In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

To be fair I cannot think of a use case where a phone needs gigabit speeds.

No neither can I, and whilst people shout about insane speeds, that isn't the business case for 5G either.

My own observation is I think only Three are grasping the bull by the horns and might end up been the new market leader as a result.

CK Hutchison Holdings (the owner) might be hoping their billions of pounds spent to roll out these additional masts will help, but Three's big problem is they are stuck at 10million customers since not long after launch. Compared with nearly 28 million on O2 for example.

In reply to a post by pluralist:

will worsen.

Assumption questioned. Why will it? Does 4G work there?

We have a large number of Victorian and other multi-storey office blocks and converted warehouses plus loads of new skyscraper apartment blocks already built and increasing. The 5G signal on streets with those old buildings is non-existent. Get into a suqare or green space and it's excellent.

You're assuming 5G will remain at 3.5 GHz. Which is incorrect.

Networks are already rolling out 5G on the 2.1 GHz band (originally for 3G) and on the relatively newly licensed 700, and Vodafone said they will use their 900 MHz for this.

Don't connect frequency/coverage with radio technology Generation.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Actually you do... Apple or Samsung or OnePlus or similar. The "provider" is the maker of the phone in my paragraph. The provider has the software configured to follow the rules in the SIM card from the mobile network operator. (MNO).

I have heard that AT&T and Verizon does it, but then that is the U.S and as far as I know both of the networks only supppy phones and not sim only. Also, from what I have read, they can only do it with Samsung phones. People should not be forced to use 5G if it is no good. What is the point in me having 5G on my phone if half of the time it will not connect and waste my battery?

Some networks (notably Three) are trying to flood the country with additional masts for 5G, but others (notably Vodafone, O2, EE) are adding 5G to the existing mast, often in many cases without visually changing them.

Only so much space on some masts, the one that I get my signal from when I am home is already full, they would have to remove stuff. The ones by the football ground are a different thing as the flood lights are used there, I expect the football club gets a fair bit of cash from having them on there.

Your argument is identical to that in 2012 when people said "I don't need 4G, 3G is good enough", luckily the networks ignored that argument.

but a lot of people don't need 4G, or 5G on a phone, they really don't.
I used 3G on my old phone for a week to see if I would notice the difference, and I did not, it made no difference whatsoever. People tend to use home Wi-fi to send photos or videos due to costs unless they have unlimited data.

I have just changed my sim only contract thing to a 4GB package, not because it has more data than my last package, but because it is cheaper. My last package was 2GB and yet I would be lucky to use 1GB.
I know we are all different and some people will use more, but not all of us do. I use my phone to send text, maybe browse a bit, make some calls and look at emails. If I take photos they are normally for my use and I will transfer them to the nas when I get home, I don't allow the phone to upload them to any cloud.

The UK has a major problem with saying "this is good enough", we should be more like the rest of the world, Singapore, Germany, USA etc, where customers demand more and crucially get more.

They also don't have council planning departments that ignore scientific experts... we have a major problem as a country that our local and central government roles attract people without scientific, engineering or technology backgrounds. This is our biggest crisis

But it is good enough, for some of us, this is the same with fibre where people will be pushed more to fibre and yet we don't need fibre.
Do you really want our phone networks to become like they are in the U.S?

i am fine with what I have got, it does what I need. 4G is reliable, well most of the time, something that 5G is not

Edited by zyborg47 (Sat 11-Mar-23 17:58:19)

In reply to a post by adslmax:

My smart phone is Samsung A53 5G

I hate Samsung phones, i would not have one if someone gave one to me.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

I have heard that AT&T and Verizon does it, but then that is the U.S and as far as I know both of the networks only supppy phones and not sim only.

Incorrect. SIM only has just started with Verizon, and AT&T limit the phones they let you activate a SIM with, and these policies change almost every 6 months. I bought a Verizon SIM only and activated in my iPad without issue. (Purchased in a retail store using dollars in cash).

Also, from what I have read, they can only do it with Samsung phones. People should not be forced to use 5G if it is no good. What is the point in me having 5G on my phone if half of the time it will not connect and waste my battery?

Seriously? Not true, the capability to adjust a menus on a phone based on the fitted SIM is built into core Android. Your phone is designed to constantly seek out new connections, of any technology, 2G/3G/4G or 5G. Having support for a technology doesn’t decrease battery life, it just doesn’t work like that! Your phone uses dramtically more battery power to transmit than it does at idle listening to see what is available.

