Investment in 4G vs. Coverage - serious question (not a troll)

Forums › New Zealand Mobile and Wireless › Investment in 4G vs. Coverage - serious question (not a troll)

aros71

122 posts

Master Geek

#116211 22-Apr-2013 09:47

So it seems the race is on to build 4G networks now, which is good because everyone needs more bandwidth, right?

Wait a second... I have a Galaxy S3 and over my 3G connection, I can stream music, watch YouTube videos, tether to my laptop and Teamviewer to my office PC fullscreen with little to no lag. Where I have coverage, that is.

Remind me why I need 4G again?

Tell you what I would like though. Some coverage at Castlepoint, my favourite holiday spot. Among others.

If my mobile provider said "You have a choice: more coverage outside the cities, or 4G in the city, which would you prefer?" - I'd choose the coverage.

Are we investing in 4G because there's a need for it? Or just to keep up with overseas with their higher population density and less mountainous terrains?

Just a thought...

1 | 2 | 3

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#803491 22-Apr-2013 09:54

Think about the growth of 3G packet switch traffic over the last 12 months? Not too far off in the close future the spectrum and networks are going to start choking, spectrum is not finite

4G / LTE makes better use of the spectrum a carrier has to use, Mobile Coverage is not static either I can tell you now the coverage foot print today is going to change in the next 8 weeks and then the following 8 weeks again and so on ................

Many new RBI sites are 4G / LTE 700Mhz ready just waiting for the spectrum and devices

NzBeagle

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#803538 22-Apr-2013 10:22

I remember being content with 2G data, and I suppose a lot of eftpos providers are still content with it and based on the 2G expansion tweets from JohnR every now and then, I'd say coverage is still growing. I think anticipation of future uses will create need for it, as it did with 3G. Phones updating in spec, 1080p screens that can cater to 1080p streams?

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#803543 22-Apr-2013 10:26

increasing coverage has huge diminsihing returns. getting the first 80% coverage probably costs about the same as getting the next 5%. Given telcos are up to 97% (population) getting a further 1-2% would just be hideously expensive.

Also, 4G isn't about the speed at all really (despite the adverts claiming it). It's really about spectrum efficiency. It means Telcos will be more able to cope better with the masively increasing demands for more data (not just per person, but more people actively using data)

aros71

122 posts

Master Geek

#803546 22-Apr-2013 10:27

s'pose... but am not entirely convinced. I'd have thought that urban wifi (such as Wellington's CBDFree) might be the answer. I use that on my iPad since it's a wi-fi only one.

I'd like some coverage in that 4km long train tunnel on the line from Porirua to Wellington too... wonder how easy it is to provide coverage in tunnels? I think there's repeaters in the Terrace tunnel so maybe it could be done

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#803565 22-Apr-2013 10:37

They are not repeaters in the terrace tunnel they are actual cellsite

wellygary

8312 posts

Uber Geek

#803573 22-Apr-2013 10:53

NzBeagle: I remember being content with 2G data, and I suppose a lot of eftpos providers are still content with it and based on the 2G expansion tweets from JohnR every now and then, I'd say coverage is still growing.

There are a whole lot of smart power meters being installed that use GSM to call home, As us humans go to 3 and 4G the robots are taking over the old space.

Also to the OP, I think that Castlepoint in within RBI coverage, so why would VF install something short term until the RBI rollout gets there?

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#803736 22-Apr-2013 14:49

Simple answer

3G is inherently a circuit switched based technology with IP in many ways being a bolt on.

4G is a fully IP based.

Yes 3G may seem fine for data but it's a limited technology in mansy ways - packet loss due to HSPA+ hard handovers is one classic example. Speed isn't the key feature of 4G, it's all about capacity and capability.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#803746 22-Apr-2013 15:21

aros71: s'pose... but am not entirely convinced. I'd have thought that urban wifi (such as Wellington's CBDFree) might be the answer. I use that on my iPad since it's a wi-fi only one.

I'd like some coverage in that 4km long train tunnel on the line from Porirua to Wellington too... wonder how easy it is to provide coverage in tunnels? I think there's repeaters in the Terrace tunnel so maybe it could be done

It is not easy to put coverage into train tunnels. Apart from the equipment costs you also need to shut down the train network to do this as you can't just put in a detour while the work is done. You also have to deal with interference from the electric trains.

Also, compared to a tunnel like the Terrace tunnel there just aren't that many people passing through using their phones so it would be hard to justify the costs.

billgates

4705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#803758 22-Apr-2013 16:01

sbiddle: Simple answer

3G is inherently a circuit switched based technology with IP in many ways being a bolt on.

4G is a fully IP based.

Yes 3G may seem fine for data but it's a limited technology in mansy ways - packet loss due to HSPA+ hard handovers is one classic example. Speed isn't the key feature of 4G, it's all about capacity and capability.

