I like my 4G device. Dont know what 5G will do. Make really fast a touch faster?
A "touch" faster? I've been reading about the new 5G network in Chicago and it's 6 times faster than the fastest iPhone XS. Things like Apple TV+ will need 5G. I'm worried that Apple will have a two year lag time on one of the most important features of a smart phone, speed. iPhones will be six times slower than Android phones from fall 2019 to fall 2021. That's two years, which in the high tech business is ten years.
Please... enough over dramatization.
By the time 5G even remotely becomes mainstream, it will be 2020, if not 2021. This "rush" is just made-up nonsense. That "test" in Chicago was a roller-coaster of reliability. Again, 5G doesn't do squat for the majority of users for a couple more years.
It won’t be mainstream until 2025, at the earliest. And that’s according to the 5G working committees. Others peg 2030 until it’s widely spread.
right now it’s just marketing hype.
I guess that depends on how you define "mainstream". Verizon alone intends to have it up and running in 30 U.S. cities over the next 9 months.
Others may feel differently, but if I was given a choice between dropping a grand on a modern 5G capable phone versus an obsolete 4G one, I will take 5G even if it pisses Trump off.
And what will it do for you that a 4G phone can't?
Remain current with technology and functionality beyond the first year of its life. I hate sinking good money into soon to be obsolete gadgets.
The "5G won't do anything" excuse looks pretty weak when, throughout the world, governments and industry are sinking hundreds of billions into it because they know what it will do.
But what does “remaining current” actually do for you? (This is a serious question.) What’s the point if it’s the newest but you can’t actually do anything different?
Some people still get their AOL mail on their desktop by dialing in. It's the kind of question they would ask.
The analogy is "Why do you need cable when you can just dial in?" In truth, the cable does nothing. It's what it enables. 5G is the same. It's what it will enable -- not today so much as over the 4,5, 6 year life of an iPhone.
Actually, some Huawei technology has surpassed Apple such as the cameras, but there is zero chance Apple will use Huawei modems for the reasons stated including its own modem development.
"The US is engaged in a global campaign to keep Chinese tech companies out of advanced 5G networks promising faster connections, enabling uses such as autonomous vehicles and remote surgery. American officials fear that the Chinese government may force companies such as Huawei to incorporate software code or hardware that would allow Beijing to spy on the US or allies and disrupt sectors ranging from power to transport and manufacturing in a crisis."
“The most fundamental security standard, really, is that you cannot have this extrajudicial, non-rule of law compliant process where a government can tell its companies to do something,” Strayer said on Monday.
and,
"Australia, New Zealand and Japan have acceded to US requests to bar Huawei’s 5G equipment. Those allies have also banded together to provide aid to the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea so that they would reject a Huawei submarine cable carrying broadband connections, saying the line represents a national security threat at its connection point in Australia."
This is absolutely about national security, and not about "protectionism"; the U.S. doesn't have any existing 5G telecom manufacturers, relying instead on the marketplace. Unfortunately for Huawei, those CCP and Chinese Government Connections as well as the legal system that is beholden to the CCP, all are high risks for Western Liberal Governments.
"The US is engaged in a global campaign to keep Chinese tech companies out of advanced 5G networks promising faster connections, enabling uses such as autonomous vehicles and remote surgery. American officials fear that the Chinese government may force companies such as Huawei to incorporate software code or hardware that would allow Beijing to spy on the US or allies and disrupt sectors ranging from power to transport and manufacturing in a crisis."
“The most fundamental security standard, really, is that you cannot have this extrajudicial, non-rule of law compliant process where a government can tell its companies to do something,” Strayer said on Monday.
and,
"Australia, New Zealand and Japan have acceded to US requests to bar Huawei’s 5G equipment. Those allies have also banded together to provide aid to the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea so that they would reject a Huawei submarine cable carrying broadband connections, saying the line represents a national security threat at its connection point in Australia."
This is absolutely about national security, and not about "protectionism"; the U.S. doesn't have any existing 5G telecom manufacturers, relying instead on the marketplace. Unfortunately for Huawei, those CCP and Chinese Government Connections as well as the legal system that is beholden to the CCP, all are high risks for Western Liberal Governments.
Of course it is about protectionism. Have we already forgotten Trump's tweets?
“I want the United States to win through competition, not by blocking out currently more advanced technologies,”
It's about stopping Huawei rooting in the US and getting a foothold (and with it more technological dominance worldwide - hence the threats to allies) and giving US ICTs some breathing space to try and catch up.
"The US is engaged in a global campaign to keep Chinese tech companies out of advanced 5G networks promising faster connections, enabling uses such as autonomous vehicles and remote surgery. American officials fear that the Chinese government may force companies such as Huawei to incorporate software code or hardware that would allow Beijing to spy on the US or allies and disrupt sectors ranging from power to transport and manufacturing in a crisis."
“The most fundamental security standard, really, is that you cannot have this extrajudicial, non-rule of law compliant process where a government can tell its companies to do something,” Strayer said on Monday.
and,
"Australia, New Zealand and Japan have acceded to US requests to bar Huawei’s 5G equipment. Those allies have also banded together to provide aid to the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea so that they would reject a Huawei submarine cable carrying broadband connections, saying the line represents a national security threat at its connection point in Australia."
This is absolutely about national security, and not about "protectionism"; the U.S. doesn't have any existing 5G telecom manufacturers, relying instead on the marketplace. Unfortunately for Huawei, those CCP and Chinese Government Connections as well as the legal system that is beholden to the CCP, all are high risks for Western Liberal Governments.
Of course it is about protectionism. Have we already forgotten Trump's tweets?
“I want the United States to win through competition, not by blocking out currently more advanced technologies,”
It's about stopping Huawei rooting in the US and getting a foothold (and with it more technological dominance worldwide - hence the threats to allies) and giving US ICTs some breathing space to try and catch up.
I wouldn't rely on Donald's words as reference for anything, yet, here you are.
Better to look at the statements from the Intelligence Services, which are not kind to Huawei, nor are the Intelligence Services of U.S. Allies, especially Australia, which is seeing increased involvement by CCP diaspora.
"Punjab Safe City Authority (PSCA) told BBC Panorama it had told the firm to remove the modules in 2017 "due to [a] potential of misuse".
