Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Rabbitte’s radio shocker: ‘The future of radio is online’
Options
-
30-04-2013 3:21pm#1http://www.siliconrepublic.com/comms/item/32489-rabbittes-radio-shocker/
Ireland’s Communications Minister Pat Rabbitte, TD, has told the IBI annual conference that radio stations will have no option but to go online, given that there are more smartphones than radios in the public’s arsenal of media devices.
Rabbitte said the entire media sector in Ireland is going through a period of “destructive change”.
However, despite the effects of Ireland’s economic decline on the media sector, it is now in a time that can be described as a perfect storm, where the sector is being reformed and reshaped.
Rabbitte cited the rise of online media and said online advertising in Ireland is now worth €150m a year and is growing at a rate of more than 12pc per annum.
Despite this, the changes that are hitting traditional media are happening faster than the rise of online revenue, with newspaper circulations falling dramatically.
RTÉ has taken €100m worth of cost cuts and reduced staff by 400. And even in the midst of the perfect storm, independent television station TV3 has invested in a new HD studio.
“But make no mistake; the television market in Ireland has changed completely,” Rabbitte said.
“There are now 34 channels of advertising sold in Ireland, up from seven a decade ago, and when taken together with the entirely value for money-driven approach of the advertising industry today, it is difficult to see revenues – and either price or volume - returning to anything like previous highs.”
Rabbitte said a five-year review of funding for the country’s public service broadcasters is due to land on his desk in the coming weeks.
He also said that when it comes to sustaining the media sector in Ireland, there are few levers available to the Government.
But when it comes to preserving the plurality of media, commercial radio stations play a critical role and the regulatory framework for the sector is being kept under continual review.
Internet saves the radio star
Rabbitte said that while commercial radio may seem more robust than other media sectors, this should not blind the sector to the challenges that are coming.
“Digital Audio Broadcasting – or DAB – looks very much like a false start, even if there were a market rationale for it in the Irish market.
“No, as with so much else, radio is ultimately going to have to go online. It may take awhile; there are a lot of FM radios out there, in cars, or on window sills around the country. But there are relatively few new radios sold, certainly relative to the number of smartphones or other connected devices, and that is where the audience is going, not just for radio or TV, but for everything.”
Rabbitte said this is only the start of what could be a long process of convergence.
“This term ‘convergence’ when applied to media doesn’t just mean the simple fact that you can now watch television or listen to the radio on your phone – the implications are far deeper and wider than that.
“In time, it will likely come to refashion media entirely as the relationship between content owners, distribution networks and audiences change.
“For example, it is possible to see a future where the role now played by television broadcasters, who effectively create or aggregate content and then distribute it, is played instead by a differentiated set of media.
“Some bodies, like sports rights holders, for example, may choose to stream and sell content themselves, offering it across multiple platforms for a share of the revenue, or perhaps just offering it to the market themselves.”
Rabbitte returned to his perfect storm analogy and said the changes wrought by online cannot be ignored.
“The trick, in so far as there is one, is not to try and stop them, or pretend that they are not happening, it is to ride that wave, to use all of the tools that are available.”0
Comments
-
Delusional stuff...this is same nonsense Comreg use to justify closing down TV transmitters especially in rural areas....these are the very same people who don't actually have broadband in the first place...utterly moronic stuff.
I guess this is a gambit to justify the internet tax, with a "look everybody can get broadband all over the country" as 3G is somehow magically "broadband"0 -
I tried streaming music on my phone once while driving from Dublin to Westport. It worked fine with occasional hiccups as far as Mullingar, then dropped out. It played again briefly as I passed Edgeworthstown, then all the way past Longford, then brief patches around Strokestown, Ballaghederreen, Charlestown, Swinford and Castlebar. In between: silence.
Yeah, let's switch off the FM transmitters in the morning.0 -
He's right though and he's talking about the near future not the present.
LTE networks go on air very soon and ultimately will have much better signal properties than 3G had because they're using 800MHz and 900Mhz rather than the very high 2100MHz used by 3G which always meant poor coverage in buildings etc
We've also got a few networks offering 15GB data bundles for dirt cheap prices.
