People also forget that respective of how much of time you can receive 5G signal, it brings additional cost to your monthly bill. Shouldn't you want to wait to pay that extra money to reap 5G benefit most places you travel ?
People also forget that respective of how much of time you can receive 5G signal, it brings additional cost to your monthly bill. Shouldn't you want to wait to pay that extra money to reap 5G benefit most places you travel ?
What are you talking about?! 5G'e' is here! Working on my iPhoneX! Thanks to AT&T!!! I mean, my reception is terrible 60% of the time, but when it work it works on 5G'eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee'!
Sarcasm? You do understand 5Ge is not 5G don’t you? It’s simply a marketing ploy that mimicked the initial 4G announcements.
Did we have any solid sources saying that 5G was definite for 2020? I mean we knew it wasn't likely for 2019, but from I hadn't heard anything other than punditry and speculation about 5G.
1. No signs of Intel being late with Intel 8160, if anything the recent showing of 10nm Custom Foundry proves 10nm Custom is on track and 8160 should be ready by 2019, whether this get selected into 2020 iPhone is a different matter.
2. Apple 5G Modem wont be ready for 2021, likely not even in 2022.
Did we have any solid sources saying that 5G was definite for 2020? I mean we knew it wasn't likely for 2019, but from I hadn't heard anything other than punditry and speculation about 5G.
It’s not clear if you were asking about 5G networks or phones. But, From the CEO of Verizon regarding today’s rollout of 5G, their plans for 2019 and availability of phones: https://apple.news/Al4xBgbk5S4WY8iAOkCGq0g
2021 is fine at this point. There's no evidence that even a single city will have sufficient coverage to make '5G' viable. This tech has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and physical obstacles. Does no one remember the issues with getting '3G' and '4G' with a wider spectrums rolled out in cities?
i was here and recall both the people complaining about a lack of coverage in an area and not wanting cell towers to ruin their neighborhood views, to the legal red tape that made new towers in SF hard to pass to the relatively easy cities like Houston.
Can’t even get 4G right and these companies already talking about 5G. Holy sh*t.
Exactly. The only true advantage I see with 5G for mobile phones is that it will force the companies to put up more antennas so we might actually be able to bet decent 4G coverage. I hear people talking and touting all the benefits of 5G, but I can't for the life of me understand why they need it on their mobile phone.
Greater speed - full LTE speeds are sufficient to stream 4k video (which is actually overkill on a cell phone, anyway, but may be useful on a tablet) Also, I've seen reports stating that "90% of the 5G in the next several years will be 3.5GHz with speeds comparable to LTE."
Less latency - useful for real time control of a car and remote surgical operations, but we're not using our iPhones for that. Gaming and remote drone operation are the two applications I can possibly see this being useful for. I'm not sure how big the real-time gaming market is on mobile phones, but it strikes me as being pretty small. Ditto the number of people who need that kind of responsiveness for drones. Later generation LTE is capable of latencies less than 10 msec which is more than adequate for 99% of people.
IoT - everyone keeps mentioning internet of things but I haven't seen how 5G is necessary for this other than it allowing more connections. More importantly, I don't see how this directly impacts use of a mobile phone. Your refrigerator can connect on 5G and your phone on 4G.
Self-driving cars - reportedly need the speeds and decreased latency. This is like the IoT argument. just because your car needs 5G doesn't' mean your mobile phone does.
The only possible advantage I can see in the near term is if the increased bandwidth actually allows your phone to achieve speeds in congested areas where it couldn't with 4G. I'm guessing on this one, though, as I've never actually seen anyone talk about this. There may be applications developed in the future for which phones need 5G, but those are going to be years away. For now 4G LTE is just fine.
Verizon today announced 300-1,000Mbs 5G with 30ms and coverage for 30 cities by year-end.
That’s a lot faster than my cable. I don’t see what your problem is. .... Oh! Apple won’t have a phone. Got it.
?? I don’t have a problem. LTE is more than adequate for all of my mobile needs. My comcast broadband works fine for what I need at home. I’d love for Comcast to have real competition from 5G, but I live in the suburbs and realistically 5G won’t be around my house for at least 5 years. If I were an Android user, would be just as happy and wouldn’t pay any extra for a 5G phone.
You seem to have this perpetual issue with not having the latest technology, even though there’s no real use for it.
I’d like to replace my 6s Plus with a new iOS device. This is a pricey adventure and I want to make sure before I layout $1500-$2000 the device is 5G capable. Apple could solve this problem quite easily if they could sort out their problems with Qualcomm. I agree the 5G infrastructure isn’t there yet. But Apple needs to have their devices 5G ready so it’s only a matter of a iOS update to turn it on.
Figure it out Apple, sooner than later!!!😡
Don't wait for 5G. There are two parts to 5G - the first is the 5G overlay on EXISTING frequencies (less than 6 GHz). The second is the frequency extension to millimeter wave frequencies (25+ GHz). The former should only require a modem change (existing antennas should be OK), but it's the latter that will also require now mmWave antennas to be added - that should take a few phone iterations to get the mmWave antennas optimized.
So I highly suspect that any phone that ships this year that says it supports 5G will only be supporting the first part.
Except Huawei, which says its Balong 5000 is already NSA and SA compatible (apart from being multi-mode too).
Balong is the modem chip. SA is a signalling scheme within the 5G protocol for smart antenna selection (presumably targeted only for the mmWave band, but I'm not sure). The placement of the integrated mmWave antennas in the 5G phone will be difficult to get right (much more so than today's phones). If you remember SJ's "You are holding it wrong," wait till the first iteration of phones arrive with mmWave antennas!
