Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 26 of 26

Thread: 5G coverage maps

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    2,309
    Device(s)
    OnePlus 7T, Apple iPhone 6S, Apple iPad 3 (VZW variant)
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, Verizon Prepaid, Total Wireless (Verizon), FreedomPop (AT&T)
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by obeythelaw View Post
    When I click the 5G map it shows 5G all over northern and central NJ. I don’t have a 5G phone but I have a band 71 phone. There are spots where I live that there is either no service or Edge speeds. Does this mean now that they flipped the switch that if you have a band 71 phone even without 5G that we’ll be able to get more and better coverage? It’s my understanding that T-Mobile 5G is strictly on band 71 right now.


    Sent from my iPhone using HoFo
    No, T-Mobile also has a little bit of mMwave in a handful of markets. That map only depicts n71 coverage for 5G.

    Many areas will get/retain a somewhat weak LTE signal on B71, or just have 5G n71. They decided that half or more of band 71's bandwidth would go to 5G, even if it was fully used for LTE previously. The exceptions seem to be areas where they underserve in supplemental LTE coverage (NW Oklahoma is an example of this). There are not a lot or exception areas if you compare the 5G map to the most recent lart2150 map.
    Hopefully they will, sooner rather than later, implement DSS along with additional [Sprint] spectrum, better backhaul and additional capacity. I feel these will help LTE users for a couple years.


    IMO many rural areas should have just stayed fully LTE until next year. We know 5G devices won't be popular for at least one generation cycle. It took LTE two cycles to get popular on every carrier and that was using new spectrum. Apple and Google may, but not guaranteed to, offer a 5G-capable device next year. Then it could have gone Nationwide at the same time, and Apple marketing would have been icing on the cake.

    I feel going "Nationwide" this early hurts T-Mobile's case for the merger. Obviously with AT&T and Verizon looking to broaden their 5G coverage using low and mid band, T-Mobile pushed them without the merger. We'll see how this plays into the case.

    Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk
    My common forum nick: GenesisDH.

    R.I.P. Circuit City

    We are the Bor... the new AT&T: Your World, Assimilated.

    1000th post: Sept. 29th, 2008, 17:42 CDT

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    594
    Device(s)
    iPhone
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Haas_Dave View Post
    No, T-Mobile also has a little bit of mMwave in a handful of markets. That map only depicts n71 coverage for 5G.

    Many areas will get/retain a somewhat weak LTE signal on B71, or just have 5G n71. They decided that half or more of band 71's bandwidth would go to 5G, even if it was fully used for LTE previously. The exceptions seem to be areas where they underserve in supplemental LTE coverage (NW Oklahoma is an example of this). There are not a lot or exception areas if you compare the 5G map to the most recent lart2150 map.
    Hopefully they will, sooner rather than later, implement DSS along with additional [Sprint] spectrum, better backhaul and additional capacity. I feel these will help LTE users for a couple years.


    IMO many rural areas should have just stayed fully LTE until next year. We know 5G devices won't be popular for at least one generation cycle. It took LTE two cycles to get popular on every carrier and that was using new spectrum. Apple and Google may, but not guaranteed to, offer a 5G-capable device next year. Then it could have gone Nationwide at the same time, and Apple marketing would have been icing on the cake.

    I feel going "Nationwide" this early hurts T-Mobile's case for the merger. Obviously with AT&T and Verizon looking to broaden their 5G coverage using low and mid band, T-Mobile pushed them without the merger. We'll see how this plays into the case.

    Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk
    If I had a 5G capable phone then would I get better coverage in an area now where I have no service or weak LTE coverage? If not, this whole band 600 seems like a farce. I thought the whole point of moving TV stations off the spectrum was to free up the use for band 71.


    Sent from my iPhone using HoFo

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,549
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Androided View Post
    5G is fake on 600mzh actually, it makes the so called 5G not fast than 4G LTE+, because the bandwidth limitation
    What do you think is fake about 5G on 600 MHz? The fact that it will not do Gbps does not make it fake. Gbps is not a requirement or design goal of 5G where the bandwidth is not available.

