5G

[davidroxburgh]

I gather that by late 2022 O2, my mobile provider, should have 5G in a fairly wide number of cities etc. By then an iPhone 12 second hand may be more affordable.

Is it likely that using a 5G iPhone in the van would be a realistic alternative to a Mi-Fi and antenna or do you think campsites and wild spots are most likely NOT to get 5G? A Mi-Fi etc does not appeal, as I have no technical skills and have just gone over to Lithium so not much enthusiasm for other stuff solely for the van.

An iPhone 12 would have regular use - have a larger screen and can of course be hotspot for the Firestick etc.

 

[KUSKUS]

5g available in Shropshire by 2024 if we're lucky , can't even get 3g in rural areas now !

 

[Phill D]

problem will still be 5g will be mainly cities for a long while yet. by the time its rolled out to cover more rural areas we are likely to be on iphone 20+

 

[davidroxburgh]

OK - back to the drawing board!

 

[Langtoftlad]

A bit like the megapixel race for cameras... more isn't necessarily better.

5g is faster... but do you actually need the speed? Or can make use of it?
A lambo is faster than a fiesta, undoubtedly but on the M25.... ???

So more to the equation that network speed

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[davidroxburgh]

My thinking was that as we seem to stream more and more plus netflix etc, and watch live TV less and less, that faster speed would help reduce/overcome buffering?

 

[olley]

This is from Google so outside of city's forget it .

The shorter wavelength means 5G can carry a lot of data much faster than 4G, but it also means a much shorter range. 4G wavelengths have a range of about 10 miles. 5G wavelengths have a range of about 1,000 feet, not even 2% of 4G's range.

 

[Langtoftlad]

My thinking was that as we seem to stream more and more plus netflix etc, and watch live TV less and less, that faster speed would help reduce/overcome buffering?

True... but I get 40+ mega thingies on 4g... Netflix only requires approx 8 for high def.
More about data capacity than network speed.

My understanding is that it is more important for future stuff like driverless cars etc
I personally don't see a need to be an early adopter of 5g

 

[Happy Jim]

5G is using the same/similar frequencies that we have now and mostly riding on the back of the 4G network infrastructure. Once we get true 5G infrastructure plus the new MM Wave frequencies then we’ll see truly bonkers speeds but only over very short distances.
5G users are currently consuming ~3 times as much data per month as a 4G user, so people are certainly finding more use for it already, but to langtoflads comment about “do you need it”…..I’m not seeing any delay with 4G, so what would 5G give me?…dunno, but I still want it and will grow into it no doubt!

Jim

 

[Langtoftlad]

I’m not seeing any delay with 4G, so what would 5G give me?…dunno, but I still want it and will grow into it no doubt!

...and that's exactly what the providers rely on to pay for it all...
Don't know what it does, Don't know if I need it... but I want it... my precious...

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Happy Jim]

It’s a very cunning plan, much like the last cunning plan of 3G to 4G ….but faster (oh wait)!

 

[Waveski]

Oddly enough I accessed 5G on the south coast of England this summer, apparently its being installed for the Coast Guard? Also received it occasionally in London; it hasn’t changed my life!

 

[Richard n Ann]

As more and more people stream and download video at ever increasing quality we'll all have to upgrade to 4g, 5g and 6g etc. It won't get any faster for the individual but it means the system will cope with the capacity required... I think

 

[cyberyacht]

5G ? When touring, especially in remote areas, range is king surely?

 

[Phill D]

5G ? When touring, especially in remote areas, range is king surely?

only if you are near one of the few cities that have it.. cant see it being useful to motorhomers for many years yet.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[cyberyacht]

That's what I was saying. 4G or even a strong 3G signal is likely to be more reliable over a larger area.

 

[Nirvanauk]

How do you know when you are getting a 5G signal? Asking for a friend.

 

[Phill D]

How do you know when you are getting a 5G signal? Asking for a friend.

your phone if capable of receiving it will show 5G next to the signal strength indicator.

 

[Guigsy]

Vodafone want to kill off 3G as soon as possible to free up spectrum for more 5G frequencies. They also want to retire 2G (yes, it's still going), but lots of equipment (including insurance approved trackers) are still using the technology, so it might be around for a few more years yet.

5G isn't going to provide a massive improvement to speeds. Although it does have a bunch of features that can deal with interference much better, so you'll probably see speed gains in marginal areas. The main benefits 5G bring are they can get far more devices on each mast. So there'll be less chance of you having a great signal but still no data because it's spread between too many phones. Operators can squeeze more customers on to each mast. So there's real incentive for mobile operators to get people on to 5G.

Problem is, at the moment most of the 5G signals that people are using are 'interim' spec 5G, which is still connected to the old 4G hardware and backhaul in the masts. So at the moment it provides almost no benefits at all.

 

[autorouter]

The shorter wavelength means 5G can carry a lot of data much faster than 4G, but it also means a much shorter range.

The speed (data bandwidth) depends on the frequency, but the range depends on the power. If they've made the regulations so the power is restricted then that's how it is, but it's not an automatic thing.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Guigsy]

The speed (data bandwidth) depends on the frequency, but the range depends on the power. If they've made the regulations so the power is restricted then that's how it is, but it's not an automatic thing.

Yeah, but the high frequency stuff has poor penetration, so is useless for longer range comms.

 

[olley]

One web and BT are going to collaborate in connecting remote areas of the UK, so they might be an option in the future and musky's Starlink is thinking of mobile phone usage.

 

[autorouter]

The 2.4GHz band is absorbed by water and water vapour in the atmosphere, which is why (a) it's used by microwave ovens, and (b) the band was made available for short-range local phone comms, because no-one else wanted to use it. Higher frequencies aren't absorbed like that. Any high-frequency wave will be mostly line-of sight anyway, which is why they have masts on high hills and buildings.

 

[Minxy]

There's nothing wrong with using a 4g (or even 3g) phone, we have 4g phones and they are more than capable of providing what we want. One thing that I recall happened when 4g first came 'on the market' is that loads of people went over to it and diluted the signal which meant that they didn't get the 'benefit' they thought they would whilst those who stayed with 3g with less users actually got better speed/signal without doing anything.