5 ms·

They should think about switching on 5G as well. The UK being one of the worst countries for 5G deployment, with totally fake coverage (shows the 5G logo but c

They should think about switching on 5G as well. The UK being one of the worst countries for 5G deployment, with totally fake coverage (shows the 5G logo but connected to LTE). - "On average, 5G users spent 10.1% of the time connected to a 5G network." Ofcom, July 2023 https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/264600/mobile-matters-2023-report.pdf https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/264600/...

have_faith 3y ago
There's a busy area down the road from me that I consistently get a couple bars of 5G signal but the internet is unusable in a 200 metre radius. Sucks for all the local businesses around.
- petercooper 3y ago
  Are you on a network that runs its own infrastructure or an MVNO? I've experienced the same thing a lot, especially on 4G in busy holiday spots, and have been told that apparently MVNO traffic is heavily deprioritised versus that of the primary carrier.
  - have_faith 3y ago
    I'm on O2. The "busy" area is just a normal mini high street. Nothing out of the ordinary.
gumballindie 3y ago
> with totally fake coverage In my region, maps shows full coverage with "excellent" outdoor signal, but I get at most two to three lines on my phone. It's basically a scam.
- fguerraz 3y ago
  The amount of "bars" is irrelevant. You need to check if you're actually connected to 5G and that's very well hidden. (##4636## on android. Anything but "connected" for "NR State" means you're actually connected to 5G)
sp332 3y ago
I thought 5G was mostly about managing congestion. What's the improvement over 4G for most users?
- fguerraz 3y ago
  Well, I've been to Portugal recently, Porto to be precise, they have actual 5G which you can actually connect to, and despite roaming and the amount of tourists, it was night and day: everything loaded instantly, not a single hickup. Back in the UK, I spent last weekend in London, 5G logo always on but not actually connected. I could not even send a message when I was in busy areas. So yes, it helps with congestion, you just don't realise how congested the network is until you've tried the real thing.
  - edf13 3y ago
    The issue here could well be the backhaul... just because you can get 5g to the cell tower doesn't ensure you will have a fast connection from the tower to the core network.
  - bananapub 3y ago
    > Back in the UK, I spent last weekend in London, 5G logo always on but not actually connected on Three? They're famously garbage. I wouldn't suggest anything other than EE or - distant second - Vodafone in London.
    - fguerraz 3y ago
      EE
- rsynnott 3y ago
  I just got a 5G-supporting phone yesterday, and had previously thought the same thing. Then I did a speed test and got 600Mbit/sec. To be honest, LTE was mostly _fine_, but this seems to be generally noticeably better.
  - 3y ago
garblegarble 3y ago
>The UK being one of the worst countries for 5G deployment, with totally fake coverage (shows the 5G logo but connected to LTE). I read the linked PDF and did some searching but I didn't see in what instances networks use a 5G Logo for LTE (although I do recall hearing about something like that in the past)... could you give some more detail?
- Nux 3y ago
  5G is currently NSA (not standalone), it can't be used without 4G/LTE. It needs a 4G connection to anchor itself on, to act as a supplementary band. This is also known as ENDC. This is an intermediary step to proper full blown, standalone 5G which will probably happen in a few years. It's often the case that when connected to a 4G site which can act as a master or anchor to 5G bands (ie it advertises ENDC capability) your average smartphone will show you the 5G icon, but in reality you are only connected to 4G/LTE and there may not even be a 5G site nearby to aggregate.. This is probably why it's called "fake". It is indeed very cheeky of the operators or manufacturers to show 5G when 5G is not actually in use. Marketing...
tentacleuno 3y ago
We're very technologically backwards. Just look at the FTTP rollout, which has now been delayed to 2030.
- flumpcakes 3y ago
  What's worse is that FTTP is the worst kind... time shared GPON. Not true FTTP in my book (a single fibre per premise back to the exchange).
- graemep 3y ago
  BT Openreach also seems to be getting away with an unjustified price structure too. ADSL established a precedent for upload speeds being far slower than download speeds, and this has been continued with FTTC and is being continued with FTTP. There are a lot of good uses cases for faster uploads (backup to cloud, home servers, maybe things like video conferencing) and much less gain from faster downloads (except allowing websites to be even more bloated and more HD video to watch on smartphones)
- Lio 3y ago
  Who's "we" in this context? Are you talking about a particular telco you work for? FTTP was rolled out where I live by several providers almost 2 years ago. I don't live anywhere particularly urban. I think we were at the back of the queue for this with FTTP available in UK cities for a few years now. (For the avoidance of confusion I mean actual FTTP and not fibre to a cab/twisted pair to premises).
  - tentacleuno 3y ago
    > Who's "we" in this context? Are you talking about a particular telco you work for? If that were the case, I would have said so. I'm referring to the UK in general. The FTTP roll-out has been delayed to 2030 (which is, if I remember correctly, 5 years ahead of the original date). The best I've ever had is Virgin with DOCSIS, which is an unfortunate situation -- in that space, you quite literally have no competition amongst providers. Surprised the regulator hasn't done anything about it.
Nux 3y ago
There is a technical reason for that, 5G in UK (and 99% of the world) is NSA, ie not stand alone, it acts as a supplementary band, anchored in LTE. Your phone/router will only aggregate this 5G band under load (ie downloading, streaming hq etc), most of the time there is little load so 5G is not needed. It is also a power optimization issue, as 5G processing requires more battery.

