3 Mobile "Mid-Band" about to become "Broadband"

taung

A press release from 3 Ireland today below indicating that speeds will be doubled. I wonder how much better this network upgrade will really improve their mobile broadband service by.


3G Ireland upgrades to I-HSPA with NSN

Irish mobile operator Hutchison 3G Ireland and Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN) have completed an Internet High-Speed Packet Access (I-HSPA) upgrade on part of the cellco’s network, currently being rolled out as part of the National Broadband Scheme (NBS), which will be extended to 3's existing network in the Republic. As a result of the tie-up with NSN, 3 will be able to offer business and residential users within the NBS coverage zone, access to high speed and high capacity broadband services. Meanwhile, maximum theoretical mobile download speeds are being upgraded from 7.2Mbps to 14.4Mbps. In preparation for the NBS project, 3’s W-CDMA network has been totally replaced with Flexi base station technology by the equipment maker. The upgrade took just one year – nearly two years ahead of the original schedule.

Dacelonid

Be interesting to hear from anyone if they have noticed any improvement when the rollout goes live.

jor el

3G will never be broadband, the drawbacks in the technology will never be overcome. Upping the speed that each user can get may have the opposite effect for the end user, unless the backhaul to the mast is up to the task. If you have 60 users on a 3-sector mast (the technological limit) then the mast will need almost 1Gbps to keep up. Even then, the users still won't get 14.4Mbps.

This is nothing more than a PR exercise, and another feather for Minister Ryan's hat.

tonc76

Had a call from 3 a few weeks ago to tell me about this and to offer me a discount on the new mobile broadband. He gave the speil about speeds of up to 7.2 mbps and how much better things would be. When I asked why I never received the 3.6mbps that was previously available he said that it was site specific. The new modem is €79 and the monthly rental is the same at €20. He offered me 1 month free rental so effectively making the modem €59. I told him that if he gave me 2 free months I would buy it. He put me on hold as he had to ask his supervisor - he came back saying no so I told him to stick it up his ar$e and see what speed he could get then

x in the city

tonc76 wrote: »

Had a call from 3 a few weeks ago to tell me about this and to offer me a discount on the new mobile broadband. He gave the speil about speeds of up to 7.2 mbps and how much better things would be. When I asked why I never received the 3.6mbps that was previously available he said that it was site specific. The new modem is €79 and the monthly rental is the same at €20. He offered me 1 month free rental so effectively making the modem €59. I told him that if he gave me 2 free months I would buy it. He put me on hold as he had to ask his supervisor - he came back saying no so I told him to stick it up his ar$e and see what speed he could get then

my a$$

an intermittent 3kb/sec connection from 3 classified as broadband ?

whatever next.

mary harney to become manager of real madrid?

utv internet and eircom offer superior dial up services

watty

The UK Digital Britain report notes:

* 3G/HSPA can't ensure even 1Mbps
* Coverage can't be universal
* 3G is worse than GSM for reliable signal, a switch from GSM to 3G on 900MHz would reduce coverage.
* Only about 10% of cell area can get the headline "up to" speed.

They can't solve the poor average throughput under load and can't solve the "breathing".

Even LTE (almost x4 capacity of HSPA and not evil W-CDMA breathing) can't deliver broadband.

Often only 5% of cell area will see significant speed improvement on moving from 7.2Mbps to 14.4 Mbps speed.

http://www.radioway.info/comparewireless/CompareHSPAandFixed-v4.html

This is misleading marketing hype.

watty

jor el wrote: »

3G will never be broadband, the drawbacks in the technology will never be overcome. Upping the speed that each user can get may have the opposite effect for the end user, unless the backhaul to the mast is up to the task. If you have 60 users on a 3-sector mast (the technological limit) then the mast will need almost 1Gbps to keep up. Even then, the users still won't get 14.4Mbps.

This is nothing more than a PR exercise, and another feather for Minister Ryan's hat.

The 3 sector x 14.4Mbps only needs 45Mbps backhaul. because the 14.4Mbps TOTAL speed for a sector.

In reality the average throughput for the sector can be as low as 1Mbps if you have 10 people in outer 50% of distance. That means they get 100kbps each.

60 people! Average 20 per sector. No matter how much backhaul there is the MAX speed total is 14.4 shared.

As the distance is doubled you have one 1/4 the speed.
As users are added you have less codes. ALSO less speed as each code looks like noise to all other signals. At 15 codes the code noise is terrible hugely limiting distance, so at 1.8Mbps total speed (before you share it) which is likely maximum speed at half cell distance or less the maximum sustained speed for 20 users concurrently is 90kbps!