I would say we're on the cusp of widespread streaming to mobiles within the next 18 months.
I already use spotify over 3G all the time without any significant cost and it works very well.
You've also got the 4 networks cooperating as two entities which will see much faster rollout than with 3G
There's a major game changing technological shift happening right now. It's far from delusional to suggest that's the case!
Smartphones and tablets are already ubiquitous in Ireland. 4G devices will be ubiquitous in 24 - 36 months max.
Content needs to be online or stations will disappear. The newspaper industry failed to adapt and suffered that fate.
I sincerely hope Irish radio stations adapt and don't just faff about talking endlessly about DAB while everyone's switching to foreign content.0 -
He's right though and he's talking about the near future not the present.
LTE networks go on air very soon and ultimately will have much better signal properties than 3G had because they're using 800MHz and 900Mhz rather than the very high 2100MHz used by 3G which always meant poor coverage in buildings etc
Well there's a lot of hype about 4G, we'll see what it actually delivers. I suspect the coverage and speeds won't be much different than with 3G.
Some of the utter nonsense spouted by the telcos is quite frankly rubbish...like claims of 180Mb/s over LTE, I suspect the real world speeds will be 10Mbs on a good day, (a tad faster than 3G) with the wind coming from the south etc AND if you don't tell your neighbours.
Yes it is true that the building penetration will be better and possibly some pockets of better coverage, I'm thinking about Connemara and West Kerry areas mainly which are unlikely to get 4G (or even 3G) anytime in the foreseeable future.So I don't see any good reason to turn off the FM transmitters anytime soon.
He'd "like" to be right, is a better way of describing it and he's just defending his new tax:)0 -
That's terribly cynical.
And true.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Well there's a lot of hype about 4G, we'll see what it actually delivers. I suspect the coverage and speeds won't be much different than with 3G.
Some of the utter nonsense spouted by the telcos is quite frankly rubbish...like claims of 180Mb/s over LTE, I suspect the real world speeds will be 10Mbs on a good day, (a tad faster than 3G))
In real world scenarios, it delivers about 20 to 30mbit/s which is more than adequate for streaming audio. It can deliver much higher speeds, but it depends on the generation of technology and a whole load of other factors.
Rural rollout will be easier because of the frequency allocations. So, ultimately coverage should be more comparable to the 900MHz GSM 2G networks than to 3G which is completely hobbled by the choice of 2100MHz which in hindsight was a huge mistake and one made right across Europe.
3G was over-hyped, and suggesting that it's a replacement for fixed-line broadband was a bit ridiculous, especially before the advent of HSPA and without adequate backhaul.
The networks will only be as good as how much fibre is rolled out to key transmission sites.
In a lot of the earlier rollouts of 3G the problem was that they just shoehorned it onto the original networks and didn't provide anything remotely approaching the kind of backhaul they needed, so the microwave links between sites just clogged up.
All that being said, it's still the case that people have devices in their pockets that are more than capable of streaming audio and mobile data's become a hell of a lot cheaper than it was even 6 months ago making listening to streaming services possible (assuming you pick the right network and data plan).0 -
In real world scenarios, it delivers about 20 to 30mbit/s which is more than adequate for streaming audio. It can deliver much higher speeds, but it depends on the generation of technology and a whole load of other factors.
Rural rollout will be easier because of the frequency allocations. So, ultimately coverage should be more comparable to the 900MHz GSM 2G networks than to 3G which is completely hobbled by the choice of 2100MHz which in hindsight was a huge mistake and one made right across Europe.
3G was over-hyped, and suggesting that it's a replacement for fixed-line broadband was a bit ridiculous, especially before the advent of HSPA and without adequate backhaul.
The networks will only be as good as how much fibre is rolled out to key transmission sites.
In a lot of the earlier rollouts of 3G the problem was that they just shoehorned it onto the original networks and didn't provide anything remotely approaching the kind of backhaul they needed, so the microwave links between sites just clogged up.
All that being said, it's still the case that people have devices in their pockets that are more than capable of streaming audio and mobile data's become a hell of a lot cheaper than it was even 6 months ago making listening to streaming services possible (assuming you pick the right network and data plan).