Did Huawei announce a Balong-equipped phone with SA mode capability? And with mmWave band capability? I couldn't find an announcement.
I stand behind what I said above - it will take a few phone iterations to get the mmWave antennas optimized, especially for SA mode. The Balong 5000 may support it, but that's only one piece of the 5G phone puzzle.
I’d like to replace my 6s Plus with a new iOS device. This is a pricey adventure and I want to make sure before I layout $1500-$2000 the device is 5G capable. Apple could solve this problem quite easily if they could sort out their problems with Qualcomm. I agree the 5G infrastructure isn’t there yet. But Apple needs to have their devices 5G ready so it’s only a matter of a iOS update to turn it on.
Figure it out Apple, sooner than later!!!ߘt;/div>
Don't wait for 5G. There are two parts to 5G - the first is the 5G overlay on EXISTING frequencies (less than 6 GHz). The second is the frequency extension to millimeter wave frequencies (25+ GHz). The former should only require a modem change (existing antennas should be OK), but it's the latter that will also require now mmWave antennas to be added - that should take a few phone iterations to get the mmWave antennas optimized.
So I highly suspect that any phone that ships this year that says it supports 5G will only be supporting the first part.
Except Huawei, which says its Balong 5000 is already NSA and SA compatible (apart from being multi-mode too).
Balong is the modem chip. SA is a signalling scheme within the 5G protocol for smart antenna selection (presumably targeted only for the mmWave band, but I'm not sure). The placement of the integrated mmWave antennas in the 5G phone will be difficult to get right (much more so than today's phones). If you remember SJ's "You are holding it wrong," wait till the first iteration of phones arrive with mmWave antennas!
Did Huawei announce a Balong-equipped phone with SA mode capability? And with mmWave band capability? I couldn't find an announcement.
I stand behind what I said above - it will take a few phone iterations to get the mmWave antennas optimized, especially for SA mode. The Balong 5000 may support it, but that's only one piece of the 5G phone puzzle.
Huawei has not - officially - presented a Balong 5000 equipped phone. It has said Balong 5000 is both NSA and SA compatible. At the time it was the only such modem compatible with both modes and is compatible with Kirin 980.
It has announced that both the current Mate 20 Pro and coming Mate X will ship in Balong 5000 variants. As such, we can assume - today - that antenna arrangements and issues have been resolved. I believe they gave mmWave benchmarks for Balong 5000. I'm speaking from memory though.
EDIT:
"On mmWave spectrum (high-frequency bands used as extended spectrum for 5G), Balong 5000 can achieve download speeds up to 6.5 Gbps – 10 times faster than top 4G LTE speeds on the market today.
Balong 5000 is also the world's first chipset that supports both standalone (SA) and non-standalone (NSA) network architectures for 5G."
2021 is fine at this point. There's no evidence that even a single city will have sufficient coverage to make '5G' viable. This tech has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and physical obstacles. Does no one remember the issues with getting '3G' and '4G' with a wider spectrums rolled out in cities?
i was here and recall both the people complaining about a lack of coverage in an area and not wanting cell towers to ruin their neighborhood views, to the legal red tape that made new towers in SF hard to pass to the relatively easy cities like Houston.
Can’t even get 4G right and these companies already talking about 5G. Holy sh*t.
Exactly. The only true advantage I see with 5G for mobile phones is that it will force the companies to put up more antennas so we might actually be able to bet decent 4G coverage. I hear people talking and touting all the benefits of 5G, but I can't for the life of me understand why they need it on their mobile phone.
Greater speed - full LTE speeds are sufficient to stream 4k video (which is actually overkill on a cell phone, anyway, but may be useful on a tablet) Also, I've seen reports stating that "90% of the 5G in the next several years will be 3.5GHz with speeds comparable to LTE."
Less latency - useful for real time control of a car and remote surgical operations, but we're not using our iPhones for that. Gaming and remote drone operation are the two applications I can possibly see this being useful for. I'm not sure how big the real-time gaming market is on mobile phones, but it strikes me as being pretty small. Ditto the number of people who need that kind of responsiveness for drones. Later generation LTE is capable of latencies less than 10 msec which is more than adequate for 99% of people.
IoT - everyone keeps mentioning internet of things but I haven't seen how 5G is necessary for this other than it allowing more connections. More importantly, I don't see how this directly impacts use of a mobile phone. Your refrigerator can connect on 5G and your phone on 4G.
Self-driving cars - reportedly need the speeds and decreased latency. This is like the IoT argument. just because your car needs 5G doesn't' mean your mobile phone does.
The only possible advantage I can see in the near term is if the increased bandwidth actually allows your phone to achieve speeds in congested areas where it couldn't with 4G. I'm guessing on this one, though, as I've never actually seen anyone talk about this. There may be applications developed in the future for which phones need 5G, but those are going to be years away. For now 4G LTE is just fine.
Verizon today announced 300-1,000Mbs 5G with 30ms and coverage for 30 cities by year-end.
That’s a lot faster than my cable. I don’t see what your problem is. .... Oh! Apple won’t have a phone. Got it.
?? I don’t have a problem. LTE is more than adequate for all of my mobile needs. My comcast broadband works fine for what I need at home. I’d love for Comcast to have real competition from 5G, but I live in the suburbs and realistically 5G won’t be around my house for at least 5 years. If I were an Android user, would be just as happy and wouldn’t pay any extra for a 5G phone.
You seem to have this perpetual issue with not having the latest technology, even though there’s no real use for it.
Most of the world thinks there’s a huge need for it and are investing heavily in it.
