6 ms·

4G, just like 3G before it will get slower over time. The spectrum is still shared, and the more devices are connected on the 4G bands, the less bandwith there

by marios 8y ago

4G, just like 3G before it will get slower over time. The spectrum is still shared, and the more devices are connected on the 4G bands, the less bandwith there is for each device. IMHO, 5G is not so much about speed as it is about latency and better handling of devices in high density areas. Regarding the speed aspect, keep in mind that most smartphones (which are the primary 4G connected devices) are not equipped with modems that can reach the speed limits of 4G. They certainly could, but that would kill battery life. I expect something similar with 5G (although one the promises of 5G is lower power consumption). VoIP over 3G is often terrible. It's better on 4G, but, in my experience, it's often hit and miss. Having improved latency and speed means VoIP (and video calls) are, theoretically, less of a gamble. (My experience with 3G/4G is a single datapoint and should not be taken too seriously, evidently) However, cheap 4G is a good option for areas that have decent cell coverage but poor broadband (I refer to the usual copper lines for DSL). 5G can make the situation better, if only by making 4G cheaper. Deploying 5G means that an operator may have to upgrade their backbone ... which is good for 4G users too.

oneowl 8y ago
> 4G, just like 3G before it will get slower over time. You are correct but that will happen again with 5G and then with 6G and so on. After a period all networks will saturate. I'm not sure if I'm right about this, but I think one solution could be to increase the network density with the deployment of small cell networks that provide a better local coverage and bandwitdh. A few companies like nokia [1] and ericsson [2] are taking that route.That also requires upgradation on hardware form the operator but at least spares the customer from buying a new equipment. [1] https://networks.nokia.com/products/small-cells https://networks.nokia.com/products/small-cells [2]https://www.ericsson.com/en/networks/offerings/small-cells/outdoor-small-cells https://www.ericsson.com/en/networks/offerings/small-cells/o...
- kalleboo 8y ago
  One of the features of 5G is support for high-frequency (30 GHz+), high-bandwidth, small cell networks. Most(?) of the 5G deployments are planned to be of this type.
  - Jhsto 8y ago
    > Most(?) of the 5G deployments are planned to be of this type. I am a software researcher in the field and I do not think this is the case. Most 5G deployments for the foreseeable future will be on 3.5Ghz. I do not think mmWave (30Ghz+) has been accepted for commercial use in any country. In fact, in many roadmaps mmWave is referred to as 5G NR (new radio), which to my understanding was left for later deployments. To give you an idea why: the mmWave receivers and transmitters (at my current facility) are the size of a door. I think the problem is shrinking those doors to fit your smartphone, but then again, I do not work on the physical layer nor have much insight regarding regulations.
    - kalleboo 8y ago
      That's interesting to hear! Most of the hype in the media (and health concern fear mongering) seems to love to talk about mmWave, but I guess it's just indirection.
    - mcguire 8y ago
      A tablet phone the size of a door, you say?
    - phonon 8y ago
      5G NR is already available in the US on Verizon with a Moto Mod RF bands 5G: n261 (27.5-28.35 GHz); n260 (37-40 GHz) 4G: B2, B4, B5, B13, B46, B48, B66 Verizon launched 5G New Radio (Nonstandalone) at 28 GHz with 400 megahertz of TDD spectrum — which doesn’t include the LTE anchor carrier, SRG said. Based on its initial survey, the firm estimated that there are close to 100 5G nodes in downtown Minneapolis, although it had yet to confirm how many of those were on-air. Each node has two Ericsson AIR 5121 5G radios, according to SRG. https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/moto-5g#specs https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/moto-5g#specs https://www.rcrwireless.com/20190405/test-and-measurement/putting-verizons-mobile-5g-through-its-paces/amp https://www.rcrwireless.com/20190405/test-and-measurement/pu...
      - Jhsto 8y ago
        How interesting! Thank you for correcting me. In my country, the government never auctioned the mmWave spectrum thus I assumed this to be the case elsewhere. Very excited that Verizon has decided to make the densely deployed infrastructure to work.
karambahh 8y ago
In Belgium, DAB TV has or is being retired because the whole country is equipped with cable tv. It leaves more spectrum for 4G communications.
fock 8y ago
But contrary to 3G, saturation of actual, human related client devices should be reached today. I agree that some mangling of frequency bands might be nice to accomodate for high-device densities (metro tunnels during rushhour are bad around here). What I personally don't get about the whole 5G-craziness is why we (as a society made up of humans in contrast to consumers which fill the pockets of shareholders) need it? Today, we face a number of challenges which all result from our lifestyle requiring an unsustainable amount of ressources/releasing a massive amount of substances (be it fungicides (candida auris up front here recently), antibiotics or CO2). Why do we "have to" go for artifical, industry-driven growth again, when we really should focus on increasing the efficiency (or even forgo implementation of ressource-using technology)? And 5G will entail a massive increase in power-consumption (more bandwith), the number of cell-"towers" [most frequencies applicable to WANs are already utilized – a lot of the promise of increased network performance now lays on microcells (e.g. every bus stop get's a basestation)] [1] and requirements on the network-clients (why stop at low-latency, if we can sell you 4K-video calls for your 8K-display...). As for the "health effects": I believe that for classic networks the effects are negligible (though it's hard to reliably do studies on this. It's like with Dieselgate and the health issues...). What happens on the long term if you move around a city where every surveillance camera has a wideband (think radar and microwaves), 5-10W transmitter, beamforming that power to the receiving device unaware of any obstructions such as various bodyparts, which are definitely affected. I guess this is really something you should study (even industry agrees [2]). BEFORE DEPLOYMENT. Additionally the whole beamforming stuff with microwaves opens up really interesting possibilities: how about hacking your surveillance cameras+the basestation and then frying the eyes of some commuters sitting idly around. And with most of the devices operating completely on software and increasingly being single sourced, such stunts are becoming relatively easy to pull of. [1] https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/power-consumption-5g-basestations-are-hungry-hungry-hippos/d/d-id/749979 https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/power-consumption-5g-... - "sponsored by Cisco Juniper Qualcomm" [2] https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-Health%20Effects%20of%20mmWave%20Radiation-PI-v01_01-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d46266a498f50166f1ada0520444 https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-Health%20Effects%20of...
- jnurmine 8y ago
  With 5G latencies, you can remote control more things (like excavators). Which means less need for humans to be physically present, which means less transportation (read: cars), which means less pollution. Looking at the bigger picture, and counting in energy savings innovations on the basestation/network level, and so on, it might not be a clear-cut "5G spends more energy".
tim333 8y ago
That assumes devices get connected faster than 4G tech improves through more masts, upgrades etc. Recent tests in London show it getting a little faster for example https://www.opensignal.com/reports/2018/04/uk/state-of-the-mobile-network https://www.opensignal.com/reports/2018/04/uk/state-of-the-m...

by marios 8y ago

oneowl 8y ago

> 4G, just like 3G before it will get slower over time. You are correct but that will happen again with 5G and then with 6G and so on. After a period all networks will saturate. I'm not sure if I'm right about this, but I think one solution could be to increase the network density with the deployment of small cell networks that provide a better local coverage and bandwitdh. A few companies like nokia [1] and ericsson [2] are taking that route.That also requires upgradation on hardware form the operator but at least spares the customer from buying a new equipment. [1] https://networks.nokia.com/products/small-cells https://networks.nokia.com/products/small-cells [2]https://www.ericsson.com/en/networks/offerings/small-cells/outdoor-small-cells https://www.ericsson.com/en/networks/offerings/small-cells/o...

kalleboo 8y ago
One of the features of 5G is support for high-frequency (30 GHz+), high-bandwidth, small cell networks. Most(?) of the 5G deployments are planned to be of this type.
- Jhsto 8y ago
  > Most(?) of the 5G deployments are planned to be of this type. I am a software researcher in the field and I do not think this is the case. Most 5G deployments for the foreseeable future will be on 3.5Ghz. I do not think mmWave (30Ghz+) has been accepted for commercial use in any country. In fact, in many roadmaps mmWave is referred to as 5G NR (new radio), which to my understanding was left for later deployments. To give you an idea why: the mmWave receivers and transmitters (at my current facility) are the size of a door. I think the problem is shrinking those doors to fit your smartphone, but then again, I do not work on the physical layer nor have much insight regarding regulations.
  - kalleboo 8y ago
    That's interesting to hear! Most of the hype in the media (and health concern fear mongering) seems to love to talk about mmWave, but I guess it's just indirection.
  - mcguire 8y ago
    A tablet phone the size of a door, you say?
  - phonon 8y ago
    5G NR is already available in the US on Verizon with a Moto Mod RF bands 5G: n261 (27.5-28.35 GHz); n260 (37-40 GHz) 4G: B2, B4, B5, B13, B46, B48, B66 Verizon launched 5G New Radio (Nonstandalone) at 28 GHz with 400 megahertz of TDD spectrum — which doesn’t include the LTE anchor carrier, SRG said. Based on its initial survey, the firm estimated that there are close to 100 5G nodes in downtown Minneapolis, although it had yet to confirm how many of those were on-air. Each node has two Ericsson AIR 5121 5G radios, according to SRG. https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/moto-5g#specs https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/moto-5g#specs https://www.rcrwireless.com/20190405/test-and-measurement/putting-verizons-mobile-5g-through-its-paces/amp https://www.rcrwireless.com/20190405/test-and-measurement/pu...
    - Jhsto 8y ago
      How interesting! Thank you for correcting me. In my country, the government never auctioned the mmWave spectrum thus I assumed this to be the case elsewhere. Very excited that Verizon has decided to make the densely deployed infrastructure to work.

karambahh 8y ago

In Belgium, DAB TV has or is being retired because the whole country is equipped with cable tv. It leaves more spectrum for 4G communications.

fock 8y ago

But contrary to 3G, saturation of actual, human related client devices should be reached today. I agree that some mangling of frequency bands might be nice to accomodate for high-device densities (metro tunnels during rushhour are bad around here). What I personally don't get about the whole 5G-craziness is why we (as a society made up of humans in contrast to consumers which fill the pockets of shareholders) need it? Today, we face a number of challenges which all result from our lifestyle requiring an unsustainable amount of ressources/releasing a massive amount of substances (be it fungicides (candida auris up front here recently), antibiotics or CO2). Why do we "have to" go for artifical, industry-driven growth again, when we really should focus on increasing the efficiency (or even forgo implementation of ressource-using technology)? And 5G will entail a massive increase in power-consumption (more bandwith), the number of cell-"towers" [most frequencies applicable to WANs are already utilized – a lot of the promise of increased network performance now lays on microcells (e.g. every bus stop get's a basestation)] [1] and requirements on the network-clients (why stop at low-latency, if we can sell you 4K-video calls for your 8K-display...). As for the "health effects": I believe that for classic networks the effects are negligible (though it's hard to reliably do studies on this. It's like with Dieselgate and the health issues...). What happens on the long term if you move around a city where every surveillance camera has a wideband (think radar and microwaves), 5-10W transmitter, beamforming that power to the receiving device unaware of any obstructions such as various bodyparts, which are definitely affected. I guess this is really something you should study (even industry agrees [2]). BEFORE DEPLOYMENT. Additionally the whole beamforming stuff with microwaves opens up really interesting possibilities: how about hacking your surveillance cameras+the basestation and then frying the eyes of some commuters sitting idly around. And with most of the devices operating completely on software and increasingly being single sourced, such stunts are becoming relatively easy to pull of. [1] https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/power-consumption-5g-basestations-are-hungry-hungry-hippos/d/d-id/749979 https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/power-consumption-5g-... - "sponsored by Cisco Juniper Qualcomm" [2] https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-Health%20Effects%20of%20mmWave%20Radiation-PI-v01_01-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d46266a498f50166f1ada0520444 https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-Health%20Effects%20of...

jnurmine 8y ago
With 5G latencies, you can remote control more things (like excavators). Which means less need for humans to be physically present, which means less transportation (read: cars), which means less pollution. Looking at the bigger picture, and counting in energy savings innovations on the basestation/network level, and so on, it might not be a clear-cut "5G spends more energy".

tim333 8y ago

That assumes devices get connected faster than 4G tech improves through more masts, upgrades etc. Recent tests in London show it getting a little faster for example https://www.opensignal.com/reports/2018/04/uk/state-of-the-mobile-network https://www.opensignal.com/reports/2018/04/uk/state-of-the-m...