What 5G means is that you’ll be paying your carriers more money for speed.
Or perhaps, in total, less -- because 5G has the capability to replace cable and FiOS coming into your home and merge it with your Wireless bill. So, going from two bills to one could lower your bill. Or, if nothing else, it can create competition to the cable and FiOS companies and force them to lower prices.
What 5G means is that you’ll be paying your carriers more money for speed.
Or perhaps, in total, less -- because 5G has the capability to replace cable and FiOS coming into your home and merge it with your Wireless bill. So, going from two bills to one could lower your bill. Or, if nothing else, it can create competition to the cable and FiOS companies and force them to lower prices.
This is probably the best potential consumer use of 5G. It is not at all clear if/when it will happen since the wireless CEOs have come out and said that the high bandwidth variety of 5G will be limited to densely populated areas, but it would sure be nice if it were a viable competitor to comcast. Of course, if you look at the pricing for wireless right now do you really think it will be cheaper?
One technical problem with this - the short wavelength signals penetrate very poorly, so you won't be able to use your 5G phone in the house as a hotspot and expect high bandwidth. You'll need an external antenna. The signal is also very susceptible to degradation (Articles I've read say a tree is enough to block the signal.) That would potentially mean your signal goes out or gets compromised in a rainstorm.
People are missing an important angle. The questions of 'what 5G can do' and 'how good coverage is' are not relevant.
Any new technology gets marketed to the hilt and 5G (being an infrastructure and end user technology) is no different. This is like 3D TVs, curved screens, UHD and of course, 4G.
When the marketers start pushing a technology, consumers will enquire about it. If the product doesn't have that technology, you are on the back foot from the start.
That is what is important. It is important to Apple too but obviously you will never hear them admit it.
People try to play down missing 5G on iPhones. Going so far as to claim it will be years before it takes off. If that were the case Apple didn't have any pressing need to sign a temporary deal with QC (stopping a potentially game changing court case in the process) to guarantee access to a 5G modem. They could have waited until 5G was truly 'ready' and stuck with 4.5G.
The reason they didn't go down that route (and are rumoured to be putting 5G on the entire refresh next year) is that they know it is in fact of extreme importance to have 5G as soon as possible.
5G is rolling out worldwide, now. In some places it has been accelerated and one of those places (China) is a major market. A major market for Apple too. Make no mistake.
Trudging through virtually all of 2020 without a 5G iPhone will be a slog. And in a market where they have been suffering a lot with handset sales. Europe isn't sitting on its laurels either. Switzerland will reach 95% 5G coverage soon.
I am already being blitzed by 5G marketing. MWC2020 early next year will take things to a whole new level and prospective buyers will have the term engraved on their minds.
Currently, 5G phones are flagship phones. Next month they will hit the midrange and next year they will be everywhere. We already know this because the manufacturers of the major SoCs have either made their roadmaps official or will do so at MWC.
What we do with 5G and if we have coverage, is the least of anyone's problems. That is how marketing works.
However, unlike 3D TVs, we will see massive use cases for 5G in both the corporate and consumer arenas.
If 5G is coming your way and you are on a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle, you really need to think things through before jumping on a new iPhone because this time next year (10 months into your cycle), Apple will be all over 5G - with its own marketing.
Ten months for a potential buyer is a long time. Ten months for a current buyer - flies.
How do you think trudging through 2020 without 5G will be a slog anymore than 'trudging' through 2019 with 4G has been a slog. What essential use will appear in the next 2 months that will make 5G so essential? Beyond that, you say "we will see massive use cases for 5G." What mobile/smartphone uses do you see? I keep asking this and no one seems to be able to come up with anything beyond speed. (one poster did talk about precise 3d localization)
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
Why is everyone so focused on 5G phones when 5G networks in any practical form don't exist.
That’s weird, doing just fine on 5G+ here. Top speed has been 1.2gbps so far. In discussions with AT&T about data plan pricing structure. That’s the only impracticality.
To make my point even more clear, they do exist. Just not where you are it seems.
Wish people would do more research before they make comments stated as facts.
5G will have valid use cases for the masses, but they don’t exist now so there is no reason for the hype other than greed.
Do we need a use case for the masses? My hotspot router is also 5G+. Why? Because I only get DSL at my address, no one wanted to pay for the easement needed.
I’m an animation generalist and despite my own rendering machines, I use that bandwidth to “cloud” render as well. I also work as a consultant, and am often transferring large files. So my hype is real, based on real needs.
I hear people moaning about 5G too often. I’m starting to believe is a case of the haves and have-nots. Heh.
What 5G means is that you’ll be paying your carriers more money for speed.
Or perhaps, in total, less -- because 5G has the capability to replace cable and FiOS coming into your home and merge it with your Wireless bill. So, going from two bills to one could lower your bill. Or, if nothing else, it can create competition to the cable and FiOS companies and force them to lower prices.
This is probably the best potential consumer use of 5G. It is not at all clear if/when it will happen since the wireless CEOs have come out and said that the high bandwidth variety of 5G will be limited to densely populated areas, but it would sure be nice if it were a viable competitor to comcast. Of course, if you look at the pricing for wireless right now do you really think it will be cheaper?
One technical problem with this - the short wavelength signals penetrate very poorly, so you won't be able to use your 5G phone in the house as a hotspot and expect high bandwidth. You'll need an external antenna. The signal is also very susceptible to degradation (Articles I've read say a tree is enough to block the signal.) That would potentially mean your signal goes out or gets compromised in a rainstorm.
I live in a suburb where Verizon has already bought the telephone poles, inspected them, and is replacing them as needed (the ones around my house are 70 years old) -- which I can only think it is so they can mount their 5G transmitters. I don't think many would call it "high density" -- but there is certainly a concentrated market.
But, price wise that could be a mixed bag as it will give them a monopoly of 5G in the area -- which could destroy any price advantage. Fortunately we have Comcast as well as Verizon cable/FiOS here -- so Comcast will likely offer some competition.
As for an external antenna, I don't see a problem. 50 years ago every house had an external antenna on the chimney. And, even today many have a satellite antenna.
As for unreliability from things like rain -- I assume that has been worked out: No company in their right mind would invest as much as they are sinking into 5G if it only worked on sunny days.
What 5G means is that you’ll be paying your carriers more money for speed.
Or perhaps, in total, less -- because 5G has the capability to replace cable and FiOS coming into your home and merge it with your Wireless bill. So, going from two bills to one could lower your bill. Or, if nothing else, it can create competition to the cable and FiOS companies and force them to lower prices.
This is probably the best potential consumer use of 5G. It is not at all clear if/when it will happen since the wireless CEOs have come out and said that the high bandwidth variety of 5G will be limited to densely populated areas, but it would sure be nice if it were a viable competitor to comcast. Of course, if you look at the pricing for wireless right now do you really think it will be cheaper?
One technical problem with this - the short wavelength signals penetrate very poorly, so you won't be able to use your 5G phone in the house as a hotspot and expect high bandwidth. You'll need an external antenna. The signal is also very susceptible to degradation (Articles I've read say a tree is enough to block the signal.) That would potentially mean your signal goes out or gets compromised in a rainstorm.
I live in a suburb where Verizon has already bought the telephone poles, inspected them, and is replacing them as needed (the ones around my house are 70 years old) -- which I can only think it is so they can mount their 5G transmitters. I don't think many would call it "high density" -- but there is certainly a concentrated market.
But, price wise that could be a mixed bag as it will give them a monopoly of 5G in the area -- which could destroy any price advantage. Fortunately we have Comcast as well as Verizon cable/FiOS here -- so Comcast will likely offer some competition.
As for an external antenna, I don't see a problem. 50 years ago every house had an external antenna on the chimney. And, even today many have a satellite antenna.
As for unreliability from things like rain -- I assume that has been worked out: No company in their right mind would invest as much as they are sinking into 5G if it only worked on sunny days.
Competition is ultimately the best way to keep prices down. Unless the CEOs are sleeping with each other. You've mentioned Verizon buying the phone poles before - I'm trying to figure out how it would be financially viable for them to invest enough to purchase the poles and install access points in a residential neighborhood. If it's to provide home 5G internet access as you propose, you're looking at maybe 3-4 households per point, max, even if everyone switched over. I don't know their costs, but it seems like it would take an awfully long time for them to come out ahead.
The external antenna would absolutely not be a problem for fixed access; I was just pointing out that you couldn't necessarily expect to use your phone as a gigabit wifi hotspot in your kitchen.
