3 ms·

None of this is really what this service is intended for. If you read the whitepaper, they list examples of what this would be useful for; namely, covering you

None of this is really what this service is intended for. If you read the whitepaper, they list examples of what this would be useful for; namely, covering your own space with your own 5G for your own devices. Deploy it in these areas instead of WiFi: 1. A stadium's remote ad/video/informational displays 2. A logistics distribution hub's stock-tracking robots/systems/handhelds 3. A corporate campus's smart displays or door access systems 4. Oil and gas drilling/processing sites's systems monitoring in remote, non-covered areas So this isn't about creating a new provider in your local city, but rather about connecting your devices in your space in cases where WiFi is insufficient or overloaded.

blowski 5y ago
Is there any reason it _couldn't_ become that?
- hattmall 5y ago
  Probably not, except cost. It would be too expensive to compete with the national providers and then you would still need to interface with them for any service outside of the city. It's possible, just not the intended use case and not a logical use.
  - blowski 5y ago
    I remember people making very similar claims about AWS EC2 in 2007.
    - imwillofficial 5y ago
      Ah, so the mythical beast of future Amazon 5G use cases can be anything I want then, right? How about unicorns? I see what you’re saying, but just because a similar statement was made about another service, does not mean the outcome will be the same in this instance with vastly different dynamics at play.
- Melkman 5y ago
  Wifi adapters are cheap and everywhere. For 5G tot surpass wifi it will have to match that. Laptops with 5G are not that common yet. ESP like controllers with 5G I haven't seen yet. One of the advantages is 5G operating outside of the ISM bands. That helps a lot with stability and preventing interference. It also means this is not for individuals in their home. If licensing is made so accessible that people at home can use it you will again get overlapping frequency use and increasing interference. If it not made this accessible I don't see the availability of cheap clients solved because the market will be limited.
  - ahaseeb 5y ago
    It's fairly early but within 10 years, every device will have 5G
tenebrisalietum 5y ago
I got the impression this is Amazon providing Airave-type "femotcells" that emit a low-powered cellular signal and use your wired network for calls and data service. Seems to also imply Amazon would be providing SIM cards. I'm not sure of the advantage of this over Wi-Fi, though, except to get devices that have no other option other than cellular connectivity to be forced to go over your own network. > Cellular technology such as 4G/LTE and 5G augments existing networks with higher bandwidth, lower latency, and reliable long-range coverage to an increasing number of devices. With AWS Private 5G, you can build private cellular networks to take advantage of the technology benefits of 5G while maintaining the security and granular application and device controls of a private network. That's from the Amazon website. Why not just deploy Wi-Fi?
- bri3d 5y ago
  Large-scale, long range Amazon-managed 5G deployment should be easier than large-scale WiFi deployment, at least if the promises are accurate. Especially outdoors where deploying a large number of base stations is challenging. Lower frequencies mean improved building material penetration in environments like warehouses and docks, meaning fewer base stations are necessary. Generally 5G also supports higher density than WiFi for use cases like hotels and conventions, where too many devices on too few channels will quickly destroy WiFi functionality. WiFi is pretty crappy for many-device midrange solutions (let's say a dockyard, a 1km long facility with 1000 employees).
  - ahaseeb 5y ago
    Commercial deployments on 5G are difficult because it's fairly new . Wifi is very tried and tested. It'll take some time to get practical experience but once done, it'll be easier than Wifi
- saltminer 5y ago
  > Why not just deploy Wi-Fi? Everyone has a potential wifi access point in their pocket. The only people who have the ability to run their own cellular networks are either a) respectful of frequency allocations or b) know a thing or two about SDR. Interfering with 5G systems is difficult to do on accident and has a much higher barrier to entry to do intentionally. And this is important for one of the use cases listed in the PDF: sports and entertainment venues. When you have a large venue, you will always have people who are using their phones as wifi hotspots (many of them having simply forgotten to turn them off), and this eats into valuable airtime. You can have your APs send deauth packets to rogue networks, but you could still end up not having enough bandwidth for your own purposes. I'm reminded of an article I read about the unveiling of the first iPhone[0]: > The software in the iPhone’s Wi-Fi radio was so unstable that Grignon and his team had to extend the phones’ antennas by connecting them to wires running offstage so the wireless signal wouldn’t have to travel as far. And audience members had to be prevented from getting on the frequency being used. “Even if the base station’s ID was hidden” — that is, not showing up when laptops scanned for Wi-Fi signals — “you had 5,000 nerds in the audience,” Grignon says. “They would have figured out how to hack into the signal.” The solution, he says, was to tweak the AirPort software so that it seemed to be operating in Japan instead of the United States. Japanese Wi-Fi uses some frequencies that are not permitted in the U.S. While wifi has come a long way since 2007, if you need a reliable, high bandwidth system in an environment with lots of interference, this is a good choice. [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-said-let-there-be-an-iphone.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-s... Edit: this comment has some more good reasons for why you would use this over wifi: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29398181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29398181
BatteryMountain 5y ago
So will 5G actually be better than 5GHz WiFi? I'm not too concerned about speed but rather a stable connection. So here's the thing, currently I have 2.4GHz and 5GHz WiFi in my home. Any device that is stationary connects to the 5GHz one and any device that moves around connects to the 2.4GHz one. Why? Because initially I had everything on the 5GHz network, but noticed if I move around with my phone/tablets/laptops (even as simple as standing still and turning around), the connection would become unstable/choppy and introduce some lag and in rare cases a drop in connection. The 2.4GHz one works no matter what I do in my home. I can also get 2.GHz all the way out to the curb and it still works, where the 5GHz one drops significantly once I'm outside my house. In some cases it will still show the 5GHz one being connected but any app that tries to use it just hangs and never loads whatever it tries to fetch. So the 5GHz version of WiFi has been utterly useless to me, thus I'm only using it for devices that I know have decent line of sight, are within certain distance and aren't moving around. I currently have no Bluetooth devices chatting in the same airspace and I've tried it with single network too (only 2.4GHz enabled or only 5GHz enabled) - still the same. It could be that there is interference from neighbors: I can see quite a few WiFi networks of neighbors, most have both frequencies active - but I also had the same issue before I live in this specific house. So if 5G can improve the situation, that will be pretty great.
- ahaseeb 5y ago
  5GHz range is less than 2.4GHz. So that's the reason

