Seriously. All that money invested for 5G that won’t even work (exist) in so many places outside of major population centers, and in practice may not even be much different in the places it does exist. Why pour billions into this when improved 4G was nearly as good?
It’s easier to transmit the mind control nanites.
Because cell companies have to have something to market, or they start losing market share.
5G is designed to be a unified, more capable platform that not only elevates mobile broadband experiences, but also supports new services such as mission-critical communications and the massive IoT. 5G can also natively support all spectrum types (licensed, shared, unlicensed) and bands (low, mid, high), a wide range of deployment models (from traditional macro-cells to hotspots), and new ways to interconnect (such as device-to-device and multi-hop mesh).
You have to synergize your investment opportunities in the Internet of Fail!
I have no idea. The meshing thing sounds cool for sensors on industrial equipment, and the extra bandwidth sounds better than laying fiber in some places that still don’t have it, but shrug.
AT&T 5G is fake it’s just rebranding
Fuck Everything, We’re Doing Five Blades
Are you secretly John Oliver?
I thought the US doesn’t really have 5G yet, it’s all modified 4G.
5G is blazing fast in China, but 4G is also crazy fast due to tower saturation in urban areas. I think your criticism stands overall - well done 5G probably won’t be noticeably better on a mobile phone compared to well done 4G.
I assume the ideal user of 5G is an industrial or commercial application, or widespread wireless home broadband. Neither really appeal to me, so I don’t think much of 5G.
I’ve disabled 5G on my T-Mobile phone. I’ve found its certainly no faster, and is actually less reliable than LTE. So I’ve set my phone to max out at LTE speeds.
I thought of the same thing, ha ha.
Low-band 5G isn’t much faster than LTE, but it works dramatically better at high densities, offering a better experience, faster speeds, and lower latencies in crowded areas. This is what really matters.
Mid-band 5G doesn’t penetrate walls well, but it might offer some improvement if you’re lucky.
High-band 5G can’t even penetrate a window and is basically bullshit unless you’re standing outside on a clear day with line of sight to the cell tower. It might be useful for connecting your ISP from the street to your house, saving companies from having to bury a wire.
It’s being used for Internet access in rural areas. Put a fixed antenna on the house that has line of sight to a master antenna and you can deliver 100Mbps service to a large area relatively cheaply.
Yeah, that’s basically what I said with the bit about connecting an ISP to your house.
I was elaborating on the real world scenario for that!
I will allow it!
The reason a 5G solution for rural Internet access is so attractive to AT&T and Verizon is they have FCC commitments going back decades to increase rural broadband availability. They’ve balked and deferred the cost of building wired infrastructure, but now they can deliver it cost effectively via 5G.
They have to share wired infrastructure and they don’t have to share wireless. Monopoly, baby.
edit: Wait, why don’t they have to share optical infrastructure? Did they get rid of the sharing wires requirement?
Whatever happened to WiMAX?