The authority said that the Chinese firm had previously made mention of the cards in its bidding documents.
But a source involved in the project suggested the reference was obscure.
A spokesman for Huawei said there had been a "misunderstanding". He added that the cards had been installed to provide diagnostic information, but said he was unable to discuss the matter further.
The PSCA confirmed that the explanation it had been given was that wi-fi connectivity could have made it easier for engineers to troubleshoot problems when they stood close to the cabinets, without having to open them up.
Two people involved in Lahore's project helped bring the matter to the BBC's attention and have asked to remain anonymous. One said that Huawei had never provided an app to make use of the wi-fi link, and added that the cabinets could already be managed remotely via the surveillance system's main network."
"The US is engaged in a global campaign to keep Chinese tech companies out of advanced 5G networks promising faster connections, enabling uses such as autonomous vehicles and remote surgery. American officials fear that the Chinese government may force companies such as Huawei to incorporate software code or hardware that would allow Beijing to spy on the US or allies and disrupt sectors ranging from power to transport and manufacturing in a crisis."
“The most fundamental security standard, really, is that you cannot have this extrajudicial, non-rule of law compliant process where a government can tell its companies to do something,” Strayer said on Monday.
and,
"Australia, New Zealand and Japan have acceded to US requests to bar Huawei’s 5G equipment. Those allies have also banded together to provide aid to the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea so that they would reject a Huawei submarine cable carrying broadband connections, saying the line represents a national security threat at its connection point in Australia."
This is absolutely about national security, and not about "protectionism"; the U.S. doesn't have any existing 5G telecom manufacturers, relying instead on the marketplace. Unfortunately for Huawei, those CCP and Chinese Government Connections as well as the legal system that is beholden to the CCP, all are high risks for Western Liberal Governments.
So let me get this straight:
A foreign country who has never attacked us might, maybe, sometime in the future ask one of their companies to reveal U.S. secretes and that company might, maybe do so in that hypothetical future and might maybe not reveal anything to any of their valued customers in the U.S. -- and that constitutes irrefutable proof that they are spies...
Meanwhile asking a country who was in the process of attacking us to expand their attack into cyber warfare in order to over turn our election is not collusion.
Lol... while the world is absolutely suspect of Huawei’s credibility In the security realm ... they want to sell to the The Biggest Ani-Huawei brand, Apple ...lol
Why would any liberal democracy trust in a company like Huawei so well entrenched in the CCP.
Buy Samsung, Nokia and Ericsson.
Do you think anyone trusts anyone else?
Huawei is the top communications backbone infrastructure manufacturer - worldwide.
That's a lot of countries. The only thing that has changed is a campaign by the US government to try a prevent Chinese communications technology leapfrogging US efforts and gaining tech influence.
In a word, protectionism.
Much of the rest of the world is basically saying 'tough luck'. They don't really care about who has telecommunications dominance unless it is them, and it isn't. They care about products and cost.
17 hours ago Donald Trump told the Spanish Prime Minister to ban Huawei. He was swiftly rebuffed and Pedro Sánchez made it clear that that wasn't going to happen.
Huawei is a couple of years ahead of the game in 5G. It would cost governments BILLIONS to change tack on Huawei at such a late stage. And, in spite of repeated requests, no evidence supporting the US claims has ever been provided. Not even to, erm, 'allies' who the US is spying on anyway! We know this for various reasons, not least Edward Snowden.
"The US is engaged in a global campaign to keep Chinese tech companies out of advanced 5G networks promising faster connections, enabling uses such as autonomous vehicles and remote surgery. American officials fear that the Chinese government may force companies such as Huawei to incorporate software code or hardware that would allow Beijing to spy on the US or allies and disrupt sectors ranging from power to transport and manufacturing in a crisis."
“The most fundamental security standard, really, is that you cannot have this extrajudicial, non-rule of law compliant process where a government can tell its companies to do something,” Strayer said on Monday.
and,
"Australia, New Zealand and Japan have acceded to US requests to bar Huawei’s 5G equipment. Those allies have also banded together to provide aid to the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea so that they would reject a Huawei submarine cable carrying broadband connections, saying the line represents a national security threat at its connection point in Australia."
This is absolutely about national security, and not about "protectionism"; the U.S. doesn't have any existing 5G telecom manufacturers, relying instead on the marketplace. Unfortunately for Huawei, those CCP and Chinese Government Connections as well as the legal system that is beholden to the CCP, all are high risks for Western Liberal Governments.
Of course it is about protectionism. Have we already forgotten Trump's tweets?
“I want the United States to win through competition, not by blocking out currently more advanced technologies,”
It's about stopping Huawei rooting in the US and getting a foothold (and with it more technological dominance worldwide - hence the threats to allies) and giving US ICTs some breathing space to try and catch up.
I wouldn't rely on Donald's words as reference for anything, yet, here you are.
Better to look at the statements from the Intelligence Services, which are not kind to Huawei, nor are the Intelligence Services of U.S. Allies, especially Australia, which is seeing increased involvement by CCP diaspora.
"Punjab Safe City Authority (PSCA) told BBC Panorama it had told the firm to remove the modules in 2017 "due to [a] potential of misuse".
The authority said that the Chinese firm had previously made mention of the cards in its bidding documents.
But a source involved in the project suggested the reference was obscure.
A spokesman for Huawei said there had been a "misunderstanding". He added that the cards had been installed to provide diagnostic information, but said he was unable to discuss the matter further.
The PSCA confirmed that the explanation it had been given was that wi-fi connectivity could have made it easier for engineers to troubleshoot problems when they stood close to the cabinets, without having to open them up.
Two people involved in Lahore's project helped bring the matter to the BBC's attention and have asked to remain anonymous. One said that Huawei had never provided an app to make use of the wi-fi link, and added that the cabinets could already be managed remotely via the surveillance system's main network."
It's simple. Very simple. If there were anything real, tangible, the US would be waving it around for its allies and the world to see. The reality is as Huawei has stated publicly: "they have nothing".
That is becoming clearer every day.
As for WiFi modules (removable at that!) It is literally impossible that any even half decent security setup would not have detected them in two minutes. If nothing was done and it was there for managers to see, perhaps we should not be reading strange things into it.
