I know there is latency associated with mobile broadband, but generally the speeds are decent at times. My question is: surely the costs to set up mobile base stations is far cheaper than rolling out fibre / copper to homes? Why is there no drive to reduce mobile data costa and get users to rather go mobile. Of course fixed line would still be there for bandwidth intensive users, but for a home user, cost effective mobilebroadband makes sense to me.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Have you ever ordered a product online and received a fake knock-off?
In SA surely wireless broadband makes sense?
- Thread starter FlashSA
- Start date
MickeyD
RIP
Barriers: DoC/ICASA/Spectrum
Enabler: LTE
Enabler: LTE
Wireless solutions ALWAYS require backhaul. The solution is a combination of increasing (and more importantly getting existing infrastructure used) fixed line infrastructure in place with as deep penetration as possible and then having efficient wireless systems in play.
Radio spectrum is finite once the bandwidth is saturated it starts to degrade there are many disadvantages to radio . Interference on wireless.
At the moment the biggest problem is antenna tower sites.
At the moment the biggest problem is antenna tower sites.
Last edited:
Hummercellc
Expert Member
Wireless could work in the form on WiMax, 5.8ghz Wifi & 3G. If the DOC and ICASA came to the party...
But the cell operators need to focus more on getting a stable speed and latency rather than higher speeds... Latency on 3G can be just as good as DSL.
But the cell operators need to focus more on getting a stable speed and latency rather than higher speeds... Latency on 3G can be just as good as DSL.