That said, there is nothing to stop whichever providers are currently supplying US carriers from developing similiar solutions which are almost definitely already well on their way to market.
Also, services like HD 5G mobile gaming are are available from some carriers:
And although network slicing can (and should) be used on 4G networks, it will only come into its own when 5G networks roll out and that is happening now on a large and ever increasing scale.
LOL... The 5G haters are out in force! Their original claim was: "It will be many years before 5G is available in any but few tiny spots"
Now that that claim has been debunked, they switch to: "But 5G isn't the limited, specific use, 5G I was complaining about!"
But, don't worry, as soon as Apple rolls out a 5G phone, the whining will cease and the 5G haters will become 5G lovers.
Meanwhile, anybody buying a 4G phone today is like somebody buying a 3G phone after LTE was rolled out: Yes, back then it was: "Right now, today, there's not a lot of difference between uses for yesterday's technology and tomorrow's technology -- your 3G phone is fine - today..."
But, on the other hand, complaints will continue as Trump expands his 5G/Huawei hating Trade War into an election issue to rally his base. Without the world leader in 5G the U.S. roll out of 5G will be restricted while the rest of the world moves on So the debate will continue....
The telecom execs have come out and said that mm wave 5G will likely never be available outside of densely populated areas, so many/most people will never really see mm wave 5G on a regular basis anyway. If that’s the case then @"Mike Wuerthele" would seem to argue that there’s no point in 5G.
Haven’t you learned from all the ranting about the electoral college that people in heavy populated areas think people in less populated areas don’t matter? They think it’s ok to impose their group think on those who must live in less populated areas in order to produce food for them. Why would it matter if they don’t get the fastest 5G?
The telecom execs have come out and said that mm wave 5G will likely never be available outside of densely populated areas, so many/most people will never really see mm wave 5G on a regular basis anyway. If that’s the case then @"Mike Wuerthele" would seem to argue that there’s no point in 5G.
Haven’t you learned from all the ranting about the electoral college that people in heavy populated areas think people in less populated areas don’t matter? They think it’s ok to impose their group think on those who must live in less populated areas in order to produce food for them. Why would it matter if they don’t get the fastest 5G?
Services in rural areas are almost always subsidized by urban areas, either via direct user fees as part of your phone/cable bill, or as subsidies from either the Federal or State governments, which are in fact derived from taxes.
You won't see 5G at all in rural areas, or at the least, anytime soon, unless one of the carriers decides to build it at a loss, or unless your local government decides to do the same by contracting to have 5G infrastructure installed, ie, subsidized.
The reason that urban residents aren't all that happy with the Electoral College, is that they see it as giving too much weight to the two Senate Seats that are allotted to each state. In all likelihood, that is going to be less of a problem as a few of the "Red" states go "purple" and the Senate goes "blue". At any rate, we will probably see the end of the Electoral College in my expected lifetime, which means it has to happen in less than 30 years.
That said, there is nothing to stop whichever providers are currently supplying US carriers from developing similiar solutions which are almost definitely already well on their way to market.
Also, services like HD 5G mobile gaming are are available from some carriers:
And although network slicing can (and should) be used on 4G networks, it will only come into its own when 5G networks roll out and that is happening now on a large and ever increasing scale.
Nobody that is a consumer will ever see those speeds unless they have MMwave, but as always, Huawei is great at marketing.
Sadly, things are not going Huawei's way in the world, and backlash to China and Huawei continues to grow:
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
"5G may have become a buzzword, but the notion that countries must rush to be first to deploy it is mistaken and reckless—and increases the odds of security breaches. There’s no doubt that 5G is important, promising the high speeds and unparalleled connectivity that are required to unleash the full potential of the “internet of things”—the ever-growing network of web-connected devices—and artificial intelligence. 5G could prove critical to economic competitiveness, but not only will a race to install the system end up backfiring, there is also reason to think twice about the claims of China’s Huawei that it alone can shape our technological future.
Huawei’s marketing—and Chinese government propaganda—has built the impression that it’s either Huawei or no way to 5G. The telecommunications firm declares itself the unparalleled leader in 5G as it attempts to secure commercial partnerships around the world, now boasting more than 50 contracts across some 30 countries. In Europe, Huawei has even launched a campaign urging residents to “Vote for 5G,” as if its 5G technologies were the only way for Europe to achieve a smarter future.