    Maybe it benefits for the Sprint merge promise
    T-Mo doing this right at this moment probably does have more to do with the painting a pretty picture for the Sprint deal.

    No benefits for customers.
    There is little immediate benefit for customers in the short term. This is the beginning of the long term transition to 5G. There is no point in building improved LTE. 5G will provide improved cell service for everyone better than some patched together LTE optimization.

    I do not expect to want or need a 5G phone for several years. I used a 3G phone for years into the LTE era.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,926
    Carrier(s)
    TMobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Haas_Dave View Post
    No, T-Mobile also has a little bit of mMwave in a handful of markets. That map only depicts n71 coverage for 5G.

    Many areas will get/retain a somewhat weak LTE signal on B71, or just have 5G n71. They decided that half or more of band 71's bandwidth would go to 5G, even if it was fully used for LTE previously. The exceptions seem to be areas where they underserve in supplemental LTE coverage (NW Oklahoma is an example of this). There are not a lot or exception areas if you compare the 5G map to the most recent lart2150 map.
    Hopefully they will, sooner rather than later, implement DSS along with additional [Sprint] spectrum, better backhaul and additional capacity. I feel these will help LTE users for a couple years.


    IMO many rural areas should have just stayed fully LTE until next year. We know 5G devices won't be popular for at least one generation cycle. It took LTE two cycles to get popular on every carrier and that was using new spectrum. Apple and Google may, but not guaranteed to, offer a 5G-capable device next year. Then it could have gone Nationwide at the same time, and Apple marketing would have been icing on the cake.

    I feel going "Nationwide" this early hurts T-Mobile's case for the merger. Obviously with AT&T and Verizon looking to broaden their 5G coverage using low and mid band, T-Mobile pushed them without the merger. We'll see how this plays into the case.

    Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk
    I was thinking the same thing. Coming out with it this early before the trial seems like a bad idea. First thing that came to mind for me, well I guess tmobile will do ok without Sprint.

    Not sure if a judge will feel the same way but I would have waited until after before coming out with it

    I think Att is really what pushed tmobile to come with it early. Att is pushing 5g and has mentioned low band also so I think tmobile wanted to be first for "nationwide"

    Maybe it helps their trial since it shows they want to compete, not really sure but to me it says "hey we can do 5g without Sprint"

    Maybe I'm wrong in my thinking. I did have 3 beers over lunch with my boss and co-workers

    Sent from my VS880 using HoFo mobile app

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    15,935
    Device(s)
    Moto G7 Power, Nexus 5X
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, PagePlus
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by obeythelaw View Post
    If I had a 5G capable phone then would I get better coverage in an area now where I have no service or weak LTE coverage? ......
    Coverage will be the same.

    One thing everyone should remember is that, in many areas, T-Mobile has not fully deployed their existing mid-band licenses. In some areas they may be running 2G, 3G & LTE all in band 2. This means that there can be mid-band deployment on mid-band (e.g. 4/66) licenses well before Sprint's band 41 becomes available. Of course, this does not apply to big cities, where mid-band is fully deployed.
    Donald Newcomb

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,346
    Device(s)
    N/A
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon Wireless;
    Feedback Score
    0
    I agree it may have been better for T-Mo to just run LTE only in rural areas where 600mhz may be used extensively. In a sense this is a PR stunt, it gets a very small sliver of 5G up while slowing down existing 4G service unnecessarily. With that said, it does work as an effective PR move, and I fully expect they'll just switch it the "5x5 4G and 5x5 5G" to "10x10 DSS 4G/5G" in a few months, maybe middle of next year; get the software update, test it in a few markets, if it works properly roll it out.

