Has 4G/5G improved? When I lived in the UK (Midlands until 2019) it was entirely unreliable. I'd wager 75% of my connection was on 3G as soon as I was more than 3Km from a town's high street.<p>I can say with confidence that the shift from 4G/LTE to 5G where I live now in British Columbia (Canada) mountains is not fun. It's significantly less reliable. I understand that its 10x faster, but I'd much prefer reliable over fast when it comes to mobile phones.
> Furthermore, the study also reveals 21% of those with a 3G handset aren’t willing to upgrade, and will simply continue to use their phone without internet connectivity.<p>Seems reasonable. Is this supposed to be a bad thing?
> Furthermore, the study also reveals 21% of those with a 3G handset aren’t willing to upgrade, and will simply continue to use their phone without internet connectivity.<p>My bet would be that these are mostly devices given to children to watch Youtube and what-not.<p>> However, calls and texts will continue to work despite the 3G switch off, as 2G won’t be fully switched off until 2033 the latest. This is because 2G is still used for critical infrastructure, including legacy connectivity solutions that typically have a longer product life.<p>Is it really that much overhead to keep 2G networks operating? It's very difficult to get behind any type of cellular technology when tomorrow it could be turned off.
The joys of mandatory obsolescence. Forcing handset churn is environmentally irresponsible. Maybe it is time for landlines to get SMS so people don't have to rely on mobile infrastructure? 5am sentiment but it'd be nice.
Relying on pools to get the data doesn’t seem very reliable. Phone carriers should have good numbers on how many users connect using 3G form base station logs. But may be they have no incentive to share because it could create pressure to delay 3G sunset.
3G has been recently switched off in the most (or all by now?) part of Hungary. I have thought that the bands get reused for 4G, but no change so far. Probably the remaining 2G occupies the same bands or whatever. Or they have gone with 5G, while all the providers banish prepaid users from using 5G, so thanks for nothing.
Anyway, the biggest downside is that where the 4G coverage sucks, I'm seeing the nightmarish EDGE on my phone instead of HSDPA+. And it happens way too many times... Sometimes it happens while just passing a corner in the streets, and sometimes it takes too much time for the phone to recover to 4G+.
I wonder why some countries are shutting down 3G but are keeping 2G around for several more years (UK, Germany), while others do the opposite, and yet others can get away with turning off both and going 4G/5G only (like the US).<p>Maybe it's a function of what type of M2M devices were rolled out most commonly in a country? For example, parking meters and vending machines often communciate via SMS in Germany; that works on 2G, so they might not even have a 3G modem.<p>On the other hand, I've seen a mobile payment terminal with a built-in 3G modem (but no LTE) that basically became obsolete with the 3G shutdown, since it falls back to GPRS which is hopelessly overloaded and/or just too slow for applications not geared towards it.
It is kind sad and funny at the same time, that in Germany I run around with 3G in major cities, which I have had in China in the middle of nowhere in probably better quality, 5 years ago.
To put in a little context. First 4G iPhone was iPhone 5, released on Sep 2012. 4G here is straightly LTE+ and not anything else. And the first 4G enabled Smartphone was released in 2010 by HTC.<p>By 2015. All Smartphone from major manufacture, including Apple has a top to bottom LTE capable Line Up.<p>i.e If the phone is 3G only, it is either very old or specifically designed for Voice and SMS only aka old Nokia non-smart phone.
> The survey also reveals 13% of people are unaware if their phone actually supports 4G or 5G<p>Include me in that. I have an old phone with a discount SIM installed. I only use it for certain international calls. Wikipedia and elsewhere describe it as "GSM / HSPA+ / LTE", and then explain that LTE "is also called 3.95G and has been marketed as 4G LTE and Advanced 4G" etc.
> Furthermore, the study also reveals 21% of those with a 3G handset aren’t willing to upgrade, and will simply continue to use their phone without internet connectivity.<p>I would guess that a large subset of those handsets are for 'emergency' use. Phones kept in car glove boxes and hand bags and rarely or infrequently used and never for internet.
It’s a positive thing, tbh. I wish the number was bigger. Our desire to switch to the hottest new thing has a significant environmental impact. People don’t need the fastest available mobile internet for checking mails or streaming videos at 1 Mbps. They don’t need the fastest PCs for using Google docs. We don’t need massive pickup trucks for doing grocery runs or even hauling passengers around. It’s fair for anyone to disagree, but I wanted to put this thought out there.