Huawei’s claims to be No. 1 in 5G can be misleading. Huawei is a leader and a powerhouse, but it is not the only top player. And it isn’t clear that the company is winning—at least, not yet. Although Huawei’s technological capabilities shouldn’t be underestimated, there are reasons to look skeptically at its supposed superiority in 5G.
Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition. Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition.
That Huawei has amassed a market share estimated at nearly 30 percent of the global telecom equipment industry reflects its capacity to underbid and undercutcompetitors, not to mention multiple alleged incidents of bribery and corruption. The Chinese firm’s determination to provide cheap services and equipment to capture market share often puts intense pressure on competitors. But it’s not always a fair fight: Huawei’s rise has been enabled by the billions of dollars in support, subsidies, and various benefits it has received from the Chinese government. For instance, Huawei has lines of credit from state-owned banks that reportedly amount to $100 billion"
...
"For all of Huawei’s grandstanding, its competitors are also gaining ground. Huawei’s apparent advantages are hardly unassailable in an industry that is continuing to evolve so rapidly. Those countries and mobile network operators that opt not to work with Huawei, whether out of concern for security or to protect competition, will have other viable options. Nokia has been catching up with Huawei in deals on the ground, Samsung and Ericsson are also receiving new contracts for major 5G projects, and Qualcomm is continuing to demonstrate new inventions in 5G."
There is now an awareness that Europe ‘can no longer rely on vague promises of reform [from Beijing] but needs to develop its own instruments to level the playing field’, ex-EU ambassador to China Dietmar Schweisgut says
Issues like the role of China’s state-owned enterprises and subsidies ‘also need to be addressed’, he says
At any rate, we will probably see the end of the Electoral College in my expected lifetime, which means it has to happen in less than 30 years.
It would take an amendment to the US Constitution to remove/modify the Electoral College from our presidential election process and since Washington can't even agree on annual budgets without multiple continuing resolutions every year, and you probably can't find a single issue that 38/50 US states agree on, that seems very unlikely.
The telecom execs have come out and said that mm wave 5G will likely never be available outside of densely populated areas, so many/most people will never really see mm wave 5G on a regular basis anyway. If that’s the case then @"Mike Wuerthele" would seem to argue that there’s no point in 5G.
Haven’t you learned from all the ranting about the electoral college that people in heavy populated areas think people in less populated areas don’t matter? They think it’s ok to impose their group think on those who must live in less populated areas in order to produce food for them. Why would it matter if they don’t get the fastest 5G?
That's a rather false analogy.
In the US., unlike other, more advanced countries, telecommunications is regulated or controlled by a central government rather than solely by profit seeking private corporations. So, while other nations insure a fair distribution of things like telecommunications, in the U.S. distribution is determined by who can pay the most - which means less populated, rural areas are treated as second class citizens. The totally weird part about that is that those rural areas support the politicians who support that rather misguided policy. Essentially, they vote against their own (and the nation's) best interests!
Because I live in the suburbs of a major urban area I benefit from that stupidity (less for you means more for me!). But, I still think it is stupid.
T-Mobile is giving speed increases like At&t has done. Though they appear to use newer modems that are only going to be available on any mainstream phones out next year.
I'd like to see a 4GLTE comparison (of each carrier) with 5GE, T-Mobile 5G, and Verizon 5G before calling this out as unimportant, as its to my understanding speeds are supposed to jump from 50Mbps, 100Mbps,250Mbps,1Gbps between the 3 types, and if thats the case people are seeing at least noticeably higher speeds years before MM wave towers make it to any rural areas, no matter what carrier it is.
AT&T 5GE is slower then 4G LTE. There is a write up on it at tomshardware.com
Do you have a link to that report? I found on Tom's Guide this information:
"When I tested AT&T's 5G network in Las Vegas, I hit 900 Mbps over 5G. LTE can't compare, but I clocked over 200 Mbps on an iPhone running on AT&T's 5G E (advanced LTE) network. That's exponentially better than AT&T's existing LTE network, which averaged download speeds of 32.91 Mbps earlier this year."
That said, there is nothing to stop whichever providers are currently supplying US carriers from developing similiar solutions which are almost definitely already well on their way to market.
