Nine more UK cities and towns join the EE 4G club

Nine more UK cities and towns join the EE 4G clubNine more UK cities and towns are now basking in the glow of 4G after EE expanded its LTE infrastructure to now cover a claimed 45% of the UK population.

The latest crop of locations to get the 4G green-light are: Amersham, Bolton, Chelmsford, Hemel Hempstead, Southend-on-Sea, Stockport, Sunderland, Sutton Coldfield and Wolverhampton.

“As the first operator to bring 4G to the UK, it is important that we make it accessible to as much of the population as possible, as quickly as possible,” EE CEO Olaf Swantee said of the latest batch of switch-ons.

“To be ahead of schedule and covering approximately 45 per cent of the population within just 90 days of the launch is a great achievement for our network team.”

That 45% population figure sounds impressive, but it's obviously slanted massively towards getting the most populated cities switched on first, and it's a vastly different picture when you consider the actual geographic coverage of EE's 4G infrastructure.

It's a particular problem the further north you travel, despite the latest batch of 4G inductees including a higher percentage of locations “up north” than we've seen so far.

As for extremely up north, a.k.a. Scotland, you're fine if you count Glasgow or Edinburgh as home, but the rest of Scotland is still waiting for the 4G revolution – and for the record, Ofcom has already said Northern Scotland will be the last part of the UK to get access to LTE technology.

Ofcom, meanwhile, is in the process of auctioning off a further two spectrum bands intended for 4G data services. Among the bidders are EE itself, plus its three network rivals O2, Vodafone and Three, and HKT, a UK offshoot of Hong Kong-based PCCW.

Via Pocket-lint

Add a comment

Pondlife  Feb. 1, 2013 at 13:20

For the 45% that can supposedly get their 4g it seems patchy at best

matt101101 / MOD  Feb. 1, 2013 at 13:30

It is patchy, it's city centre only, that's why. I live about 10 miles outside Nottingham (which is a not inconsiderate city, which has 4G coverage), and I don't get ANY 4G signal, not even one bar.

Compare that to HSDPA+ where I get full bars and enough bandwidth to stream HD video (not that I use mobile data at home very often, obviously).

Pondlife  Feb. 1, 2013 at 13:59

Even in the city centre (although that's a vague term in london) the beeb found it varied widely.

Though I'd hope it would have improved by now

rickeiebayoi  Feb. 8, 2013 at 22:49

It bugs me when people whinge about 4G speeds, looking at the those results above id be more than happy. In general just on the basis of the reduction in latency. On a good 3G I will typically get just 130-300ms with random spikes. From what ive seen 4G offers between 30ms --> 70ms consistently. That means much more responsive browsing, a mobile connection capable of games and fairly shortly move away from the need for a landline.

Exciting times

Pondlife  Feb. 9, 2013 at 00:06

Fair enough you settle for 3rd rate 4g then.


You don't need an account to comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.