GSMA calls on ICASA and Government to Support Mobile Broadband

Can LTE not be deployed in the existing frequency bands? Also it will give better coverage in a lower band surely? Why are we going higher and higher in the bands when it is known that it gives much smaller coverage?

Maybe we should start going the route that Japan took and switch over to a complete 3G/LTE network where 2G is switched off completely after a certain cut off date and use our spectrum for more spectrum efficient techno like HSDPA+ and LTE? Maybe say right, cut off is 31st December 2012...after that you better make sure you have a 3G 900/1800 capable phone or no more Ayoba or Yebo Gogo for you! :-)
 
LTE can slip into low AND high frequencies

There are two main frequency bands for mobile broadband -- the 2.6GHz band (where Sentech is squatting on it's small but critical chunk) and the hundreds of MHz band (called the "Digital Dividend") typically around 700-800MHz.

The 2.6GHz band is good for urban areas (high density, lots of base stations, lots of users, high expectations of link speeds), the Digital Dividend is better for rural (lower freq has better range and penetration).

Releasing Digital Dividend is pretty much tied to what Icasa does with digital TV standard -- ideally dig TV gets a small, contiguous chunk, freeing a nice contiguous chink of spectrum for mobile broadband. Releasing 2.6GHz for mobile broadband means shifting Sentech's and WBS' chunk somewhere else in the band so that we are harmonised with other markets.
 
Aaargh. Unfortunately, everyone is so focused on coverage that they seem to be ignoring the quality of the connection. Wireless is the ideal solution for mobile users and rural areas, but I wish they would stop this blanket approach of hailing wireless as the solution to all SAs Internet connectivity woes.

What I want is some competition in the fixed-line (fibre or otherwise) business in residential areas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X