Also, services like HD 5G mobile gaming are are available from some carriers:
And although network slicing can (and should) be used on 4G networks, it will only come into its own when 5G networks roll out and that is happening now on a large and ever increasing scale.
Nobody that is a consumer will ever see those speeds unless they have MMwave, but as always, Huawei is great at marketing.
Sadly, things are not going Huawei's way in the world, and backlash to China and Huawei continues to grow:
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
"5G may have become a buzzword, but the notion that countries must rush to be first to deploy it is mistaken and reckless—and increases the odds of security breaches. There’s no doubt that 5G is important, promising the high speeds and unparalleled connectivity that are required to unleash the full potential of the “internet of things”—the ever-growing network of web-connected devices—and artificial intelligence. 5G could prove critical to economic competitiveness, but not only will a race to install the system end up backfiring, there is also reason to think twice about the claims of China’s Huawei that it alone can shape our technological future.
Huawei’s marketing—and Chinese government propaganda—has built the impression that it’s either Huawei or no way to 5G. The telecommunications firm declares itself the unparalleled leader in 5G as it attempts to secure commercial partnerships around the world, now boasting more than 50 contracts across some 30 countries. In Europe, Huawei has even launched a campaign urging residents to “Vote for 5G,” as if its 5G technologies were the only way for Europe to achieve a smarter future.
Huawei’s claims to be No. 1 in 5G can be misleading. Huawei is a leader and a powerhouse, but it is not the only top player. And it isn’t clear that the company is winning—at least, not yet. Although Huawei’s technological capabilities shouldn’t be underestimated, there are reasons to look skeptically at its supposed superiority in 5G.
Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition. Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition.
That Huawei has amassed a market share estimated at nearly 30 percent of the global telecom equipment industry reflects its capacity to underbid and undercutcompetitors, not to mention multiple alleged incidents of bribery and corruption. The Chinese firm’s determination to provide cheap services and equipment to capture market share often puts intense pressure on competitors. But it’s not always a fair fight: Huawei’s rise has been enabled by the billions of dollars in support, subsidies, and various benefits it has received from the Chinese government. For instance, Huawei has lines of credit from state-owned banks that reportedly amount to $100 billion"
...
"For all of Huawei’s grandstanding, its competitors are also gaining ground. Huawei’s apparent advantages are hardly unassailable in an industry that is continuing to evolve so rapidly. Those countries and mobile network operators that opt not to work with Huawei, whether out of concern for security or to protect competition, will have other viable options. Nokia has been catching up with Huawei in deals on the ground, Samsung and Ericsson are also receiving new contracts for major 5G projects, and Qualcomm is continuing to demonstrate new inventions in 5G."
There is now an awareness that Europe ‘can no longer rely on vague promises of reform [from Beijing] but needs to develop its own instruments to level the playing field’, ex-EU ambassador to China Dietmar Schweisgut says
Issues like the role of China’s state-owned enterprises and subsidies ‘also need to be addressed’, he says
Man, talk about headwinds for Huawei...
You should re-read the link.
This is without mmWave, using a live commercially deployed network and commercially available 5G phones. The Sunrise 5G gaming platform of course doesn't use mmWave either.
The rest is all politics and tacit admissions that Huawei is leading the way. Of course the word 'alleged' is ever present in the absence of actual proof. Lots of bluster and very little more. Except maybe for fear and paranoia. Take a look at this as a prime example:
Someone should remind him that huge chunks of the internet have been running over Huawei infrastructure for decades and there hasn't been a problem.
Bring on the competition! Competition is what counts.
Sadly for the U.S, and according to WSJ, U.S companies aren't able to compete due to purely political reasons and are losing billions in revenues (needed for investment into future products) as a result. A result which is seeing those billions pumped into their foreign competitors.
That said, there is nothing to stop whichever providers are currently supplying US carriers from developing similiar solutions which are almost definitely already well on their way to market.
Also, services like HD 5G mobile gaming are are available from some carriers:
And although network slicing can (and should) be used on 4G networks, it will only come into its own when 5G networks roll out and that is happening now on a large and ever increasing scale.
Nobody that is a consumer will ever see those speeds unless they have MMwave, but as always, Huawei is great at marketing.