To get more range you have to limit the number of code and time multiplex the data (which makes ping rise).
So if you schedule five users doing simultaneous traffic on same code, then the ping rises to maybe 400mS.

Each box in that table represents the total speed (before sharing) for a given signal condition. So top left means one user @ 600kbps or 10 users at 60kbps at edge of cell. Bottom right is 1 user only quite close to mast.
With 3 users simultaneously (minimum pings) if signals is very good, 1 could have 5 code 4/4 QAM16 = 4.8MBps if his signal with one user was good enough for 14.4. The other two users could be on only 600kbps each if close enough that with being only user getting over 2Mbps.

You can see as you add users the speed degrades badly and the cell shrinks.


You could argue that 45Mbps backhaul can only be fully utilized in less than 5% of situations and typical AVERAGE backhaul speed would be 5Mbps on a busy cell. Ironically a busy cell needs less backhaul than one with 6 or so users as the "on air" system degrades so badly and higher likelyhood that majority of people have less than 1/4 signal.

If people are evenly distributed in a cell, by mathematical fact, almost 70% of them have less than 1/4 signal (which means < 1/4 speed for cell)!

If everyone is outside the 50% distance to mast then the backhaul can never reach past 12.5Mbps. As you add people the average backhaul speed drops!

watty

Bear in mind the "real" business of a Mobile Operator is phone calls.


They are all playing "get customer base" A €20 mobile data with 10 Gbyte used is 500x more costly to "3" than the cost of supplying €20 voice package.

The voice calls are subtracted out of above and since they are subsidising it, they get priority.

Mobile Data thus is not Broadband. It can't be always on and may not even connect even when there are only 10 other users due cell breathing. Don't forget phone users make it breathe too.

clohamon

3’s W-CDMA network has been totally replaced with Flexi base station technology by the equipment maker.

What does this bit mean?

jor el

watty wrote: »

The 3 sector x 14.4Mbps only needs 45Mbps backhaul. because the 14.4Mbps TOTAL speed for a sector.

Ah, of course. I forgot that. But basically no one will ever see 14.4Mbps unless they're the only person in the entire sector, and they're standing outside the cell tower.

CutzEr

Wait wait - Since when have they been offering 7.2mbps?

watty

clohamon wrote: »

3’s W-CDMA network has been totally replaced with Flexi base station technology by the equipment maker.

What does this bit mean?

Nothing for the User. It's still 100% W-CDMA. Very very little for the Operator.

The newer gear allows higher speed closer to mast. It's the same gear that might be used for LTE. But if 3 really believe that they have now got LTE base stations they are daft.

LTE uses a different band. All the aerials, RF Power amps, Duplex filters and RF LNA (Reciever front end) all need changed for LTE. LTE will overlap 3G for 5 to 10 years (as you can't switch 3G off the day LTE arrives as 3G phones don't work on 3G) so these base stations are just 3G. If 3 Ireland replaced any existing HSDPA gear they spent a lot of money (Over 250,000k per base potentially) for at best a 10% improvement in throughput on Data (none on voice) which makes a loss for them.

3 are repeating Base Station Vendor Marketing hype.

So yes the new gear is not limited to doing W-CDMA. But the new gear will only ever do W-CDMA as that is what 3G uses till its dying day. Those bases will still likely be W-CDMA in 10 years, maybe 13 years.

3's licence is from 2002 to 2022
http://www.odtr.ie/radio_spectrum/3G_and_GSM_licensing_information.541.515.html

So in 13 years time:
IF the 3G band is changed to LTE
IF 3 win a licence for LTE for that band (a earlier won LTE licence on the proposed LTE band would not count.
THEN they can reuse the bases. Not a reason I'd pay extra. You want the return on investment in 2 to 5 years.

3 can't be sure they will EVER be doing ANY mobile on any other band and in any other Standard than 3G. If you took independent measurement of their coverage I think you might find them short on their 2002 licence conditions of coverage complete by 2007. The NBS and current rollout is to help them improve their mobile phone (voice) coverage which is abysmal without Vodafone roaming.

rebel.ranter

watty wrote: »

The 3 sector x 14.4Mbps only needs 45Mbps backhaul. because the 14.4Mbps TOTAL speed for a sector.

In reality the average throughput for the sector can be as low as 1Mbps if you have 10 people in outer 50% of distance. That means they get 100kbps each.

60 people! Average 20 per sector. No matter how much backhaul there is the MAX speed total is 14.4 shared.