Lol... while the world is absolutely suspect of Huawei’s credibility In the security realm ... they want to sell to the The Biggest Ani-Huawei brand, Apple ...lol
Why would any liberal democracy trust in a company like Huawei so well entrenched in the CCP.
Buy Samsung, Nokia and Ericsson.
Do you think anyone trusts anyone else?
Huawei is the top communications backbone infrastructure manufacturer - worldwide.
That's a lot of countries. The only thing that has changed is a campaign by the US government to try a prevent Chinese communications technology leapfrogging US efforts and gaining tech influence.
In a word, protectionism.
Much of the rest of the world is basically saying 'tough luck'. They don't really care about who has telecommunications dominance unless it is them, and it isn't. They care about products and cost.
17 hours ago Donald Trump told the Spanish Prime Minister to ban Huawei. He was swiftly rebuffed and Pedro Sánchez made it clear that that wasn't going to happen.
Huawei is a couple of years ahead of the game in 5G. It would cost governments BILLIONS to change tack on Huawei at such a late stage. And, in spite of repeated requests, no evidence supporting the US claims has ever been provided. Not even to, erm, 'allies' who the US is spying on anyway! We know this for various reasons, not least Edward Snowden.
Lol... while the world is absolutely suspect of Huawei’s credibility In the security realm ... they want to sell to the The Biggest Ani-Huawei brand, Apple ...lol
Why would any liberal democracy trust in a company like Huawei so well entrenched in the CCP.
Buy Samsung, Nokia and Ericsson.
Do you think anyone trusts anyone else?
Huawei is the top communications backbone infrastructure manufacturer - worldwide.
That's a lot of countries. The only thing that has changed is a campaign by the US government to try a prevent Chinese communications technology leapfrogging US efforts and gaining tech influence.
In a word, protectionism.
Much of the rest of the world is basically saying 'tough luck'. They don't really care about who has telecommunications dominance unless it is them, and it isn't. They care about products and cost.
17 hours ago Donald Trump told the Spanish Prime Minister to ban Huawei. He was swiftly rebuffed and Pedro Sánchez made it clear that that wasn't going to happen.
Huawei is a couple of years ahead of the game in 5G. It would cost governments BILLIONS to change tack on Huawei at such a late stage. And, in spite of repeated requests, no evidence supporting the US claims has ever been provided. Not even to, erm, 'allies' who the US is spying on anyway! We know this for various reasons, not least Edward Snowden.
I like my 4G device. Dont know what 5G will do. Make really fast a touch faster?
A "touch" faster? I've been reading about the new 5G network in Chicago and it's 6 times faster than the fastest iPhone XS. Things like Apple TV+ will need 5G. I'm worried that Apple will have a two year lag time on one of the most important features of a smart phone, speed. iPhones will be six times slower than Android phones from fall 2019 to fall 2021. That's two years, which in the high tech business is ten years.
Please... enough over dramatization.
By the time 5G even remotely becomes mainstream, it will be 2020, if not 2021. This "rush" is just made-up nonsense. That "test" in Chicago was a roller-coaster of reliability. Again, 5G doesn't do squat for the majority of users for a couple more years.
It won’t be mainstream until 2025, at the earliest. And that’s according to the 5G working committees. Others peg 2030 until it’s widely spread.
right now it’s just marketing hype.
I guess that depends on how you define "mainstream". Verizon alone intends to have it up and running in 30 U.S. cities over the next 9 months.
Others may feel differently, but if I was given a choice between dropping a grand on a modern 5G capable phone versus an obsolete 4G one, I will take 5G even if it pisses Trump off.
And what will it do for you that a 4G phone can't?
Remain current with technology and functionality beyond the first year of its life. I hate sinking good money into soon to be obsolete gadgets.
The "5G won't do anything" excuse looks pretty weak when, throughout the world, governments and industry are sinking hundreds of billions into it because they know what it will do.
But what does “remaining current” actually do for you? (This is a serious question.) What’s the point if it’s the newest but you can’t actually do anything different?
Some people still get their AOL mail on their desktop by dialing in. It's the kind of question they would ask.
The analogy is "Why do you need cable when you can just dial in?" In truth, the cable does nothing. It's what it enables. 5G is the same. It's what it will enable -- not today so much as over the 4,5, 6 year life of an iPhone.
And what you give is a sarcastic, non-answer, and your analogies are equally pathetic. For people interested in cutting-edge technology, iPhones do not have a 6 or even 4 year life span. In what way is being 'limited' to 4G speeds/latency going to limit how you use your cell phone in the next 2-3 years?
I like my 4G device. Dont know what 5G will do. Make really fast a touch faster?
A "touch" faster? I've been reading about the new 5G network in Chicago and it's 6 times faster than the fastest iPhone XS. Things like Apple TV+ will need 5G. I'm worried that Apple will have a two year lag time on one of the most important features of a smart phone, speed. iPhones will be six times slower than Android phones from fall 2019 to fall 2021. That's two years, which in the high tech business is ten years.
Please... enough over dramatization.
By the time 5G even remotely becomes mainstream, it will be 2020, if not 2021. This "rush" is just made-up nonsense. That "test" in Chicago was a roller-coaster of reliability. Again, 5G doesn't do squat for the majority of users for a couple more years.
It won’t be mainstream until 2025, at the earliest. And that’s according to the 5G working committees. Others peg 2030 until it’s widely spread.
right now it’s just marketing hype.
I guess that depends on how you define "mainstream". Verizon alone intends to have it up and running in 30 U.S. cities over the next 9 months.
Others may feel differently, but if I was given a choice between dropping a grand on a modern 5G capable phone versus an obsolete 4G one, I will take 5G even if it pisses Trump off.
And what will it do for you that a 4G phone can't?
Remain current with technology and functionality beyond the first year of its life. I hate sinking good money into soon to be obsolete gadgets.
The "5G won't do anything" excuse looks pretty weak when, throughout the world, governments and industry are sinking hundreds of billions into it because they know what it will do.
But what does “remaining current” actually do for you? (This is a serious question.) What’s the point if it’s the newest but you can’t actually do anything different?
