While Australia’s communications regulator determines a new standard for how mobile coverage maps are presented, Telstra has responded to accusations that its network doesn’t cover as wide an area as it claims.
In a blog post authored by Shailin Sehgal, Telstra’s Group Executive of Global Networks and Tech, the telco claims that its competitors want to use the new standard to “downplay the large difference between their network and [Telstra’s].”
“We know that our customers use over 1 million square kilometres of coverage today that sits below the -115dBm threshold,” a Telstra spokesperson told GadgetGuy. “Our concern is that if this coverage were removed from the comparable map, we may need to find a different way to help our customers understand that it exists because we know it works, without an external antenna.”
Telstra also claimed that 1.5 million of its customers use coverage below -115dBM every month, citing internal data.
Telstra responded by saying that its third-party testing is “vastly more extensive” than TPG’s tests submitted to the ACMA. Furthermore, a Telstra spokesperson explained that “no map, from any provider, can guarantee mobile service at a particular time or exact location”.
“That’s because all our maps are predictions based on extensive modelling and real-world testing.”
In contrast to the ACMA’s proposal to define mobile signal strength weaker than -115dBM as ‘no coverage, the National Audit of Mobile coverage uses a different set of metrics. This audit, commissioned by the Australian Government, refers to signal strength of -122dBm for 4G, and -126dBm for 5G, as ‘modest’. Anything weaker than -122dBm and -126dBm is classified as ‘limited’.
Telstra points to this audit as proof that “usable coverage exists below -115dBm,” the current lower-end threshold proposed by the ACMA.
It raises questions about what the finalised standard, due by 31 March, will look like before it takes effect on 30 June. Telstra supports the ACMA’s goals of simplifying coverage maps for Australians, albeit with tweaks to what data gets included.
For some years now, Sonos has built a reputation for making high-quality speakers, albeit with some software missteps along the way. As good as the brand’s speakers are, they err on the pricier side. Today, Sonos announced two new speakers, including one that sits at a more affordable price point.
One is the Sonos Era 100 SL, a $289 microphone-free version of 2023’s brilliant Era 100 speaker. It’s fundamentally the same device but without the option of voice controls. The Era 100 SL is also over $100 cheaper than the original launch price of the base Era 100 (which now retails for $319).
Sonos’ other device is a brand-new speaker: the Sonos Play. Advertised as the brand’s “most versatile speaker”, it’s designed for listening to music at home and on the go. At $499 in Australia, the Sonos Play is significantly more affordable than the $799 Sonos Move 2, a speaker also known for its portable design.
The Sonos Era 100 SL is a cheaper version of the original model. Image: Sonos.
Like the rest of the core Sonos ecosystem, the Play connects to other speakers via Wi-Fi. It means you can connect two speakers to create a stereo setup, and also cast audio using AirPlay 2 and Spotify Connect.
In a new addition for Sonos, the speaker also supports connecting up to four Play or Move 2 speakers together via Bluetooth. If you’re hosting an outdoor party or somewhere without reliable Wi-Fi connectivity, you can still get a pseudo surround sound system up and running.
Inside the Play are three amplifiers, two tweeters, one midwoofer, and dual passive radiators. It’s also more weather-resistant than the Move 2, with an IP67 rating, compared to IP56. Sonos claims the speaker lasts up to 24 hours of nonstop music playback on a single battery charge.
Vodafone’s parent company, TPG Telecom, has hit out at Telstra’s network coverage claims as part of a submission to Australia’s communications regulator that could change the way telcos show coverage information to consumers.
When you look at a phone network coverage map, you might expect it to clearly explain where you will and won’t get a signal. But coverage maps are predictive by nature, and some telcos use different approaches when presenting this information.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) wants to simplify coverage information by making telcos display a standardised set of service categories ranging from “good” service to “none”. It recently closed submissions for the draft Telecommunications (Mobile Network Coverage Maps) Standard 2026, which will help inform the finalised standard scheduled for 31 March.