As the distance is doubled you have one 1/4 the speed.
As users are added you have less codes. ALSO less speed as each code looks like noise to all other signals. At 15 codes the code noise is terrible hugely limiting distance, so at 1.8Mbps total speed (before you share it) which is likely maximum speed at half cell distance or less the maximum sustained speed for 20 users concurrently is 90kbps!

To get more range you have to limit the number of code and time multiplex the data (which makes ping rise).
So if you schedule five users doing simultaneous traffic on same code, then the ping rises to maybe 400mS.

Each box in that table represents the total speed (before sharing) for a given signal condition. So top left means one user @ 600kbps or 10 users at 60kbps at edge of cell. Bottom right is 1 user only quite close to mast.
With 3 users simultaneously (minimum pings) if signals is very good, 1 could have 5 code 4/4 QAM16 = 4.8MBps if his signal with one user was good enough for 14.4. The other two users could be on only 600kbps each if close enough that with being only user getting over 2Mbps.

You can see as you add users the speed degrades badly and the cell shrinks.


You could argue that 45Mbps backhaul can only be fully utilized in less than 5% of situations and typical AVERAGE backhaul speed would be 5Mbps on a busy cell. Ironically a busy cell needs less backhaul than one with 6 or so users as the "on air" system degrades so badly and higher likelyhood that majority of people have less than 1/4 signal.

If people are evenly distributed in a cell, by mathematical fact, almost 70% of them have less than 1/4 signal (which means < 1/4 speed for cell)!

If everyone is outside the 50% distance to mast then the backhaul can never reach past 12.5Mbps. As you add people the average backhaul speed drops!

You keep trotting this stuff out as if the networks don't plan for cell breathing. All of the networks are building more & more sites to counteract the cell breathing phenomenon.
Everyone should remember that fixed line operators cannot guarantee speeds either, that is a fact. All services fixed or mobile are dependent on fair usage or typical user profiles. If there is any deviation in usage it causes problems.
I do agree that mobile broadband is not true broadband, mainly in my opinion due to latency issues. I think it is a disgrace that 3 got the National Broadband Scheme contract for a number of reasons:
1. Their previous track record on capacity.
2. HSDPA is not broadband
3. They are building where Eircom & other operators are already providing service.
4. They have basically just been given funding to make themselves competitive with with Meteor, O2 & Vodafone are doing.
5. They have a minimal Irish employee base, the other operators have a stronger presence here.

watty

Breathing:
They would need to have x4 or more cells. It's not economically feasible.

Carter's Digital Britain report intially was in favour of 3G to provide rural 2Mbps.

They concluded after study
1) There is no solution to "Breathing". 900MHz GSM should not be replaced by 3G as coverage will suffer badly even for voice.

2) 3G can't provide 1Mbps reliably.


You might not like it, but it's true. W-CDMA is a "bad" technology. That is why NO new wireless system uses CDMA.

(You can trim/edit a quote)

rebel.ranter

watty wrote: »

(You can trim/edit a quote)

Thanks I know.

watty wrote: »

You might not like it, but it's true. W-CDMA is a "bad" technology. That is why NO new wireless system uses CDMA.

I couldn't give two hoots about it, I fully understand that 3G BB is a stop-gap technology. All I am saying is that there are potential issues to be experienced with fixed services & other wireless services such as Clearwire & Irish Broadband too. You seem hell bent on pointing out the deficiencies one one technology over another when the reality is that all technologies are limited in some way.

jor el

rebel.ranter wrote: »

All I am saying is that there are potential issues to be experienced with fixed services & other wireless services such as Clearwire & Irish Broadband too. You seem hell bent on pointing out the deficiencies one one technology over another when the reality is that all technologies are limited in some way.

The scarce and sparse availability of Ripwave and Clearwire means that there aren't many questions about them. When anyone does mention them, someone (often watty) always points out that these are both little more than a dial-up alternative, equivalent to ISDN in many ways, except fixed cost.

A lot of people falsely believe that they will get 3.6, 7.2 or 14.4Mbps out of their 3G "broadband" because the operator told them that. When they get home and discover they are 3km from the mast and only getting any connection at 8AM or after midnight, the reality sinks in, and they need to be told why this happens.

I don't believe there is any vendetta against 3G by anyone, but the general public needs to be educated to the marketing hype of the 3G operators and our minister for communications.