I’d like to replace my 6s Plus with a new iOS device. This is a pricey adventure and I want to make sure before I layout $1500-$2000 the device is 5G capable. Apple could solve this problem quite easily if they could sort out their problems with Qualcomm. I agree the 5G infrastructure isn’t there yet. But Apple needs to have their devices 5G ready so it’s only a matter of a iOS update to turn it on.
Figure it out Apple, sooner than later!!!ߘt;/div>
Don't wait for 5G. There are two parts to 5G - the first is the 5G overlay on EXISTING frequencies (less than 6 GHz). The second is the frequency extension to millimeter wave frequencies (25+ GHz). The former should only require a modem change (existing antennas should be OK), but it's the latter that will also require now mmWave antennas to be added - that should take a few phone iterations to get the mmWave antennas optimized.
So I highly suspect that any phone that ships this year that says it supports 5G will only be supporting the first part.
Except Huawei, which says its Balong 5000 is already NSA and SA compatible (apart from being multi-mode too).
Balong is the modem chip. SA is a signalling scheme within the 5G protocol for smart antenna selection (presumably targeted only for the mmWave band, but I'm not sure). The placement of the integrated mmWave antennas in the 5G phone will be difficult to get right (much more so than today's phones). If you remember SJ's "You are holding it wrong," wait till the first iteration of phones arrive with mmWave antennas!
Did Huawei announce a Balong-equipped phone with SA mode capability? And with mmWave band capability? I couldn't find an announcement.
I stand behind what I said above - it will take a few phone iterations to get the mmWave antennas optimized, especially for SA mode. The Balong 5000 may support it, but that's only one piece of the 5G phone puzzle.
Huawei has not - officially - presented a Balong 5000 equipped phone. It has said Balong 5000 is both NSA and SA compatible. At the time it was the only such modem compatible with both modes and is compatible with Kirin 980.
It has announced that both the current Mate 20 Pro and coming Mate X will ship in Balong 5000 variants. As such, we can assume - today - that antenna arrangements and issues have been resolved. I believe they gave mmWave benchmarks for Balong 5000. I'm speaking from memory though.
EDIT:
"On mmWave spectrum (high-frequency bands used as extended spectrum for 5G), Balong 5000 can achieve download speeds up to 6.5 Gbps – 10 times faster than top 4G LTE speeds on the market today.
Balong 5000 is also the world's first chipset that supports both standalone (SA) and non-standalone (NSA) network architectures for 5G."
I read that press release. No mention of a mmWave, SA-capable phone (yet); maybe at Mobile World Congress later this year. That is the most capable, technically challenging configuration for a 5G phone, IMHO. The five 5G phones listed right now on GSM Arena are all in the sub-6 GHz bands (what I call the first part of 5G).
The bolded sentence above is suspect. mmWave propagation is not trivial. When someone announces a shipping mmWave/SA phone, that means that the supporting carrier(s) is ready from the infrastructure side. I suspect not for at least 2 years, and only in very few cities.
While I don't doubt the Balong benchmarks, they represent carrier aggregation that I doubt any service provider would allow.
2021 is fine at this point. There's no evidence that even a single city will have sufficient coverage to make '5G' viable. This tech has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and physical obstacles. Does no one remember the issues with getting '3G' and '4G' with a wider spectrums rolled out in cities?
i was here and recall both the people complaining about a lack of coverage in an area and not wanting cell towers to ruin their neighborhood views, to the legal red tape that made new towers in SF hard to pass to the relatively easy cities like Houston.
Can’t even get 4G right and these companies already talking about 5G. Holy sh*t.
Exactly. The only true advantage I see with 5G for mobile phones is that it will force the companies to put up more antennas so we might actually be able to bet decent 4G coverage. I hear people talking and touting all the benefits of 5G, but I can't for the life of me understand why they need it on their mobile phone.
Greater speed - full LTE speeds are sufficient to stream 4k video (which is actually overkill on a cell phone, anyway, but may be useful on a tablet) Also, I've seen reports stating that "90% of the 5G in the next several years will be 3.5GHz with speeds comparable to LTE."
Less latency - useful for real time control of a car and remote surgical operations, but we're not using our iPhones for that. Gaming and remote drone operation are the two applications I can possibly see this being useful for. I'm not sure how big the real-time gaming market is on mobile phones, but it strikes me as being pretty small. Ditto the number of people who need that kind of responsiveness for drones. Later generation LTE is capable of latencies less than 10 msec which is more than adequate for 99% of people.
IoT - everyone keeps mentioning internet of things but I haven't seen how 5G is necessary for this other than it allowing more connections. More importantly, I don't see how this directly impacts use of a mobile phone. Your refrigerator can connect on 5G and your phone on 4G.
Self-driving cars - reportedly need the speeds and decreased latency. This is like the IoT argument. just because your car needs 5G doesn't' mean your mobile phone does.
The only possible advantage I can see in the near term is if the increased bandwidth actually allows your phone to achieve speeds in congested areas where it couldn't with 4G. I'm guessing on this one, though, as I've never actually seen anyone talk about this. There may be applications developed in the future for which phones need 5G, but those are going to be years away. For now 4G LTE is just fine.
Verizon today announced 300-1,000Mbs 5G with 30ms and coverage for 30 cities by year-end.
That’s a lot faster than my cable. I don’t see what your problem is. .... Oh! Apple won’t have a phone. Got it.
?? I don’t have a problem. LTE is more than adequate for all of my mobile needs. My comcast broadband works fine for what I need at home. I’d love for Comcast to have real competition from 5G, but I live in the suburbs and realistically 5G won’t be around my house for at least 5 years. If I were an Android user, would be just as happy and wouldn’t pay any extra for a 5G phone.