I'd agree with most of that...however I would hold my judgement on the LTE speed thing until it's rolled out, current speeds on the UK 4GEE (silly name) network don't reach anything near those speeds and Vodafone published a page a while back saying that expected speeds would be similar to top-end 3G connections at about 5-10Mb/s. Which if you have coverage is fine for streaming too....but the key is "if you have coverage"
Having said that some friends in the US/Canada say they are getting speeds of about 20Mb/s on LTE but they are typically the only user in the cell...0 -
You'll easily get 50+ (and I've seen realworld speed tests) if you're in an ideal situation and a not very busy cell.
The other thing to remember is that the 4 networks have joined-up infrastructure on this rollout and will be doing infrastructure sharing.
Vodafone + 3
O2 + Meteor/Eircom as "Mosaic"
The networks will retain their own services, own branding, own switching etc. They're just sharing radio infrastructure and mobile sites.
So, that should at least make coverage in rural areas a little more viable than was the case with 4 seperate infrastructural providers covering pretty low density areas in the West of Ireland / Northwest etc.0 -
There's your problem right there - at least, one of them. Rural mobile coverage requires rural masts. Rural masts don't have fibre anywhere next, nigh nor near them.The networks will only be as good as how much fibre is rolled out to key transmission sites.
But if everybody is streaming audio on their phones instead of listening to the radio, will there ever be such a thing as a "not very busy cell" again?You'll easily get 50+ (and I've seen realworld speed tests) if you're in an ideal situation and a not very busy cell.0 -
Advertisement
-
You'll easily get 50+ (and I've seen realworld speed tests) if you're in an ideal situation and a not very busy cell.
So, that should at least make coverage in rural areas a little more viable than was the case with 4 seperate infrastructural providers covering pretty low density areas in the West of Ireland / Northwest etc.
Agreed except for the speeds...
Well that's not what Vodafone have said but I do hope you are right about the speeds that would indeed be fantastic.
A lot of the marketing nonsense being touted about LTE are carefully constructed "tests" (one phone beside the mast) for journalists to write gushingly about and journos are easily persuaded to write "nice things" about your product, all they need is a good lunch:-)
But cell congestion will be a huge uncontrollable factor for the telcos and of course fibring up all those masts at the top of rural mountains, I really can't see that happening even if Mosaic and the yet un-named 3/Voda "merge" have the cash to roll out fibre everywhere there's a mast.
I can see reasonable speeds in the towns ok (probably) but 3G is abysmal currently in Dublin city centre and those pathetic download limits don't help either...0 -
The limits aren't all pathetic. I've 15GB for quite a cheap price per month.0
-
The limits aren't all pathetic. I've 15GB for quite a cheap price per month.
I find them pathetic as I regularly go over my limits and I've more data allowance than that...and I rarely watch youtube or stream radio on my mobile. Your mileage obviously varies:)
The limits are the only way the telcos have to control contention..so they are rabid about enforcing them and gouging the customers while they are at it.0 -
-
Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,497 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 26417
The limits aren't all pathetic. I've 15GB for quite a cheap price per month.
Yeah I have 15GB also (emobile plan), but the average person doesn't have anywhere near this high a usage cap and both you and I would be a foolish to assume that most people have this sort of limit.
Its also not cheap for alot of people and an awful lot of people are on PAYG plans.
20e with emobile gets you 250MB data on PAYG
Some providers like O2 still charge 1e per day for data usage (50MB a day) which would be 30e a month - http://www.o2online.ie/o2/shop/plans/prepay.php
Sure there are larger data plans but they are on bill pay, not everyone has an interest in monthly plans.0 -
You'll easily get 50+ (and I've seen realworld speed tests) if you're in an ideal situation and a not very busy cell.
These descriptions appear to be contradictory. What do you think would be a reasonable cell radius for delivery of reliable minimum 30Mbs?. How many simultaneous connections could be supported at that speed? How much spectrum do you think would be required to do that?The other thing to remember is that the 4 networks have joined-up infrastructure on this rollout and will be doing infrastructure sharing.