All technologies have their limitations, but 3G is being hailed as the solution to Ireland's broadband problem, with no mention of it's very serious drawbacks, drawbacks which IMO are far greater than any of the other technologies.

rebel.ranter

jor el wrote: »

All technologies have their limitations, but 3G is being hailed as the solution to Ireland's broadband problem, with no mention of it's very serious drawbacks, drawbacks which IMO are far greater than any of the other technologies.

Yes I am aware of the limitations & I am in full agreement with you when you (& Watty) say that 3G is not the right way for this country to meet its broadband needs.
On top of this it is galling to think that we the tax payer are effectively paying 3 €200,000,000 to roll out the rest of their network. The other networks have to pay their own way. (Including fixed line companies)
The problem is the companies like Eircom, Irish Broadband & Clearwire do not have the money to roll out any kind of service to areas that some of the 3G networks are rolling out to so we are effectively stuck with the mobile operators offerings for now.
Yes it makes sense to opt for a fixed line service if the option is open to you & your circumstances suit (e.g. not on a short term rent or only require basic internet connectivity).
The point I am making is that 3G has its place & will be perfectly fine for most people.

darc

There seems to a set goup of people here that moan about three - as far as I can see there is nothing whatsoever forcing these people to be with three.

I have had three BB for about a year now and was reasonably happy with it up to about 6 weeks ago when i upgraded to the 7.2mb modem. I now am extremely happy with it, I can work from home and avoid rush hours, I can update files, download movies etc.

As for eircom - the exchange is bb enabled, but I have a split line and they refuse to do anything about it. - Now I use skpe via three and have ditched the landline menaing the three service is costing me less than nothing after taking the landline cost out.

Average spped during working hours is close to 3mb and sometimes over 4mb. At peak time in the evening it has not dropped below 1.2mb. Upload is regularly 300-400kbs.

In the office I have 3mb bb - and get approx 2.4mb so Three during office hours is better than my dsl line in the office!

rebel.ranter

darc wrote: »

There seems to a set group of people here that moan about three

I hope you are not including me in that set group. My principal moan is that they are being paid by the government to roll out their network.

darc

rebel.ranter wrote: »

I hope you are not including me in that set group. My principal moan is that they are being paid by the government to roll out their network.

Nope - just the ones that go on and on and on and on about the lack of speed. Surely at some stage they realise its not for them. Cut the contract and get another service. - I don't go on and on and on about eircom who had me on a split line and who's voice quality was crap and BB was unavailable - i just closed the account and moved my requirements to another provider.

I for one am extremely happy with the servcie especially since their last upgrade as it is allowing me finally to work from home at the same pace as working from the office.

bealtine

darc wrote: »

There seems to a set goup of people here that moan about three - as far as I can see there is nothing whatsoever forcing these people to be with three.

Three (the company) are not the target, as was clearly pointed out in previous posts. The ludicrous claims of the operators (all of them) are the target. Quoting impossible and misleading throughput is the biggest issue and while also ignoring probable contention.

Average spped during working hours is close to 3mb and sometimes over 4mb. At peak time in the evening it has not dropped below 1.2mb. Upload is regularly 300-400kbs.

Wait until all your neighbours start using the system then come back and praise it.

That's exactly what happened to a friend of mine, he got a 3G dongle and was delighted with it. He told all his neighbours about the wonderful service and voila they all went out and bought one too.

Now his service is dire because of contention.

So the moral of the story is don't tell anyone you are using the service and that you have a great service then pray nobody else finds out and start using it too...

bealtine

darc wrote: »

Nope - just the ones that go on and on and on and on about the lack of speed. Surely at some stage they realise its not for them. Cut the contract and get another service. - I don't go on and on and on about eircom who had me on a split line and who's voice quality was crap and BB was unavailable - i just closed the account and moved my requirements to another provider.

I for one am extremely happy with the servcie especially since their last upgrade as it is allowing me finally to work from home at the same pace as working from the office.

What about the "national broadband scheme" where people have no other choice? Should they just "realise" it's not for them and go somewhere else?
I'd love to hear your suggestions as to what they should do...

watty

rebel.ranter wrote: »

.
On top of this it is galling to think that we the tax payer are effectively paying 3 €200,000,000 to roll out the rest of their network. The other networks have to pay their own way. (Including fixed line companies)

.. snip ..

The point I am making is that 3G has its place & will be perfectly fine for most people.

The 200,000,000 is a lie. Government misinformation. There is 40M EU grant and 38M Government grant. Still a total waste.

The place for 3G is phone calls and light Mobile On-the-go data, it was never intended as a fixed Broadband. It's not at all fine for most people and will get worse as more customers are added. People during this phase of market capture are not seeing the true cost either which in reality should be x5 cost of DSL inc line rental, not 1/2 the cost.

