4 ms·

Well wireless won't ever replace wired for every use case, I don't see why we can't get to a point where 90% of households are provided internet service via cel

by kylec 5y ago

Well wireless won't ever replace wired for every use case, I don't see why we can't get to a point where 90% of households are provided internet service via cellular technologies, either to a MiFi-like device or with cellular built into the computer. If my iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch have cellular built in, why not my Mac too?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
michaelmrose 5y ago
The radio is the most trivial part possible in fact computers with cellular radios have been a thing for a very long time. The little micro cell tower alternative arrangement exists to support devices that expect to communicate with a cell tower where cell service is poor. You normally actually plug them into your wired router so they are actually for areas where relying on wireless would be the worst possible experience. Fiber is able to provide Gbps to for example all homes in a square mile where they each get Gbps and can indeed fairly heavily use it. Cellular internet isn't actually wireless you run fiber to the towers and then everyone in that square mile. Urban areas where 80% of people live have a high density so for example in New York City that 1 sq mile contains 27000 people.
eloisant 5y ago
Wireless makes sense in the country side, because it's expensive to pull optical fiber for just a few houses. In cities however, where most of the population is: - Bringing optical fiber is cost effective because of the population density - Wireless gets clogged very quickly (also because of the population density). Additionally 5G is even worse than 4G at going through walls.
dmingod666 5y ago
Does energy cost come into play here? Quality of Service is definitely one of the metrics ISPs track, wired is a more reliable way to guarantee service than wired in a fixed setting, upto the house.
themulticaster 5y ago
But why would you want to have that? Simply put, with wireless you are trading the convenience of having no cables for essentially everything: Wired has better throughput, lower latency, lower bit-error rates resulting in less retransmissions (better goodput). I'll admit there is one aspect where wireless might be interesting: Comparatively lower cost of initial set-up, especially when infrastructure is lacking. In other words, if you're trying to provide Internet access to a developing country (little existing cable/telephone infrastructure), wireless might be an interesting intermediate option. But if you're looking at a industrial nation where (rough guess) more than 90% of households already have some kind of cable/telephone/fibre infrastructure, wireless would be a downgrade.
- esclerofilo 5y ago
  This sounds like a very "faster horses" kind of comment. Simply put, with SSDs you are trading the convenience of having faster boot times for essentially everything: HDDs have (a lot) more space, lower prices, longer lifespans. Simply put, with electric cars you are trading the convenience of charging at home for essentially everything: Gas has higher range, maintenance is easier to find, filling your tank takes 2 minutes instead of hours and that tank's capacity doesn't diminish over time. Simply put, with screens you are trading the convenience of not having to deal with paper for essentially everything: Printers have better resolution, paper is easier on your eyes, it's more portable. I guess people just like convenience.
  - OldTimeCoffee 5y ago
    Wireless is a worse product than wired, but you trade the worse product for the convenience of not having the wire. None of the examples you give match that pattern. SSDs are a better product than HDDs, they trade capacity for speed, but if you need capacity it's likely you don't really need the extra speed, and you're likely running into other bottlenecks anyway (a HDD can still saturate 1G Ethernet) Electric cars are a "worse" product, but for most use cases they're functionally equivalent. Most people don't drive farther than the range in a day, maintenance is at the same place as ICE, slow recharge times are easily negated by just plugging in every night and charging while you sleep. Paper is a worse product than a screen because a screen can be updated. It's about as easy to read, the resolution is about the same, they're equally portable (see a cellphone), but you can put just about anything on a screen and update it many times a second. You can't do that with paper, which is why screens have mostly replaced paper.
XorNot 5y ago
You connect literally all those things to a wifi hub in your house most of the time, and the likelihood of big data consumption on all of them is quite low. It's a huge difference to think you're going to be servicing all rather then some user workstations data requirements with just todays celltowers - which isn't to say you couldn't make it feel similar, but at some point you're cramming a 5G tower into every apartment and those still need fiber backhaul.

by kylec 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

michaelmrose 5y ago

The radio is the most trivial part possible in fact computers with cellular radios have been a thing for a very long time. The little micro cell tower alternative arrangement exists to support devices that expect to communicate with a cell tower where cell service is poor. You normally actually plug them into your wired router so they are actually for areas where relying on wireless would be the worst possible experience. Fiber is able to provide Gbps to for example all homes in a square mile where they each get Gbps and can indeed fairly heavily use it. Cellular internet isn't actually wireless you run fiber to the towers and then everyone in that square mile. Urban areas where 80% of people live have a high density so for example in New York City that 1 sq mile contains 27000 people.

eloisant 5y ago

Wireless makes sense in the country side, because it's expensive to pull optical fiber for just a few houses. In cities however, where most of the population is: - Bringing optical fiber is cost effective because of the population density - Wireless gets clogged very quickly (also because of the population density). Additionally 5G is even worse than 4G at going through walls.

dmingod666 5y ago

Does energy cost come into play here? Quality of Service is definitely one of the metrics ISPs track, wired is a more reliable way to guarantee service than wired in a fixed setting, upto the house.

themulticaster 5y ago

But why would you want to have that? Simply put, with wireless you are trading the convenience of having no cables for essentially everything: Wired has better throughput, lower latency, lower bit-error rates resulting in less retransmissions (better goodput). I'll admit there is one aspect where wireless might be interesting: Comparatively lower cost of initial set-up, especially when infrastructure is lacking. In other words, if you're trying to provide Internet access to a developing country (little existing cable/telephone infrastructure), wireless might be an interesting intermediate option. But if you're looking at a industrial nation where (rough guess) more than 90% of households already have some kind of cable/telephone/fibre infrastructure, wireless would be a downgrade.

esclerofilo 5y ago
This sounds like a very "faster horses" kind of comment. Simply put, with SSDs you are trading the convenience of having faster boot times for essentially everything: HDDs have (a lot) more space, lower prices, longer lifespans. Simply put, with electric cars you are trading the convenience of charging at home for essentially everything: Gas has higher range, maintenance is easier to find, filling your tank takes 2 minutes instead of hours and that tank's capacity doesn't diminish over time. Simply put, with screens you are trading the convenience of not having to deal with paper for essentially everything: Printers have better resolution, paper is easier on your eyes, it's more portable. I guess people just like convenience.
- OldTimeCoffee 5y ago
  Wireless is a worse product than wired, but you trade the worse product for the convenience of not having the wire. None of the examples you give match that pattern. SSDs are a better product than HDDs, they trade capacity for speed, but if you need capacity it's likely you don't really need the extra speed, and you're likely running into other bottlenecks anyway (a HDD can still saturate 1G Ethernet) Electric cars are a "worse" product, but for most use cases they're functionally equivalent. Most people don't drive farther than the range in a day, maintenance is at the same place as ICE, slow recharge times are easily negated by just plugging in every night and charging while you sleep. Paper is a worse product than a screen because a screen can be updated. It's about as easy to read, the resolution is about the same, they're equally portable (see a cellphone), but you can put just about anything on a screen and update it many times a second. You can't do that with paper, which is why screens have mostly replaced paper.

XorNot 5y ago

You connect literally all those things to a wifi hub in your house most of the time, and the likelihood of big data consumption on all of them is quite low. It's a huge difference to think you're going to be servicing all rather then some user workstations data requirements with just todays celltowers - which isn't to say you couldn't make it feel similar, but at some point you're cramming a 5G tower into every apartment and those still need fiber backhaul.