3G Shutdown Impact

[NachoRuby]

It was announced. Lol a lifespan? What tinfoil hat looney tune expected their cellphone to last a life span? Seriously?

It’s called evolution. Oh no!! Faster cellphone service! Go back to 3G, Verizon, they’re watching me!

Another reason? Uh yeah. Better cellphone service and faster speeds, pretty simple.

Sure. But the problem is 4g isnt even in enough places yet let alone 5g. I don't have a problem with 5g (or 4g). They are awesome, when they work. But it's just not terribly pervasive in my locale yet. Sure I have it at home, but not in the hills between my home and my work. Or for that matter, even at my job. I'm all for progress. But there are a lot of gaps in the current maps.

See all these holes? Unfortunately, some folks live there. They need to fix that problem first. Maybe they will.

Sponsored

 

[Challenger85]

Sure but the problem is 4g isnt even in enough places yet let alone 5g. I don't have a problem with 5g (or 4g). They are awesome, when they work. But it's just not terribly pervasive in my locale yet. Sure I have it at home, but not in the hills between my home and my work. Or for thatatter, even at my job. I'm all for progress. But there are a lot of gaps in the current maps.

See all these holes? Unfortunately, some folks live there. They need to fix that problem first. Maybe they will.

Right. I think that’s the point, they need the capacity to expand their network with new technology.

 

[u-joint]

3G utilization is < 1% of all cellular traffic at this point.

Estimates I've read put that closer to 6%, but you're right - it's certainly not the lion share of usage.

I also think that carriers should be able to shut down whatever they want, whenever they want. However, considering embedded industries - for example the automotive industry - build and release devices with long lifespans, perhaps this was a little premature.

 

[NachoRuby]

Right. I think that’s the point, they need the capacity to expand their network with new technology.

I hope you're right. I'm not challenging the challenger . It's also partially my fault for picking T-Mobile, but we've had them since the 90s (Sprint PCS), when they built the first all digital network. When they shut down analog, that was controversial too, we got over that with time.

 

[Challenger85]

I hope you're right. I'm not challenging the challenger . It's also partially my fault for picking T-Mobile, but we've had them since the 90s (Sprint PCS), when they built the first all digital network. When they shut down analog, that was controversial too, we got over that with time.

Lol yeah we left t-mobile to back to Verizon. I’ve been mostly Verizon for 20 years outside of a year or two and nothing compares. I understand being from Colorado that cellphone service can be non-existent in areas out east or in the mountains etc.

 

[Challenger85]

I'm not sure how I triggered you, but I'd recommend a serious evaluation of priorities, and I'm sorry if I offended you.

Lol whatever you say. ??

 

[dcmdon]

Who knew so many people still used or cared about 3G. A kindle? Money grab? It’s been 22 years people.

My wife's 2016 Volvo uses a 3G modem and all of the Volvo "safe and secure" connectivity features, which Volvo advertised as being included in the price of the car for TEN YEARS, will stop.

I'm actually happy about it. If you've seen the thread I started on disabling the LTE modem on the Gladiator you will understand why.

Either way, Volvo has a problem because they have a contractual obligation to provide connectivity until 2026.

 

[Beemer533]

Who knew so many people still used or cared about 3G. A kindle? Money grab? It’s been 22 years people.

Well, I only bought my kindle a couple of years ago so that is annoying.

Regardless, it sounds like you don't get out into the boonies to much. I don't have anything against 5g, but it is shit when you are away from a city. If that city even has 5g.

With higher frequencies 5g doesn't cover as well and is more easily scattered compared to 3g and 4g.

I'm all for new improved tech, but 5g will definitely not improve coverage.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Who knew so many people still used or cared about 3G. A kindle? Money grab? It’s been 22 years people.

Easy for some to say - you have no clue about the reality of this country and the lack of access hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of us have.
Like was already said - it means NO reception in some areas - many areas, in fact. It means I may lose internet at home half the time.
5G has a tiny range, it sucks, in fact. 4G is better but still - the reason millions have access "out in the boonies" as some say, is the fact that 3G covers many times more the distance and isn't as subject to interference by trees and buildings.
For those who have no clue of the world beyond the ends of their noses - take a look around and stop being so.....xxxxx about it. There's a world outside your own.

When you pay enough the whole country can have access, then you'll be right but right now it will mean the loss of reception and access for a lot of people.

3G utilization is < 1% of all cellular traffic at this point.

That may be true "traffic" wise, but it's not true as far as usage. Of course because 4G is faster and 5G faster still, if you measure by packets or traffic being passed, sure, of course, but if you use other metrics to measure, that's a false indication of the real impact it will have.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Well, I only bought my kindle a couple of years ago so that is annoying.

Regardless, it sounds like you don't get out into the boonies to much. I don't have anything against 5g, but it is is shit when you are away from a city. If that city even has 5g.

With higher frequencies 5g doesn't cover as well and is more easily scattered compared to 3g and 4g.

I'm all for new improved tech, but but 5g will definitely not improve coverage.

And that's why one company CEO said that for big chunks of KS they aren't in a hurry to change to 5G because it would mean huge chunks of KS would lose service.
People in the big cities with dozens of towers within a short walk need to get outside of their own world and look at the rest of the country.
Fact is, the USA is one of the worst "developed countries" as far as broadband and cell coverage.
People in the heavy population centers will be celebrating the 5G thing while others will be wondering where the hell their coverage went.
5G is really impacted badly by trees, buildings, even atmospheric conditions.
We barely get 4G and when that drops out in bad weather things drop to 3G - and when that goes away, it means chunks of time we'll have no service, no internet.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Sure. But the problem is 4g isnt even in enough places yet let alone 5g. I don't have a problem with 5g (or 4g). They are awesome, when they work. But it's just not terribly pervasive in my locale yet. Sure I have it at home, but not in the hills between my home and my work. Or for that matter, even at my job. I'm all for progress. But there are a lot of gaps in the current maps.

See all these holes? Unfortunately, some folks live there. They need to fix that problem first. Maybe they will.

False advertising - fact is, there's a whole lot bigger holes than that in Iowa! I fought that when I worked for the state and every employee was given a cell phone - and used it as a "hot spot" when they went out to clients homes and businesses. There was no cell coverage in the middle of MASON CITY, Iowa! Look it up - it's no small town. And Decorah, Dubuque? Good luck getting data signals in many of those areas. I think you need to erase some of that pink in Iowa.
We live in SE Polk County, Iowa and most people who come to this neighborhood can't even use a cell phone - unless they use USCellular. They are the only company with coverage here, and you'd better have a good phone. iPhones won't work out here, antenna not good enough. And that's 4G and they think, they actually believe, 5G will work in Iowa with all the trees and hills?

 

[Beemer533]

And that's why one company CEO said that for big chunks of KS they aren't in a hurry to change to 5G because it would mean huge chunks of KS would lose service.
People in the big cities with dozens of towers within a short walk need to get outside of their own world and look at the rest of the country.
Fact is, the USA is one of the worst "developed countries" as far as broadband and cell coverage.
People in the heavy population centers will be celebrating the 5G thing while others will be wondering where the hell their coverage went.
5G is really impacted badly by trees, buildings, even atmospheric conditions.
We barely get 4G and when that drops out in bad weather things drop to 3G - and when that goes away, it means chunks of time we'll have no service, no internet.

Exactly! It basically comes down to faster service in populated areas but less or no coverage the further out you get.

Having worked all over the world over the past 2 decades I can definitely agree that the US is way behind in cell coverage.

 

[NachoRuby]

False advertising - fact is, there's a whole lot bigger holes than that in Iowa! I fought that when I worked for the state and every employee was given a cell phone - and used it as a "hot spot" when they went out to clients homes and businesses. There was no cell coverage in the middle of MASON CITY, Iowa! Look it up - it's no small town. And Decorah, Dubuque? Good luck getting data signals in many of those areas. I think you need to erase some of that pink in Iowa.
We live in SE Polk County, Iowa and most people who come to this neighborhood can't even use a cell phone - unless they use USCellular. They are the only company with coverage here, and you'd better have a good phone. iPhones won't work out here, antenna not good enough. And that's 4G and they think, they actually believe, 5G will work in Iowa with all the trees and hills?

I know. There are bigger holes here in Pennsylvania too. But it's the map they provide, so all I had to go by. There's coverage in the Gulf of Mexico, but not at my job.

 

[BAT]

And that's why one company CEO said that for big chunks of KS they aren't in a hurry to change to 5G because it would mean huge chunks of KS would lose service.
People in the big cities with dozens of towers within a short walk need to get outside of their own world and look at the rest of the country.
Fact is, the USA is one of the worst "developed countries" as far as broadband and cell coverage.
People in the heavy population centers will be celebrating the 5G thing while others will be wondering where the hell their coverage went.
5G is really impacted badly by trees, buildings, even atmospheric conditions.
We barely get 4G and when that drops out in bad weather things drop to 3G - and when that goes away, it means chunks of time we'll have no service, no internet.

They say there is coverage at my house and I am in a major city area. But yet we do not see it on our devices. No speed increase. Nor does the phone change to show 5G as it does in other areas. But they certainly raised my fees for this so-called service. They told me I needed to upgrade my phone. I was like this thing is only 2 years old and is still very functional for what I do with it. Perhaps they should give me a new phone to go with the new rates increase. Having traveled overseas a lot over the years we are indeed way behind others.

 

[Dennis K]

They say there is coverage at my house and I am in a major city area. But yet we do not see it on our devices. No speed increase. Nor does the phone change to show 5G as it does in other areas. But they certainly raised my fees for this so-called service. They told me I needed to upgrade my phone. I was like this thing is only 2 years old and is still very functional for what I do with it. Perhaps they should give me a new phone to go with the new rates increase. Having traveled overseas a lot over the years we are indeed way behind others.

AT&T did give new phones to get 4G and 5G...
4G is still pretty good in the "boonies"...

Sponsored