Ir enables services which need a low latency like multi player gaming.
It increases my internet speed in city centers. The 4G base station are saturated in really crowded cities like New York and the main cities in Europe and Asia. Even without new the millilmeter base stations, which will only be available in a later phase, 5G will immediate boost the internet speed for users in these crowded areas.
Does that require a 5G-enabled device, or will all devices benefit from the increased number of allowed connections?
I like my 4G device. Dont know what 5G will do. Make really fast a touch faster?
A "touch" faster? I've been reading about the new 5G network in Chicago and it's 6 times faster than the fastest iPhone XS. Things like Apple TV+ will need 5G. I'm worried that Apple will have a two year lag time on one of the most important features of a smart phone, speed. iPhones will be six times slower than Android phones from fall 2019 to fall 2021. That's two years, which in the high tech business is ten years.
Please... enough over dramatization.
By the time 5G even remotely becomes mainstream, it will be 2020, if not 2021. This "rush" is just made-up nonsense. That "test" in Chicago was a roller-coaster of reliability. Again, 5G doesn't do squat for the majority of users for a couple more years.
It won’t be mainstream until 2025, at the earliest. And that’s according to the 5G working committees. Others peg 2030 until it’s widely spread.
right now it’s just marketing hype.
I guess that depends on how you define "mainstream". Verizon alone intends to have it up and running in 30 U.S. cities over the next 9 months.
Others may feel differently, but if I was given a choice between dropping a grand on a modern 5G capable phone versus an obsolete 4G one, I will take 5G even if it pisses Trump off.
And what will it do for you that a 4G phone can't?
Remain current with technology and functionality beyond the first year of its life. I hate sinking good money into soon to be obsolete gadgets.
The "5G won't do anything" excuse looks pretty weak when, throughout the world, governments and industry are sinking hundreds of billions into it because they know what it will do.
But what does “remaining current” actually do for you? (This is a serious question.) What’s the point if it’s the newest but you can’t actually do anything different?
Some people still get their AOL mail on their desktop by dialing in. It's the kind of question they would ask.
The analogy is "Why do you need cable when you can just dial in?" In truth, the cable does nothing. It's what it enables. 5G is the same. It's what it will enable -- not today so much as over the 4,5, 6 year life of an iPhone.
And what you give is a sarcastic, non-answer, and your analogies are equally pathetic. For people interested in cutting-edge technology, iPhones do not have a 6 or even 4 year life span. In what way is being 'limited' to 4G speeds/latency going to limit how you use your cell phone in the next 2-3 years?
Sorry that you did not understand. But I'm happy for you that you can trade in your iPhone every year.
Lol... while the world is absolutely suspect of Huawei’s credibility In the security realm ... they want to sell to the The Biggest Ani-Huawei brand, Apple ...lol
Why would any liberal democracy trust in a company like Huawei so well entrenched in the CCP.
Buy Samsung, Nokia and Ericsson.
Do you think anyone trusts anyone else?
Huawei is the top communications backbone infrastructure manufacturer - worldwide.
That's a lot of countries. The only thing that has changed is a campaign by the US government to try a prevent Chinese communications technology leapfrogging US efforts and gaining tech influence.
In a word, protectionism.
Much of the rest of the world is basically saying 'tough luck'. They don't really care about who has telecommunications dominance unless it is them, and it isn't. They care about products and cost.
17 hours ago Donald Trump told the Spanish Prime Minister to ban Huawei. He was swiftly rebuffed and Pedro Sánchez made it clear that that wasn't going to happen.
Huawei is a couple of years ahead of the game in 5G. It would cost governments BILLIONS to change tack on Huawei at such a late stage. And, in spite of repeated requests, no evidence supporting the US claims has ever been provided. Not even to, erm, 'allies' who the US is spying on anyway! We know this for various reasons, not least Edward Snowden.
Yes, funny, because none of the links you ever publish here mean anything.
That's your opinion. Not a fact in any shape or form. Each individual reading this will make up their own minds.
If anything means anything it is that you have not actually countered anything. I backed up my comments. You haven't.
You back up your Huawei bias for the story, and I for my National Security bias. Either of us might be correct today, but when risk is assessed, I'll take my my bias of long term National Security over the convenience of low cost and instant gratification that Huawei is promising with it's 5G.
Lol... while the world is absolutely suspect of Huawei’s credibility In the security realm ... they want to sell to the The Biggest Ani-Huawei brand, Apple ...lol
Why would any liberal democracy trust in a company like Huawei so well entrenched in the CCP.
Buy Samsung, Nokia and Ericsson.
Do you think anyone trusts anyone else?
Huawei is the top communications backbone infrastructure manufacturer - worldwide.
That's a lot of countries. The only thing that has changed is a campaign by the US government to try a prevent Chinese communications technology leapfrogging US efforts and gaining tech influence.
In a word, protectionism.
Much of the rest of the world is basically saying 'tough luck'. They don't really care about who has telecommunications dominance unless it is them, and it isn't. They care about products and cost.
17 hours ago Donald Trump told the Spanish Prime Minister to ban Huawei. He was swiftly rebuffed and Pedro Sánchez made it clear that that wasn't going to happen.
Huawei is a couple of years ahead of the game in 5G. It would cost governments BILLIONS to change tack on Huawei at such a late stage. And, in spite of repeated requests, no evidence supporting the US claims has ever been provided. Not even to, erm, 'allies' who the US is spying on anyway! We know this for various reasons, not least Edward Snowden.
Yes, funny, because none of the links you ever publish here mean anything.
That's your opinion. Not a fact in any shape or form. Each individual reading this will make up their own minds.
If anything means anything it is that you have not actually countered anything. I backed up my comments. You haven't.
You back up your Huawei bias for the story, and I for my National Security bias. Either of us might be correct today, but when risk is assessed, I'll take my my bias of long term National Security over the convenience of low cost and instant gratification that Huawei is promising with it's 5G.
What bias?
There is no evidence. The US has been called out by some of its so-called 'allies' as well as Huawei. They asked for evidence. None was forthcoming.
First the US urged them. Then it threatened them. Then Trump Tweeted and the house came tumbling down.
That isn't bias. That is fact. Snowden is fact.
I can accept the US position, though. That said, we've been here before, right? 'Here are our 'facts'. We will act on them'.
Other countries got burnt for swallowing those 'facts'.
That's poor but its not my country.
However, when they organise a world tour and - literally - threaten countries to toe the line, 'or else!' that is something completely different and I can assure you that this bullying attitude has simply strengthened the EU's desire to do its own thing and its own way. Not that this is anything new. The minute Trump got elected, the EU went on record as saying the US could no longer be considered a close partner. The relationship changed for the worse.
Yes. I know you are biased. All I have ever asked for is the same as the UK, Spain, Germany, Huawei etc - evidence.
I like my 4G device. Dont know what 5G will do. Make really fast a touch faster?
A "touch" faster? I've been reading about the new 5G network in Chicago and it's 6 times faster than the fastest iPhone XS. Things like Apple TV+ will need 5G. I'm worried that Apple will have a two year lag time on one of the most important features of a smart phone, speed. iPhones will be six times slower than Android phones from fall 2019 to fall 2021. That's two years, which in the high tech business is ten years.
Please... enough over dramatization.
By the time 5G even remotely becomes mainstream, it will be 2020, if not 2021. This "rush" is just made-up nonsense. That "test" in Chicago was a roller-coaster of reliability. Again, 5G doesn't do squat for the majority of users for a couple more years.
It won’t be mainstream until 2025, at the earliest. And that’s according to the 5G working committees. Others peg 2030 until it’s widely spread.
right now it’s just marketing hype.
I guess that depends on how you define "mainstream". Verizon alone intends to have it up and running in 30 U.S. cities over the next 9 months.
Others may feel differently, but if I was given a choice between dropping a grand on a modern 5G capable phone versus an obsolete 4G one, I will take 5G even if it pisses Trump off.
And what will it do for you that a 4G phone can't?
Remain current with technology and functionality beyond the first year of its life. I hate sinking good money into soon to be obsolete gadgets.
The "5G won't do anything" excuse looks pretty weak when, throughout the world, governments and industry are sinking hundreds of billions into it because they know what it will do.
But what does “remaining current” actually do for you? (This is a serious question.) What’s the point if it’s the newest but you can’t actually do anything different?
Some people still get their AOL mail on their desktop by dialing in. It's the kind of question they would ask.
The analogy is "Why do you need cable when you can just dial in?" In truth, the cable does nothing. It's what it enables. 5G is the same. It's what it will enable -- not today so much as over the 4,5, 6 year life of an iPhone.
This is an interesting (though baseless) notion... So, in your opinion- if 4g LTE is absolutely PLENTY fast enough to stream 4k content with ease (the highest throughput data type currently); what do you see as being a new data type in the next 4-6 years, that uses so much more data than audio/video? That is how humans have been experiencing things for literally hundreds of thousands of years... are we all going to develop new senses in the next 4-6 years, so that we can take advantage of whatever it is that can be experienced beyond audio/visual? I don’t get it. I suppose a very feeble argument could be made that AR/VR mobile experiences will take off at an incredible rate in the next 4-6 years, and that nobody will come up with a compression file type, and that we will need extreme bandwidth to stream immense raw data, describing entire virtual worlds... but that is extremely far-fetched, and literally the only scenario I can think of that would make 5g in any way “necessary”. Take a look at the home internet market... is there a difference between having 200mb/s internet & having gigabit internet? No. No, there is not. At some point, you reach the point of diminishing returns.
Lol... while the world is absolutely suspect of Huawei’s credibility In the security realm ... they want to sell to the The Biggest Ani-Huawei brand, Apple ...lol
Why would any liberal democracy trust in a company like Huawei so well entrenched in the CCP.
Buy Samsung, Nokia and Ericsson.
Do you think anyone trusts anyone else?
Huawei is the top communications backbone infrastructure manufacturer - worldwide.
That's a lot of countries. The only thing that has changed is a campaign by the US government to try a prevent Chinese communications technology leapfrogging US efforts and gaining tech influence.
In a word, protectionism.
Much of the rest of the world is basically saying 'tough luck'. They don't really care about who has telecommunications dominance unless it is them, and it isn't. They care about products and cost.
17 hours ago Donald Trump told the Spanish Prime Minister to ban Huawei. He was swiftly rebuffed and Pedro Sánchez made it clear that that wasn't going to happen.
Huawei is a couple of years ahead of the game in 5G. It would cost governments BILLIONS to change tack on Huawei at such a late stage. And, in spite of repeated requests, no evidence supporting the US claims has ever been provided. Not even to, erm, 'allies' who the US is spying on anyway! We know this for various reasons, not least Edward Snowden.
Yes, funny, because none of the links you ever publish here mean anything.
That's your opinion. Not a fact in any shape or form. Each individual reading this will make up their own minds.
If anything means anything it is that you have not actually countered anything. I backed up my comments. You haven't.
You back up your Huawei bias for the story, and I for my National Security bias. Either of us might be correct today, but when risk is assessed, I'll take my my bias of long term National Security over the convenience of low cost and instant gratification that Huawei is promising with it's 5G.
What bias?
There is no evidence. The US has been called out by some of its so-called 'allies' as well as Huawei. They asked for evidence. None was forthcoming.
First the US urged them. Then it threatened them. Then Trump Tweeted and the house came tumbling down.
That isn't bias. That is fact. Snowden is fact.
I can accept the US position, though. That said, we've been here before, right? 'Here are our 'facts'. We will act on them'.
Other countries got burnt for swallowing those 'facts'.
That's poor but its not my country.
However, when they organise a world tour and - literally - threaten countries to toe the line, 'or else!' that is something completely different and I can assure you that this bullying attitude has simply strengthened the EU's desire to do its own thing and its own way. Not that this is anything new. The minute Trump got elected, the EU went on record as saying the US could no longer be considered a close partner. The relationship changed for the worse.
Yes. I know you are biased. All I have ever asked for is the same as the UK, Spain, Germany, Huawei etc - evidence.
There is none.
There will be little public evidence forthcoming in the Meng Wanzhou trial, should she be extradited. She will be tried in a FISA court, where the Prosecution and the Judge will be able to see the evidence, but not the defendant. That's just standard procedure to protect National Intelligence sources, and other technical means, and is likely true for most every other Western Nation in some form or another. Your call to see the evidence is a straw man, but in this case, there is certainly evidence that she illegally sold U.S. technology to Iran.