TPG Telecom’s submission directly questions Telstra’s network coverage map, following TPG’s claim last year that Telstra allegedly misled customers with inflated coverage statistics over a 15-year period. As part of its submission, TPG Telecom alleges that its engineers could not make phone calls in areas covered by Telstra’s “full coverage” map.
What does the ACMA’s draft standard say?
ACMA’s efforts seek to bring parity to Australian network coverage maps. Per its consultation paper, “current industry practices vary significantly”.
“Differences in modelling approaches, underlying assumptions and presentation conventions mean that coverage maps are not directly comparable between operators,” the ACMA’s document said. “This weakens the usefulness of coverage maps for consumers and undermines broader policy goals such as improving transparency and supporting informed choice.”
Limitations with the predictive techniques used in coverage maps are another issue the ACMA wants to tackle. To help consumers understand the likelihood of getting phone coverage in any given area, the regulator proposed four categories of phone signal:
Good
Moderate
Usable
None
In this example, ‘good’ refers to “reliable” and “high-quality” connections for voice calls, SMS and data. Go down the list, and ‘Usable’ means “reduced reliability and variable performance”.
Under the currently proposed standard, these categories would correspond with signal strength, measured in decibel-milliwatts (dBm). ‘Good’ is used when the signal is greater than -95dBm, while a signal strength between -95dBm and -105dBm fits the ‘Moderate’ category. Based on the ACMA’s current draft, ‘no coverage’ includes signals weaker than -115dBM.
The ACMA acknowledged that signal strength isn’t the only factor impacting whether a phone call will go through. Different phones have different antenna technologies, and being indoors or outdoors also has an impact.
TPG Telecom’s issue with Telstra
Telstra largely agrees with the ACMA’s goal of making information about phone coverage clear and consistent. The telco’s submission expresses agreement with consistent mobile coverage standards designed to help consumers, with some caveats.
Telstra’s biggest issue is with ACMA setting the ‘no coverage’ limit at -115dBM. Via its submission, Telstra claims that “around one million square kilometres of predicted outdoor coverage”, equal to “an area greater than the entire state of NSW”, would no longer be included on its coverage map if -115dBM was used as a cutoff point.
According to Telstra, usable mobile service is still possible on lower signal strengths. It recommended that -122dBM be used as a “lower boundary” instead, claiming it distinguished “basic but usable outdoor service from areas with genuinely no coverage.”
Conversely, TPG Telecom supports -115dBM as the lower end of what it suggested be a two-tiered network coverage system of “good outdoor” and “usable outdoor”. But it stopped short of agreeing that signal strength weaker than -115dBM should be referred to as ‘no coverage’.
Instead, it recommended that mobile network operators display a disclaimer so that consumers know it might still be possible to connect, pending factors like hardware and location.
TPG claimed that its engineers couldn’t connect to Telstra in areas designated as ‘full coverage’ on the telco’s map.
Also included in TPG Telecom’s submission to the ACMA is the claim that its engineers couldn’t reliably connect to Telstra’s network across “over 20 unique locations” included on Telstra’s “full coverage” map.
Telstra splits its coverage map into two distinct views: initial view and full coverage view. Areas depicted on the initial view are deemed sufficient for calls, texts, and video streaming. Telstra classifies full coverage as being “ordinarily sufficient for voice calls, texting and web-browsing, although higher-data activities involving video or high-resolution graphics may be slower or less consistent”.
Telstra’s initial view coverage map (left) vs the full coverage map (right).
Network performance in this latter category is the crux of TPG’s issue with Telstra, while Telstra argues that the ACMA should be more lenient in its coverage definitions.
Once the ACMA confirms the new standard by 31 March, it will be put into practice starting on 30 June.
As a reviewer, you often gravitate to the best model in a range. However, a review is all about helping you find the best product for doing a job. Robots that help with menial tasks around the home have become the hottest-selling items, whether a vacuum, a lawn mower, or, in this case, a pool cleaner.
I recently looked at the Aiper Scuba X1, the brand’s mid-range pool-cleaning robot, and found some surprising results.