You seem to have this perpetual issue with not having the latest technology, even though there’s no real use for it.
Most of the world thinks there’s a huge need for it and are investing heavily in it.
I never said there wasn't a need. I just said that there is not a need for 5G on a mobile phone in the next 2-3 years.
And when Verizon (or any other company) says '5G available in xx cities,' they do not mean the entire city, much less the surrounding area. They mean that some part of the city has a patch of 1st gen 5G available. Claiming that 'the majority of the US has access to 5G' is just plain misleading and wrong,
Again, you seem to be incredibly fixated on your need for 5G. Just what do you plan on using it for?
I’d like to replace my 6s Plus with a new iOS device. This is a pricey adventure and I want to make sure before I layout $1500-$2000 the device is 5G capable. Apple could solve this problem quite easily if they could sort out their problems with Qualcomm. I agree the 5G infrastructure isn’t there yet. But Apple needs to have their devices 5G ready so it’s only a matter of a iOS update to turn it on.
Figure it out Apple, sooner than later!!!ߘt;/div>
Don't wait for 5G. There are two parts to 5G - the first is the 5G overlay on EXISTING frequencies (less than 6 GHz). The second is the frequency extension to millimeter wave frequencies (25+ GHz). The former should only require a modem change (existing antennas should be OK), but it's the latter that will also require now mmWave antennas to be added - that should take a few phone iterations to get the mmWave antennas optimized.
So I highly suspect that any phone that ships this year that says it supports 5G will only be supporting the first part.
Except Huawei, which says its Balong 5000 is already NSA and SA compatible (apart from being multi-mode too).
Balong is the modem chip. SA is a signalling scheme within the 5G protocol for smart antenna selection (presumably targeted only for the mmWave band, but I'm not sure). The placement of the integrated mmWave antennas in the 5G phone will be difficult to get right (much more so than today's phones). If you remember SJ's "You are holding it wrong," wait till the first iteration of phones arrive with mmWave antennas!
Did Huawei announce a Balong-equipped phone with SA mode capability? And with mmWave band capability? I couldn't find an announcement.
I stand behind what I said above - it will take a few phone iterations to get the mmWave antennas optimized, especially for SA mode. The Balong 5000 may support it, but that's only one piece of the 5G phone puzzle.
Huawei has not - officially - presented a Balong 5000 equipped phone. It has said Balong 5000 is both NSA and SA compatible. At the time it was the only such modem compatible with both modes and is compatible with Kirin 980.
It has announced that both the current Mate 20 Pro and coming Mate X will ship in Balong 5000 variants. As such, we can assume - today - that antenna arrangements and issues have been resolved. I believe they gave mmWave benchmarks for Balong 5000. I'm speaking from memory though.
EDIT:
"On mmWave spectrum (high-frequency bands used as extended spectrum for 5G), Balong 5000 can achieve download speeds up to 6.5 Gbps – 10 times faster than top 4G LTE speeds on the market today.
Balong 5000 is also the world's first chipset that supports both standalone (SA) and non-standalone (NSA) network architectures for 5G."
I read that press release. No mention of a mmWave, SA-capable phone (yet); maybe at Mobile World Congress later this year. That is the most capable, technically challenging configuration for a 5G phone, IMHO. The five 5G phones listed right now on GSM Arena are all in the sub-6 GHz bands (what I call the first part of 5G).
The bolded sentence above is suspect. mmWave propagation is not trivial. When someone announces a shipping mmWave/SA phone, that means that the supporting carrier(s) is ready from the infrastructure side. I suspect not for at least 2 years, and only in very few cities.
While I don't doubt the Balong benchmarks, they represent carrier aggregation that I doubt any service provider would allow.
Edit for clarity.
At this point I don't think anyone has reason to doubt. Everything they promised on 5G has appeared on time.
Kirin 980 was released at the end of August 2018 and they made it very clear it was Balong 5000 compatible. The first Huawei Phone to be announced with the Kirin 980 was the Mate 20 Series. Now, following the official reveal of Balong 5000, the Mate 20 Pro will be retrofitted with it at some point. The first consumer product to get the Balong 5000 was the CPE, followed by the window (outside) antenna to go with it. The first Balong 5000 phone will probably be a toss up between Mate 20 Pro and Mate X. The backplate of the X is neither metal nor glass but a specially formulated (plastic?) composite material. I wonder if the reason for this material is connected with reception. Perhaps that's a stretch.
They have already shipped 40,000 5G base stations and as the roll out will be in selected markets with Huawei involved across the entire communications chain (carriers included), mmWave shouldn't be an issue although it may go live in specific areas first. Some of those areas will be industrial parks.
Personally, I thought a bigger problem was going to be heat and power consumption in mobile devices. It seems those issues have mitigated.
From the first official mention of Balong 5000 last August, through to today, all the pieces seem to be falling into place on schedule.
I never said there wasn't a need. I just said that there is not a need for 5G on a mobile phone in the next 2-3 years.
And when Verizon (or any other company) says '5G available in xx cities,' they do not mean the entire city, much less the surrounding area. They mean that some part of the city has a patch of 1st gen 5G available. Claiming that 'the majority of the US has access to 5G' is just plain misleading and wrong,
Again, you seem to be incredibly fixated on your need for 5G. Just what do you plan on using it for?
Pretty sure the only need for it is to bang on Apple for not having it soon enough.