Vodafone + 3
O2 + Meteor/Eircom as "Mosaic"
The networks will retain their own services, own branding, own switching etc. They're just sharing radio infrastructure and mobile sites.
So, that should at least make coverage in rural areas a little more viable than was the case with 4 seperate infrastructural providers covering pretty low density areas in the West of Ireland / Northwest etc.
Why would commercial MNOs voluntarily forgo profits in order to provision low density areas when there is no obligation to do so under their licence. The NBS areas (40% of the country) were deemed to have no broadband. That means that there was no business case at all in those areas. And it doesn't matter if they share the overhead in those areas because they also have to share the revenue.
Try looking at the IoffL overview map. Select Vodafone and filter for only 3g. Then select the "70%pop" underlay and see how closely the Vodafone 3g roll-out has tracked the high density areas. My prediction is the roll-out will be far worse for LTE and €175M will not fix it.0 -
I was chatting to someone just yesterday who are on a PAYG phone - they'd been listening to the radio in their house on their smartphone... using the radio station's app! They forgot about that as they left their house (with the wifi!) and headed off to work still listening to the radio. Later that day they went to call or text someone only to discover they had no credit... but they'd had €35 that morning! Well as I'm sure you all guessed, when they left the range of their wifi the phone switched to 3g and during that morning they'd used all their credit listening to some local radio station.0
-
Try looking at the IoffL overview map. Select Vodafone and filter for only 3g. Then select the "70%pop" underlay and see how closely the Vodafone 3g roll-out has tracked the high density areas. My prediction is the roll-out will be far worse for LTE and €175M will not fix it.
And from Vodafone themselves :
http://www.vodafone.ie/coverage/
Click Data and indoor coverage
Gives a clear picture of their priority areas and Vodafone have the most extensive network of all the operators...
So I don't think "radio" can possibly be delivered over 3G/4G any time soon. Perhaps it could be done in 2025 but certainly not now as it stands and in the foreseeable future with 4G.
I'd still say this is a thinly veiled, but rather weak, justification for the internet tax they want to introduce...0 -
It's delusional.
Broadcast and IP are complementary. Also in a Disaster scenario the IP infrastructure is fragile. You can listen for 1000 hours on one set of batteries on a Radio and power a transmitter that covers the entire country with one mast and Generator, with AM.
I have a 1954 radio that manages 490 hours continuous operation. How long does the iPad / Tablet / phone last?
For decent capacity and coverage of 3G or 4G universal listening you need about 8,000+ masts at maybe 3kW consumption each, 24MW! You'd be lucky to even get 6 hours listening on one charge on 3G/4G.0 -
I agree, they are complimentary but the fact is that you're going to see a massive growth of non-Irish audio media on smart phones. It's already here, it's just that it's not as widely adopted as it will be in a couple of years.
4G will definitely see major improvements. I've seen services up and running on SFR in France, T-Mobile USA, Verizon and EE.
The EE and Verizon versions were unimpressive. T-Mobile was delivering speeds of well in excess of 40Mbit/s in downtown NYC and the same with SFR in France.
A lot of it is dependent on having no bottlenecks in your network. It's only as good as the weakest link. That's one issue that certain networks here have had with 3G i.e. long, cumbersome microwave-link routes back to a central node somewhere that results in slow connections and high ping times. It's not always just about coverage and the radio interface aspect of it.
I'm not here to defend the mobile sector and I'm not having a long protracted argument either. Some operators are useless, some aren't and coverage is variable.
There's absolutely no doubt though that 4G in Ireland will definitely be a major improvement over 3G not only because of the protocol but because of the choice of bands being used here taking things down to 800MHz.
All I'm saying is he has a point in so far as broadcasting is moving towards streaming and hybrid streaming/caching services like Spotify.
I'm just concerned that if broadcasters just ignore the technological changes, then they'll end up like the newspaper industry.
So far, other than RTE I'm not seeing a hell of a lot of innovation in Ireland from commercial broadcasters when it comes to online radio. They're just all simulcasted FM content live / doing the odd haphazard podcast here and there.