Huawei will see the same result with its suit against the U.S. Government for "banning" as Kapersky, a Russion company. Nations have an inherent right to safeguard their infrastructure against foreign intervention. Imagine how a 5G system, which is extremely complex, could be taken down en masse and the chaos that would create for a nation. Maybe you can't imagine that.
The question is the risk associated with a country's infrastructure that comes from another country that has no real distinction between party, Governance, and corporation. The U.S. and most other Western countries are aware of the risk, but some are more than willing to take the low cost route to 5G, with an increased risk of foreign espionage and potential sabotage, from illiberal nations like China. You're biased towards low cost technology that Huawei can provide, almost certainly with the support of the Chinese Government. Seems that Spain is as well.
You likely can't even imagine how Westerner's are treated by the Chinese Criminal Justice system, but it certainly isn't comparable to the U.S. legal system, nor Canada's. Do you really think that the two Canadians that were picked up for spying in China, "coincidentally" a short time after Meng was arrested, would be allowed the freedom of house arrest that Meng has been granted in Vancouver.? Almost certainly they have been detained in small, no frills cells, without visitation or legal services. They are, in essence, hostages.
You probably aren't even aware of the extensive propaganda efforts that the Chinese Government , Huawei, and Chinese diaspora are engaged in, but it is quite noticeable in Australia, New Zealand, and even in Europe.
I like my 4G device. Dont know what 5G will do. Make really fast a touch faster?
A "touch" faster? I've been reading about the new 5G network in Chicago and it's 6 times faster than the fastest iPhone XS. Things like Apple TV+ will need 5G. I'm worried that Apple will have a two year lag time on one of the most important features of a smart phone, speed. iPhones will be six times slower than Android phones from fall 2019 to fall 2021. That's two years, which in the high tech business is ten years.
Please... enough over dramatization.
By the time 5G even remotely becomes mainstream, it will be 2020, if not 2021. This "rush" is just made-up nonsense. That "test" in Chicago was a roller-coaster of reliability. Again, 5G doesn't do squat for the majority of users for a couple more years.
It won’t be mainstream until 2025, at the earliest. And that’s according to the 5G working committees. Others peg 2030 until it’s widely spread.
right now it’s just marketing hype.
I guess that depends on how you define "mainstream". Verizon alone intends to have it up and running in 30 U.S. cities over the next 9 months.
Others may feel differently, but if I was given a choice between dropping a grand on a modern 5G capable phone versus an obsolete 4G one, I will take 5G even if it pisses Trump off.
And what will it do for you that a 4G phone can't?
Remain current with technology and functionality beyond the first year of its life. I hate sinking good money into soon to be obsolete gadgets.
The "5G won't do anything" excuse looks pretty weak when, throughout the world, governments and industry are sinking hundreds of billions into it because they know what it will do.
But what does “remaining current” actually do for you? (This is a serious question.) What’s the point if it’s the newest but you can’t actually do anything different?
Some people still get their AOL mail on their desktop by dialing in. It's the kind of question they would ask.
The analogy is "Why do you need cable when you can just dial in?" In truth, the cable does nothing. It's what it enables. 5G is the same. It's what it will enable -- not today so much as over the 4,5, 6 year life of an iPhone.
And what you give is a sarcastic, non-answer, and your analogies are equally pathetic. For people interested in cutting-edge technology, iPhones do not have a 6 or even 4 year life span. In what way is being 'limited' to 4G speeds/latency going to limit how you use your cell phone in the next 2-3 years?
Sorry that you did not understand. But I'm happy for you that you can trade in your iPhone every year.
Just so I'm clear... 5G is going to be critical by the end of 2020, even though the full roll out is expected to take several years. You claim any phone without 5G capabilities will be obsolete by the end of the year yet you can't identify a single case where 5G is necessary or provides any benefit over 4G. You want your phone to have the latest technology, but only want to get a new phone every 5 or 6 years.
Got it.
Mark Twain was right when he talked about arguing...
I like my 4G device. Dont know what 5G will do. Make really fast a touch faster?
A "touch" faster? I've been reading about the new 5G network in Chicago and it's 6 times faster than the fastest iPhone XS. Things like Apple TV+ will need 5G. I'm worried that Apple will have a two year lag time on one of the most important features of a smart phone, speed. iPhones will be six times slower than Android phones from fall 2019 to fall 2021. That's two years, which in the high tech business is ten years.
Please... enough over dramatization.
By the time 5G even remotely becomes mainstream, it will be 2020, if not 2021. This "rush" is just made-up nonsense. That "test" in Chicago was a roller-coaster of reliability. Again, 5G doesn't do squat for the majority of users for a couple more years.
It won’t be mainstream until 2025, at the earliest. And that’s according to the 5G working committees. Others peg 2030 until it’s widely spread.
right now it’s just marketing hype.
I guess that depends on how you define "mainstream". Verizon alone intends to have it up and running in 30 U.S. cities over the next 9 months.
Others may feel differently, but if I was given a choice between dropping a grand on a modern 5G capable phone versus an obsolete 4G one, I will take 5G even if it pisses Trump off.
And what will it do for you that a 4G phone can't?
Remain current with technology and functionality beyond the first year of its life. I hate sinking good money into soon to be obsolete gadgets.
The "5G won't do anything" excuse looks pretty weak when, throughout the world, governments and industry are sinking hundreds of billions into it because they know what it will do.
But what does “remaining current” actually do for you? (This is a serious question.) What’s the point if it’s the newest but you can’t actually do anything different?
Some people still get their AOL mail on their desktop by dialing in. It's the kind of question they would ask.
The analogy is "Why do you need cable when you can just dial in?" In truth, the cable does nothing. It's what it enables. 5G is the same. It's what it will enable -- not today so much as over the 4,5, 6 year life of an iPhone.