2021 is fine at this point. There's no evidence that even a single city will have sufficient coverage to make '5G' viable. This tech has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and physical obstacles. Does no one remember the issues with getting '3G' and '4G' with a wider spectrums rolled out in cities?
i was here and recall both the people complaining about a lack of coverage in an area and not wanting cell towers to ruin their neighborhood views, to the legal red tape that made new towers in SF hard to pass to the relatively easy cities like Houston.
Can’t even get 4G right and these companies already talking about 5G. Holy sh*t.
Exactly. The only true advantage I see with 5G for mobile phones is that it will force the companies to put up more antennas so we might actually be able to bet decent 4G coverage. I hear people talking and touting all the benefits of 5G, but I can't for the life of me understand why they need it on their mobile phone.
Greater speed - full LTE speeds are sufficient to stream 4k video (which is actually overkill on a cell phone, anyway, but may be useful on a tablet) Also, I've seen reports stating that "90% of the 5G in the next several years will be 3.5GHz with speeds comparable to LTE."
Less latency - useful for real time control of a car and remote surgical operations, but we're not using our iPhones for that. Gaming and remote drone operation are the two applications I can possibly see this being useful for. I'm not sure how big the real-time gaming market is on mobile phones, but it strikes me as being pretty small. Ditto the number of people who need that kind of responsiveness for drones. Later generation LTE is capable of latencies less than 10 msec which is more than adequate for 99% of people.
IoT - everyone keeps mentioning internet of things but I haven't seen how 5G is necessary for this other than it allowing more connections. More importantly, I don't see how this directly impacts use of a mobile phone. Your refrigerator can connect on 5G and your phone on 4G.
Self-driving cars - reportedly need the speeds and decreased latency. This is like the IoT argument. just because your car needs 5G doesn't' mean your mobile phone does.
The only possible advantage I can see in the near term is if the increased bandwidth actually allows your phone to achieve speeds in congested areas where it couldn't with 4G. I'm guessing on this one, though, as I've never actually seen anyone talk about this. There may be applications developed in the future for which phones need 5G, but those are going to be years away. For now 4G LTE is just fine.
Verizon today announced 300-1,000Mbs 5G with 30ms and coverage for 30 cities by year-end.
That’s a lot faster than my cable. I don’t see what your problem is. .... Oh! Apple won’t have a phone. Got it.
?? I don’t have a problem. LTE is more than adequate for all of my mobile needs. My comcast broadband works fine for what I need at home. I’d love for Comcast to have real competition from 5G, but I live in the suburbs and realistically 5G won’t be around my house for at least 5 years. If I were an Android user, would be just as happy and wouldn’t pay any extra for a 5G phone.
You seem to have this perpetual issue with not having the latest technology, even though there’s no real use for it.
Most of the world thinks there’s a huge need for it and are investing heavily in it.
I never said there wasn't a need. I just said that there is not a need for 5G on a mobile phone in the next 2-3 years.
And when Verizon (or any other company) says '5G available in xx cities,' they do not mean the entire city, much less the surrounding area. They mean that some part of the city has a patch of 1st gen 5G available. Claiming that 'the majority of the US has access to 5G' is just plain misleading and wrong,
Again, you seem to be incredibly fixated on your need for 5G. Just what do you plan on using it for?
Will potential purchasers agree that 5G isn't anything they would be interested in when it comes time for a phone this year or next? Marketing will be heavy. Whether 5G is available or useful to them personally won't really matter will it? Most will believe they want it and wouldn't buy a phone without it.
Consider most folks holding onto a phone for 2-4 years and an iPhone purchased next year would certainly be seen as lacking even by the following year if it couldn't take advantage of it. You know the future-proofing argument. If that Verizon iPhone lacking 5G is surrounded by a whole lotta phones offering it displayed on shelves and walls promoting the virtues of 5G what's a purchaser going to do? A dedicated iPhone user may decide to wait until the next one, and if not dedicated might grab a 5G capable phone from another OEM instead. Not what Apple wants I'll guarantee.
2021 is fine at this point. There's no evidence that even a single city will have sufficient coverage to make '5G' viable. This tech has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and physical obstacles. Does no one remember the issues with getting '3G' and '4G' with a wider spectrums rolled out in cities?
i was here and recall both the people complaining about a lack of coverage in an area and not wanting cell towers to ruin their neighborhood views, to the legal red tape that made new towers in SF hard to pass to the relatively easy cities like Houston.
Can’t even get 4G right and these companies already talking about 5G. Holy sh*t.
Exactly. The only true advantage I see with 5G for mobile phones is that it will force the companies to put up more antennas so we might actually be able to bet decent 4G coverage. I hear people talking and touting all the benefits of 5G, but I can't for the life of me understand why they need it on their mobile phone.
Greater speed - full LTE speeds are sufficient to stream 4k video (which is actually overkill on a cell phone, anyway, but may be useful on a tablet) Also, I've seen reports stating that "90% of the 5G in the next several years will be 3.5GHz with speeds comparable to LTE."
Less latency - useful for real time control of a car and remote surgical operations, but we're not using our iPhones for that. Gaming and remote drone operation are the two applications I can possibly see this being useful for. I'm not sure how big the real-time gaming market is on mobile phones, but it strikes me as being pretty small. Ditto the number of people who need that kind of responsiveness for drones. Later generation LTE is capable of latencies less than 10 msec which is more than adequate for 99% of people.
IoT - everyone keeps mentioning internet of things but I haven't seen how 5G is necessary for this other than it allowing more connections. More importantly, I don't see how this directly impacts use of a mobile phone. Your refrigerator can connect on 5G and your phone on 4G.
