I don't have a problem with the technology
It's the aesthetics and greed that *sometimes* annoys me. Now, I'm not an expert in telecomms, but here are my thoughts:

Rather than have one common mast covering a given area, each operator seems hell-bent on having their own tower. I struggle to believe that it's consistently unfeasible to share - they can do it when they're made to (eg. 999/911/112 calls), and they can do it when they want to (effectively subletting to a subsidiary brand). It might even make it cheaper to cover otherwise-marginal areas; if you're considering all-mobile user-numbers rather than just your-network user-numbers.

I've been in situations where I have clear line-of sight to a mast, but not one of "my" network's masts; so I have to struggle with a poor and drop-prone connection. Awkward for trivial information, but alarming for important information.

Case study: Out on a hire boat, some distance from hire depot. Need to call boat company to let them know OK but delayed return - clearly NOT worthy of clogging 999 system. Struggled to get through (1bar reception on my network but 5bar reception on an unusable rival network), yet if I hadn't been able to; I'd possibly have been booked overdue and search/rescue initiated.

And then there's a related problem: So you have 4-5 towers covering a given relatively remote hilly area, but they're sited on the highest and most visually-intrusive spots, usally as plain masts. Surely the same (or even better) coverage could be achieved with 4-5 shared towers spread out, maybe added to existing structures or less-prominent locations. Credit where it's due, I've seen power pylons retro-fitted with transmitters; adding extra functionality to a long-established feature; but this seems to be the exception rather than the norm.

/rant
(The Incredible Sulk Finally remembered his password on, Fri 20 Feb 2009, 5:23, Reply)