In some ways Ripwave and Clearwire are inferior to 3G/HSPA. They are not fixed Wireless Broadband services. Ripwave uses S-CDMA. The indoor omini aerial makes Clearwire and Ripwave wasteful of spectrum capacity and poor performance, apart from being poor technology.

I've seen Ripwave with 1829ms or more latency only 200m from a basestation.

Walkman

rebel.ranter wrote: »

On top of this it is galling to think that we the tax payer are effectively paying 3 €200,000,000 to roll out the rest of their network.

Incorrect. The total cost of the NBS is €223 million. The government will pay €80 million and 3 themselves will pay €143 million for the network rollout, hardly getting their network rollout paid for by the government.

bealtine

Walkman wrote: »

Incorrect. The total cost of the NBS is €223 million. The government will pay €80 million and 3 themselves will pay €143 million for the network rollout, hardly getting their network rollout paid for by the government.

Still a fair whack of the rollout costs being subsidised, more than a third, being paid for by tax payer subsidies.

rebel.ranter

Walkman wrote: »

Incorrect. The total cost of the NBS is €223 million. The government will pay €80 million and 3 themselves will pay €143 million for the network rollout, hardly getting their network rollout paid for by the government.

That's fair enough, point taken (& yours Watty in regard to funding numbers), still €80 million funding is still quite substantial.

nuttlys

as part of the contract on the NBS, 3 has to provide wholesale access to other operators - http://www.three.ie/nbs/authorised-undertakings.htm

So really the government are paying 3 to implement methods of delivering countrywide BB, from which any operator can supply a service. Fair, no?

Also worth noting is that the NBS does not involve 3G only but also satellite "which may cover up to 8% of the NBS areas".

PogMoThoin

nuttlys wrote: »

as part of the contract on the NBS, 3 has to provide wholesale access to other operators - http://www.three.ie/nbs/authorised-undertakings.htm

So really the government are paying 3 to implement methods of delivering countrywide BB, from which any operator can supply a service. Fair, no?

Great, more phone users and less room for data, You really think O2, Vodafone and Meteor are gonna pay 3 for data roaming?. Its not nor ever will be a Broadband service, its a phone network that does a little data. We've just helped them build it with tax payers money

nuttlys wrote: »

Also worth noting is that the NBS does not involve 3G only but also satellite "which may cover up to 8% of the NBS areas".

What satellite? Its still on the ground with no launch date

watty

nuttlys wrote: »

as part of the contract on the NBS, 3 has to provide wholesale access to other operators - http://www.three.ie/nbs/authorised-undertakings.htm

So really the government are paying 3 to implement methods of delivering countrywide BB, from which any operator can supply a service. Fair, no?

Also worth noting is that the NBS does not involve 3G only but also satellite "which may cover up to 8% of the NBS areas".

It's not "Methods of Broadband" but plain ordinary 3g/HSPA voice & Data. A Mobile phone network. The rates for over cap are nearly €250 a gigabyte.

They picked a tiny cheap supplier for the Satellite (minimum 790ms latency).
The rocket has never flown. It is an experimental prototype Falcon9 by SpaceX
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2009/05/30/falcon-9-launch-delayed-unitl-fall/

The Satellite is also behind schedule and is a ESA funded prototype. It was 5th in queue, but now 2nd. The failure rate of new rockets historically is high, so the investors/stakeholders are now looking at a possibility of established launcher. This of course will cost very very much more.

There is possibility that it won't launch till 2010. Even then it could fail.
http://www.echarcha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30814

No-one knows when or if the Satellite "3" have picked will ever be in service. Eutelsat's new Kasat for 13E is a better bet. But there is existing capacity, it's just tha Avanti, 3's satellite provider have very little as they only lease a few transponders.

The wholesale access clause is part of their 3G licence. They have no EXTRA licence. They would be in breach of their 3G licence without offering nationwide coverage and wholesale.

The ONLY thing the NBS adds that we wouldn't be getting ANYWAY, is the non-existant Satellite service from 3.

You already can get economical Satellite services from real ISPs nationwide in Ireland, that actually exist.

So in the end the Government is paying €79M for nothing extra at all. It doesn't even deliver Universal outdoor Mobile coverage. Nor is the NBS satellite subsidized install universal either.

drunkmonkey

watty wrote: »

You already can get economical Satellite services from real ISPs nationwide in Ireland, that actually exist.
.

do any of them offer nationwide coverage?

watty

All do.

40% of secondary schools are on Satellite.