Self-driving cars - reportedly need the speeds and decreased latency. This is like the IoT argument. just because your car needs 5G doesn't' mean your mobile phone does.
The only possible advantage I can see in the near term is if the increased bandwidth actually allows your phone to achieve speeds in congested areas where it couldn't with 4G. I'm guessing on this one, though, as I've never actually seen anyone talk about this. There may be applications developed in the future for which phones need 5G, but those are going to be years away. For now 4G LTE is just fine.
Verizon today announced 300-1,000Mbs 5G with 30ms and coverage for 30 cities by year-end.
That’s a lot faster than my cable. I don’t see what your problem is. .... Oh! Apple won’t have a phone. Got it.
?? I don’t have a problem. LTE is more than adequate for all of my mobile needs. My comcast broadband works fine for what I need at home. I’d love for Comcast to have real competition from 5G, but I live in the suburbs and realistically 5G won’t be around my house for at least 5 years. If I were an Android user, would be just as happy and wouldn’t pay any extra for a 5G phone.
You seem to have this perpetual issue with not having the latest technology, even though there’s no real use for it.
Most of the world thinks there’s a huge need for it and are investing heavily in it.
I never said there wasn't a need. I just said that there is not a need for 5G on a mobile phone in the next 2-3 years.
And when Verizon (or any other company) says '5G available in xx cities,' they do not mean the entire city, much less the surrounding area. They mean that some part of the city has a patch of 1st gen 5G available. Claiming that 'the majority of the US has access to 5G' is just plain misleading and wrong,
Again, you seem to be incredibly fixated on your need for 5G. Just what do you plan on using it for?
Will potential purchasers agree that 5G isn't anything they would be interested in when it comes time for a phone this year or next? Marketing will be heavy. Whether 5G is available or useful to them personally won't really matter will it? Most will believe they want it and wouldn't buy a phone without it.
Consider most folks holding onto a phone for 2-4 years and an iPhone purchased next year would certainly be seen as lacking even by the following year if it couldn't take advantage of it. You know the future-proofing argument. If that Verizon iPhone lacking 5G is surrounded by a whole lotta phones offering it displayed on shelves and walls promoting the virtues of 5G what's a purchaser going to do? A dedicated iPhone user may decide to wait until the next one, and if not dedicated might grab a 5G capable phone from another OEM instead. Not what Apple wants I'll guarantee.
This is an absolutely key aspect in the short to mid term and your points highlight the reality if Apple doesn't ship a 5G modem in tandem with competitors.
The simplest '5G Ready' label is damaging from the outset. In a worst case scenario, people may switch. Slightly better would be a user delaying a purchase - but for how long?
Apple supposedly developing it own 5G modem at such a late stage would mark a huge strategic error. It will also not come cheap.
There is talk of intel's project possibly being ready in time for Apple but just not particularly good. If they have a shippable product, Apple will have to weigh things up and decide whether to swallow its pride and include a poor 5G offering just to have 5G on the box or sweat things out by skipping 5G until 2020 or 2021.
They are already considered to be behind even on 4G modems as well as batteries and cameras etc. September is still a long way off but big things are expected in the 2019 refresh. Samsung delivered. So did Huawei. Apple has to do the same (and adjust prices down).
2021 is fine at this point. There's no evidence that even a single city will have sufficient coverage to make '5G' viable. This tech has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and physical obstacles. Does no one remember the issues with getting '3G' and '4G' with a wider spectrums rolled out in cities?
i was here and recall both the people complaining about a lack of coverage in an area and not wanting cell towers to ruin their neighborhood views, to the legal red tape that made new towers in SF hard to pass to the relatively easy cities like Houston.
Can’t even get 4G right and these companies already talking about 5G. Holy sh*t.
Exactly. The only true advantage I see with 5G for mobile phones is that it will force the companies to put up more antennas so we might actually be able to bet decent 4G coverage. I hear people talking and touting all the benefits of 5G, but I can't for the life of me understand why they need it on their mobile phone.
Greater speed - full LTE speeds are sufficient to stream 4k video (which is actually overkill on a cell phone, anyway, but may be useful on a tablet) Also, I've seen reports stating that "90% of the 5G in the next several years will be 3.5GHz with speeds comparable to LTE."
Less latency - useful for real time control of a car and remote surgical operations, but we're not using our iPhones for that. Gaming and remote drone operation are the two applications I can possibly see this being useful for. I'm not sure how big the real-time gaming market is on mobile phones, but it strikes me as being pretty small. Ditto the number of people who need that kind of responsiveness for drones. Later generation LTE is capable of latencies less than 10 msec which is more than adequate for 99% of people.
IoT - everyone keeps mentioning internet of things but I haven't seen how 5G is necessary for this other than it allowing more connections. More importantly, I don't see how this directly impacts use of a mobile phone. Your refrigerator can connect on 5G and your phone on 4G.
Self-driving cars - reportedly need the speeds and decreased latency. This is like the IoT argument. just because your car needs 5G doesn't' mean your mobile phone does.
The only possible advantage I can see in the near term is if the increased bandwidth actually allows your phone to achieve speeds in congested areas where it couldn't with 4G. I'm guessing on this one, though, as I've never actually seen anyone talk about this. There may be applications developed in the future for which phones need 5G, but those are going to be years away. For now 4G LTE is just fine.
Verizon today announced 300-1,000Mbs 5G with 30ms and coverage for 30 cities by year-end.
That’s a lot faster than my cable. I don’t see what your problem is. .... Oh! Apple won’t have a phone. Got it.
