Giffgaff - good or bad?

T

theflyingwasp

Guest
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.
 
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.
 
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

New member
Jan 15, 2009
38
0
0
Visit site
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

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
theflyingwasp said:
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

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2007
992
22
18,895
Visit site
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).
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
professorhat said:
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

Well-known member
Dec 28, 2007
992
22
18,895
Visit site
MajorFubar said:
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)
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
...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.
 
MajorFubar said:
...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

Well-known member
MajorFubar said:
...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

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
6
0
Visit site
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.
 

daveh75

Well-known member
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,
 

micky045

New member
Nov 26, 2013
3
0
0
Visit site
bigboss said:
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.

I agree with this, I've been with GiffGaff for about a year after my iPhone contract expired and had no problems what-so-ever. I pay £12.00 for 250 mins / unlimited texts / unlimited 3G data. I also just have a recurreing payment taken every month which I am not tied into. I would recommend these to anyone who isn't wanting to be tied to a contract
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts