5G is going to have issues no matter what, its performance is tied to the frequencies used, so its going be possibly short range and will have impediments from nature, buildings and more for good coverage.
Yes indeed! The shorter the RF frequency, the shorter the range, the more impedance by RF absorbing and blocking materials.
Then consider this recently released US NIH / National Toxicology Program study:
“The wireless radiation from 5G will be 30 times greater than previous 4G LTE systems based on our recent study of 28Ghz planned to be used by new 5G wireless systems-this radiation will be most absorbed by the skin and eyes. I do not believe that this and other safety issues are being taken into account adequately before the FCC auctions off 28Ghz and similar 24Ghz microwave frequencies on November 14th [2018]...” Seungmo Kim, Ph.D, Assistant Professor Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Southern University.
[For those concerned, the posting of this information does constitute FUD. This is science. Please deal with it as such.]
Test neighborhoods have already complained about 5G installations due to the need to place 5G hubs on every telephone pole along a street. Those fears may be justified, considering the above noted NIH / National Toxicology Program study. IOW: Don't expect any REAL 5G in 2019. Instead, expect further contention regarding the REAL standard vs marketing blah-blah non-standards vs further study of the physiological effects of 5G RF exposure. Key phrase: Interesting times.
My understanding of what they did is slightly different, though very similar. Right now, they have LTE and 4G displaying on their phones. LTE is the real 4G. 4G is really 3G from my understanding. I live in an area where I often get LTE, but it's rural--so I go through so-called "4G" zones.
This is the first time I've seen the accusation that their LTE is not actually LTE.
"LTE" is not REAL 4G. LTE Advanced qualifies as REAL 4G in that it actually attains the speeds that qualify it as fitting with in the defined standard for 4G, as set by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).
To my knowledge, only Verizon has bothered to install REAL 4G anywhere in the USA. I know they started in Chicago a couple years back. AT&T has never bothered to install LTE Advanced anywhere, to my knowledge. The Wikipedia entries about 4G and 5G have been kept nicely up-to-date. I keep an eye on them as well as the references they provide to the standards websites.
From the Wikipedia article about 4G, this helps explain where the nonsense of FAKE 4G came from:
Since the first-release versions of Mobile WiMAX and LTE support much less than 1 Gbit/s peak bit rate, they are not fully IMT-Advanced compliant, but are often branded 4G by service providers. According to operators, a generation of the network refers to the deployment of a new non-backward-compatible technology. On December 6, 2010, ITU-R recognized that these two technologies, as well as other beyond-3G technologies that do not fulfill the IMT-Advanced requirements, could nevertheless be considered "4G", provided they represent forerunners to IMT-Advanced compliant versions and "a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed".
Sadly, WiMAX in the USA has almost exclusively been used in industry, whereas it is much more available commercially in Asia. Most US commercial service providers went for the early version of LTE instead, then stopped. This is a constant theme of Asia having far better data access than the USA. The blame in the US goes solely to the service providers, who consistently promise bandwidth expansion then neglect to do so. In New York, this is why Charter/Spectrum in on course to be thrown out of the state as an ISP. [To those concerned: Yes, this remains the case, despite admitted and withdrawn disinformation from Charter.]
For years now, the marketing divisions of all these companies have been foisting the term "4G" on customers when in fact all they're offering is fast 3G mobile technology. REAL 4G is LTE Advanced. If your provider isn't offering you LTE Advanced, then you're using REAL 3G. 3G. 3G. 3G
And now the liars are ticked off at AT&T for foisting a bigger lie than they are.
In the US, carriers display “LTE” not “4G” when you are connected to LTE. T-Mobile and AT&T display “4G” when you are connected to HSPA+ since T-Mobile got the rules changed when they didn’t have an LTE network.
MplsP said: A few weeks ago there was a report on some tests done at a '5G' hotspot. I can't remember if it was ATT or Verizon but regardless, the speeds were barely faster than 4G LTE speeds.
A main point of 5G on low frequencies is lessened latency and improved congestion handling, so it won’t show up in simple tests, but should scale to handle events where thousands are using their cell phones and handle a future with lots of IOT connected devices that need low bandwidth much better.
Comments
Then consider this recently released US NIH / National Toxicology Program study:
$25 Million NIH Study Proves Wireless Technology Causes Cancer and DNA Damage - US Brain Tumor Association.com
https://www.prweb.com/releases/25_million_nih_study_proves_wireless_technology_causes_cancer_and_dna_damage_us_brain_tumor_association_com/prweb15885861.htm
“The wireless radiation from 5G will be 30 times greater than previous 4G LTE systems based on our recent study of 28Ghz planned to be used by new 5G wireless systems-this radiation will be most absorbed by the skin and eyes. I do not believe that this and other safety issues are being taken into account adequately before the FCC auctions off 28Ghz and similar 24Ghz microwave frequencies on November 14th [2018]...” Seungmo Kim, Ph.D, Assistant Professor Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Southern University.
[For those concerned, the posting of this information does constitute FUD. This is science. Please deal with it as such.]
Test neighborhoods have already complained about 5G installations due to the need to place 5G hubs on every telephone pole along a street. Those fears may be justified, considering the above noted NIH / National Toxicology Program study.
IOW: Don't expect any REAL 5G in 2019. Instead, expect further contention regarding the REAL standard vs marketing blah-blah non-standards vs further study of the physiological effects of 5G RF exposure. Key phrase: Interesting times.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Telecommunication_Union
LTE Advanced peak download = 1000 Mbit/sec
LTE Advanced peak upload = 500Mbit/sec
To my knowledge, only Verizon has bothered to install REAL 4G anywhere in the USA. I know they started in Chicago a couple years back. AT&T has never bothered to install LTE Advanced anywhere, to my knowledge. The Wikipedia entries about 4G and 5G have been kept nicely up-to-date. I keep an eye on them as well as the references they provide to the standards websites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4G
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G
From the Wikipedia article about 4G, this helps explain where the nonsense of FAKE 4G came from:
Since the first-release versions of Mobile WiMAX and LTE support much less than 1 Gbit/s peak bit rate, they are not fully IMT-Advanced compliant, but are often branded 4G by service providers. According to operators, a generation of the network refers to the deployment of a new non-backward-compatible technology. On December 6, 2010, ITU-R recognized that these two technologies, as well as other beyond-3G technologies that do not fulfill the IMT-Advanced requirements, could nevertheless be considered "4G", provided they represent forerunners to IMT-Advanced compliant versions and "a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed".
Sadly, WiMAX in the USA has almost exclusively been used in industry, whereas it is much more available commercially in Asia. Most US commercial service providers went for the early version of LTE instead, then stopped. This is a constant theme of Asia having far better data access than the USA. The blame in the US goes solely to the service providers, who consistently promise bandwidth expansion then neglect to do so. In New York, this is why Charter/Spectrum in on course to be thrown out of the state as an ISP. [To those concerned: Yes, this remains the case, despite admitted and withdrawn disinformation from Charter.]