?? I don’t have a problem. LTE is more than adequate for all of my mobile needs. My comcast broadband works fine for what I need at home. I’d love for Comcast to have real competition from 5G, but I live in the suburbs and realistically 5G won’t be around my house for at least 5 years. If I were an Android user, would be just as happy and wouldn’t pay any extra for a 5G phone.
You seem to have this perpetual issue with not having the latest technology, even though there’s no real use for it.
Most of the world thinks there’s a huge need for it and are investing heavily in it.
I never said there wasn't a need. I just said that there is not a need for 5G on a mobile phone in the next 2-3 years.
And when Verizon (or any other company) says '5G available in xx cities,' they do not mean the entire city, much less the surrounding area. They mean that some part of the city has a patch of 1st gen 5G available. Claiming that 'the majority of the US has access to 5G' is just plain misleading and wrong,
Again, you seem to be incredibly fixated on your need for 5G. Just what do you plan on using it for?
Will potential purchasers agree that 5G isn't anything they would be interested in when it comes time for a phone this year or next? Marketing will be heavy. Whether 5G is available or useful to them personally won't really matter will it? Most will believe they want it and wouldn't buy a phone without it.
Consider most folks holding onto a phone for 2-4 years and an iPhone purchased next year would certainly be seen as lacking even by the following year if it couldn't take advantage of it. You know the future-proofing argument. If that Verizon iPhone lacking 5G is surrounded by a whole lotta phones offering it displayed on shelves and walls promoting the virtues of 5G what's a purchaser going to do? A dedicated iPhone user may decide to wait until the next one, and if not dedicated might grab a 5G capable phone from another OEM instead. Not what Apple wants I'll guarantee.
So true. Marketing will be heavy for 5G over existing frequencies (sub-6 GHz). Then a few years later, they will market "mega-5G" phones (mmWave frequencies), which will start another "must-have" buying cycle. Witness today the totally bogus AT&T "5Ge" marketing push to get 5G in the minds of potential purchasers.
2021 is fine at this point. There's no evidence that even a single city will have sufficient coverage to make '5G' viable. This tech has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and physical obstacles. Does no one remember the issues with getting '3G' and '4G' with a wider spectrums rolled out in cities?
i was here and recall both the people complaining about a lack of coverage in an area and not wanting cell towers to ruin their neighborhood views, to the legal red tape that made new towers in SF hard to pass to the relatively easy cities like Houston.
While I mostly agree with you, the life of a phone is more than 1 year these days. When phones are crossing the $1k boundary, quite a few people buy them for 2+ years. So if 5G will be forecasted to be big in 2021 and someone is due a new phone in 2020 this might sway them. Please note I have no numbers to back this up, just a thought of mine. Will it spell doom for Apple or put Samdung in the lead? No, but not offering something that average consumers see as the future could be a bad business decision.
2021 is fine at this point. There's no evidence that even a single city will have sufficient coverage to make '5G' viable. This tech has a lot of downsides in terms of geography and physical obstacles. Does no one remember the issues with getting '3G' and '4G' with a wider spectrums rolled out in cities?
i was here and recall both the people complaining about a lack of coverage in an area and not wanting cell towers to ruin their neighborhood views, to the legal red tape that made new towers in SF hard to pass to the relatively easy cities like Houston.
Can’t even get 4G right and these companies already talking about 5G. Holy sh*t.
Exactly. The only true advantage I see with 5G for mobile phones is that it will force the companies to put up more antennas so we might actually be able to bet decent 4G coverage. I hear people talking and touting all the benefits of 5G, but I can't for the life of me understand why they need it on their mobile phone.
Greater speed - full LTE speeds are sufficient to stream 4k video (which is actually overkill on a cell phone, anyway, but may be useful on a tablet) Also, I've seen reports stating that "90% of the 5G in the next several years will be 3.5GHz with speeds comparable to LTE."
Less latency - useful for real time control of a car and remote surgical operations, but we're not using our iPhones for that. Gaming and remote drone operation are the two applications I can possibly see this being useful for. I'm not sure how big the real-time gaming market is on mobile phones, but it strikes me as being pretty small. Ditto the number of people who need that kind of responsiveness for drones. Later generation LTE is capable of latencies less than 10 msec which is more than adequate for 99% of people.
IoT - everyone keeps mentioning internet of things but I haven't seen how 5G is necessary for this other than it allowing more connections. More importantly, I don't see how this directly impacts use of a mobile phone. Your refrigerator can connect on 5G and your phone on 4G.
Self-driving cars - reportedly need the speeds and decreased latency. This is like the IoT argument. just because your car needs 5G doesn't' mean your mobile phone does.
The only possible advantage I can see in the near term is if the increased bandwidth actually allows your phone to achieve speeds in congested areas where it couldn't with 4G. I'm guessing on this one, though, as I've never actually seen anyone talk about this. There may be applications developed in the future for which phones need 5G, but those are going to be years away. For now 4G LTE is just fine.
Verizon today announced 300-1,000Mbs 5G with 30ms and coverage for 30 cities by year-end.
That’s a lot faster than my cable. I don’t see what your problem is. .... Oh! Apple won’t have a phone. Got it.
?? I don’t have a problem. LTE is more than adequate for all of my mobile needs. My comcast broadband works fine for what I need at home. I’d love for Comcast to have real competition from 5G, but I live in the suburbs and realistically 5G won’t be around my house for at least 5 years. If I were an Android user, would be just as happy and wouldn’t pay any extra for a 5G phone.
You seem to have this perpetual issue with not having the latest technology, even though there’s no real use for it.
Most of the world thinks there’s a huge need for it and are investing heavily in it.