Only so much space on some masts, the one that I get my signal from when I am home is already full, they would have to remove stuff.

The antenna panels (the bits you see) are designed for certain frequencies or ranges of frequencies. If you have panels that can do 1800 to 2600 MHz, then nothing stops you running 2G, 4G or 5G on those frequencies without touching the antenna. (Some networks may choose to install Massive MIMO antenna for enhanced 5G performance).

I used 3G on my old phone for a week to see if I would notice the difference, and I did not, it made no difference whatsoever.

In 2012 on the T-Mobile and Three networks you could get nearly 30 Mbps on a 3G connection in an area where few other users. Today you’re lucky to get 8 Mbps… because the spectrum has been moved to 4G. This sort of thing happens all the time, and in the main town near me the 3G has been switched off already.

My last package was 2GB and yet I would be lucky to use 1GB.

Because that works for you, don’t assume it works for everyone. I easily use 10GB a month, and I have a SMARTY SIM which is £10/month for 30GB.

yet we don't need fibre.

As everyone has told you, stop assuming what other people need, and stop connecting a technology to a speed. Full optical fibre might just be the way you get your 40 Mbps home internet in 2030. 5G/NR might be the way you get your mobile data so you can use the less than 1Gigabyte for your messages and occasional phone calls in 2030.

Concentrate on what you need in terms of the connectivity, data amount, and price, and let the companies worry about the technology they use to supply you - for the price you want to pay.

Do you really want our phone networks to become like they are in the U.S?

No, we want them like Germany, Austrla and Switzerland to be honest.

i am fine with what I have got, it does what I need. 4G is reliable, well most of the time, something that 5G is not

You have demonstrated you have no idea what you talk about. As you’ve been told many times its the frequency that impacts this, not the protocol. Its like saying HTTPS doesn’t work and FTP does.

Edited by jchamier (Sat 11-Mar-23 18:13:25)

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

I hate Samsung phones, i would not have one if someone gave one to me.

Better than Apple iphone as I hate Apple.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by pluralist:

will worsen.

Assumption questioned. Why will it? Does 4G work there?

We have a large number of Victorian and other multi-storey office blocks and converted warehouses plus loads of new skyscraper apartment blocks already built and increasing. The 5G signal on streets with those old buildings is non-existent. Get into a suqare or green space and it's excellent.

You're assuming 5G will remain at 3.5 GHz. Which is incorrect.

Networks are already rolling out 5G on the 2.1 GHz band (originally for 3G) and on the relatively newly licensed 700, and Vodafone said they will use their 900 MHz for this.

Don't connect frequency/coverage with radio technology Generation.

A couple of misunderstandings there about my post .

I meant specifically (Three) 5G just disappears in that environment. 4G/4G+ is fine. I accept things may improve with moves to lower frequencies but even then I have my doubts.

Other network providers may well do better in these parts of Manchester city, but I won't be fitting second SIMs in my phone to find out.

As others have said, currently 5G isn't a necessity on phones anyway. I certainly don't need it. I shall upgrade my Home (Mobile) Broadband router to it however come July when my minimum term expires. It might improve things for devices including my two phones on my LAN, but mainly only when Apps are being updated, but that's hardly a necessity.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Incorrect. SIM only has just started with Verizon, and AT&T limit the phones they let you activate a SIM with, and these policies change almost every 6 months. I bought a Verizon SIM only and activated in my iPad without issue. (Purchased in a retail store using dollars in cash).

I don't live in the states, I don't intend to go there, so they can do what they want, but from what I heard Verizon is useless and just another one of those huge companies that think they can do what they like

Seriously? Not true, the capability to adjust a menus on a phone based on the fitted SIM is built into core Android. Your phone is designed to constantly seek out new connections, of any technology, 2G/3G/4G or 5G. Having support for a technology doesn’t decrease battery life, it just doesn’t work like that! Your phone uses dramtically more battery power to transmit than it does at idle listening to see what is available.

As far as I remember, the menu where I can turn on and off 4G on my phone is in a different place than on a Samsung, so a sim would have to send that info back to the network provider

i doubt very much if they will stop people turning off 5G on their phone, they never stopped people turning off 4G, maybe in a few years when 5G becomes the norm

The antenna panels (the bits you see) are designed for certain frequencies or ranges of frequencies. If you have panels that can do 1800 to 2600 MHz, then nothing stops you running 2G, 4G or 5G on those frequencies without touching the antenna. (Some networks may choose to install Massive MIMO antenna for enhanced 5G performance).