Does that mean that VOIP calls like Skype/SIP based one's over 4G will be crystal clear and there will be no loss in quality or calls will not drop during handovers from tower to tower when traveling providing you are always in 4G coverage?

Do whatever you want to do man.

nickb800

2715 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#803766 22-Apr-2013 16:15

graemeh:
aros71: s'pose... but am not entirely convinced. I'd have thought that urban wifi (such as Wellington's CBDFree) might be the answer. I use that on my iPad since it's a wi-fi only one.

I'd like some coverage in that 4km long train tunnel on the line from Porirua to Wellington too... wonder how easy it is to provide coverage in tunnels? I think there's repeaters in the Terrace tunnel so maybe it could be done

It is not easy to put coverage into train tunnels. Apart from the equipment costs you also need to shut down the train network to do this as you can't just put in a detour while the work is done. You also have to deal with interference from the electric trains.

Also, compared to a tunnel like the Terrace tunnel there just aren't that many people passing through using their phones so it would be hard to justify the costs.

Minor point here, but I would have thought that there would be more demand in railway corridors/tunnels than road corridors/tunnels. Most car journeys have no passengers, and the driver shouldn't be doing very much with their phone while driving (not watching youtube I'd hope!) whereas in a rail tunnel you have potentially hundreds of people (during peak times) who could be using their phone to watch videos, stream music or using 3G to do work on their laptop.

Still, I'm sure that if it was a viable idea then at least one network would have implemented it by now.

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#803767 22-Apr-2013 16:18

Building / expanding mobile networks costs real $$$ and they are not cheap to deploy and maintain and also permits would be required like building any cell

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#803772 22-Apr-2013 16:23

nickb800:
graemeh:
aros71: s'pose... but am not entirely convinced. I'd have thought that urban wifi (such as Wellington's CBDFree) might be the answer. I use that on my iPad since it's a wi-fi only one.

I'd like some coverage in that 4km long train tunnel on the line from Porirua to Wellington too... wonder how easy it is to provide coverage in tunnels? I think there's repeaters in the Terrace tunnel so maybe it could be done

It is not easy to put coverage into train tunnels. Apart from the equipment costs you also need to shut down the train network to do this as you can't just put in a detour while the work is done. You also have to deal with interference from the electric trains.

Also, compared to a tunnel like the Terrace tunnel there just aren't that many people passing through using their phones so it would be hard to justify the costs.

Minor point here, but I would have thought that there would be more demand in railway corridors/tunnels than road corridors/tunnels. Most car journeys have no passengers, and the driver shouldn't be doing very much with their phone while driving (not watching youtube I'd hope!) whereas in a rail tunnel you have potentially hundreds of people (during peak times) who could be using their phone to watch videos, stream music or using 3G to do work on their laptop.

Still, I'm sure that if it was a viable idea then at least one network would have implemented it by now.

Agreed, if it was viable someone would have done it.

Don't forget though with a road tunnel you get a constant stream of people going through but with a rail tunnel it will be more like 8 trains per hour (4 in each direction).

I haven't been able to quickly find any info on traffic volumes through the Terrace tunnel.

Perhaps they put the coverage in for when people are stuck in a jam and they want to ring to say they are delayed :)

NzBeagle

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#803774 22-Apr-2013 16:25

graemeh: Perhaps they put the coverage in for when people are stuck in a jam and they want to ring to say they are delayed :)

I would've said it was more to do with people dropping calls, handsfree of course, while going through the tunnel?

BlueShift

1692 posts

Uber Geek

#803786 22-Apr-2013 16:42

NzBeagle:
graemeh: Perhaps they put the coverage in for when people are stuck in a jam and they want to ring to say they are delayed :)

I would've said it was more to do with people dropping calls, handsfree of course, while going through the tunnel?

Because Cellphone Network Engineers have their own carparks, so don't take the trains?

Firebreaker

269 posts

Ultimate Geek

#803789 22-Apr-2013 16:48

aros71: So it seems the race is on to build 4G networks now, which is good because everyone needs more bandwidth, right?

Wait a second... I have a Galaxy S3 and over my 3G connection, I can stream music, watch YouTube videos, tether to my laptop and Teamviewer to my office PC fullscreen with little to no lag. Where I have coverage, that is.

Remind me why I need 4G again?

Tell you what I would like though. Some coverage at Castlepoint, my favourite holiday spot. Among others.

If my mobile provider said "You have a choice: more coverage outside the cities, or 4G in the city, which would you prefer?" - I'd choose the coverage.

Are we investing in 4G because there's a need for it? Or just to keep up with overseas with their higher population density and less mountainous terrains?

Just a thought...

With this mentality we would be in the stone age. We don't "need" anything.

I hope Vodafone will deploy DC LTE as soon as it is possible to advance tech.

1 | 2 | 3