RTE's done quite a bit but, they do have a whole team of developers which helps.
---
I'm sure Rabbitte will squeeze us for a 'broadcasting charge' one way or the other. He's determined to pull in more cash.
---
As for people having tiny caps on prepay and even bill pay plans. It's up to them to exercise their freedom of choice and move to a cheaper network.
It's not the technology's fault that people are willing to sit and be ripped off by networks because they don't shop around. There are pretty reasonably priced data products on the market at the moment. OK 15GB isn't an enormous bundle of data compared to 500GB / month on a cable / DSL line, but it's still drastically better than what's being offered in most other markets in Europe that I've come across.
EE's limits are a complete joke in the UK, although they have dropped a tiny bit in price since the threat of more competition is coming as other networks launch 4G this year.
----
What I would love to see is FM + interactive content over IP all on the same device through a single app utilising the FM radio + the internet connection.
(Runs to patent office!)
I don't just mean adding Twitter to an FM radio app either which is what some people seem to think interactive is.
I'm thinking more like podcasts, access to streaming content, maybe integration with something like Spotify and DJ selected playlists
Possibilities are endless. The only problem is that I have yet to see a phone that will allow FM radio to be accessed via an API from an app.0 -
Advertisement
-
I think the newspapers are gone because they didn't provide any news - just personal opinion with a (steep) slant usually in the direction of whoever will pay most.I'm just concerned that if broadcasters just ignore the technological changes, then they'll end up like the newspaper industry.
You can get more relevant news, often from the horses mouth, online.
I think the comparison with the printed news media is an apples & oranges scenario myself. To be sure, in a world where people can carry their entire music collection in their pocket, pure music radio stations have little future. But most of our radio stations offer more than music.
No, I think this really about what others have already allude to sums it up...
Rabbitte's depth goes no deeper.I'd still say this is a thinly veiled, but rather weak, justification for the internet tax they want to introduce...0 -
In real world scenarios, it delivers about 20 to 30mbit/s which is more than adequate for streaming audio. It can deliver much higher speeds, but it depends on the generation of technology and a whole load of other factors.
No, that is NOT representative. With 10 users in a sector in the real world the speed will be 0.24 Mbps in 5MHz vs 0.12 Mbps on 3G. With ONLY ONE user at less than 900m from mast with no obstructions you get the SAME speed as 3G in 5MHz channel, a peak of 21Mbps.
LTE here is using 5MHz channels and no RAN. When first launched it will be better due to lack of subscribers. If it's affordable it will end up only slightly better than 3G. The Vodafone route in Germany is to price it for Road Warriors as complementary to real Broadband and thus better performance due to having 1/10th the users of 3G.
They'd need to build 10 times more masts than planned for it to replace FM Broadcast Radio and 100 times more masts at least for it to replace Broadcast HDTV.0 -
The RTE Niche DAB stations and other niche music stations are almost pointless given that you can carry your entire collection. Broadcast needs to give you analysis, live, stuff you would not look for. Niche stations become less useful the more niche they are to the point where a catalogue to download of what you are familiar with is more point. The Internet can do catalogues and Niche.
RTE need to ditch 2Fm Music and all the niche stations, put all the phone ins and Music on RTE R1 on 2FM and have some more PSB content instead of wasting money on DAB and Internet.
TV is in crisis due to too many channels and chasing lowest common denominator.
The crisis of Broadcast content (partly created by pay TV) is no excuse to close Broadcast and only have A la Carte Internet content.0 -
No, that is NOT representative. With 10 users in a sector in the real world the speed will be 0.24 Mbps in 5MHz vs 0.12 Mbps on 3G. With ONLY ONE user at less than 900m from mast with no obstructions you get the SAME speed as 3G in 5MHz channel, a peak of 21Mbps.
LTE here is using 5MHz channels and no RAN. When first launched it will be better due to lack of subscribers. If it's affordable it will end up only slightly better than 3G. The Vodafone route in Germany is to price it for Road Warriors as complementary to real Broadband and thus better performance due to having 1/10th the users of 3G.