I realise they can operate at a wide range of frequencies, but I did not know they could change them to run 5G, I thought the hardware would need to be different.

In 2012 on the T-Mobile and Three networks you could get nearly 30 Mbps on a 3G connection in an area where few other users. Today you’re lucky to get 8 Mbps… because the spectrum has been moved to 4G. This sort of thing happens all the time, and in the main town near me the 3G has been switched off already.

Just done a test, about 10Mb/s on 3G and for most part that is fine, can even play music with from a streaming service and also stream videos. I don't understand this need for 4K on a tiny phone screen. I used to have less than that on my home broadband and still watched HD content.
4G I get about 32Mb/s that is indoors. 5G can't be picked up indoors here as I had a friend over who has a phone with 5G over here last week and they could not get 5G and yet according to the Vodafone site as they are on Vodafone, the signal is good indoors and outdoors here., It seems like they have not really tested

As everyone has told you, stop assuming what other people need, and stop connecting a technology to a speed. Full optical fibre might just be the way you get your 40 Mbps home internet in 2030. 5G/NR might be the way you get your mobile data so you can use the less than 1Gigabyte for your messages and occasional phone calls in 2030.

Sorry, that should have been I don't need fibre, not we. I don't think I will be bothered in 2030, if I am still alive I will be 63ish, I am more interested in the now. By 2030 they will no doubt bring some over technology that they will say is better than 5G. You say stop connecting technology by speed, but that is what people do and that is what providers do. Most adverts for 5G and fibre is always about the speed. Go onto a website from a provider and again it is all about the speed.

Concentrate on what you need in terms of the connectivity, data amount, and price, and let the companies worry about the technology they use to supply you - for the price you want to pay.

For me, it is about getting something that works for as little costs as I can and hassle. If I get a 5G capable phone, and it is not working as it should then that is hassle, so better to switch off 5G. Fibre is hassle with people having to come in and fit it and from what I have heard from people having problems, I am better off with FTTc

have demonstrated you have no idea what you talk about. As you’ve been told many times its the frequency that impacts this, not the protocol. Its like saying HTTPS doesn’t work and FTP does.

i know it is the frequency, but it is still rubbish, if 5G can't get past building, or inside buildings then it is rubbish.

At the end of the day, my phone works for me and I will keep it as long as it stays working, if the battery starts having problems, then I will have a look at getting the battery replaced, normally I go and buy another phone, I normally keep my phones for around 4 years if I can, this one is just over 2, I thought I had it longer, but was told last week it is only 2 4G phones are still being made and sold.
you never know what happens in the future, but for now I will keep what I have, I have also decided to stay on FTTC as well.,

In reply to a post by adslmax:

Better than Apple iphone as I hate Apple.

I don't really like Iphones, I doubt I will ever get one, out of my price range for what I would pay for a phone. Samsung's phones are full of bloat, also, everyone has a Samsung, I like to be different.


I got the Oppo as it was a good offer at the time, it had good specs. I am not a fan of any modern smartphone to be honest, they are bulky, have a ton of lenses on the back, a silly aspect ratio and either have a notch or a pin home on the front. If my old Huawei did not stop working, I would still be using that, a nice compact phone that did what i required.

In reply to a post by pluralist:

[[/quote]A couple of misunderstandings there about my post .

I meant specifically (Three) 5G just disappears in that environment. 4G/4G+ is fine. I accept things may improve with moves to lower frequencies but even then I have my doubts.

Three are already using their new 700 MHz spectrum for 5G, which should easy cover more than any of their existing 4G transmissions. (They are also using it for 4G in areas with high load)

From yours (and Adrian's posts) its not about the "G" its about the transmission. If it can be heard by your phone and your phone can be heard by the receiver. If either way fails, the connection fails.

Other network providers may well do better in these parts of Manchester city, but I won't be fitting second SIMs in my phone to find out.

Apparently a tiny number of people have two SIMs, more people in the UK have second phones supplied by employers.

As others have said, currently 5G isn't a necessity on phones anyway. I certainly don't need it.

I suspect if you got it free you would just ignore it, not go out of your way to put up a concrete barrier preventing you from using the empty lanes.

But forget the "G" its about capacity. We had the same discussion in 2011/2012 when everyone said 4G wasn't required.