As far as signal interference, I honestly don't know. Clearly I have no first hand experience with 5G, this is all based on what I have read about it. Unless you live in Seattle, most days are not rainy, so most days it wouldn't be a problem, but It would still suck if your bandwidth dropped by 60% when it started raining, though.
What 5G means is that you’ll be paying your carriers more money for speed.
Or perhaps, in total, less -- because 5G has the capability to replace cable and FiOS coming into your home and merge it with your Wireless bill. So, going from two bills to one could lower your bill. Or, if nothing else, it can create competition to the cable and FiOS companies and force them to lower prices.
This is probably the best potential consumer use of 5G. It is not at all clear if/when it will happen since the wireless CEOs have come out and said that the high bandwidth variety of 5G will be limited to densely populated areas, but it would sure be nice if it were a viable competitor to comcast. Of course, if you look at the pricing for wireless right now do you really think it will be cheaper?
One technical problem with this - the short wavelength signals penetrate very poorly, so you won't be able to use your 5G phone in the house as a hotspot and expect high bandwidth. You'll need an external antenna. The signal is also very susceptible to degradation (Articles I've read say a tree is enough to block the signal.) That would potentially mean your signal goes out or gets compromised in a rainstorm.
I live in a suburb where Verizon has already bought the telephone poles, inspected them, and is replacing them as needed (the ones around my house are 70 years old) -- which I can only think it is so they can mount their 5G transmitters. I don't think many would call it "high density" -- but there is certainly a concentrated market.
But, price wise that could be a mixed bag as it will give them a monopoly of 5G in the area -- which could destroy any price advantage. Fortunately we have Comcast as well as Verizon cable/FiOS here -- so Comcast will likely offer some competition.
As for an external antenna, I don't see a problem. 50 years ago every house had an external antenna on the chimney. And, even today many have a satellite antenna.
As for unreliability from things like rain -- I assume that has been worked out: No company in their right mind would invest as much as they are sinking into 5G if it only worked on sunny days.
Competition is ultimately the best way to keep prices down. Unless the CEOs are sleeping with each other. You've mentioned Verizon buying the phone poles before - I'm trying to figure out how it would be financially viable for them to invest enough to purchase the poles and install access points in a residential neighborhood. If it's to provide home 5G internet access as you propose, you're looking at maybe 3-4 households per point, max, even if everyone switched over. I don't know their costs, but it seems like it would take an awfully long time for them to come out ahead.
The external antenna would absolutely not be a problem for fixed access; I was just pointing out that you couldn't necessarily expect to use your phone as a gigabit wifi hotspot in your kitchen.
As far as signal interference, I honestly don't know. Clearly I have no first hand experience with 5G, this is all based on what I have read about it. Unless you live in Seattle, most days are not rainy, so most days it wouldn't be a problem, but It would still suck if your bandwidth dropped by 60% when it started raining, though.
Telephone poles (or buildings in a dense urban area) are ideal for the smaller 5G transmitters. They are essentially pre-built towers with electric already supplied. Not only could they replace cable for home service but would simultaneously blanket the area with 5G. As for cost: it would be likely, I would think, to be cheaper than stringing a cable to individual homes while providing (potentially) improved bandwidth and speed. The Comcast coax coming into my house is close to 40 years old -- a left over from the municipal sponsored cable days back in the 80's where mostly all we got was better reception for local broadcast channels. I suspect it would be easy to improve on it with modern technology.
As an aside, I've wondered what would happen to those newer neighborhoods where utility cables are all underground feeds. I wouldn't be surprised to see operators contract with individual home owners to allow them to install a 5G transmitter on their roof -- so one home in, say, a block would be supplied with a cable and transmitter and that signal broadcast to other homes and even re-transmitted as in a mesh router type set-up. It could conceivably be where the organization supplied the antenna (like they do now with routers) and each would be equipped with a transmitter -- similar to how Comcast uses their routers to broadcast a public WiFi signal.
As for reception during rain & snow: I would have to think reliability would have to be closer to 99.9% than 60%. Few people would trade cable and 4G for a replacement that only worked a little better than half the time. I suspect that would work as a mixture of the various flavors of 5G -- some slower and more resistant to interference and some the opposite.
People are missing an important angle. The questions of 'what 5G can do' and 'how good coverage is' are not relevant.
Any new technology gets marketed to the hilt and 5G (being an infrastructure and end user technology) is no different. This is like 3D TVs, curved screens, UHD and of course, 4G.
When the marketers start pushing a technology, consumers will enquire about it. If the product doesn't have that technology, you are on the back foot from the start.
That is what is important. It is important to Apple too but obviously you will never hear them admit it.
People try to play down missing 5G on iPhones. Going so far as to claim it will be years before it takes off. If that were the case Apple didn't have any pressing need to sign a temporary deal with QC (stopping a potentially game changing court case in the process) to guarantee access to a 5G modem. They could have waited until 5G was truly 'ready' and stuck with 4.5G.
The reason they didn't go down that route (and are rumoured to be putting 5G on the entire refresh next year) is that they know it is in fact of extreme importance to have 5G as soon as possible.
5G is rolling out worldwide, now. In some places it has been accelerated and one of those places (China) is a major market. A major market for Apple too. Make no mistake.
Trudging through virtually all of 2020 without a 5G iPhone will be a slog. And in a market where they have been suffering a lot with handset sales. Europe isn't sitting on its laurels either. Switzerland will reach 95% 5G coverage soon.
I am already being blitzed by 5G marketing. MWC2020 early next year will take things to a whole new level and prospective buyers will have the term engraved on their minds.
Currently, 5G phones are flagship phones. Next month they will hit the midrange and next year they will be everywhere. We already know this because the manufacturers of the major SoCs have either made their roadmaps official or will do so at MWC.
What we do with 5G and if we have coverage, is the least of anyone's problems. That is how marketing works.
However, unlike 3D TVs, we will see massive use cases for 5G in both the corporate and consumer arenas.
If 5G is coming your way and you are on a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle, you really need to think things through before jumping on a new iPhone because this time next year (10 months into your cycle), Apple will be all over 5G - with its own marketing.
Ten months for a potential buyer is a long time. Ten months for a current buyer - flies.
How do you think trudging through 2020 without 5G will be a slog anymore than 'trudging' through 2019 with 4G has been a slog. What essential use will appear in the next 2 months that will make 5G so essential? Beyond that, you say "we will see massive use cases for 5G." What mobile/smartphone uses do you see? I keep asking this and no one seems to be able to come up with anything beyond speed. (one poster did talk about precise 3d localization)
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
Think of 5G as an enabler.
You will need a device to connect to 5G infrastructure which could be a vehicle, IoT, handset etc.
Currently, under the most advanced 4G infrastructure, you can provide support to around 100,000 devices per kilometre. That figure rises to 1,000,000 for 5G.
On top of that, users, devices and services can be separated on the same infrastructure via network slicing.
The potential is frankly huge in just about every area of our day to day lives.
From a purely handset related perspective there are many use cases.
Toll payments. Currently where I live you need a device attached to the windscreen of your vehicle for toll gates to open and close for you without needing to stop your car. Your phone can be that device.
Public transport. Currently you need a physical ticket or smart card to be able to move around the transport system. Your phone can be those elements.
Health. We are already seeing what health related sensors can offer. Currently much of that raw data is sychronised via your phone. In the future, your watch, phone, band etc will connect independently to collate data but for a time, the phone will remain the hub for those devices. Some phone technologies can already check your breath rate just by pointing the camera at your face, for example. Phones will remain key elements.
Transit. 5G will allow for road infrastructure to sense other vehicles and pedestrians. After sensing a pedestrian, extra information can also be collected from a user's phone (for example in case of emergency/accident).
The list is long and limited only by our will and imagination.
I work in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the use cases I mentioned.
You may think that your current 4G handset could handle some of those cases, and it can. The problem is that the technology behind it can't guarantee the latency, speed QoS, network slicing or scope of 5G.
People are missing an important angle. The questions of 'what 5G can do' and 'how good coverage is' are not relevant.
Any new technology gets marketed to the hilt and 5G (being an infrastructure and end user technology) is no different. This is like 3D TVs, curved screens, UHD and of course, 4G.
When the marketers start pushing a technology, consumers will enquire about it. If the product doesn't have that technology, you are on the back foot from the start.
That is what is important. It is important to Apple too but obviously you will never hear them admit it.
People try to play down missing 5G on iPhones. Going so far as to claim it will be years before it takes off. If that were the case Apple didn't have any pressing need to sign a temporary deal with QC (stopping a potentially game changing court case in the process) to guarantee access to a 5G modem. They could have waited until 5G was truly 'ready' and stuck with 4.5G.
The reason they didn't go down that route (and are rumoured to be putting 5G on the entire refresh next year) is that they know it is in fact of extreme importance to have 5G as soon as possible.
5G is rolling out worldwide, now. In some places it has been accelerated and one of those places (China) is a major market. A major market for Apple too. Make no mistake.
Trudging through virtually all of 2020 without a 5G iPhone will be a slog. And in a market where they have been suffering a lot with handset sales. Europe isn't sitting on its laurels either. Switzerland will reach 95% 5G coverage soon.
I am already being blitzed by 5G marketing. MWC2020 early next year will take things to a whole new level and prospective buyers will have the term engraved on their minds.
Currently, 5G phones are flagship phones. Next month they will hit the midrange and next year they will be everywhere. We already know this because the manufacturers of the major SoCs have either made their roadmaps official or will do so at MWC.
What we do with 5G and if we have coverage, is the least of anyone's problems. That is how marketing works.
However, unlike 3D TVs, we will see massive use cases for 5G in both the corporate and consumer arenas.
If 5G is coming your way and you are on a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle, you really need to think things through before jumping on a new iPhone because this time next year (10 months into your cycle), Apple will be all over 5G - with its own marketing.
Ten months for a potential buyer is a long time. Ten months for a current buyer - flies.
How do you think trudging through 2020 without 5G will be a slog anymore than 'trudging' through 2019 with 4G has been a slog. What essential use will appear in the next 2 months that will make 5G so essential? Beyond that, you say "we will see massive use cases for 5G." What mobile/smartphone uses do you see? I keep asking this and no one seems to be able to come up with anything beyond speed. (one poster did talk about precise 3d localization)
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
Think of 5G as an enabler. ...
From my experience, history supports that argument: Every major advance in computing was enabled by a major advance in telecommunications technology: From the introduction of T1 lines, to dial-up, to cable, to wireless. Each enabled major advances in computing that few foresaw coming.
People are missing an important angle. The questions of 'what 5G can do' and 'how good coverage is' are not relevant.
Any new technology gets marketed to the hilt and 5G (being an infrastructure and end user technology) is no different. This is like 3D TVs, curved screens, UHD and of course, 4G.
When the marketers start pushing a technology, consumers will enquire about it. If the product doesn't have that technology, you are on the back foot from the start.
That is what is important. It is important to Apple too but obviously you will never hear them admit it.
People try to play down missing 5G on iPhones. Going so far as to claim it will be years before it takes off. If that were the case Apple didn't have any pressing need to sign a temporary deal with QC (stopping a potentially game changing court case in the process) to guarantee access to a 5G modem. They could have waited until 5G was truly 'ready' and stuck with 4.5G.
The reason they didn't go down that route (and are rumoured to be putting 5G on the entire refresh next year) is that they know it is in fact of extreme importance to have 5G as soon as possible.
5G is rolling out worldwide, now. In some places it has been accelerated and one of those places (China) is a major market. A major market for Apple too. Make no mistake.
Trudging through virtually all of 2020 without a 5G iPhone will be a slog. And in a market where they have been suffering a lot with handset sales. Europe isn't sitting on its laurels either. Switzerland will reach 95% 5G coverage soon.
I am already being blitzed by 5G marketing. MWC2020 early next year will take things to a whole new level and prospective buyers will have the term engraved on their minds.
Currently, 5G phones are flagship phones. Next month they will hit the midrange and next year they will be everywhere. We already know this because the manufacturers of the major SoCs have either made their roadmaps official or will do so at MWC.
What we do with 5G and if we have coverage, is the least of anyone's problems. That is how marketing works.
However, unlike 3D TVs, we will see massive use cases for 5G in both the corporate and consumer arenas.
If 5G is coming your way and you are on a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle, you really need to think things through before jumping on a new iPhone because this time next year (10 months into your cycle), Apple will be all over 5G - with its own marketing.
Ten months for a potential buyer is a long time. Ten months for a current buyer - flies.
How do you think trudging through 2020 without 5G will be a slog anymore than 'trudging' through 2019 with 4G has been a slog. What essential use will appear in the next 2 months that will make 5G so essential? Beyond that, you say "we will see massive use cases for 5G." What mobile/smartphone uses do you see? I keep asking this and no one seems to be able to come up with anything beyond speed. (one poster did talk about precise 3d localization)
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
Think of 5G as an enabler.
You will need a device to connect to 5G infrastructure which could be a vehicle, IoT, handset etc.
Currently, under the most advanced 4G infrastructure, you can provide support to around 100,000 devices per kilometre. That figure rises to 1,000,000 for 5G.
On top of that, users, devices and services can be separated on the same infrastructure via network slicing.
The potential is frankly huge in just about every area of our day to day lives.
From a purely handset related perspective there are many use cases.
Toll payments. Currently where I live you need a device attached to the windscreen of your vehicle for toll gates to open and close for you without needing to stop your car. Your phone can be that device.
Public transport. Currently you need a physical ticket or smart card to be able to move around the transport system. Your phone can be those elements.
Health. We are already seeing what health related sensors can offer. Currently much of that raw data is sychronised via your phone. In the future, your watch, phone, band etc will connect independently to collate data but for a time, the phone will remain the hub for those devices. Some phone technologies can already check your breath rate just by pointing the camera at your face, for example. Phones will remain key elements.
Transit. 5G will allow for road infrastructure to sense other vehicles and pedestrians. After sensing a pedestrian, extra information can also be collected from a user's phone (for example in case of emergency/accident).
The list is long and limited only by our will and imagination.
I work in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the use cases I mentioned.
You may think that your current 4G handset could handle some of those cases, and it can. The problem is that the technology behind it can't guarantee the latency, speed QoS, network slicing or scope of 5G.
"I live in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the cases I mentioned.
You don't seem to comprehend that most of the applications of 5G that you noted are quite a ways off into the future, so there is almost no chance that Apple will lose current customers to Android OS devices.
The fact that you yourself are not an early adopter of a 5G handset, having stated that you are waiting for a midrange priced Huawei/Honor device, is a validation of many posters claims here that 5G infrastructure has little value in most locations, and what is operational, has so far been mostly problematic.
You are correct that it is a massive marketing push, but that isn't translating to much current availability. Apple delivering next year will be right on time, and with a better spec'd modem, supporting mmwave, than would be currently possible.
People are missing an important angle. The questions of 'what 5G can do' and 'how good coverage is' are not relevant.
Any new technology gets marketed to the hilt and 5G (being an infrastructure and end user technology) is no different. This is like 3D TVs, curved screens, UHD and of course, 4G.
When the marketers start pushing a technology, consumers will enquire about it. If the product doesn't have that technology, you are on the back foot from the start.
That is what is important. It is important to Apple too but obviously you will never hear them admit it.
People try to play down missing 5G on iPhones. Going so far as to claim it will be years before it takes off. If that were the case Apple didn't have any pressing need to sign a temporary deal with QC (stopping a potentially game changing court case in the process) to guarantee access to a 5G modem. They could have waited until 5G was truly 'ready' and stuck with 4.5G.
The reason they didn't go down that route (and are rumoured to be putting 5G on the entire refresh next year) is that they know it is in fact of extreme importance to have 5G as soon as possible.
5G is rolling out worldwide, now. In some places it has been accelerated and one of those places (China) is a major market. A major market for Apple too. Make no mistake.
Trudging through virtually all of 2020 without a 5G iPhone will be a slog. And in a market where they have been suffering a lot with handset sales. Europe isn't sitting on its laurels either. Switzerland will reach 95% 5G coverage soon.
I am already being blitzed by 5G marketing. MWC2020 early next year will take things to a whole new level and prospective buyers will have the term engraved on their minds.
Currently, 5G phones are flagship phones. Next month they will hit the midrange and next year they will be everywhere. We already know this because the manufacturers of the major SoCs have either made their roadmaps official or will do so at MWC.
What we do with 5G and if we have coverage, is the least of anyone's problems. That is how marketing works.
However, unlike 3D TVs, we will see massive use cases for 5G in both the corporate and consumer arenas.
If 5G is coming your way and you are on a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle, you really need to think things through before jumping on a new iPhone because this time next year (10 months into your cycle), Apple will be all over 5G - with its own marketing.
Ten months for a potential buyer is a long time. Ten months for a current buyer - flies.
How do you think trudging through 2020 without 5G will be a slog anymore than 'trudging' through 2019 with 4G has been a slog. What essential use will appear in the next 2 months that will make 5G so essential? Beyond that, you say "we will see massive use cases for 5G." What mobile/smartphone uses do you see? I keep asking this and no one seems to be able to come up with anything beyond speed. (one poster did talk about precise 3d localization)
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
Think of 5G as an enabler.
You will need a device to connect to 5G infrastructure which could be a vehicle, IoT, handset etc.
Currently, under the most advanced 4G infrastructure, you can provide support to around 100,000 devices per kilometre. That figure rises to 1,000,000 for 5G.
On top of that, users, devices and services can be separated on the same infrastructure via network slicing.
The potential is frankly huge in just about every area of our day to day lives.
From a purely handset related perspective there are many use cases.
Toll payments. Currently where I live you need a device attached to the windscreen of your vehicle for toll gates to open and close for you without needing to stop your car. Your phone can be that device.
Public transport. Currently you need a physical ticket or smart card to be able to move around the transport system. Your phone can be those elements.
Health. We are already seeing what health related sensors can offer. Currently much of that raw data is sychronised via your phone. In the future, your watch, phone, band etc will connect independently to collate data but for a time, the phone will remain the hub for those devices. Some phone technologies can already check your breath rate just by pointing the camera at your face, for example. Phones will remain key elements.
Transit. 5G will allow for road infrastructure to sense other vehicles and pedestrians. After sensing a pedestrian, extra information can also be collected from a user's phone (for example in case of emergency/accident).
The list is long and limited only by our will and imagination.
I work in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the use cases I mentioned.
You may think that your current 4G handset could handle some of those cases, and it can. The problem is that the technology behind it can't guarantee the latency, speed QoS, network slicing or scope of 5G.
"I live in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the cases I mentioned.
You don't seem to comprehend that most of the applications of 5G that you noted are quite a ways off into the future, so there is almost no chance that Apple will lose current customers to Android OS devices.
The fact that you yourself are not an early adopter of a 5G handset, having stated that you are waiting for a midrange priced Huawei/Honor device, is a validation of many posters claims here that 5G infrastructure has little value in most locations, and what is operational, has so far been mostly problematic.
You are correct that it is a massive marketing push, but that isn't translating to much current availability. Apple delivering next year will be right on time, and with a better spec'd modem, supporting mmwave, than would be currently possible.
I have said from the start that the angle where Apple will lose out initially has more to do with marketing. Where Apple users will lose out is if they buy a current iPhone on a three or four year cycle and 5G is destined for their area within their upgrade cycle.
I gave the use cases as an answer to potential use cases requested by the OP. It doesn't matter that they are not rolling out right now.
As I said earlier, Apple could have easily waited until its own modem was ready and remained on intel 4G in the meantime and kept up the pressure on QC. That would pre-suppose that 5G wasn't of key strategic interest to Apple right now. That definitely isn't the case.
5G and gaming could work well too. Such a service will go live this month (Sunrise via Gamestream):
The use cases that require more 5G elements will be the ones that take longer to root. That would be the case of transit example mentioned above where pedestrians, vehicles and infrastructure like road signs and traffic lights have to come together.
Those cases will probably be rolled out in smart cities first (which themselves will grow in number due to the enormous economic potential of 5G for government and private enterprise).
In those cases, being first will give technology companies and government a big leg up on competitors. It is one of the reasons the U.S government doesn't want the Chinese government (or any government) to gain a technological advantage by the hand of Huawei. As an industry revenue earner, we are talking billions of U.S dollars in the short term. And lets not forget that ultimately, 5G will draw on AI. Yet more billions on the table in that case.
Huawei's decision to sell its 4G IoT chips to third parties for the first time could be the forebearer of a similar decision to put 5G IoT chips in the hands of third parties.
People are missing an important angle. The questions of 'what 5G can do' and 'how good coverage is' are not relevant.
Any new technology gets marketed to the hilt and 5G (being an infrastructure and end user technology) is no different. This is like 3D TVs, curved screens, UHD and of course, 4G.
When the marketers start pushing a technology, consumers will enquire about it. If the product doesn't have that technology, you are on the back foot from the start.
That is what is important. It is important to Apple too but obviously you will never hear them admit it.
People try to play down missing 5G on iPhones. Going so far as to claim it will be years before it takes off. If that were the case Apple didn't have any pressing need to sign a temporary deal with QC (stopping a potentially game changing court case in the process) to guarantee access to a 5G modem. They could have waited until 5G was truly 'ready' and stuck with 4.5G.
The reason they didn't go down that route (and are rumoured to be putting 5G on the entire refresh next year) is that they know it is in fact of extreme importance to have 5G as soon as possible.
5G is rolling out worldwide, now. In some places it has been accelerated and one of those places (China) is a major market. A major market for Apple too. Make no mistake.
Trudging through virtually all of 2020 without a 5G iPhone will be a slog. And in a market where they have been suffering a lot with handset sales. Europe isn't sitting on its laurels either. Switzerland will reach 95% 5G coverage soon.
I am already being blitzed by 5G marketing. MWC2020 early next year will take things to a whole new level and prospective buyers will have the term engraved on their minds.
Currently, 5G phones are flagship phones. Next month they will hit the midrange and next year they will be everywhere. We already know this because the manufacturers of the major SoCs have either made their roadmaps official or will do so at MWC.
What we do with 5G and if we have coverage, is the least of anyone's problems. That is how marketing works.
However, unlike 3D TVs, we will see massive use cases for 5G in both the corporate and consumer arenas.
If 5G is coming your way and you are on a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle, you really need to think things through before jumping on a new iPhone because this time next year (10 months into your cycle), Apple will be all over 5G - with its own marketing.
Ten months for a potential buyer is a long time. Ten months for a current buyer - flies.
How do you think trudging through 2020 without 5G will be a slog anymore than 'trudging' through 2019 with 4G has been a slog. What essential use will appear in the next 2 months that will make 5G so essential? Beyond that, you say "we will see massive use cases for 5G." What mobile/smartphone uses do you see? I keep asking this and no one seems to be able to come up with anything beyond speed. (one poster did talk about precise 3d localization)
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
Think of 5G as an enabler.
You will need a device to connect to 5G infrastructure which could be a vehicle, IoT, handset etc.
Currently, under the most advanced 4G infrastructure, you can provide support to around 100,000 devices per kilometre. That figure rises to 1,000,000 for 5G.
On top of that, users, devices and services can be separated on the same infrastructure via network slicing.
The potential is frankly huge in just about every area of our day to day lives.
From a purely handset related perspective there are many use cases.
Toll payments. Currently where I live you need a device attached to the windscreen of your vehicle for toll gates to open and close for you without needing to stop your car. Your phone can be that device.
Public transport. Currently you need a physical ticket or smart card to be able to move around the transport system. Your phone can be those elements.
Health. We are already seeing what health related sensors can offer. Currently much of that raw data is sychronised via your phone. In the future, your watch, phone, band etc will connect independently to collate data but for a time, the phone will remain the hub for those devices. Some phone technologies can already check your breath rate just by pointing the camera at your face, for example. Phones will remain key elements.
Transit. 5G will allow for road infrastructure to sense other vehicles and pedestrians. After sensing a pedestrian, extra information can also be collected from a user's phone (for example in case of emergency/accident).
The list is long and limited only by our will and imagination.
I work in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the use cases I mentioned.
You may think that your current 4G handset could handle some of those cases, and it can. The problem is that the technology behind it can't guarantee the latency, speed QoS, network slicing or scope of 5G.
"I live in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the cases I mentioned.
You don't seem to comprehend that most of the applications of 5G that you noted are quite a ways off into the future, so there is almost no chance that Apple will lose current customers to Android OS devices.
The fact that you yourself are not an early adopter of a 5G handset, having stated that you are waiting for a midrange priced Huawei/Honor device, is a validation of many posters claims here that 5G infrastructure has little value in most locations, and what is operational, has so far been mostly problematic.
You are correct that it is a massive marketing push, but that isn't translating to much current availability. Apple delivering next year will be right on time, and with a better spec'd modem, supporting mmwave, than would be currently possible.
I have said from the start that the angle where Apple will lose out initially has more to do with marketing. Where Apple users will lose out is if they buy a current iPhone on a three or four year cycle and 5G is destined for their area within their upgrade cycle.
Apple iPhones have a huge used market, and Apple itself has a number of reasonably priced upgrade programs such that any iPhone user that wants an iPhone 11 / 11 Pro this year isn't going to take a beating on price. For a fact, many of the current modems do not support mmwave, which is what the U.S. is going to standardize on and which all iPhone 12 models will incorporate next fall.
As for Huawei, yes the U.S. will not allow Huawei infrastructure due to National Security issues, but this will certainly benefit Ericsson and Nokia. More to the point, what is happening in China, especially Hong Kong is creating a backlash against China, and Huawei being so closely aligned with the CCP, that will create more headwinds for Huawei telecom.
People are missing an important angle. The questions of 'what 5G can do' and 'how good coverage is' are not relevant.
Any new technology gets marketed to the hilt and 5G (being an infrastructure and end user technology) is no different. This is like 3D TVs, curved screens, UHD and of course, 4G.
When the marketers start pushing a technology, consumers will enquire about it. If the product doesn't have that technology, you are on the back foot from the start.
That is what is important. It is important to Apple too but obviously you will never hear them admit it.
People try to play down missing 5G on iPhones. Going so far as to claim it will be years before it takes off. If that were the case Apple didn't have any pressing need to sign a temporary deal with QC (stopping a potentially game changing court case in the process) to guarantee access to a 5G modem. They could have waited until 5G was truly 'ready' and stuck with 4.5G.
The reason they didn't go down that route (and are rumoured to be putting 5G on the entire refresh next year) is that they know it is in fact of extreme importance to have 5G as soon as possible.
5G is rolling out worldwide, now. In some places it has been accelerated and one of those places (China) is a major market. A major market for Apple too. Make no mistake.
Trudging through virtually all of 2020 without a 5G iPhone will be a slog. And in a market where they have been suffering a lot with handset sales. Europe isn't sitting on its laurels either. Switzerland will reach 95% 5G coverage soon.
I am already being blitzed by 5G marketing. MWC2020 early next year will take things to a whole new level and prospective buyers will have the term engraved on their minds.
Currently, 5G phones are flagship phones. Next month they will hit the midrange and next year they will be everywhere. We already know this because the manufacturers of the major SoCs have either made their roadmaps official or will do so at MWC.
What we do with 5G and if we have coverage, is the least of anyone's problems. That is how marketing works.
However, unlike 3D TVs, we will see massive use cases for 5G in both the corporate and consumer arenas.
If 5G is coming your way and you are on a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle, you really need to think things through before jumping on a new iPhone because this time next year (10 months into your cycle), Apple will be all over 5G - with its own marketing.
Ten months for a potential buyer is a long time. Ten months for a current buyer - flies.
How do you think trudging through 2020 without 5G will be a slog anymore than 'trudging' through 2019 with 4G has been a slog. What essential use will appear in the next 2 months that will make 5G so essential? Beyond that, you say "we will see massive use cases for 5G." What mobile/smartphone uses do you see? I keep asking this and no one seems to be able to come up with anything beyond speed. (one poster did talk about precise 3d localization)
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
Think of 5G as an enabler.
You will need a device to connect to 5G infrastructure which could be a vehicle, IoT, handset etc.
Currently, under the most advanced 4G infrastructure, you can provide support to around 100,000 devices per kilometre. That figure rises to 1,000,000 for 5G.
On top of that, users, devices and services can be separated on the same infrastructure via network slicing.
The potential is frankly huge in just about every area of our day to day lives.
From a purely handset related perspective there are many use cases.
Toll payments. Currently where I live you need a device attached to the windscreen of your vehicle for toll gates to open and close for you without needing to stop your car. Your phone can be that device.
Public transport. Currently you need a physical ticket or smart card to be able to move around the transport system. Your phone can be those elements.
Health. We are already seeing what health related sensors can offer. Currently much of that raw data is sychronised via your phone. In the future, your watch, phone, band etc will connect independently to collate data but for a time, the phone will remain the hub for those devices. Some phone technologies can already check your breath rate just by pointing the camera at your face, for example. Phones will remain key elements.
Transit. 5G will allow for road infrastructure to sense other vehicles and pedestrians. After sensing a pedestrian, extra information can also be collected from a user's phone (for example in case of emergency/accident).
The list is long and limited only by our will and imagination.
I work in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the use cases I mentioned.
You may think that your current 4G handset could handle some of those cases, and it can. The problem is that the technology behind it can't guarantee the latency, speed QoS, network slicing or scope of 5G.
"I live in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the cases I mentioned.
You don't seem to comprehend that most of the applications of 5G that you noted are quite a ways off into the future, so there is almost no chance that Apple will lose current customers to Android OS devices.
The fact that you yourself are not an early adopter of a 5G handset, having stated that you are waiting for a midrange priced Huawei/Honor device, is a validation of many posters claims here that 5G infrastructure has little value in most locations, and what is operational, has so far been mostly problematic.
You are correct that it is a massive marketing push, but that isn't translating to much current availability. Apple delivering next year will be right on time, and with a better spec'd modem, supporting mmwave, than would be currently possible.
I have said from the start that the angle where Apple will lose out initially has more to do with marketing. Where Apple users will lose out is if they buy a current iPhone on a three or four year cycle and 5G is destined for their area within their upgrade cycle.
Apple iPhones have a huge used market, and Apple itself has a number of reasonably priced upgrade programs such that any iPhone user that wants an iPhone 11 / 11 Pro this year isn't going to take a beating on price. For a fact, many of the current modems do not support mmwave, which is what the U.S. is going to standardize on and which all iPhone 12 models will incorporate next fall.
As for Huawei, yes the U.S. will not allow Huawei infrastructure due to National Security issues, but this will certainly benefit Ericsson and Nokia. More to the point, what is happening in China, especially Hong Kong is creating a backlash against China, and Huawei being so closely aligned with the CCP, that will create more headwinds for Huawei telecom.
We know that the last few years of flat sales have included all manner of upgrade programs. 2018/19 was particularly aggressive on pricing. It didn't help bump handset unit sales.
We also know that iPhone users are holding onto phones for longer.
That could indicate that iPhone 11 series purchasers could find themselves in the same situation as buyers since 2015/16. The only seismic change would be the move to 5G and is reason to think things through very carefully.
We can do that as we can see through marketing and know what we need. The wider public probably doesn't have that 'advantage' and that's where the marketers will focus their attention.
There have been little headwinds for Huawei so far on 5G. This is surprising given the action against it. Nokia and Ericsson will see little gain over Huawei in the U.S as Huawei's presence was almost non-existent to begin with.
Unfortunately, U.S companies are feeling the pinch as a result. Huawei finished testing on its reconfigured 5G equipment sans U.S components in August and subsequently began mass production (400,000/500,000 base stations by the end of 2019 and 1,500,000 for 2020). Recent revelations have put this new equipment as performing 30% better than units containing U.S components.
We can consider the lost business will not be coming back in large quantities, whatever the outcome of U.S governmental changes. 260 companies have requested licences to do business with Huawei.
On a non-U.S level, Huawei now has around 65 5G contracts signed.
If we were to evaluate the effectiveness of U.S attempts to derail the company during 2019, it is clear that it has served no purpose and has clearly done more harm to U.S business interests.
People are missing an important angle. The questions of 'what 5G can do' and 'how good coverage is' are not relevant.
Any new technology gets marketed to the hilt and 5G (being an infrastructure and end user technology) is no different. This is like 3D TVs, curved screens, UHD and of course, 4G.
When the marketers start pushing a technology, consumers will enquire about it. If the product doesn't have that technology, you are on the back foot from the start.
That is what is important. It is important to Apple too but obviously you will never hear them admit it.
People try to play down missing 5G on iPhones. Going so far as to claim it will be years before it takes off. If that were the case Apple didn't have any pressing need to sign a temporary deal with QC (stopping a potentially game changing court case in the process) to guarantee access to a 5G modem. They could have waited until 5G was truly 'ready' and stuck with 4.5G.
The reason they didn't go down that route (and are rumoured to be putting 5G on the entire refresh next year) is that they know it is in fact of extreme importance to have 5G as soon as possible.
5G is rolling out worldwide, now. In some places it has been accelerated and one of those places (China) is a major market. A major market for Apple too. Make no mistake.
Trudging through virtually all of 2020 without a 5G iPhone will be a slog. And in a market where they have been suffering a lot with handset sales. Europe isn't sitting on its laurels either. Switzerland will reach 95% 5G coverage soon.
I am already being blitzed by 5G marketing. MWC2020 early next year will take things to a whole new level and prospective buyers will have the term engraved on their minds.
Currently, 5G phones are flagship phones. Next month they will hit the midrange and next year they will be everywhere. We already know this because the manufacturers of the major SoCs have either made their roadmaps official or will do so at MWC.
What we do with 5G and if we have coverage, is the least of anyone's problems. That is how marketing works.
However, unlike 3D TVs, we will see massive use cases for 5G in both the corporate and consumer arenas.
If 5G is coming your way and you are on a 3 or 4 year upgrade cycle, you really need to think things through before jumping on a new iPhone because this time next year (10 months into your cycle), Apple will be all over 5G - with its own marketing.
Ten months for a potential buyer is a long time. Ten months for a current buyer - flies.
How do you think trudging through 2020 without 5G will be a slog anymore than 'trudging' through 2019 with 4G has been a slog. What essential use will appear in the next 2 months that will make 5G so essential? Beyond that, you say "we will see massive use cases for 5G." What mobile/smartphone uses do you see? I keep asking this and no one seems to be able to come up with anything beyond speed. (one poster did talk about precise 3d localization)
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
Think of 5G as an enabler.
You will need a device to connect to 5G infrastructure which could be a vehicle, IoT, handset etc.
Currently, under the most advanced 4G infrastructure, you can provide support to around 100,000 devices per kilometre. That figure rises to 1,000,000 for 5G.
On top of that, users, devices and services can be separated on the same infrastructure via network slicing.
The potential is frankly huge in just about every area of our day to day lives.
From a purely handset related perspective there are many use cases.
Toll payments. Currently where I live you need a device attached to the windscreen of your vehicle for toll gates to open and close for you without needing to stop your car. Your phone can be that device.
Public transport. Currently you need a physical ticket or smart card to be able to move around the transport system. Your phone can be those elements.
Health. We are already seeing what health related sensors can offer. Currently much of that raw data is sychronised via your phone. In the future, your watch, phone, band etc will connect independently to collate data but for a time, the phone will remain the hub for those devices. Some phone technologies can already check your breath rate just by pointing the camera at your face, for example. Phones will remain key elements.
Transit. 5G will allow for road infrastructure to sense other vehicles and pedestrians. After sensing a pedestrian, extra information can also be collected from a user's phone (for example in case of emergency/accident).
The list is long and limited only by our will and imagination.
I work in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the use cases I mentioned.
You may think that your current 4G handset could handle some of those cases, and it can. The problem is that the technology behind it can't guarantee the latency, speed QoS, network slicing or scope of 5G.
"I live in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the cases I mentioned.
You don't seem to comprehend that most of the applications of 5G that you noted are quite a ways off into the future, so there is almost no chance that Apple will lose current customers to Android OS devices.
The fact that you yourself are not an early adopter of a 5G handset, having stated that you are waiting for a midrange priced Huawei/Honor device, is a validation of many posters claims here that 5G infrastructure has little value in most locations, and what is operational, has so far been mostly problematic.
You are correct that it is a massive marketing push, but that isn't translating to much current availability. Apple delivering next year will be right on time, and with a better spec'd modem, supporting mmwave, than would be currently possible.
I have said from the start that the angle where Apple will lose out initially has more to do with marketing. Where Apple users will lose out is if they buy a current iPhone on a three or four year cycle and 5G is destined for their area within their upgrade cycle.
Apple iPhones have a huge used market, and Apple itself has a number of reasonably priced upgrade programs such that any iPhone user that wants an iPhone 11 / 11 Pro this year isn't going to take a beating on price. For a fact, many of the current modems do not support mmwave, which is what the U.S. is going to standardize on and which all iPhone 12 models will incorporate next fall.
As for Huawei, yes the U.S. will not allow Huawei infrastructure due to National Security issues, but this will certainly benefit Ericsson and Nokia. More to the point, what is happening in China, especially Hong Kong is creating a backlash against China, and Huawei being so closely aligned with the CCP, that will create more headwinds for Huawei telecom.
We know that the last few years of flat sales have included all manner of upgrade programs. 2018/19 was particularly aggressive on pricing. It didn't help bump handset unit sales.
We also know that iPhone users are holding onto phones for longer.
That could indicate that iPhone 11 series purchasers could find themselves in the same situation as buyers since 2015/16. The only seismic change would be the move to 5G and is reason to think things through very carefully.
We can do that as we can see through marketing and know what we need. The wider public probably doesn't have that 'advantage' and that's where the marketers will focus their attention.
There have been little headwinds for Huawei so far on 5G. This is surprising given the action against it. Nokia and Ericsson will see little gain over Huawei in the U.S as Huawei's presence was almost non-existent to begin with.
Unfortunately, U.S companies are feeling the pinch as a result. Huawei finished testing on its reconfigured 5G equipment sans U.S components in August and subsequently began mass production (400,000/500,000 base stations by the end of 2019 and 1,500,000 for 2020). Recent revelations have put this new equipment as performing 30% better than units containing U.S components.
We can consider the lost business will not be coming back in large quantities, whatever the outcome of U.S governmental changes. 260 companies have requested licences to do business with Huawei.
On a non-U.S level, Huawei now has around 65 5G contracts signed.
If we were to evaluate the effectiveness of U.S attempts to derail the company during 2019, it is clear that it has served no purpose and has clearly done more harm to U.S business interests.
But it served as a nice distraction from the country that actually attacked (Oops! I meant IS attacking) us. It also served as leverage in the ill fated "trade war".
And, in the end, Huawei, China and many others throughout the world will be working on becoming less dependent on the U.S., its technology, its currency and its businesses.
What 5G means is that you’ll be paying your carriers more money for speed.
Or perhaps, in total, less -- because 5G has the capability to replace cable and FiOS coming into your home and merge it with your Wireless bill. So, going from two bills to one could lower your bill. Or, if nothing else, it can create competition to the cable and FiOS companies and force them to lower prices.
This is probably the best potential consumer use of 5G. It is not at all clear if/when it will happen since the wireless CEOs have come out and said that the high bandwidth variety of 5G will be limited to densely populated areas, but it would sure be nice if it were a viable competitor to comcast. Of course, if you look at the pricing for wireless right now do you really think it will be cheaper?
One technical problem with this - the short wavelength signals penetrate very poorly, so you won't be able to use your 5G phone in the house as a hotspot and expect high bandwidth. You'll need an external antenna. The signal is also very susceptible to degradation (Articles I've read say a tree is enough to block the signal.) That would potentially mean your signal goes out or gets compromised in a rainstorm.
I live in a suburb where Verizon has already bought the telephone poles, inspected them, and is replacing them as needed (the ones around my house are 70 years old) -- which I can only think it is so they can mount their 5G transmitters. I don't think many would call it "high density" -- but there is certainly a concentrated market.
But, price wise that could be a mixed bag as it will give them a monopoly of 5G in the area -- which could destroy any price advantage. Fortunately we have Comcast as well as Verizon cable/FiOS here -- so Comcast will likely offer some competition.
As for an external antenna, I don't see a problem. 50 years ago every house had an external antenna on the chimney. And, even today many have a satellite antenna.
As for unreliability from things like rain -- I assume that has been worked out: No company in their right mind would invest as much as they are sinking into 5G if it only worked on sunny days.
Competition is ultimately the best way to keep prices down. Unless the CEOs are sleeping with each other. You've mentioned Verizon buying the phone poles before - I'm trying to figure out how it would be financially viable for them to invest enough to purchase the poles and install access points in a residential neighborhood. If it's to provide home 5G internet access as you propose, you're looking at maybe 3-4 households per point, max, even if everyone switched over. I don't know their costs, but it seems like it would take an awfully long time for them to come out ahead.
The external antenna would absolutely not be a problem for fixed access; I was just pointing out that you couldn't necessarily expect to use your phone as a gigabit wifi hotspot in your kitchen.
As far as signal interference, I honestly don't know. Clearly I have no first hand experience with 5G, this is all based on what I have read about it. Unless you live in Seattle, most days are not rainy, so most days it wouldn't be a problem, but It would still suck if your bandwidth dropped by 60% when it started raining, though.
Telephone poles (or buildings in a dense urban area) are ideal for the smaller 5G transmitters. They are essentially pre-built towers with electric already supplied. Not only could they replace cable for home service but would simultaneously blanket the area with 5G. As for cost: it would be likely, I would think, to be cheaper than stringing a cable to individual homes while providing (potentially) improved bandwidth and speed. The Comcast coax coming into my house is close to 40 years old -- a left over from the municipal sponsored cable days back in the 80's where mostly all we got was better reception for local broadcast channels. I suspect it would be easy to improve on it with modern technology.
As an aside, I've wondered what would happen to those newer neighborhoods where utility cables are all underground feeds. I wouldn't be surprised to see operators contract with individual home owners to allow them to install a 5G transmitter on their roof -- so one home in, say, a block would be supplied with a cable and transmitter and that signal broadcast to other homes and even re-transmitted as in a mesh router type set-up. It could conceivably be where the organization supplied the antenna (like they do now with routers) and each would be equipped with a transmitter -- similar to how Comcast uses their routers to broadcast a public WiFi signal.
As for reception during rain & snow: I would have to think reliability would have to be closer to 99.9% than 60%. Few people would trade cable and 4G for a replacement that only worked a little better than half the time. I suspect that would work as a mixture of the various flavors of 5G -- some slower and more resistant to interference and some the opposite.
Yeah - we'll have to see what the effect of rain and snow is once the networks are widely available and have significant usage. Like I said - my comment was strictly based off of reading.
It would certainly be cheaper than running cable to every house. The problem is, the cable companies have already done that, and even though the coax may be older, if it's intact you can still get good speeds on it and speeds that are more than adequate for most consumers' needs. Therein lies the rub for Verizon - they have to have a product that has a value good enough to induce people to switch.
I live in a new neighborhood (Our house is 9 years old.) All of the utilities are new and underground. You know what really stinks? It's all old technology. The two providers in town are Comcast and Century Link, and Century Link didn't bother running fiber when the utilities were put in, meaning the only viable option for us is Comcast. The mesh setup is neat, but I again wonder if it would be financially viable. Regardless, I'm quite certain there are people at Verizon who are or have already crunched these numbers. If 5G ever comes to our neighborhood, I'll happily consider it but for me I'm guessing that day is a long. way off.
What 5G means is that you’ll be paying your carriers more money for speed.
Or perhaps, in total, less -- because 5G has the capability to replace cable and FiOS coming into your home and merge it with your Wireless bill. So, going from two bills to one could lower your bill. Or, if nothing else, it can create competition to the cable and FiOS companies and force them to lower prices.
This is probably the best potential consumer use of 5G. It is not at all clear if/when it will happen since the wireless CEOs have come out and said that the high bandwidth variety of 5G will be limited to densely populated areas, but it would sure be nice if it were a viable competitor to comcast. Of course, if you look at the pricing for wireless right now do you really think it will be cheaper?
One technical problem with this - the short wavelength signals penetrate very poorly, so you won't be able to use your 5G phone in the house as a hotspot and expect high bandwidth. You'll need an external antenna. The signal is also very susceptible to degradation (Articles I've read say a tree is enough to block the signal.) That would potentially mean your signal goes out or gets compromised in a rainstorm.
I live in a suburb where Verizon has already bought the telephone poles, inspected them, and is replacing them as needed (the ones around my house are 70 years old) -- which I can only think it is so they can mount their 5G transmitters. I don't think many would call it "high density" -- but there is certainly a concentrated market.
But, price wise that could be a mixed bag as it will give them a monopoly of 5G in the area -- which could destroy any price advantage. Fortunately we have Comcast as well as Verizon cable/FiOS here -- so Comcast will likely offer some competition.
As for an external antenna, I don't see a problem. 50 years ago every house had an external antenna on the chimney. And, even today many have a satellite antenna.
As for unreliability from things like rain -- I assume that has been worked out: No company in their right mind would invest as much as they are sinking into 5G if it only worked on sunny days.
Competition is ultimately the best way to keep prices down. Unless the CEOs are sleeping with each other. You've mentioned Verizon buying the phone poles before - I'm trying to figure out how it would be financially viable for them to invest enough to purchase the poles and install access points in a residential neighborhood. If it's to provide home 5G internet access as you propose, you're looking at maybe 3-4 households per point, max, even if everyone switched over. I don't know their costs, but it seems like it would take an awfully long time for them to come out ahead.
The external antenna would absolutely not be a problem for fixed access; I was just pointing out that you couldn't necessarily expect to use your phone as a gigabit wifi hotspot in your kitchen.
As far as signal interference, I honestly don't know. Clearly I have no first hand experience with 5G, this is all based on what I have read about it. Unless you live in Seattle, most days are not rainy, so most days it wouldn't be a problem, but It would still suck if your bandwidth dropped by 60% when it started raining, though.
Telephone poles (or buildings in a dense urban area) are ideal for the smaller 5G transmitters. They are essentially pre-built towers with electric already supplied. Not only could they replace cable for home service but would simultaneously blanket the area with 5G. As for cost: it would be likely, I would think, to be cheaper than stringing a cable to individual homes while providing (potentially) improved bandwidth and speed. The Comcast coax coming into my house is close to 40 years old -- a left over from the municipal sponsored cable days back in the 80's where mostly all we got was better reception for local broadcast channels. I suspect it would be easy to improve on it with modern technology.
As an aside, I've wondered what would happen to those newer neighborhoods where utility cables are all underground feeds. I wouldn't be surprised to see operators contract with individual home owners to allow them to install a 5G transmitter on their roof -- so one home in, say, a block would be supplied with a cable and transmitter and that signal broadcast to other homes and even re-transmitted as in a mesh router type set-up. It could conceivably be where the organization supplied the antenna (like they do now with routers) and each would be equipped with a transmitter -- similar to how Comcast uses their routers to broadcast a public WiFi signal.
As for reception during rain & snow: I would have to think reliability would have to be closer to 99.9% than 60%. Few people would trade cable and 4G for a replacement that only worked a little better than half the time. I suspect that would work as a mixture of the various flavors of 5G -- some slower and more resistant to interference and some the opposite.
Yeah - we'll have to see what the effect of rain and snow is once the networks are widely available and have significant usage. Like I said - my comment was strictly based off of reading.
It would certainly be cheaper than running cable to every house. The problem is, the cable companies have already done that, and even though the coax may be older, if it's intact you can still get good speeds on it and speeds that are more than adequate for most consumers' needs. Therein lies the rub for Verizon - they have to have a product that has a value good enough to induce people to switch.
I live in a new neighborhood (Our house is 9 years old.) All of the utilities are new and underground. You know what really stinks? It's all old technology. The two providers in town are Comcast and Century Link, and Century Link didn't bother running fiber when the utilities were put in, meaning the only viable option for us is Comcast. The mesh setup is neat, but I again wonder if it would be financially viable. Regardless, I'm quite certain there are people at Verizon who are or have already crunched these numbers. If 5G ever comes to our neighborhood, I'll happily consider it but for me I'm guessing that day is a long. way off.
I think the key is two-fold: 1) Merging the two systems (cable and wireless) into one.
2) Most of the infrastructure is already there: Poles, electric, and connection to the internet via cable/fiber back to the ISP. And, even where the poles do not exist, they will incentivize homeowners to let them install a transmitter on their roof along with the receiver -- most likely the sales pitch would go something like: We won't charge you for the antenna if you let us add a transmitter to it.
For the home owner the the incentive will be: 1) A lower total bill (at least initially) 2) Improved service to both their home and mobile devices (currently today most home cable runs very slowly -- at least in the U.S. To get >30 Mbs speed is expensive)
For me, it just fits. The multiple ISPs from all over the world would not have committed to the many Billions of dollars to roll out 5G without having thought through the implementation plan.
But, as always, the rural areas will be mostly ignored. The one thing that might help them is installing 5G along major highways -- making corridors of service much like trains made 100 years ago... But mostly the rural areas are screwed: They will only get service if government steps in. But, since they tend to support Libertarian politicians who advocate private over public or even a regulated private sector -- they won't get much because the private sector has no incentive to make unprofitable investments.. It's been that way for 100 years -- they only reason they have electricity is because of government intervention -- which they now hate.
Comments
One technical problem with this - the short wavelength signals penetrate very poorly, so you won't be able to use your 5G phone in the house as a hotspot and expect high bandwidth. You'll need an external antenna. The signal is also very susceptible to degradation (Articles I've read say a tree is enough to block the signal.) That would potentially mean your signal goes out or gets compromised in a rainstorm.
You are right, marketing is the main thing driving 5G right now, and ultimately probably the biggest reason manufacturers will need a 5G phone.
To make my point even more clear, they do exist. Just not where you are it seems.
Wish people would do more research before they make comments stated as facts.
I’m an animation generalist and despite my own rendering machines, I use that bandwidth to “cloud” render as well. I also work as a consultant, and am often transferring large files. So my hype is real, based on real needs.
I hear people moaning about 5G too often. I’m starting to believe is a case of the haves and have-nots. Heh.
The joys of DSL.
As for an external antenna, I don't see a problem. 50 years ago every house had an external antenna on the chimney. And, even today many have a satellite antenna.
As for unreliability from things like rain -- I assume that has been worked out: No company in their right mind would invest as much as they are sinking into 5G if it only worked on sunny days.
The external antenna would absolutely not be a problem for fixed access; I was just pointing out that you couldn't necessarily expect to use your phone as a gigabit wifi hotspot in your kitchen.
As far as signal interference, I honestly don't know. Clearly I have no first hand experience with 5G, this is all based on what I have read about it. Unless you live in Seattle, most days are not rainy, so most days it wouldn't be a problem, but It would still suck if your bandwidth dropped by 60% when it started raining, though.
As for reception during rain & snow: I would have to think reliability would have to be closer to 99.9% than 60%. Few people would trade cable and 4G for a replacement that only worked a little better than half the time. I suspect that would work as a mixture of the various flavors of 5G -- some slower and more resistant to interference and some the opposite.
You will need a device to connect to 5G infrastructure which could be a vehicle, IoT, handset etc.
Currently, under the most advanced 4G infrastructure, you can provide support to around 100,000 devices per kilometre. That figure rises to 1,000,000 for 5G.
On top of that, users, devices and services can be separated on the same infrastructure via network slicing.
The potential is frankly huge in just about every area of our day to day lives.
From a purely handset related perspective there are many use cases.
Toll payments. Currently where I live you need a device attached to the windscreen of your vehicle for toll gates to open and close for you without needing to stop your car. Your phone can be that device.
Public transport. Currently you need a physical ticket or smart card to be able to move around the transport system. Your phone can be those elements.
Health. We are already seeing what health related sensors can offer. Currently much of that raw data is sychronised via your phone. In the future, your watch, phone, band etc will connect independently to collate data but for a time, the phone will remain the hub for those devices. Some phone technologies can already check your breath rate just by pointing the camera at your face, for example. Phones will remain key elements.
Transit. 5G will allow for road infrastructure to sense other vehicles and pedestrians. After sensing a pedestrian, extra information can also be collected from a user's phone (for example in case of emergency/accident).
The list is long and limited only by our will and imagination.
I work in a smart city and 5G is already being tested in some of the use cases I mentioned.
You may think that your current 4G handset could handle some of those cases, and it can. The problem is that the technology behind it can't guarantee the latency, speed QoS, network slicing or scope of 5G.
You don't seem to comprehend that most of the applications of 5G that you noted are quite a ways off into the future, so there is almost no chance that Apple will lose current customers to Android OS devices.
The fact that you yourself are not an early adopter of a 5G handset, having stated that you are waiting for a midrange priced Huawei/Honor device, is a validation of many posters claims here that 5G infrastructure has little value in most locations, and what is operational, has so far been mostly problematic.
You are correct that it is a massive marketing push, but that isn't translating to much current availability. Apple delivering next year will be right on time, and with a better spec'd modem, supporting mmwave, than would be currently possible.
I gave the use cases as an answer to potential use cases requested by the OP. It doesn't matter that they are not rolling out right now.
As I said earlier, Apple could have easily waited until its own modem was ready and remained on intel 4G in the meantime and kept up the pressure on QC. That would pre-suppose that 5G wasn't of key strategic interest to Apple right now. That definitely isn't the case.
5G and gaming could work well too. Such a service will go live this month (Sunrise via Gamestream):
https://www.verdict.co.uk/cloud-gaming-5g-networks/
The use cases that require more 5G elements will be the ones that take longer to root. That would be the case of transit example mentioned above where pedestrians, vehicles and infrastructure like road signs and traffic lights have to come together.
Those cases will probably be rolled out in smart cities first (which themselves will grow in number due to the enormous economic potential of 5G for government and private enterprise).
In those cases, being first will give technology companies and government a big leg up on competitors. It is one of the reasons the U.S government doesn't want the Chinese government (or any government) to gain a technological advantage by the hand of Huawei. As an industry revenue earner, we are talking billions of U.S dollars in the short term. And lets not forget that ultimately, 5G will draw on AI. Yet more billions on the table in that case.
Huawei's decision to sell its 4G IoT chips to third parties for the first time could be the forebearer of a similar decision to put 5G IoT chips in the hands of third parties.
https://www.iotm2mcouncil.org/hweibalong
As for Huawei, yes the U.S. will not allow Huawei infrastructure due to National Security issues, but this will certainly benefit Ericsson and Nokia. More to the point, what is happening in China, especially Hong Kong is creating a backlash against China, and Huawei being so closely aligned with the CCP, that will create more headwinds for Huawei telecom.
We also know that iPhone users are holding onto phones for longer.
That could indicate that iPhone 11 series purchasers could find themselves in the same situation as buyers since 2015/16. The only seismic change would be the move to 5G and is reason to think things through very carefully.
We can do that as we can see through marketing and know what we need. The wider public probably doesn't have that 'advantage' and that's where the marketers will focus their attention.
There have been little headwinds for Huawei so far on 5G. This is surprising given the action against it. Nokia and Ericsson will see little gain over Huawei in the U.S as Huawei's presence was almost non-existent to begin with.
Unfortunately, U.S companies are feeling the pinch as a result. Huawei finished testing on its reconfigured 5G equipment sans U.S components in August and subsequently began mass production (400,000/500,000 base stations by the end of 2019 and 1,500,000 for 2020). Recent revelations have put this new equipment as performing 30% better than units containing U.S components.
We can consider the lost business will not be coming back in large quantities, whatever the outcome of U.S governmental changes. 260 companies have requested licences to do business with Huawei.
On a non-U.S level, Huawei now has around 65 5G contracts signed.
If we were to evaluate the effectiveness of U.S attempts to derail the company during 2019, it is clear that it has served no purpose and has clearly done more harm to U.S business interests.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/11/11/huawei-has-defied-trumps-blacklist-so-what-happens-now/
https://www.intelligentcio.com/eu/2019/11/12/huawei-single-voice-core-won-awards-at-the-voice-advanced-communications-summit/
https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight-america/cyber/2019/11/whats-really-behind-uss-huawei-ban
https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/news/2019/10/huawei-released-5g-microwave-superhub-solution
https://techblog.comsoc.org/2019/08/21/huawei-to-ship-over-2-million-5g-base-stations-by-2020-android-vs-harmonyos/
https://www.huawei.com/en/industry-insights/outlook/mobile-broadband/wireless-for-sustainability/cases/power-a-green-5g-era-with-huawei-5g-power
And, in the end, Huawei, China and many others throughout the world will be working on becoming less dependent on the U.S., its technology, its currency and its businesses.
It would certainly be cheaper than running cable to every house. The problem is, the cable companies have already done that, and even though the coax may be older, if it's intact you can still get good speeds on it and speeds that are more than adequate for most consumers' needs. Therein lies the rub for Verizon - they have to have a product that has a value good enough to induce people to switch.
I live in a new neighborhood (Our house is 9 years old.) All of the utilities are new and underground. You know what really stinks? It's all old technology. The two providers in town are Comcast and Century Link, and Century Link didn't bother running fiber when the utilities were put in, meaning the only viable option for us is Comcast. The mesh setup is neat, but I again wonder if it would be financially viable. Regardless, I'm quite certain there are people at Verizon who are or have already crunched these numbers. If 5G ever comes to our neighborhood, I'll happily consider it but for me I'm guessing that day is a long. way off.
1) Merging the two systems (cable and wireless) into one.
1) A lower total bill (at least initially)
2) Improved service to both their home and mobile devices (currently today most home cable runs very slowly -- at least in the U.S. To get >30 Mbs speed is expensive)