From: Bella Jones on 2 Feb 2010 03:35 Flavio Matani <flavio_mataniTAKETHISBITOUT(a)mac.com> wrote: > Graeme <Graeme(a)greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > > In message <1jd5so8.99vcyf1p6zti6N%me9(a)privacy.net> > > me9(a)privacy.net (Bella Jones) wrote: [...] > > > > > > > > Good point. I think my IQ drops year by year. > > > > > > Although the objection to that is that you pay something for the phone > > > when you go less than �45, anywhere. > > > > > > > > > Easy sum, is the price more than 90 quid? If so go for the �45/m and > > drop it after 9 months. If less than �90 then you gamble on only > > wanting the lower tariff. > > That was my calculation, and what I did at the time. Thanks for all the input, everyone. Of course I still haven't made my decision! I would go with O2 but am conerned about the coverage factor. Everyone says such different things. -- bellajonez at yahoo dot co dot uk
From: Woody on 2 Feb 2010 03:46 Bella Jones <me9(a)privacy.net> wrote: > Flavio Matani <flavio_mataniTAKETHISBITOUT(a)mac.com> wrote: > > > Graeme <Graeme(a)greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > In message <1jd5so8.99vcyf1p6zti6N%me9(a)privacy.net> > > > me9(a)privacy.net (Bella Jones) wrote: > [...] > > > > > > > > > > Good point. I think my IQ drops year by year. > > > > > > > > Although the objection to that is that you pay something for the phone > > > > when you go less than �45, anywhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Easy sum, is the price more than 90 quid? If so go for the �45/m and > > > drop it after 9 months. If less than �90 then you gamble on only > > > wanting the lower tariff. > > > > That was my calculation, and what I did at the time. > > Thanks for all the input, everyone. Of course I still haven't made my > decision! I would go with O2 but am conerned about the coverage factor. > Everyone says such different things. I have never had *no* signal anywhere I have been in london where I should have had it, ie, out of the tube. There are a few times where the data has been on slow, near old street station, parts of the overground tube etc, but nothing that would particulalry put me off getting them. If I had your choice, I would go for O2. I don't really much liek them, but I just feel that vodafone are likely to put some silly restriction on it (this could be my own prejudice against them though) and orange i have heard dont have the network for it. And my friend has just got an orange one and had a problem setting up her MMS, I don't know why it needed setting up if she just bought it. -- Woody
From: Jon B on 2 Feb 2010 09:01 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > Jon B <black.hole(a)jonbradbury.com> wrote: > > > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > On 29/01/2010 12:17, Geoff Berrow wrote: > > > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:00:15 +0000, me9(a)privacy.net (Bella Jones) > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Still tossing up between O2 and voda. > > > > > > > > I'm with O2, daughter is with Voda. > > > > > > > > Voda seems to have much better coverage. > > > > > > I would imagine it depends on the area but in general I would assume > > > they do. Do they have the visual voicemail and data plans? > > > > > > I have noticed since having an iPhone that my texting rate has shot up > > > as it works much better - do they give you enough of that? > > > > That an there is no indication of how long your text is. > > I find that a bit of a pain, as a friend of mine had an old phone that > wouldn't recieve a multi-part text. Ie, not just not get the first part, > just get a blank text. > > Luckily she has just broken her phone and got an iPhone, so I guess it > is not a pain anymore! Yeah not many people have a phone that can't handle multipart texts, and they are the types I wouldn't send a multipart text to, generally because they're unlikely to even know how to get into the texts if their phone is that old. -- Jon B Above email address IS valid. <http://www.bramley-computers.co.uk/> Apple Laptop Repairs.
From: zoara on 3 Feb 2010 11:17 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > > > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > > > > > On 2010-01-30 10:33:22 +0000, D.M. Procida said: > > > > > > > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > >>> I doubt I've sent as many as fifty in my life! > > > >> > > > >> Oh get with the program grandad. > > > > > > > > Make it 51, I sent another last night. Hip to the beat, Daddy-o! > > > > > > Many happy returns you old codger! > > > > Thank you. It was my 40th birthday. I spent the evening in the > > emergency > > medical admission unit. Not on my own account, I should say, but I > > still > > had other plans. > > Happy birthday for that and hope it worked out ok. > I have never done that on my birthday, only christmas eve in Motreal. > At > least it makes for a memorable event. It certainly doesn't sound like a fun way to spend an important day. Happy big four-oh anyway, Daniele. -zoara- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: Bella Jones on 3 Feb 2010 16:51
Graeme <Graeme(a)greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: > In message <1jd5so8.99vcyf1p6zti6N%me9(a)privacy.net> > me9(a)privacy.net (Bella Jones) wrote: > [...] > > > > Yeah, I'd recommend getting a lower tariff than you think you want. > > > > They'll happily let you upgrade to a higher-priced tariff right away if > > > > you chose the wrong one, but you'd have to wait a while to downgrade. > > > > There would always be expenses in choosing the wrong tariffs, but I > > > > reckon they'd work out to be less by choosing a too-low tariff than a > > > > too-high one. > > > > > > Good point. I think my IQ drops year by year. > > > > Although the objection to that is that you pay something for the phone > > when you go less than �45, anywhere. > > > > Easy sum, is the price more than 90 quid? If so go for the �45/m and drop it > after 9 months. If less than �90 then you gamble on only wanting the lower > tariff. OK, about to go with O2 probably - but can you explain this calculation? Where does the �90 come from? I am almost dyscalculic. -- bellajonez at yahoo dot co dot uk |