have_faith 3y ago

There's a busy area down the road from me that I consistently get a couple bars of 5G signal but the internet is unusable in a 200 metre radius. Sucks for all the local businesses around.

petercooper 3y ago
Are you on a network that runs its own infrastructure or an MVNO? I've experienced the same thing a lot, especially on 4G in busy holiday spots, and have been told that apparently MVNO traffic is heavily deprioritised versus that of the primary carrier.
- have_faith 3y ago
  I'm on O2. The "busy" area is just a normal mini high street. Nothing out of the ordinary.

gumballindie 3y ago

> with totally fake coverage In my region, maps shows full coverage with "excellent" outdoor signal, but I get at most two to three lines on my phone. It's basically a scam.

fguerraz 3y ago
The amount of "bars" is irrelevant. You need to check if you're actually connected to 5G and that's very well hidden. (##4636## on android. Anything but "connected" for "NR State" means you're actually connected to 5G)

sp332 3y ago

I thought 5G was mostly about managing congestion. What's the improvement over 4G for most users?

fguerraz 3y ago
Well, I've been to Portugal recently, Porto to be precise, they have actual 5G which you can actually connect to, and despite roaming and the amount of tourists, it was night and day: everything loaded instantly, not a single hickup. Back in the UK, I spent last weekend in London, 5G logo always on but not actually connected. I could not even send a message when I was in busy areas. So yes, it helps with congestion, you just don't realise how congested the network is until you've tried the real thing.
- edf13 3y ago
  The issue here could well be the backhaul... just because you can get 5g to the cell tower doesn't ensure you will have a fast connection from the tower to the core network.
- bananapub 3y ago
  > Back in the UK, I spent last weekend in London, 5G logo always on but not actually connected on Three? They're famously garbage. I wouldn't suggest anything other than EE or - distant second - Vodafone in London.
  - fguerraz 3y ago
    EE
rsynnott 3y ago
I just got a 5G-supporting phone yesterday, and had previously thought the same thing. Then I did a speed test and got 600Mbit/sec. To be honest, LTE was mostly _fine_, but this seems to be generally noticeably better.
- 3y ago

garblegarble 3y ago

>The UK being one of the worst countries for 5G deployment, with totally fake coverage (shows the 5G logo but connected to LTE). I read the linked PDF and did some searching but I didn't see in what instances networks use a 5G Logo for LTE (although I do recall hearing about something like that in the past)... could you give some more detail?

Nux 3y ago
5G is currently NSA (not standalone), it can't be used without 4G/LTE. It needs a 4G connection to anchor itself on, to act as a supplementary band. This is also known as ENDC. This is an intermediary step to proper full blown, standalone 5G which will probably happen in a few years. It's often the case that when connected to a 4G site which can act as a master or anchor to 5G bands (ie it advertises ENDC capability) your average smartphone will show you the 5G icon, but in reality you are only connected to 4G/LTE and there may not even be a 5G site nearby to aggregate.. This is probably why it's called "fake". It is indeed very cheeky of the operators or manufacturers to show 5G when 5G is not actually in use. Marketing...

tentacleuno 3y ago

We're very technologically backwards. Just look at the FTTP rollout, which has now been delayed to 2030.

flumpcakes 3y ago
What's worse is that FTTP is the worst kind... time shared GPON. Not true FTTP in my book (a single fibre per premise back to the exchange).
graemep 3y ago
BT Openreach also seems to be getting away with an unjustified price structure too. ADSL established a precedent for upload speeds being far slower than download speeds, and this has been continued with FTTC and is being continued with FTTP. There are a lot of good uses cases for faster uploads (backup to cloud, home servers, maybe things like video conferencing) and much less gain from faster downloads (except allowing websites to be even more bloated and more HD video to watch on smartphones)
Lio 3y ago
Who's "we" in this context? Are you talking about a particular telco you work for? FTTP was rolled out where I live by several providers almost 2 years ago. I don't live anywhere particularly urban. I think we were at the back of the queue for this with FTTP available in UK cities for a few years now. (For the avoidance of confusion I mean actual FTTP and not fibre to a cab/twisted pair to premises).
- tentacleuno 3y ago
  > Who's "we" in this context? Are you talking about a particular telco you work for? If that were the case, I would have said so. I'm referring to the UK in general. The FTTP roll-out has been delayed to 2030 (which is, if I remember correctly, 5 years ahead of the original date). The best I've ever had is Virgin with DOCSIS, which is an unfortunate situation -- in that space, you quite literally have no competition amongst providers. Surprised the regulator hasn't done anything about it.

Nux 3y ago

There is a technical reason for that, 5G in UK (and 99% of the world) is NSA, ie not stand alone, it acts as a supplementary band, anchored in LTE. Your phone/router will only aggregate this 5G band under load (ie downloading, streaming hq etc), most of the time there is little load so 5G is not needed. It is also a power optimization issue, as 5G processing requires more battery.