blowski 5y ago

Is there any reason it _couldn't_ become that?

hattmall 5y ago
Probably not, except cost. It would be too expensive to compete with the national providers and then you would still need to interface with them for any service outside of the city. It's possible, just not the intended use case and not a logical use.
- blowski 5y ago
  I remember people making very similar claims about AWS EC2 in 2007.
  - imwillofficial 5y ago
    Ah, so the mythical beast of future Amazon 5G use cases can be anything I want then, right? How about unicorns? I see what you’re saying, but just because a similar statement was made about another service, does not mean the outcome will be the same in this instance with vastly different dynamics at play.
Melkman 5y ago
Wifi adapters are cheap and everywhere. For 5G tot surpass wifi it will have to match that. Laptops with 5G are not that common yet. ESP like controllers with 5G I haven't seen yet. One of the advantages is 5G operating outside of the ISM bands. That helps a lot with stability and preventing interference. It also means this is not for individuals in their home. If licensing is made so accessible that people at home can use it you will again get overlapping frequency use and increasing interference. If it not made this accessible I don't see the availability of cheap clients solved because the market will be limited.
- ahaseeb 5y ago
  It's fairly early but within 10 years, every device will have 5G

tenebrisalietum 5y ago

I got the impression this is Amazon providing Airave-type "femotcells" that emit a low-powered cellular signal and use your wired network for calls and data service. Seems to also imply Amazon would be providing SIM cards. I'm not sure of the advantage of this over Wi-Fi, though, except to get devices that have no other option other than cellular connectivity to be forced to go over your own network. > Cellular technology such as 4G/LTE and 5G augments existing networks with higher bandwidth, lower latency, and reliable long-range coverage to an increasing number of devices. With AWS Private 5G, you can build private cellular networks to take advantage of the technology benefits of 5G while maintaining the security and granular application and device controls of a private network. That's from the Amazon website. Why not just deploy Wi-Fi?

