know their customers won't ever use the quota. I'd much rather have unlimited data, 100 minutes and 250 texts.

professorhat's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 50 min ago
Joined: 28/12/2007 - 11:34
Posts: 11034
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

But it's the data that takes up all the mobile bandwidth - calls and texts are pretty much irrelevant next to a 3G, let alone a 4G connection, hence why the higher data plans are the more expensive.

I recently switched to Three from Vodafone after an incredibly rude customer services representative insulted my wife (she will be switching as soon as her contract runs out next month). £6.90 for 200 mins, 5,000 texts and 500 MB per month ( link) is virtually half the price Vodafone could offer, and the Three network is actually better down here in Worthing.

That's for a 12 month contract, but it's £9.90 for the same if you want to just run a monthly plan (i.e. so you can pretty much leave when you want to).

 

The owls are not what they seem...

daveh75's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 2 hours ago
Joined: 31/07/2008 - 18:54
Posts: 8339
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

Its stupid they still differentiate between callls , texts and data when its all bits

 

 

 

 

bigboss's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 37 min ago
Joined: 25/03/2009 - 21:40
Posts: 12732
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

Crocodile wrote:

O2 don't own Giffgaff, they simply provide the network.

Yes it does.

Giffgaff is owned by Telefonica:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giffgaff

Telefonica operates under the brand name of O2 in the UK:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telefónica

MajorFubar's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 59 min ago
Joined: 03/03/2010 - 00:01
Posts: 3437
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

professorhat wrote:

But it's the data that takes up all the mobile bandwidth - calls and texts are pretty much irrelevant next to a 3G, let alone a 4G connection, hence why the higher data plans are the more expensive.

Yeah I know.  I don't know if the long-term benefits of the infrastructure they're putting in place to deliver 4G will mean that we will all get unlimted data cheaply, but in the short term, I would rather they had improved the 3G service with better coverage and greater bandwidth than just introduce a faster service for the sake of it. There's never a time where I haven't found 3G quick enough: I'm lucky to live in an area which is well-served by 3G coverage, and the 4.5Mbps download and 1Mbps upload I get on my phone is easily fast enough for any use I can think of on a mobile device. But coverage is still patchy in places, non-existant in others, and restrictions on data-consumption is starting to look anachronistic, like it did ten years ago on home broadband then one company (was it BT?) finally broke the mould and offered 'unlimited' downloads (with fair-usage restrictions), and they all had to follow.

professorhat's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 50 min ago
Joined: 28/12/2007 - 11:34
Posts: 11034
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

MajorFubar wrote:

I don't know if the long-term benefits of the infrastructure they're putting in place to deliver 4G will mean that we will all get unlimted data cheaply

I've just noticed on my Three plan, I can get "all-you-can-eat-data" for an extra £3 per month for the rest of my contract. So that makes it £9.90 per month for 200 mins, 5,000 texts and unlimited data. Pretty good if you ask me...

(NB - this doesn't allow tethering i.e. using phone to allow browsing on a wifi tablet or laptop - so all are aware. Tethering seems to be an extra £5 per month)

 

The owls are not what they seem...

MajorFubar's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 59 min ago
Joined: 03/03/2010 - 00:01
Posts: 3437
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

...yep and I have to admit that's something I don't fully understand either. If my phone has the hardware and software to generate a short-range wireless hotspot I don't understand what the hell it's got to do with my cellular-network provider and why it's chargeable.

bigboss's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 37 min ago
Joined: 25/03/2009 - 21:40
Posts: 12732
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

MajorFubar wrote:

...yep and I have to admit that's something I don't fully understand either. If my phone has the hardware and software to generate a short-range wireless hotspot I don't understand what the hell it's got to do with my cellular-network provider and why it's chargeable.

I think they don't want users to abuse their unlimited data by replacing their home broadband with it.

daveh75's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 2 hours ago
Joined: 31/07/2008 - 18:54
Posts: 8339
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

MajorFubar wrote:

...yep and I have to admit that's something I don't fully understand either. If my phone has the hardware and software to generate a short-range wireless hotspot I don't understand what the hell it's got to do with my cellular-network provider and why it's chargeable.

Because of contention, and the assumption anyone tethering will be hammering the network.

MajorFubar's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 59 min ago
Joined: 03/03/2010 - 00:01
Posts: 3437
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

In which case it all falls back to the comment I made a few posts further up that I wish the network providers had invested in better networks with improved coverage and greater bandwidth than introduce something new that is (IMO in most instances) needlessly faster than 3G and of benefit only to a comparatively small number of people with new phones. But that would probably have been more expensive to roll-out.

bigboss's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 37 min ago
Joined: 25/03/2009 - 21:40
Posts: 12732
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

But then '4G ' makes better headlines than 'improved 3G', allowing network operators to charge a premium.

daveh75's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 2 hours ago
Joined: 31/07/2008 - 18:54
Posts: 8339
RE: Giffgaff - good or bad?

4G will have better coverage than 3G does (ofcom learning from their mistake with the 3G auctions)

The operators are at least upgrading backhaul from the 2/100 Mbps microwave/copper links used for 2/3G to Gbit fiber, but contention always has, and is going to be an issue, when you operate in a market where the consumer expects to pay peanuts,

Pages

Log in or register to post comments