They'd need to build 10 times more masts than planned for it to replace FM Broadcast Radio and 100 times more masts at least for it to replace Broadcast HDTV.
This is the constant debate between those that believe the future is "bright and shiny" and can deliver fantastical speeds and technology will continue to evolve and continue to improve and we'll all be flying in hover cars in 2050. I call these the "futurists" and indeed without these futurists we wouldn't have many advances in technology but the problem with the futurists is they tend to ignore the realities in favour of that optimistic, elusive and shiny future. However, having said that, of course technology will improve and more efficient algorithms will be uncovered and things may well improve.
The futurists are constantly urging us on and helping us go forward and looking for innovative ways to circumvent our current limitations.
This is the optimistic view.
On the other side of the debate are those who see the technical possibilities and indeed the limitations of any given technology, be it radio or other technologies (except for perhaps micro technology but limits are being reached there too, just not as quickly).
On the other side of the debate are the pragmatists. They point out we have the Shannon Limit and for instance , the inverse square law and various other laws that govern radio communications (like small 5Mhz channels generally though some paid for larger channels, which has strangled the Irish LTE rollout at birth).
They, the pragmatists are often left out in the cold saying that the marketing nonsense that mobile companies come out with is frankly just that, utter nonsense...made up by pretty young things that have no clue what so ever about technology...the bunnies have massive marketing budgets and influence. They convinced all and sundry that 3G could deliver and now they are marketing 4G and it will be utterly amazing and deliver 180Mb/s to everybody everywhere. Blah blah
Those who know very little about technology see the shiny brochures and believe the bizarre claims without question, they simply don't have the intellectual tools to analyse the reality behind the shiny brochures. Here I'm thinking about the DECNR and others in government.
The French LTE launch is fairly anaemic from what I've seen of it, with minuscule download limits and so-so speeds. Friends in Germany tell me much the same story that it was great at launch time but now that more and more LTE phones are becoming available speeds are dropping rapidly.
The "truth", what ever that may be, is probably somewhere in the middle. I personally tend towards the more pessimistic view that we are reaching the limits of radio communications and there will be no more amazing discoveries in the radio field in the foreseeable future, we can use our current technologies in more innovative ways, for sure, and squeeze more out of them but there will be no fundamental changes any time soon. LTE may possibly be the last real advance(could be wrong here).
In this case, some of the easily fixed issues are contention and backhaul congestion. We can, of course, fix the backhaul....but will the telcos actually do it? Will they run a fibre up Sliabh Sneacht?
The point of this rant is that I simply don't believe LTE will be much better than 3G in the way it is envisaged that 4G will eventually be used especially on busy cells. It will be better for one man and his dog close to the cell site but for the others will be similar to 3G0 -
I saw a H+ indicator on my phone today. Hmm, sez I, HSPA+ has a theoretical download speed of 168Mb/s - I wonder what I can get? So I ran a speed test, and got 3Mb/s download, outdoors at 11am.
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, however...0 -
168Mbps would be 8 bonded channels. Maybe if you used all the facing sectors of 3 masts of ALL operators together you can get 8 bonded channels. But no-one is offering that.
I doubt anyone is even offering 2 bonded channels here. I think no-one has more than 3 channels anyway.
I'm no Luddite. I have a Raspberry Pi, two Miniature SDRs (Software Defined Receivers), PC based quad tuner PVR, VGA CRT upto 1600 x 1200, HDMI LCD Monitors and HDTVwith in house Satellite & TV distribution system, 3 satellite Dishes (one with 4 different satellites and one Motorised), 2 x WiFi points and wired Gbps Ethernet. 10GHz link for Broadband, my own server, a Kindle etc. I designed an iPad/iPhone device twice, 1987+ and 2005+ (the 2nd one used 4G and VOIP).
1971 I was criticised by Chairman of RTE at the Young Scientists that my idea of Digital TV over laser based communication was fantasy and we would never see it. 1972 BBC demonstrated a Digital TV system, digital TV not was practicable for the Public till the early 1990s but the first commercially viable Fibre connection (using Lasers of course as today) was about 1972. 1970 Fibre was made with low enough attenuation.