Sadly, things are not going Huawei's way in the world, and backlash to China and Huawei continues to grow:
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
"5G may have become a buzzword, but the notion that countries must rush to be first to deploy it is mistaken and reckless—and increases the odds of security breaches. There’s no doubt that 5G is important, promising the high speeds and unparalleled connectivity that are required to unleash the full potential of the “internet of things”—the ever-growing network of web-connected devices—and artificial intelligence. 5G could prove critical to economic competitiveness, but not only will a race to install the system end up backfiring, there is also reason to think twice about the claims of China’s Huawei that it alone can shape our technological future.
Huawei’s marketing—and Chinese government propaganda—has built the impression that it’s either Huawei or no way to 5G. The telecommunications firm declares itself the unparalleled leader in 5G as it attempts to secure commercial partnerships around the world, now boasting more than 50 contracts across some 30 countries. In Europe, Huawei has even launched a campaign urging residents to “Vote for 5G,” as if its 5G technologies were the only way for Europe to achieve a smarter future.
Huawei’s claims to be No. 1 in 5G can be misleading. Huawei is a leader and a powerhouse, but it is not the only top player. And it isn’t clear that the company is winning—at least, not yet. Although Huawei’s technological capabilities shouldn’t be underestimated, there are reasons to look skeptically at its supposed superiority in 5G.
Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition. Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition.
That Huawei has amassed a market share estimated at nearly 30 percent of the global telecom equipment industry reflects its capacity to underbid and undercutcompetitors, not to mention multiple alleged incidents of bribery and corruption. The Chinese firm’s determination to provide cheap services and equipment to capture market share often puts intense pressure on competitors. But it’s not always a fair fight: Huawei’s rise has been enabled by the billions of dollars in support, subsidies, and various benefits it has received from the Chinese government. For instance, Huawei has lines of credit from state-owned banks that reportedly amount to $100 billion"
...
"For all of Huawei’s grandstanding, its competitors are also gaining ground. Huawei’s apparent advantages are hardly unassailable in an industry that is continuing to evolve so rapidly. Those countries and mobile network operators that opt not to work with Huawei, whether out of concern for security or to protect competition, will have other viable options. Nokia has been catching up with Huawei in deals on the ground, Samsung and Ericsson are also receiving new contracts for major 5G projects, and Qualcomm is continuing to demonstrate new inventions in 5G."
There is now an awareness that Europe ‘can no longer rely on vague promises of reform [from Beijing] but needs to develop its own instruments to level the playing field’, ex-EU ambassador to China Dietmar Schweisgut says
Issues like the role of China’s state-owned enterprises and subsidies ‘also need to be addressed’, he says
Man, talk about headwinds for Huawei...
You should re-read the link.
This is without mmWave, using a live commercially deployed network and commercially available 5G phones. The Sunrise 5G gaming platform of course doesn't use mmWave either.
The rest is all politics and tacit admissions that Huawei is leading the way. Of course the word 'alleged' is ever present in the absence of actual proof. Lots of bluster and very little more.
Bring on the competition! Competition is what counts.
Sadly for the U.S, and according to WSJ, U.S companies aren't able to compete due to purely political reasons and are losing billions in revenues (needed for investment into future products) as a result. A result which is seeing those billions pumped into their foreign competitors.
You shouldn't believe that a Huawei test is going to demonstrate normal consumer performance of 5G, and it won't. Just more Huawei marketing.
As for the losses to American component manufacturers, be aware that they will have the remaining market for 5G telecom to compete in, and as far as handsets, Huawei is going to run into problems if they don't support Google services, which plays right into Samsung's advantage.
You see how the networks are planning on deceiving customers? 5G and all the marketing nonsense is all about advertising crazy-fast speeds, but now that the 5G-buzz is seeded into people, they are going to quietly remove the key (and expensive) part of 5G and try to pass it off as the real thing.
We are years away - if not longer - from the true 5G that the providers promised. This is no better than what LTE provides.
That said, there is nothing to stop whichever providers are currently supplying US carriers from developing similiar solutions which are almost definitely already well on their way to market.
Also, services like HD 5G mobile gaming are are available from some carriers:
And although network slicing can (and should) be used on 4G networks, it will only come into its own when 5G networks roll out and that is happening now on a large and ever increasing scale.