bri3d 5y ago
Large-scale, long range Amazon-managed 5G deployment should be easier than large-scale WiFi deployment, at least if the promises are accurate. Especially outdoors where deploying a large number of base stations is challenging. Lower frequencies mean improved building material penetration in environments like warehouses and docks, meaning fewer base stations are necessary. Generally 5G also supports higher density than WiFi for use cases like hotels and conventions, where too many devices on too few channels will quickly destroy WiFi functionality. WiFi is pretty crappy for many-device midrange solutions (let's say a dockyard, a 1km long facility with 1000 employees).
- ahaseeb 5y ago
  Commercial deployments on 5G are difficult because it's fairly new . Wifi is very tried and tested. It'll take some time to get practical experience but once done, it'll be easier than Wifi
saltminer 5y ago
> Why not just deploy Wi-Fi? Everyone has a potential wifi access point in their pocket. The only people who have the ability to run their own cellular networks are either a) respectful of frequency allocations or b) know a thing or two about SDR. Interfering with 5G systems is difficult to do on accident and has a much higher barrier to entry to do intentionally. And this is important for one of the use cases listed in the PDF: sports and entertainment venues. When you have a large venue, you will always have people who are using their phones as wifi hotspots (many of them having simply forgotten to turn them off), and this eats into valuable airtime. You can have your APs send deauth packets to rogue networks, but you could still end up not having enough bandwidth for your own purposes. I'm reminded of an article I read about the unveiling of the first iPhone[0]: > The software in the iPhone’s Wi-Fi radio was so unstable that Grignon and his team had to extend the phones’ antennas by connecting them to wires running offstage so the wireless signal wouldn’t have to travel as far. And audience members had to be prevented from getting on the frequency being used. “Even if the base station’s ID was hidden” — that is, not showing up when laptops scanned for Wi-Fi signals — “you had 5,000 nerds in the audience,” Grignon says. “They would have figured out how to hack into the signal.” The solution, he says, was to tweak the AirPort software so that it seemed to be operating in Japan instead of the United States. Japanese Wi-Fi uses some frequencies that are not permitted in the U.S. While wifi has come a long way since 2007, if you need a reliable, high bandwidth system in an environment with lots of interference, this is a good choice. [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-said-let-there-be-an-iphone.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-s... Edit: this comment has some more good reasons for why you would use this over wifi: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29398181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29398181

BatteryMountain 5y ago

So will 5G actually be better than 5GHz WiFi? I'm not too concerned about speed but rather a stable connection. So here's the thing, currently I have 2.4GHz and 5GHz WiFi in my home. Any device that is stationary connects to the 5GHz one and any device that moves around connects to the 2.4GHz one. Why? Because initially I had everything on the 5GHz network, but noticed if I move around with my phone/tablets/laptops (even as simple as standing still and turning around), the connection would become unstable/choppy and introduce some lag and in rare cases a drop in connection. The 2.4GHz one works no matter what I do in my home. I can also get 2.GHz all the way out to the curb and it still works, where the 5GHz one drops significantly once I'm outside my house. In some cases it will still show the 5GHz one being connected but any app that tries to use it just hangs and never loads whatever it tries to fetch. So the 5GHz version of WiFi has been utterly useless to me, thus I'm only using it for devices that I know have decent line of sight, are within certain distance and aren't moving around. I currently have no Bluetooth devices chatting in the same airspace and I've tried it with single network too (only 2.4GHz enabled or only 5GHz enabled) - still the same. It could be that there is interference from neighbors: I can see quite a few WiFi networks of neighbors, most have both frequencies active - but I also had the same issue before I live in this specific house. So if 5G can improve the situation, that will be pretty great.

ahaseeb 5y ago
5GHz range is less than 2.4GHz. So that's the reason