But we won't have Broadband by Mobile, Flying cars or Robot Butlers and Maids in every home any time soon.
I'm a pragmatic Futurist. I can do sums, not just write Science Fiction or Fantasy. I know the difference.0 -
-
-
Why aren't the operators using their full 10MHz (&15/25) allocations?
They will be. but it's not sensible to use it all for one channel unless it's a mast with only one sector out of coverage of all other masts.
If you have a cell based system ideally you need 9 channels. At a pinch you can use 3, so that sectors on different masts facing each other can overlap slightly to avoid holes in coverage. 3 x 5MHz channels is 15MHz for the "network".
Having only 10MHz is really poor, not possible to have coverage without either holes or interference between sectors as it only allows 2 different channels.
So Comreg is ensuring really poor networks.
Why is 9 channels better?
In a city you need a higher density to get capacity, so you have more masts running at lower power, but with only 3 channels interference between sectors in a mast and not the neighbour but the next mast is likely.
With lower frequencies (900MHz is much worse than 2.1GHz and the new 800MHz even worse) the signals travel longer distances more easily, especially outdoors and in Rural areas. It's hard to balance the power for good enough signal for decent speed and limit cell size.
Also not just the masts interfere. The phones transmit on the separate 5MHz uplink channel and thus if the cells are engineered for general indoor coverage and you stand at a window upstairs or in an apartment you can be degrading the signal on more distant masts on same channel communicating to an indoor phone/modem, so that other phone/modem either drops connection or drops speed to an 1/8th to get a more robust connection.
3G's CDMA does allow downlinks on same channel to share by using a different code. But then the speed is a bit less than half. The 4G doesn't use CDMA on downlink but COFDM. Using COFDMA it's possible to share a channel between different masts, but again if both get equal performance each has half the speed.
The maths of why this is so (and it's common sense too, you can't get something for nothing) was mature by 1948, though by 1920s it was suspected to be the case. Shannon & Nyquist.
The 4G that's hyped is 20MHz channel, thus for one user with a perfect signal 4 times faster than 5MHz. Actually since 4 guard bands are saved you get 5x faster. But to make a minimum cellular network you need 3 x 20 downlink and 3 x 20 uplink spectrum plus a gap between uplink and downlink, about 125 MHz to 130MHz altogether. The 800MHz band is only 72MHz! For good Urban performance & capacity (small cells) you need 240MHz to 250MHz of spectrum. Combining 800MHz TV as uplink and 900MHz GSM as downlink with the existing 864MHz SRD in the guard band would mean one guard band instead of current two (or four depending how you count) with 72MHz uplink and 88 MHz downlink.
But Comreg want to sell as many licences as possible with as light a requirement as possible. Not one licence with decent performance and universal coverage.
There are TDD systems that use the same channel for uplink and downlink as WiFi does. This gives somewhat worse than 1/2 download speed due to TDD overhead of sharing channel between up and down and increases latency as you can't transmit and receive at the same time. You can't get something for nothing.0 -
Advertisement
-
They will be.
Crackin' detail, ta!
I had just glanced over the allocations, and assumed that 2x25MHz would mean a decent chunk of 4G for Vodafone in ultra-urban areas, ignoring overlap completely!
So we are truly doomed then! Even at 1800 which we can safely assume will be for narrow urban coverage, 2x15MHz is going to have to be divvied up so bad to avoid sector overlap, or not so bad (but then get the performance impact of interference).
Or, in other words, if it's deployed on 2 sectors either end of O'Connell St., nobody is going to get the "real world" (except it's not) 4G speeds, even if they happen to be the only one on the street.
Vodafone announced they're upgrade all 2[.5]G to 3G and comically described it as anyone with voice coverage will be able to get 3G (oh dear). But, glory be to all that's sacred, if Three can give blanked coverage of 5MHz using their 2x5MHz allocations (up to 2015). That'll be worse than their current 3G, surely?
In general, the future of rural 4G is set to be actually worse than current EDGE coverage, no? I'm giggling that we're talking about EDGE being the accepted norm for so many people; you know, that kind of disbelief & sympathy, almost nervous laughter.0
Advertisement