This is an interesting (though baseless) notion... So, in your opinion- if 4g LTE is absolutely PLENTY fast enough to stream 4k content with ease (the highest throughput data type currently); what do you see as being a new data type in the next 4-6 years, that uses so much more data than audio/video? That is how humans have been experiencing things for literally hundreds of thousands of years... are we all going to develop new senses in the next 4-6 years, so that we can take advantage of whatever it is that can be experienced beyond audio/visual? I don’t get it. I suppose a very feeble argument could be made that AR/VR mobile experiences will take off at an incredible rate in the next 4-6 years, and that nobody will come up with a compression file type, and that we will need extreme bandwidth to stream immense raw data, describing entire virtual worlds... but that is extremely far-fetched, and literally the only scenario I can think of that would make 5g in any way “necessary”. Take a look at the home internet market... is there a difference between having 200mb/s internet & having gigabit internet? No. No, there is not. At some point, you reach the point of diminishing returns.
It is not only about speed. One of the most important factors is latency.
4G cannot satisfy widespread 4K delivery either. The more people streaming, the more stress on the infrastructure. It might be ok now but what about the near future.
IoT should benefit hugely from 5G. MWC 2019 demoed traffic lights on pedestrian crossings with sensors capable of detecting people and sending the information to approaching cars. Cars, likewise can send information back to people (visually impaired for example) who are crossing or about to cross. To their phones of course. The biggest train station in China even uses 5G to let you know how busy the toilets are. Fire Brigades have plans to use drones over 5G. 5G Ambulances. 5G on public transport etc. Your phone will be your link to a world of services that can't exist on a huge scale over 4G due to speed, bandwidth or latency issues.
I like my 4G device. Dont know what 5G will do. Make really fast a touch faster?
A "touch" faster? I've been reading about the new 5G network in Chicago and it's 6 times faster than the fastest iPhone XS. Things like Apple TV+ will need 5G. I'm worried that Apple will have a two year lag time on one of the most important features of a smart phone, speed. iPhones will be six times slower than Android phones from fall 2019 to fall 2021. That's two years, which in the high tech business is ten years.
Please... enough over dramatization.
By the time 5G even remotely becomes mainstream, it will be 2020, if not 2021. This "rush" is just made-up nonsense. That "test" in Chicago was a roller-coaster of reliability. Again, 5G doesn't do squat for the majority of users for a couple more years.
It won’t be mainstream until 2025, at the earliest. And that’s according to the 5G working committees. Others peg 2030 until it’s widely spread.
right now it’s just marketing hype.
I guess that depends on how you define "mainstream". Verizon alone intends to have it up and running in 30 U.S. cities over the next 9 months.
Others may feel differently, but if I was given a choice between dropping a grand on a modern 5G capable phone versus an obsolete 4G one, I will take 5G even if it pisses Trump off.
And what will it do for you that a 4G phone can't?
Remain current with technology and functionality beyond the first year of its life. I hate sinking good money into soon to be obsolete gadgets.
The "5G won't do anything" excuse looks pretty weak when, throughout the world, governments and industry are sinking hundreds of billions into it because they know what it will do.
But what does “remaining current” actually do for you? (This is a serious question.) What’s the point if it’s the newest but you can’t actually do anything different?
Some people still get their AOL mail on their desktop by dialing in. It's the kind of question they would ask.
The analogy is "Why do you need cable when you can just dial in?" In truth, the cable does nothing. It's what it enables. 5G is the same. It's what it will enable -- not today so much as over the 4,5, 6 year life of an iPhone.
This is an interesting (though baseless) notion... So, in your opinion- if 4g LTE is absolutely PLENTY fast enough to stream 4k content with ease (the highest throughput data type currently); what do you see as being a new data type in the next 4-6 years, that uses so much more data than audio/video? That is how humans have been experiencing things for literally hundreds of thousands of years... are we all going to develop new senses in the next 4-6 years, so that we can take advantage of whatever it is that can be experienced beyond audio/visual? I don’t get it. I suppose a very feeble argument could be made that AR/VR mobile experiences will take off at an incredible rate in the next 4-6 years, and that nobody will come up with a compression file type, and that we will need extreme bandwidth to stream immense raw data, describing entire virtual worlds... but that is extremely far-fetched, and literally the only scenario I can think of that would make 5g in any way “necessary”. Take a look at the home internet market... is there a difference between having 200mb/s internet & having gigabit internet? No. No, there is not. At some point, you reach the point of diminishing returns.
It is not only about speed. One of the most factors is latency.
4G cannot satisfy widespread 4K delivery either. The more people streaming, the more stress on the infrastructure. It might be ok now but what about the near future.
IoT should benefit hugely from 5G. MWC 2019 demoed traffic lights on pedestrian crossings with sensors capable of detecting people and sending the information to approaching cars. Cars, likewise can send information back to people (visually impaired for example) who are crossing or about to cross. To their phones of course. The biggest train station in China even uses 5G to let you know how busy the toilets are. Fire Brigades have plans to use drones over 5G. 5G Ambulances. 5G on public transport etc. Your phone will be your link to a world of services that can't exist on a huge scale over 4G due to speed, bandwidth or latency issues.
All, that, and you have no security concerns wrt 5G.
Comments
The analogy is "Why do you need cable when you can just dial in?" In truth, the cable does nothing. It's what it enables. 5G is the same. It's what it will enable -- not today so much as over the 4,5, 6 year life of an iPhone.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3005407/us-seeks-freeze-out-huawei-europe-using-rule-law-argument
"The US is engaged in a global campaign to keep Chinese tech companies out of advanced 5G networks promising faster connections, enabling uses such as autonomous vehicles and remote surgery. American officials fear that the Chinese government may force companies such as Huawei to incorporate software code or hardware that would allow Beijing to spy on the US or allies and disrupt sectors ranging from power to transport and manufacturing in a crisis."
“The most fundamental security standard, really, is that you cannot have this extrajudicial, non-rule of law compliant process where a government can tell its companies to do something,” Strayer said on Monday.
and,
"Australia, New Zealand and Japan have acceded to US requests to bar Huawei’s 5G equipment. Those allies have also banded together to provide aid to the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea so that they would reject a Huawei submarine cable carrying broadband connections, saying the line represents a national security threat at its connection point in Australia."
