back to article Will rush for New Radio compromise 5G quality?

The US operators have ended their long love affair with sub-1 GHz spectrum, which was so important to their LTE coverage roll-outs, and are leading the world in harnessing high frequency bands to address the challenge of the expected capacity demands of the 5G era. While regulators and operators in some areas – many in Europe …

  1. Mage Silver badge
    Flame

    Spectrum

    The sub 1GHz, especially 800MHz and lower is cells that are too big for high capacity, high speed data. Only a cheap way to extend voice coverage at expense of capacity.

    Above 2GHz, toward 3.5GHz radio spectrum becomes progressively more Line Of Sight. So 3.5GHz is only much good for roof top aerials or femto cells.

    Above the 4.5GHz / 6GHz you are looking at only open plan offices pico-cells or air-point per room WiFi.

    I've used 10GHz band terrestrial Fixed Wireless Broadband and both Ku Band (11GHz to 12GHz approx) and Ka Band (19GHz to 21GHz) gear, not just as a user, but both as RF Equipment design engineer and also evaluation of systems.

    28GHz etc is fantasy outside of a room or open plan.

    Very much in the media, stuff by Regulators etc is nonsense.

    Mobile is viable between 900MHz and 2600MHz bands. The 2300MHz is the only useful new band in Europe.

    Most of the existing 900, 1800 and 2100 spectrum is massively underutilised:

    1) Cells too big

    2) Split between multiple operators. Using one shared Infrastructure, or even "roaming" where an operator actually HAS coverage, would almost double capacity!

    Regulators need to be forbidden to auction as this encourages weak licence conditions to make auction price go higher. Auctions are the enemy of efficient spectrum use.

    Conventional badly applied theories of Competition benefiting Consumer damage Mobile performance and competition as it's NOT like making baked beans. Spectrum is too finite. They need to be only competing for customers by offering shorter contracts, better deals from the same wholesale properly regulated spectrum.

    Subsidy of handsets by subscription is hidden hire purchase.

    Also hidden is the overcharging on voice and text, subsidising data.

    The regulators have totally messed up.

    The FCC is messing it up for the rest of the world too, as does greed of royalty earners like Qualcomm wanting to sell new model chips for new bands. The proposal to have LTE on WiFi bands is driven by chip vendor greed and to an extent Mobile Operators (Femto cells without an expensive licence or bothering to co-ordinate channels).

    700MHz and 600MHz are madness as the cell size can't be controlled and even larger than 800MHz which is poor for cell size.

    You can't beat the laws of physics.

  2. Christian Berger

    Why don't they simply make different standards?

    I mean, IoT and Youtube have vastly different requirements. Why are they all trying to stuff it into the same standard, but with incompatible sub standards?

  3. DerekCurrie
    Holmes

    The usual reminder: REAL 4G arrives with LTE-Advanced

    Anything called '4G' that isn't LTE-Advanced is not actually 4G. Instead, it's merely a marketing ploy to sell high end 3G technology.

    "5G" is similarly an act of imagination, not actually having any agreed upon specification. Meanwhile, it took many years for real 4G to be deployed after the spec and sample hardware were available. Real 4G still hasn't been deployed in the majority of the world. It's of course going to take several more years before we see real '5G' deployed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G

  4. Just Another SteveO
    Headmaster

    High Frequency Band?

    "While regulators and operators in some areas – many in Europe, for instance – see the centimeter and millimeter wave bands as a second phase, adding targeted dense capacity after a more conventional sub-6 GHz network has been built out, the US carriers are impatient to start using the underpopulated high frequency bands."

    Hmmmm - I shall look forward to new phones using the 3-30MHz range. Antennas might be a bit big though...

    </pedant>

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021