Everything Everywhere's attempt to garner public backing for its UK monopoly on 4G launched to angry responses today. EE has promised to inject £75bn into Blighty's economy if only the regulator would stand aside. The operator wants Ofcom to approve its application to deploy LTE (aka "4G") in the swath of 1800MHz spectrum lying …
.... are they injecting £75 billion [or £75 thousand million ?] ?
The hardware vendor will either be Swedish, French or possibly Chinese. Most of the build work will be done by sub-contractors with a lot of the extra staff taken on through agencies sourcing from out side the UK and if they go with the Chinese option, mostly Chinse for the design work as well.
The benefits of having one LTE network [which is NOT 4G...!!!] is unlikely to have that big a knock on benefit in the working lives of subscribers, who are not going to start replacing their high speed fixed for LTE.
Naa, don't buy this at all I have to say.
Re: Exactly how.....
Investing more like. As in, putting money in, with the expectation of taking more money out later. When you "inject" something, you don't usually try to remove it as fast as possible afterwards.
Unless they are planning to take money from other countries and lose it in the UK. That would make their shareholders very happy.
Re: Exactly how.....
LTE is the 4th Generation network unlike the USA with there fake 4g HSPA+ network that's using 3g band still so speeds are only an little bit faster (1mb is now 2-3mb speeds)
LTE and LTE-Adv is an new network in it self and should be classed as such
"a five-minute video of dancing cats would download in one minute, rather than four, leaving one three minutes to build an extra widget..."
Not really. The thing is that most people watch video using streaming, which means it doesn't really matter how long it takes to 'download', as it still takes 5 minutes to watch the video.
Not everybody stands about gawping at downloads for however long anyway. Some people might have enough gumption to get on with something else whilst a download completes.
Please don't start referring to LTE as 4G. It's just going to give the network operators leeway to brand it like they do in the US and we all know the ASA will be too spineless to do anything about it.
The ASA are more toothless than spineless - they are one of the few quangos with the will to rule against companies. Their problem is they make an almost pointless ruling in retrospect after ad campaigns have already finished (usually.)
Just want fast reliable, fast Network access (mobile and wired) at a reasonable price and with reasonable terms.
Here's an idea, "EE"...
...instead of using the 1800 spectrum for more pointless bollocks, how about using it to plug the holes in your coverage? Like the village I live in (near Cambridge) where there's a mast on either side of the village but magically sod all signal in the village itself.
@ Here's an idea, "EE"...
I agree, or just rolling out 3G to the (it seems) 99% of anywhere outside a town where I can't seem to get 3G
Re: @ Here's an idea, "EE"...
From what I've read LTE infrastructure is much easier to set up than WCDMA. I don't really agree with giving EE a monopoly but if they do get it then as I understand the economics of it, 'not-spots' are likely to bypass 3G entirely and be LTE right from the moment they get coverage. I'm no wireless engineer though.
Re: @ Here's an idea, "EE"...
OK, I am a wireless engineer. From a site perspective, it's not particularly different to set up an LTE1800 network compared to a GSM/DCS1800 network. 1800MHz propagation is 1800 MHz propagation (not great) so the site count is pretty much the same. Moving RNC functionality into the Base Station and the core network is not a massive time saver.
On the non-technical side, what is clear is that EE are under a legal obligation to give up the 15+15MHz that the European Commision said had to be relinquished in order to support the T-Mobile/Orange Merger <<Specifically to prevent an unfair advantage for LTE>>. That's not litigation, that's called playing by the rules. If this spectrum is cleared and sold, it can be used by another operator to launch LTE1800. If EE can clear spectrum for their own use, they can surely clear what they already know they have to clear legally.
And since the article claims that they will use "" the swath of 1800MHz spectrum lying largely empty as a result of merging Orange and T-Mobile."" there can be no argument.