The Aiper Scuba X1 is a cordless pool cleaner designed to clean the floor and walls, including the waterline. It is suitable for use in both fresh and saltwater pools.
The X1 uses smart navigation to create a crisscross pattern within your pool to ensure all areas are cleaned. The robot has a range of sensors that can detect obstacles up to 6m away, ensuring it navigates around them. Able to circulate 25,000 litres of water an hour through its suction, sand and pebbles are no issue and get sucked into the 5-litre filter basket. An included micro-mesh basket can be added and removed as needed, and goes one step further by collecting dust and pollen down to 3µm.
Beyond suction power, there are four brushes that not only aid in transporting dirt, but also brush the surfaces of your pool to ensure a better clean. This cleaning also occurs on the pool walls up to 5cm above the water line. With exposure to air, this is the most likely place for algae to grow, and the X1, with its horizontal scrubbing, helps keep it in check.
Horizontal scubbing above the waterline. Image: Angus Jones.
The robot is controlled via buttons on the top of the unit or via the Aiper app. Using the app, you can also set up a schedule. There are four modes: ‘Smart’, which cleans walls and floor, ‘Floor’, ‘Wall’ and ‘Waterline’. If your pool is an irregular shape, like a kidney, you can adapt the cleaning path to better suit the shape and ensure an intelligent clean.
Note that the connection with the app only works when the robot is out of the water, unless you purchase the optional HydroComm Pro ($680), which adds underwater communication, including sending instructions to the surface for retrieval, water-quality analysis, and chemical recommendations.
An optional caddy ($449) is also available, allowing you to wheel the robot away from the pool for storage or to keep it out of sight.
If you have a 10-metre pool and clean it three times a week in summer over three months, you will save up to 53 hours of manual labour. If you value your time at $50 an hour, then you just saved yourself $2,650. At the time of writing, the Aiper X1 Pro was on special for $1,700. So, the robot essentially paid for itself in two months.
The basket needs regular emptying, and you can remove the fine filter and skip using it on every clean. The basket should also be rinsed with clean tap water after each emptying to remove finer particles that have been collected.
Removable fine filter. Image: Angus Jones.
My friend Bernard’s pool has been cleaned to an inch of its life over the summer, comparing different pool cleaners, including three models from Aiper. His commentary is:
“Having tried a few robot cleaners for our pool, this one has some really great features and is highly effective.”
“A more compact robot than the next level up and much lighter, it’s easy to handle and simple to operate using the Aiper app.”
“Being more compact and lighter means it is really easy to handle and get into the charging dock.”
“The leaf basket is really quite large, which is great for a pool like ours that has lots of large deciduous trees in the back yard and lots of leaf litter.”
“This model also has a really convenient drop-in fine-particle filter for when you need small particles collected and filtered out. This is much better than those cleaners that require installing finer filters by attaching them to the basket.”
“The sensors work really well, systematically moving around the pool to clean all areas.”
“The Scuba X1’s water-edge cleaning mode is quite strong and effective. It has also performed really well on the pool steps, even in the curved areas.”
Cleaning curved areas. Image: Angus Jones.
“We have a lot of leaf litter, and this cleaner has been very effective at clearing it from the pool floor.”
“Combined with the Surfer S2 surface skimmer, the pool is ready to use whenever you’re ready. I haven’t used the leaf rake since we combined these two cleaners.”
“Having the robots has dramatically reduced the number of times I have to clean the cartridge filter as well.”
“The Scuba X1 is a perfect, more compact, lighter cleaner for our smaller-to-mid-sized pool.”
Bernard had previously tested the higher-end Scuba X1 Pro Max, so I asked him which model he would choose. His answer was surprising.
He said the X1, as long as he could also have the Surfer S2 pool skimmer. The Pro Max sells for $3,500, whilst you can purchase the X1 and Surfer for $2,700 (currently on special for $2,280). His reasons are that the X1 is lighter and easier to handle (11kg vs 15kg), the filter box’s fine filter was easier to manage, and the cleaning job was as good. One negative he did mention was the reduced battery life, from five hours to three hours.
