Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovejedd
I’ve seen speedtest results of people getting gigabit LTE speeds.
|
That's usually aggregating 20MHz channels when you are at the boundary of two sectors, or getting good signal from multiple masts. It's not sustainable economically, it's only possible when few people are using the system.
The 4G needs bigger channels and multiple channels for broadband speeds and STILL can't reliably provide a connection.
The higher 5G speeds are needing special bands, no use for everyday access. It's no faster than 4G LTE in the same size channel.
Spectrum is very limited below 2.5 GHz. You need 900 MHz to 2.5 GHz for effective mobile. It's stupid greed and unwillingness to put more masts that has had the sell off of TV spectrum to Mobile. It means Terrestrial TV is crippled from having newer and better services and the 700 MHz to 900 MHz approximate spectrum gives too big, uncontrollable cells, a cheap lazy way of rural deployment that makes lots of money auctions and then annually in licence for Regulators.
Most of 5G is NOT about everyday faster speeds (it may seem fast at first due to few users). It's about better backend infrastructure and a charged version of WiFi for open plan offices, café's, stadiums, race tracks, etc where the 3 GHz to 10 GHz bands work as they are line of sight and short range.
This was produced 11 years ago when it was stupidly proposed in Ireland to spend over €150 million funding a 3G rollout instead of broadband. The company that "won" simply used £150 m to fund masts their licence said they were already supposed to have, years earlier.
http://www.radioway.info/comparewireless/
There are only a few suppliers supplying the Mobile companies. Many of the mobile companies have outsourced everything technical as well as customer support. They are basically now retail marketing operations. So there is almost no technical expertise.
Motorola is gone, their telecom division sold to Nokia Networks, which ate Siemens Networks. There is Ericsson, ZTE (Chinese Government), Huawei (Chinese Independent), Nokia. The USA companies only do the data network parts like switches / routers (Cisco). They need to replace all the Mobile operator's kit every years. ZTE has Africa tied up (often taking mines, ports etc as security and bartered food or minerals as ongoing payments).
I've worked in a senior technical role in three Telecoms companies. I've met with Nokia-Siemens-Networks (as it was then), Mitel, Tellabs, Technomen, Irish Regulator and Minister, T-Mobile in Europe.
The media has unrealistic (to the real world with economic numbers of subscribers) Peak figures, or even "lab" tests. While none is actually a lie, most of what you read is totally misleading.
You know Huawei hardly gets contracts in China or any country under China's sway? ZTE gets that.
Netflix or YouTube etc needs real broadband. NO mobile wireless system can reliably provide even decent SD video CONSISTENTLY.