Nobody that is a consumer will ever see those speeds unless they have MMwave, but as always, Huawei is great at marketing.
Sadly, things are not going Huawei's way in the world, and backlash to China and Huawei continues to grow:
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
"5G may have become a buzzword, but the notion that countries must rush to be first to deploy it is mistaken and reckless—and increases the odds of security breaches. There’s no doubt that 5G is important, promising the high speeds and unparalleled connectivity that are required to unleash the full potential of the “internet of things”—the ever-growing network of web-connected devices—and artificial intelligence. 5G could prove critical to economic competitiveness, but not only will a race to install the system end up backfiring, there is also reason to think twice about the claims of China’s Huawei that it alone can shape our technological future.
Huawei’s marketing—and Chinese government propaganda—has built the impression that it’s either Huawei or no way to 5G. The telecommunications firm declares itself the unparalleled leader in 5G as it attempts to secure commercial partnerships around the world, now boasting more than 50 contracts across some 30 countries. In Europe, Huawei has even launched a campaign urging residents to “Vote for 5G,” as if its 5G technologies were the only way for Europe to achieve a smarter future.
Huawei’s claims to be No. 1 in 5G can be misleading. Huawei is a leader and a powerhouse, but it is not the only top player. And it isn’t clear that the company is winning—at least, not yet. Although Huawei’s technological capabilities shouldn’t be underestimated, there are reasons to look skeptically at its supposed superiority in 5G.
Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition. Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition.
That Huawei has amassed a market share estimated at nearly 30 percent of the global telecom equipment industry reflects its capacity to underbid and undercutcompetitors, not to mention multiple alleged incidents of bribery and corruption. The Chinese firm’s determination to provide cheap services and equipment to capture market share often puts intense pressure on competitors. But it’s not always a fair fight: Huawei’s rise has been enabled by the billions of dollars in support, subsidies, and various benefits it has received from the Chinese government. For instance, Huawei has lines of credit from state-owned banks that reportedly amount to $100 billion"
...
"For all of Huawei’s grandstanding, its competitors are also gaining ground. Huawei’s apparent advantages are hardly unassailable in an industry that is continuing to evolve so rapidly. Those countries and mobile network operators that opt not to work with Huawei, whether out of concern for security or to protect competition, will have other viable options. Nokia has been catching up with Huawei in deals on the ground, Samsung and Ericsson are also receiving new contracts for major 5G projects, and Qualcomm is continuing to demonstrate new inventions in 5G."
There is now an awareness that Europe ‘can no longer rely on vague promises of reform [from Beijing] but needs to develop its own instruments to level the playing field’, ex-EU ambassador to China Dietmar Schweisgut says
Issues like the role of China’s state-owned enterprises and subsidies ‘also need to be addressed’, he says
Man, talk about headwinds for Huawei...
You should re-read the link.
This is without mmWave, using a live commercially deployed network and commercially available 5G phones. The Sunrise 5G gaming platform of course doesn't use mmWave either.
The rest is all politics and tacit admissions that Huawei is leading the way. Of course the word 'alleged' is ever present in the absence of actual proof. Lots of bluster and very little more.
Bring on the competition! Competition is what counts.
Sadly for the U.S, and according to WSJ, U.S companies aren't able to compete due to purely political reasons and are losing billions in revenues (needed for investment into future products) as a result. A result which is seeing those billions pumped into their foreign competitors.
You shouldn't believe that a Huawei test is going to demonstrate normal consumer performance of 5G, and it won't. Just more Huawei marketing.
As for the losses to American component manufacturers, be aware that they will have the remaining market for 5G telecom to compete in, and as far as handsets, Huawei is going to run into problems if they don't support Google services, which plays right into Samsung's advantage.
What?
Who I shouldn't believe is you. These results are obviously where we are heading and supported by the carriers. Sunrise is just one. Other speed milestones have been set in other countries and also verified by the carriers. None of them using mmWave which is what you said was needed to achieve those speeds. Clearly you were wrong because the carriers have verified the speeds. These are NOT lab settings.
If you think U.S companies can simply shrug off multi billion revenue losses by looking elsewhere for business you are seriously missing the point.
Independently of what business they may (or may not) pick up, losing Huawei is lost business whichever way you look at it.