Bernard is a busy single parent, and as an observer, the pool has never looked so good, and I am pleased he has got some more time back.
Who is the Aiper Scuba X1 for?
Owning a pool is a big commitment in terms of cost, including ongoing maintenance. Contrary to popular belief, you cannot just jump in anytime you like without a lot of manual labour to keep the pool clean, just like your house.
The Aiper Scuba X1 will suit most Australian backyard pools, incorporating the latest technology and performance without being the Lexus model in the range. It works hard so you don’t have to.
When combined with the Aiper Surfer 2, the duo is formidable, removing leaf litter and insects before they reach the bottom, removing sand and grit from the floor, and scrubbing algae from the sides.
GadgetGuy occasionally uses affiliate links and may receive a small commission from purchased products.
Aiper Scuba X1
Lighter than the premium pool-cleaning robot, the Aiper Scuba X1 proves you don't always need to spend the most to get good results.
If you tried to catalogue every robot vacuum available in Australian stores right now, you’d have a big task ahead of you. There are a lot of robotic devices to choose from. With its latest model, Ecovacs wants to set itself apart by positioning the $2,299 Deebot T90 Pro Omni as the go-to robot cleaner for pet owners.
That’s a lofty goal; as pet owners will tell you, the vacuuming and cleaning requirements — especially for long-haired furry friends — are through the roof. To set the stage for its pet cleaning prowess, Ecovacs demoed the new robot earlier in the year at CES 2026, showing off some big changes to the Deebot range’s vacuum and mop system.
Most notably, the Deebot T90 Pro Omni employs a 27cm mop roller, substantially longer than the roller used in Ecovacs’ previous models. The robot continually washes the mop mid-clean via built-in water nozzles, letting the roller spin at speeds of up to 200RPM to scrub away grimy messes.
Looking at the vacuum, the T90 Pro Omni uses what Ecovacs calls “BLAST technology”. It’s a fun acronym that stands for “Boosted Large-Airflow Suction Technology”. In real-world terms, it refers to larger fan blades and a wider air intake system that Ecovacs says improves vacuuming performance.
On that front, the new robot boasts suction power of up to 30,000Pa. Combined with the larger fan system, it’s a big part of why Ecovacs labels this particular robot as being suited to pet cleanup.
As well as the T90 Pro Omni, Ecovacs also launched a more affordable $1,799 Deebot T80S Omni appliance. Cleaning power, alongside other subtle differences, is the main separating point between the models; the T80S Omni has a maximum of 24,800Pa suction power, while it still benefits from a roller mop system.
In Australia, the Deebot T90 Pro Ommi is available now at major appliance retailers. Meanwhile, the T80S Omni arrives later on 9 April.
Rode has a new piece of equipment out for podcasters and video producers: the RodeCaster Video Core, a device that helps mix video and audio together on the fly.
Priced at $940 in Australia, the Core follows last year’s launch of the RodeCaster Video S, Rode’s version of a compact production desk. The Australian-based audio gear company described the RodeCaster Video Core as combining video switching, recording and streaming with a built-in audio mixer.
Alongside the new device, Rode also announced a new connectivity feature: RodeCaster Sync. It enables connectivity between the Video Core and Rode’s dedicated audio interfaces, like the RodeCaster Pro II and Duo devices. So, if you already have the dedicated audio equipment, you can add video into the equation without entirely replacing your equipment stack.
Designed for podcasts and studio-based video productions, the Video Core supports three 1080p HDMI inputs, two USB-C slots, and two combo jacks that work with inputs like XLR microphones. Streaming directly online is possible through a direct Ethernet connection, in addition to saving files directly to external USB storage.
It’s an interesting device, coming so soon after Rode’s compact video production gadget. While the RodeCaster Video S includes various buttons for scene and input switching, the Video Core seems to be more of a bridging device between Rode’s existing audio interfaces.