As for the OfCom claims that it is litigation stopping the auction, from the BBC """17 November 2010 Last updated at 17:21......The airwaves that will enable 4G networks will be auctioned off in the first half of 2012, Mr Richards said."" so what is the reason for a 6 month delay to the end of the year? DD800 was switched off in London 2 weeks ago, only TyneTees, Kent and NI remain using the spectrum, so come on OfCom, get EE to clear and sell their 1800, auction 800 and 2600 and allow all 1800MHz spectrum owners use it for LTE.
LTE is 4G
@Fibbes, re "Please don't start referring to LTE as 4G. It's just going to give the network operators leeway to brand it like they do in the US and we all know the ASA will be too spineless to do anything about it."
Well, I consider LTE to be 4G. What the US carriers are doing (GSM carriers like T-Mobile and AT&T especially) are upgrading their existing HSPA networks then falsely calling an upgraded 3G network is 4G. The earliest 2G networks ran just 9600bps data which overlapped in speed with CDPD over analog (1G). But the GSM and CDMA networks had an upgrade path while CDPD didn't. UMTS (3G) ran at just 384kbps, not much better than EDGE (2G), but EDGE was as far as it'd go while UMTS was just starting down an upgrade path. Same thing now -- a company can tweak out a 3G network to approach LTE speeds, but the LTE network has an upgrade path ahead of it while the HSPA+ network will be about as far as it can go.
Anyway... I don't like the sound of EE really, it seems like a big reduction in competition. But, on the other hand, I like the idea of spectrum being technology neutral. As much as poeple like to laugh at the US's fragmented technology landscape, the fact of the matter is the CDMA carriers here saved loads of money due to CDMA's spectral efficiency compared to 2G GSM, TDMA, or analog (which at the time were all viable competitors, if the US had mandated technology we'd probably be stuck with TDMA still.) More recently, the CDMA carriers had 2.4mbps mobile data (EVDO Revision 0) rolled out over a good portion of their networks by the time UMTS hardware (at just 384kbps) was even available on the market, let alone the 1.8mbps and 3.6mbps upgrades that made UMTS competitive. So, now, the EVDO Rev A (3.1mbps) is falling behind, but since the CDMA carriers started their EVDO upgrades so long ago, that's a sunk cost now and they have no problem moving quickly on LTE upgrades. The GSM carriers here are just falsely renaming their 3G networks 4G, while doing bare minimum LTE upgrades so they can say they are doing some. None of this would have been possible with technology mandates.
"leaving one three minutes to build an extra widget"?
Or just more time to download other pointless videos...
A moniker so 'clever' a lobotomised chimp armed with a dictionary and a couple of darts could have done better.
Name apart, no one has done more to argue the toss through legal channels about spectrum use than T'orange Anywhere. The bastard in me would like to see them end up with nothing at all, not least because their customer service is about as informative, friendly and helpful as last Wednesday's Daily Mail.
"As well as recruiting media and the less technically literate organisations"
Who the fuck is less technically literate than the media? (Staff at PC World don't count as an "organisation")
Angola will beat us to LTE
The process needs to be streamlined by government and an accelerated timetable put in place; the existing 3G operators should be invited to operate 4G networks and an invitation made to other interested parties to at least attempt to increase competition. After that the spectrum should be split based on agreed criteria (market share, proposed investments etc.)
Hoping to cash in on the licensing process will only hold the economy back, so the government should minimise this and recoup on corporation taxes later on.
How about while we all wait.
The networks use this time to fix the existing problems in their current networks...
Where are the handsets/tablets that will use this new bandwidth?
So EE gets it's way and rolls out LTE at 1800. Who has a tablet in their hand or handset in their pocket that can use it? Or does EE expect me to buy a shiny new one just to access a faster download when I happen to be on a motorway or in London?
Re: Where are the handsets/tablets that will use this new bandwidth?
If you want to use LTE then you will be expected to take a plan with a "shiny" new device... No one is forcing you to do anything!
- Does Apple's iOS 7 make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets with glowing KILL RAY
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA
- Hands on Satisfy my scroll: El Reg gets claws on Windows 8.1 spring update