I never said there wasn't a need. I just said that there is not a need for 5G on a mobile phone in the next 2-3 years.
And when Verizon (or any other company) says '5G available in xx cities,' they do not mean the entire city, much less the surrounding area. They mean that some part of the city has a patch of 1st gen 5G available. Claiming that 'the majority of the US has access to 5G' is just plain misleading and wrong,
Again, you seem to be incredibly fixated on your need for 5G. Just what do you plan on using it for?
Will potential purchasers agree that 5G isn't anything they would be interested in when it comes time for a phone this year or next? Marketing will be heavy. Whether 5G is available or useful to them personally won't really matter will it? Most will believe they want it and wouldn't buy a phone without it.
Consider most folks holding onto a phone for 2-4 years and an iPhone purchased next year would certainly be seen as lacking even by the following year if it couldn't take advantage of it. You know the future-proofing argument. If that Verizon iPhone lacking 5G is surrounded by a whole lotta phones offering it displayed on shelves and walls promoting the virtues of 5G what's a purchaser going to do? A dedicated iPhone user may decide to wait until the next one, and if not dedicated might grab a 5G capable phone from another OEM instead. Not what Apple wants I'll guarantee.
True - this is probalby the biggest reason for Apple to get a 5G modem in its phones; not because there’s any true need, but because of the perception. It’s not unlike the hype around 4K (and now 8k) TVs. 4K TVs came out several years ago and had awesome pictures in the stores with dedicated high def signals. Unfortunatly, there was no content to take advantage of that picture, and by the time there was, the early adopters who were so focused on it were upgrading anyway. I just find it puzzling when people are more focused on a spec than what they actually need or can do in the real world.
Comments
2. Apple 5G Modem wont be ready for 2021, likely not even in 2022.
https://apple.news/Al4xBgbk5S4WY8iAOkCGq0g
I don’t have a problem. LTE is more than adequate for all of my mobile needs. My comcast broadband works fine for what I need at home. I’d love for Comcast to have real competition from 5G, but I live in the suburbs and realistically 5G won’t be around my house for at least 5 years. If I were an Android user, would be just as happy and wouldn’t pay any extra for a 5G phone.
You seem to have this perpetual issue with not having the latest technology, even though there’s no real use for it.
It has announced that both the current Mate 20 Pro and coming Mate X will ship in Balong 5000 variants. As such, we can assume - today - that antenna arrangements and issues have been resolved. I believe they gave mmWave benchmarks for Balong 5000. I'm speaking from memory though.
EDIT:
"On mmWave spectrum (high-frequency bands used as extended spectrum for 5G), Balong 5000 can achieve download speeds up to 6.5 Gbps – 10 times faster than top 4G LTE speeds on the market today.
Balong 5000 is also the world's first chipset that supports both standalone (SA) and non-standalone (NSA) network architectures for 5G."
https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/news/2019/1/huawei-5g-multi-mode-chipset-5g-cpe-pro
And when Verizon (or any other company) says '5G available in xx cities,' they do not mean the entire city, much less the surrounding area. They mean that some part of the city has a patch of 1st gen 5G available. Claiming that 'the majority of the US has access to 5G' is just plain misleading and wrong,
Again, you seem to be incredibly fixated on your need for 5G. Just what do you plan on using it for?
Kirin 980 was released at the end of August 2018 and they made it very clear it was Balong 5000 compatible. The first Huawei Phone to be announced with the Kirin 980 was the Mate 20 Series. Now, following the official reveal of Balong 5000, the Mate 20 Pro will be retrofitted with it at some point. The first consumer product to get the Balong 5000 was the CPE, followed by the window (outside) antenna to go with it. The first Balong 5000 phone will probably be a toss up between Mate 20 Pro and Mate X. The backplate of the X is neither metal nor glass but a specially formulated (plastic?) composite material. I wonder if the reason for this material is connected with reception. Perhaps that's a stretch.
They have already shipped 40,000 5G base stations and as the roll out will be in selected markets with Huawei involved across the entire communications chain (carriers included), mmWave shouldn't be an issue although it may go live in specific areas first. Some of those areas will be industrial parks.
Personally, I thought a bigger problem was going to be heat and power consumption in mobile devices. It seems those issues have mitigated.
From the first official mention of Balong 5000 last August, through to today, all the pieces seem to be falling into place on schedule.
Now I've said that, things will fall apart, LOL.
Consider most folks holding onto a phone for 2-4 years and an iPhone purchased next year would certainly be seen as lacking even by the following year if it couldn't take advantage of it. You know the future-proofing argument. If that Verizon iPhone lacking 5G is surrounded by a whole lotta phones offering it displayed on shelves and walls promoting the virtues of 5G what's a purchaser going to do? A dedicated iPhone user may decide to wait until the next one, and if not dedicated might grab a 5G capable phone from another OEM instead. Not what Apple wants I'll guarantee.
The simplest '5G Ready' label is damaging from the outset. In a worst case scenario, people may switch. Slightly better would be a user delaying a purchase - but for how long?
Apple supposedly developing it own 5G modem at such a late stage would mark a huge strategic error. It will also not come cheap.
There is talk of intel's project possibly being ready in time for Apple but just not particularly good. If they have a shippable product, Apple will have to weigh things up and decide whether to swallow its pride and include a poor 5G offering just to have 5G on the box or sweat things out by skipping 5G until 2020 or 2021.
They are already considered to be behind even on 4G modems as well as batteries and cameras etc. September is still a long way off but big things are expected in the 2019 refresh. Samsung delivered. So did Huawei. Apple has to do the same (and adjust prices down).