Mobile network providers are gradually shutting down 3G for economical reasons, because 4G/LTE's establishment made 3G mostly obsolete, and because most devices support 4G already.
Many places are also widely equipped with LTE-A (or 4G+).
2G will remain for a while for compatibility reasons and long range, but is also said to shut down.
But it would be good if remote places will still keep 2G and 3G due to their superior range (4G speeds are useless without signal, and 5G's range is crap anyway).
In lesser crowded and more remote places, one 3G antenna might provide for the entire valley.
It might not be fast, but enough for exchanging text contents (e.g. tweets, browsing wikis) and maybe downloading multiple videos at 480p overnight.
Of course, there's also satellite Internet, but that requires a big stationary satellite receiver for the home, so no portability.
Another reason for keeping 2G and 3G in remote places is providing access to emergency information in very remote places.
Mobile network providers are gradually shutting down 3G for economical reasons, because 4G/LTE's establishment made 3G mostly obsolete, and because most devices support 4G already.
Many places are also widely equipped with LTE-A (or *4G+*).
2G will remain for a while for compatibility reasons and long range, but is also said to shut down.
But it would be good if **remote places** will still keep 2G and 3G due to their superior range (4G speeds are useless without signal, and 5G's range is crap anyway).
In lesser crowded and more remote places, one 3G antenna might provide for the entire valley.
It might not be fast, but enough for exchanging text contents (e.g. tweets, browsing wikis) and maybe downloading multiple videos at 480p overnight.
Of course, there's also satellite Internet, but that requires a big stationary satellite receiver for the home, so no portability.
Another reason for keeping 2G and 3G in remote places is providing access to emergency information in very remote places.
(post is archived)