Have you considered the fact that the Huawei Mobile Services Genie is already out of the bottle and its not going back?
Google pleaded with Trump not to do what he did because they know full well what the consequences are. It's too late now though. It won't appear overnight but HarmonyOS/Huawei Mobile Services will develop to become a major challenge to Android/Google Mobile Services.
Trump lit the fuse to the dynamite but he hasn't realised he is still holding it!
T-Mobile is giving speed increases like At&t has done. Though they appear to use newer modems that are only going to be available on any mainstream phones out next year.
I'd like to see a 4GLTE comparison (of each carrier) with 5GE, T-Mobile 5G, and Verizon 5G before calling this out as unimportant, as its to my understanding speeds are supposed to jump from 50Mbps, 100Mbps,250Mbps,1Gbps between the 3 types, and if thats the case people are seeing at least noticeably higher speeds years before MM wave towers make it to any rural areas, no matter what carrier it is.
AT&T 5GE is slower then 4G LTE. There is a write up on it at tomshardware.com
Now, AT&T's 5GE is really LTE-Advanced. We know that. So it can't be slower than 4G LTE because that's what it is. If you mean slower than Verizon's LTE, that's very possible. It probably depends on where you are, obviously network conditions, etc. In my experience, Verizon has broader and more consistent coverage, but AT&T can be faster in some locations.
5G is 5G regardless. There’s a slower and a faster version, but it’s all 5G. IMHO, a more steady and useable 5G (slower) is a better start than the unsteady (difficulty penetrating, etc.) faster 5G one.
There's also almost no point to 5G from a network speed and usability standpoint without the faster mmWave.
That is incorrect. A 5G network using the standard 4G spectrum has several advantages compared to 4G.
A lower latency. The network reacts faster. This is quite important for a number of applications like VOIP where reaction time is crucial. Example: in a multiplayer shooter game a 4G connected player will have a hard time beating a 5G connected player
A higher capacity due to better encoding techniques. A 5G cell can connect more users at the same speed than a 4G network. In crowded areas 4G networks are suffering from saturation, leading to a drop in the connection speed per user. In such a saturated network, 5G will have roughly 3 times faster connections
Eh, I'm with Mike on this one. What you're saying is true from a technical, theoretical standpoint. Real-world latency and capacity improvements will take years, as will promised speeds.
That said, there is nothing to stop whichever providers are currently supplying US carriers from developing similiar solutions which are almost definitely already well on their way to market.
Also, services like HD 5G mobile gaming are are available from some carriers:
And although network slicing can (and should) be used on 4G networks, it will only come into its own when 5G networks roll out and that is happening now on a large and ever increasing scale.
Nobody that is a consumer will ever see those speeds unless they have MMwave, but as always, Huawei is great at marketing.
See for yourself. This time London but three months ago so not the same speeds but a valid comparison to 4G+ nevertheless.
Or this. Now in Spain and from June this year. The exact same phone for comparative purposes:
And just for good measure, a short comparison of Nokia, Ericsson and Huawei 5G solutions in London and Leeds.
At any rate, we will probably see the end of the Electoral College in my expected lifetime, which means it has to happen in less than 30 years.
It would take an amendment to the US Constitution to remove/modify the Electoral College from our presidential election process and since Washington can't even agree on annual budgets without multiple continuing resolutions every year, and you probably can't find a single issue that 38/50 US states agree on, that seems very unlikely.
5G is 5G regardless. There’s a slower and a faster version, but it’s all 5G. IMHO, a more steady and useable 5G (slower) is a better start than the unsteady (difficulty penetrating, etc.) faster 5G one.
There's also almost no point to 5G from a network speed and usability standpoint without the faster mmWave.
That is incorrect. A 5G network using the standard 4G spectrum has several advantages compared to 4G.
A lower latency. The network reacts faster. This is quite important for a number of applications like VOIP where reaction time is crucial. Example: in a multiplayer shooter game a 4G connected player will have a hard time beating a 5G connected player
A higher capacity due to better encoding techniques. A 5G cell can connect more users at the same speed than a 4G network. In crowded areas 4G networks are suffering from saturation, leading to a drop in the connection speed per user. In such a saturated network, 5G will have roughly 3 times faster connections
Someday, yes. But not this year, not next, and not with what T-Mobile is declaring victory about today.