    Re: 600mhz being fake 5G. I mean, it's not "fake", it's real 5G; but I do view running like 5mhz of it as a bit of a PR stunt. Not 5G speed for sure. From a technical standpoint it makes sense (on bands other than mmwave) to wait the few months for DSS. It would have made sense to wait for Samsung etc. to come up with a phone that supports both mmwave and "sub6" 5G bands, instead of one that only supports one and one that only supports the other. I do fully expect the carriers to start trying as hard as possible to blur the line between mmwave and sub6 5g, implying gigabit speeds all over the country. Still, as more 5G phones come out, getting a 20-100% speed boost out of the existing spectrum's not bad.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    15,935
    Device(s)
    Moto G7 Power, Nexus 5X
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile, PagePlus
    Feedback Score
    0
    Since the subject is "5G Coverage Maps", I think it would be interesting to see a 5G coverage map with colors representing the theoretical maximum 5G download speed, given factors such as bandwidth, distance to tower, average humidity, etc.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    629
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hwertz View Post
    I agree it may have been better for T-Mo to just run LTE only in rural areas where 600mhz may be used extensively. In a sense this is a PR stunt, it gets a very small sliver of 5G up while slowing down existing 4G service unnecessarily. With that said, it does work as an effective PR move, and I fully expect they'll just switch it the "5x5 4G and 5x5 5G" to "10x10 DSS 4G/5G" in a few months, maybe middle of next year; get the software update, test it in a few markets, if it works properly roll it out.

    Re: 600mhz being fake 5G. I mean, it's not "fake", it's real 5G; but I do view running like 5mhz of it as a bit of a PR stunt. Not 5G speed for sure. From a technical standpoint it makes sense (on bands other than mmwave) to wait the few months for DSS. It would have made sense to wait for Samsung etc. to come up with a phone that supports both mmwave and "sub6" 5G bands, instead of one that only supports one and one that only supports the other. I do fully expect the carriers to start trying as hard as possible to blur the line between mmwave and sub6 5g, implying gigabit speeds all over the country. Still, as more 5G phones come out, getting a 20-100% speed boost out of the existing spectrum's not bad.
    Fake 5G is slower than LTE+

    Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,146
    Device(s)
    Pixel 3a & 4xl; Moto X4 & 7; ZTE R2; iPhone XR
    Carrier(s)
    Google Fi; Visible
    Feedback Score
    0
    You can put lipstick on a pig but it’s still a pig. In a couple of years it will be worth talking about.
    Nexus 5x, Pixel 2, 3, 3a, Moto X4, G6 & G7 on Google Fi
    iPhone XR & ZTE R2 on Visible

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    1,979
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DRNewcomb View Post
    Since the subject is "5G Coverage Maps", I think it would be interesting to see a 5G coverage map with colors representing the theoretical maximum 5G download speed, given factors such as bandwidth, distance to tower, average humidity, etc.
    Don't worry all the tech media already have these devices on hand are testing them as we speak. I'm sure there's a NDA to not saying anything until Friday. What I want to see is people testing t-mobile 5G service then in the exact same spot test at&t and Verizon's 4G service and if those 2 are still faster this will be such a bad look for T-Mobile. Because if it's not faster and the coverage is the same what's the point?

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,588
    Device(s)
    S9
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Qualcomm new 865 Flagship and 765 Midrange Snapdragon chips with 5G will become the standard in Android phones in early 2020.


    https://www.theverge.com/circuitbrea...em-tech-summit

    The Mobile World Congress in Barcelona Spain at the end of February will have many new 5G phones announcements from most major manufacturers.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Projected 5G Coverage Maps
    By @TheRealDanny in forum T-Mobile
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-30-2018, 11:42 PM
  2. better coverage maps
    By dgordo in forum Verizon Wireless
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-14-2002, 02:02 PM
  3. Nokia Chargers and Coverage maps
    By Her.ph in forum General Mobile Questions and Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-21-2002, 11:13 PM
  4. GSM coverage map
    By Guest 280 in forum AT&T
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-21-2002, 07:18 PM
  5. Bell Updated Coverage Map
    By reality416 in forum Bell/Virgin/Lucky/Solo
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-23-2001, 01:16 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks