Quote:
Originally Posted by craigj2k12
Anyone on here using EE 4G?
|
Yes.
Quote:
|
Im finding the 4G signal range isnt brilliant, I knew it wasnt great before I signed up, but knowing merseyside, staffordshire and london were covered it didnt bother me. In stafford I get 4G signal near enough everywhere, although most places its at 1 bar out of 4, except for in and around the town centre where I see 3/4 bars. Having travelled to visit my parents, I noticed I had 4g signal all the way here (to st helens) and now at my parents house Im only getting 3G.
|
"Bars" is a pretty poor measure of signal strength, particularly considering there's a big difference on the S4 between how much signal constitutes a bar on 3G and 4G. In some extreme cases, one bar of 4G could be equivalent to 4 bars of 3G. 4G LTE in my experience however, performs a lot better with a weak signal than 3G or 2G. Even with zero "bars" (actually, it'd be minus 1.5 bars if the scale went that low) I'll typically get higher speeds and lower packet loss than 3G.
Put bluntly, in areas where the 4G network is "mature", 4G has better coverage and range than 3G. Outside these areas it will drop off quickly like everything else, but not as quickly as 3G would when you're moving out of 3G range.
Unfortunately though, in many cases a phone will prefer to hop onto a slightly stronger 3G signal than stay on a weaker, yet faster and more reliable 4G signal. Hence, I often find myself disabling 3G and forcing my S4 onto 4G only when I'm in an area with weak signal, because I know despite having less "bars" the 4G connection will be better.
Mind you though I find their coverage checker to be pretty accurate, and it does say St. Helens is little to no outdoor 4G coverage and no indoor coverage at all - it seems to be right in the middle of a dead spot. It'll get upgraded soon enough though (see the end of my post)
Quote:
|
Anyone had a similar experience with EE/4G?
|
See above, the scale is massively different to begin with, and I suspect future software updates and newer phones will tune it somewhat. Remember the whole Apple shebang about the iPhone "calculating bars wrong" when people complained they didn't like the number bars they were seeing?
Quote:
|
I should add when in signal its bloody quick, did a couple of speed tests in stafford at 30Mb+ download and 20Mb upload
|
I typically get about 40-50 download and 30-45 upload, though occasionally it peaks up to 70-80Mb. Remember though the S4 is only capable of using 2/3rds of the network's capacity, so will be limited to approximately 100Mb, a Cat 4 device would get 50% more.
---------- Post added at 04:11 ---------- Previous post was at 04:09 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcopeland
EE 4G is 2.6Ghz and doesn't give very good indoor coverage.
You should consider going onto 4G from Vodafone.
|
Incorrect, EE is primarily 1800Mhz right now but they also own the second most 2.6Ghz spectrum.
Vodafone has the most 2.6Ghz of anybody in the country.
Quote:
|
They will use 800Mhz which is much better coverage indoor.
|
*Every* network will use 800Mhz.
Quote:
|
Not only that but Vodafone own there fibre back bone and have full control over it unlike EE who don't.
|
It's also an ancient and archaic backbone with poor coverage.
---------- Post added at 04:14 ---------- Previous post was at 04:11 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrispuk2004
Actually EE is 1800MHz, and Vodafone will be 2600MHz
|
Also not correct.
EE is 800Mhz, 1800Mhz and 2.6Ghz.
Vodafone is 800Mhz and 2.6Ghz
---------- Post added at 04:18 ---------- Previous post was at 04:14 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcopeland
sorry my mistake about EE frequency however you are still wrong Chris. Vodafone have the 800 Mhz frequency for the benefit of long range and better indoor coverage, fact. 1800Mhz is rubbish for long range and indoor coverage.
|
The coverage difference between 1800Mhz and 800Mhz is nowhere near as big as you imagine.
Assuming two transmitters in the exact same place transmitting at the same power, you'll get about 6dB difference in received signal, which equates to one third of a bar of extra signal. However since EE have twice as much 1800Mhz dedicated to LTE than any network even owns in 800Mhz, you'll get double the speed on 1800Mhz, even discounting for the increase in capacity.
Quote:
|
Vodafone are using 2600Mhz for densely populated places like cities such as London.
|
So is EE.
---------- Post added at 04:30 ---------- Previous post was at 04:18 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zee
EE is 1800MHz and will be 800MHz also in the future.
|
And 2.6Ghz.
Quote:
|
Vodafone is 2.6GHz and 800MHz.
|
Correct, though they have the option of 900Mhz and 1800Mhz as well. While Vodafone has the potentially the most 4G spectrum of all, owning more spectrum does not mean a better network. It's what you do with it that counts. As demonstrated by the fact that Vodafone's got the slowest and least reliable 3G network with joint worst coverage despite having the most 3G spectrum.
Quote:
|
If Vodafones 3G is anything to go by i'd stay clear of them.
|
Exactly. In some ways the auction turnout was a shame, as I'm particularly disappointed by O2's takings. I'd have preferred Vodafone to end up with less and O2 with more, simply because O2 have demonstrably been exceptionally good at putting spectrum to use efficiently in the past. The only saving grace though is that Vodafone's network in Scotland will be operated by O2 anyway.
Quote:
|
You could have waited till December and got 4G with Three for free with any of their PAYG, SIM Only or phone contracts.
|
I'm not particularly optimistic about 3's 4G offering. They have been quite vocal in the past about a conservative rollout, and they also have very little spectrum to run it in. Offering the cheapest tariffs, along with unlimited data with very little network capacity is not a good combination. 3 has less than half the 4G spectrum of Vodafone and a third the amount owned by EE. They'll also have the lowest speeds of anyone but O2 due to having the smallest contiguous blocks.
---------- Post added at 04:32 ---------- Previous post was at 04:30 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigj2k12
What would coverage be like though?
|
Depends, if 3 continue aggressively network sharing with EE it should be pretty good.
In the long run though, who knows how it'll turn out. EE has far superior coverage at the moment, yet O2 has a formal obligation to provide far more. But with each of the four operators in one of two giant network shares of similar size across the UK, it'll probably not differ a whole lot in the end.
Mind you EE did state they plan to upgrade every single 2G transmitter of theirs across the UK to 4G by the end of 2014. That's a huge commitment, considering after ten years, there's still only around half as many 3G transmitters as there are 2G. On the other hand it's a lot easier, one benefit of running 4G on the same frequencies as your existing 2G network is that it makes for a very simple drop-in upgrade with no exterior changes. In theory, that means 4G coverage will become equal to or better than 2G ever was, and in just a over a year you'll be able to get 4G reception everywhere you can get 2G now. This has actually borne out in practice in some cities already, and considering they've already extended their 3G network to the northernmost coast of mainland Scotland - where a few years ago you couldn't even get 2G - it's almost believable. Also, it runs on Huawei kit, which I personally quite like.
Now all I'm waiting for is VoLTE to roll out and then I can finally switch off that dratted 2G completely.
Join CF
You are here: 