One of the potentially helpful features is the ability to switch between media sources and scenes automatically. According to Rode, this works based on audio inputs, so when someone else starts speaking during a two-person recording, the device could automatically swap to a shot focusing on the speaker.
The RodeCaster Video Core is available to pre-order now via Rode’s website. Devices compatible with RodeCaster Sync can update to gain the feature via the RodeCaster App.
Do you really need an expensive Telstra SIM for reliable coverage in Australia, or can a cheaper MVNO plan perform just as well? I put both to the test on a month-long road trip from Sydney to Melbourne to find out.
How mobile networks actually work
A mobile phone works by connecting to cell towers. As you travel, such as when driving in a car, your call is handed off from one tower to the next. Eventually, if you move far enough from populated areas, you will run out of towers and lose coverage.
In Australia, there are three network operators: Telstra, Optus and TPG (Vodafone). Many more phone network retailers sell phone plans without owning their own infrastructure. These companies are called Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs).
Network coverage in Australia
Coverage depends on which operator owns the tower in a particular location. In some remote locations, Telstra may have a tower while Optus or TPG does not. In others, Optus may have a tower, but Telstra may not. Telstra is known for having the best coverage (ie. the most towers) in Australia. Optus and TPG have a sharing agreement, which has substantially increased their coverage.
If you had an Optus SIM and only a Telstra tower is available, you could make an emergency call, but you could not make regular calls or use mobile data (and vice versa).
What is an MVNO?
MVNOs in Australia have a contract with a network operator to use the operator’s cell towers and infrastructure, but own the relationship with the customer, which usually includes billing and customer service. In most cases, network operators do not provide MVNOs the same coverage and data speeds, so they keep a competitive advantage. Countering this, MVMOs offer lower prices for monthly plans.
One exception to this is Boost Mobile, which is now owned by Telstra and offers full Telstra network coverage. Its advantage is lower pricing for the same Telstra coverage.
Boost Mobile v Woolworths Everyday Mobile coverage maps
Boost Mobile coverageWoolworths Everyday Mobile coverage
Most Australians live in a major city or town and rarely venture out to woop woop (aka remote Australia). So the question needs to be asked: Does it really matter if you have a Network operator SIM or an MVNO SIM?
Testing coverage on a Sydney to Melbourne road trip
On a recent trip to Melbourne, I went to test this out, as Melbourne to Sydney is a trip many Australians are likely to make at some time in their lives. I travelled to Melbourne along the coast road via Wilson Promontory and returned via the Hume Highway, detouring into the Victorian High Country.
I use a Woolworths Everyday Mobile SIM and have a Boost SIM in a mobile Wi-Fi router mounted in the car. These SIMs both use the Telstra network.
Over the course of a month, I worked from the caravan using the mobile network for phone calls and internet connection (data). For the most part, I had no issues. I found that in some out-of-the-way towns where I had a good reception, I still had slow internet. This was not a coverage issue, but rather a limitation of how much internet bandwidth had been provisioned to the tower.
The results: Telstra vs Boost vs Woolworths Mobile
When comparing the two SIMs, there was only one location where the Woolworths SIM lost coverage while the Boost SIM still had a signal. This was around the NSW-Victorian border on a very hilly, winding road.
From a data speed perspective, the Boost SIM performed better, but the faster speeds were rarely necessary for my day-to-day usage.
Which SIM should you choose?
Overall, the results of this trip would not change my SIM choices. I like having the Boost SIM for the peace of mind of extra coverage, especially in an emergency, and for providing shared mobile data across multiple devices. My everyday usage is driven by the low cost of using the Woolworths SIM and the 10% off groceries.
In this scenario, Telstra is arguably the loser. While it owns the network infrastructure, its retail plans are the most expensive and offer little additional benefit over alternatives that use the same network.
If I lived in Sydney or Melbourne and never really left either city, and only had one SIM, I would use a cheaper MVNO. In my case, if I were limited to one SIM, the low price and full network coverage of the Boost SIM make it an easy pick.