This is absolutely about national security, and not about "protectionism"; the U.S. doesn't have any existing 5G telecom manufacturers, relying instead on the marketplace. Unfortunately for Huawei, those CCP and Chinese Government Connections as well as the legal system that is beholden to the CCP, all are high risks for Western Liberal Governments.
“I want the United States to win through competition, not by blocking out currently more advanced technologies,”
https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/21/18234540/donald-trump-6g-internet-5g-us-telecom-cell-network-carriers
As if it wasn't already crystal clear!
It's about stopping Huawei rooting in the US and getting a foothold (and with it more technological dominance worldwide - hence the threats to allies) and giving US ICTs some breathing space to try and catch up.
Better to look at the statements from the Intelligence Services, which are not kind to Huawei, nor are the Intelligence Services of U.S. Allies, especially Australia, which is seeing increased involvement by CCP diaspora.
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/why-is-the-uk-jeopardising-its-five-eyes-partnership-over-5g/
This is new;
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47856098
"Punjab Safe City Authority (PSCA) told BBC Panorama it had told the firm to remove the modules in 2017 "due to [a] potential of misuse".
The authority said that the Chinese firm had previously made mention of the cards in its bidding documents.
But a source involved in the project suggested the reference was obscure.
A spokesman for Huawei said there had been a "misunderstanding". He added that the cards had been installed to provide diagnostic information, but said he was unable to discuss the matter further.
The PSCA confirmed that the explanation it had been given was that wi-fi connectivity could have made it easier for engineers to troubleshoot problems when they stood close to the cabinets, without having to open them up.
Two people involved in Lahore's project helped bring the matter to the BBC's attention and have asked to remain anonymous. One said that Huawei had never provided an app to make use of the wi-fi link, and added that the cabinets could already be managed remotely via the surveillance system's main network."
That is becoming clearer every day.
As for WiFi modules (removable at that!) It is literally impossible that any even half decent security setup would not have detected them in two minutes. If nothing was done and it was there for managers to see, perhaps we should not be reading strange things into it.
If anything means anything it is that you have not actually countered anything. I backed up my comments. You haven't.
There is no evidence. The US has been called out by some of its so-called 'allies' as well as Huawei. They asked for evidence. None was forthcoming.
First the US urged them. Then it threatened them. Then Trump Tweeted and the house came tumbling down.
That isn't bias. That is fact. Snowden is fact.
I can accept the US position, though. That said, we've been here before, right? 'Here are our 'facts'. We will act on them'.
Other countries got burnt for swallowing those 'facts'.
That's poor but its not my country.
However, when they organise a world tour and - literally - threaten countries to toe the line, 'or else!' that is something completely different and I can assure you that this bullying attitude has simply strengthened the EU's desire to do its own thing and its own way. Not that this is anything new. The minute Trump got elected, the EU went on record as saying the US could no longer be considered a close partner. The relationship changed for the worse.
Yes. I know you are biased. All I have ever asked for is the same as the UK, Spain, Germany, Huawei etc - evidence.
There is none.
So, in your opinion- if 4g LTE is absolutely PLENTY fast enough to stream 4k content with ease (the highest throughput data type currently); what do you see as being a new data type in the next 4-6 years, that uses so much more data than audio/video?
That is how humans have been experiencing things for literally hundreds of thousands of years... are we all going to develop new senses in the next 4-6 years, so that we can take advantage of whatever it is that can be experienced beyond audio/visual?
I don’t get it.
I suppose a very feeble argument could be made that AR/VR mobile experiences will take off at an incredible rate in the next 4-6 years, and that nobody will come up with a compression file type, and that we will need extreme bandwidth to stream immense raw data, describing entire virtual worlds... but that is extremely far-fetched, and literally the only scenario I can think of that would make 5g in any way “necessary”.
Take a look at the home internet market... is there a difference between having 200mb/s internet & having gigabit internet? No. No, there is not. At some point, you reach the point of diminishing returns.
Huawei will see the same result with its suit against the U.S. Government for "banning" as Kapersky, a Russion company. Nations have an inherent right to safeguard their infrastructure against foreign intervention. Imagine how a 5G system, which is extremely complex, could be taken down en masse and the chaos that would create for a nation. Maybe you can't imagine that.
The question is the risk associated with a country's infrastructure that comes from another country that has no real distinction between party, Governance, and corporation. The U.S. and most other Western countries are aware of the risk, but some are more than willing to take the low cost route to 5G, with an increased risk of foreign espionage and potential sabotage, from illiberal nations like China. You're biased towards low cost technology that Huawei can provide, almost certainly with the support of the Chinese Government. Seems that Spain is as well.
You likely can't even imagine how Westerner's are treated by the Chinese Criminal Justice system, but it certainly isn't comparable to the U.S. legal system, nor Canada's. Do you really think that the two Canadians that were picked up for spying in China, "coincidentally" a short time after Meng was arrested, would be allowed the freedom of house arrest that Meng has been granted in Vancouver.? Almost certainly they have been detained in small, no frills cells, without visitation or legal services. They are, in essence, hostages.
You probably aren't even aware of the extensive propaganda efforts that the Chinese Government , Huawei, and Chinese diaspora are engaged in, but it is quite noticeable in Australia, New Zealand, and even in Europe.
5G is going to be critical by the end of 2020, even though the full roll out is expected to take several years.
You claim any phone without 5G capabilities will be obsolete by the end of the year yet you can't identify a single case where 5G is necessary or provides any benefit over 4G.
You want your phone to have the latest technology, but only want to get a new phone every 5 or 6 years.
Got it.
Mark Twain was right when he talked about arguing...
4G cannot satisfy widespread 4K delivery either. The more people streaming, the more stress on the infrastructure. It might be ok now but what about the near future.
IoT should benefit hugely from 5G. MWC 2019 demoed traffic lights on pedestrian crossings with sensors capable of detecting people and sending the information to approaching cars. Cars, likewise can send information back to people (visually impaired for example) who are crossing or about to cross. To their phones of course. The biggest train station in China even uses 5G to let you know how busy the toilets are. Fire Brigades have plans to use drones over 5G. 5G Ambulances. 5G on public transport etc. Your phone will be your link to a world of services that can't exist on a huge scale over 4G due to speed, bandwidth or latency issues.
Good for you!
Not so much for me.