Comments
https://venturebeat.com/2019/10/09/huawei-hits-record-5g-speed-of-3-67gbps-on-live-swiss-c-band-network/
That said, there is nothing to stop whichever providers are currently supplying US carriers from developing similiar solutions which are almost definitely already well on their way to market.
Also, services like HD 5G mobile gaming are are available from some carriers:
https://www.sunrise.ch/en/residential/world-of-5g/gaming.html
And although network slicing can (and should) be used on 4G networks, it will only come into its own when 5G networks roll out and that is happening now on a large and ever increasing scale.
Their original claim was: "It will be many years before 5G is available in any but few tiny spots"
Yes, back then it was: "Right now, today, there's not a lot of difference between uses for yesterday's technology and tomorrow's technology -- your 3G phone is fine - today..."
You won't see 5G at all in rural areas, or at the least, anytime soon, unless one of the carriers decides to build it at a loss, or unless your local government decides to do the same by contracting to have 5G infrastructure installed, ie, subsidized.
The reason that urban residents aren't all that happy with the Electoral College, is that they see it as giving too much weight to the two Senate Seats that are allotted to each state. In all likelihood, that is going to be less of a problem as a few of the "Red" states go "purple" and the Senate goes "blue". At any rate, we will probably see the end of the Electoral College in my expected lifetime, which means it has to happen in less than 30 years.
Sadly, things are not going Huawei's way in the world, and backlash to China and Huawei continues to grow:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/11/29/has-huaweis-darkest-secret-just-been-exposed-by-this-new-report/#6d6513c24061
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/12/huawei-china-5g-race-technology/
"5G may have become a buzzword, but the notion that countries must rush to be first to deploy it is mistaken and reckless—and increases the odds of security breaches. There’s no doubt that 5G is important, promising the high speeds and unparalleled connectivity that are required to unleash the full potential of the “internet of things”—the ever-growing network of web-connected devices—and artificial intelligence. 5G could prove critical to economic competitiveness, but not only will a race to install the system end up backfiring, there is also reason to think twice about the claims of China’s Huawei that it alone can shape our technological future.
Huawei’s marketing—and Chinese government propaganda—has built the impression that it’s either Huawei or no way to 5G. The telecommunications firm declares itself the unparalleled leader in 5G as it attempts to secure commercial partnerships around the world, now boasting more than 50 contracts across some 30 countries. In Europe, Huawei has even launched a campaign urging residents to “Vote for 5G,” as if its 5G technologies were the only way for Europe to achieve a smarter future.
Huawei’s claims to be No. 1 in 5G can be misleading. Huawei is a leader and a powerhouse, but it is not the only top player. And it isn’t clear that the company is winning—at least, not yet. Although Huawei’s technological capabilities shouldn’t be underestimated, there are reasons to look skeptically at its supposed superiority in 5G.
Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition. Huawei’s quest for dominance in the global telecommunications industry has involved tactics and practices that are antithetical to fair, healthy competition.
That Huawei has amassed a market share estimated at nearly 30 percent of the global telecom equipment industry reflects its capacity to underbid and undercutcompetitors, not to mention multiple alleged incidents of bribery and corruption. The Chinese firm’s determination to provide cheap services and equipment to capture market share often puts intense pressure on competitors. But it’s not always a fair fight: Huawei’s rise has been enabled by the billions of dollars in support, subsidies, and various benefits it has received from the Chinese government. For instance, Huawei has lines of credit from state-owned banks that reportedly amount to $100 billion"
...
"For all of Huawei’s grandstanding, its competitors are also gaining ground. Huawei’s apparent advantages are hardly unassailable in an industry that is continuing to evolve so rapidly. Those countries and mobile network operators that opt not to work with Huawei, whether out of concern for security or to protect competition, will have other viable options. Nokia has been catching up with Huawei in deals on the ground, Samsung and Ericsson are also receiving new contracts for major 5G projects, and Qualcomm is continuing to demonstrate new inventions in 5G."
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3040064/europe-needs-adopt-harder-line-relations-china-former-envoy
Man, talk about headwinds for Huawei...
Because I live in the suburbs of a major urban area I benefit from that stupidity (less for you means more for me!). But, I still think it is stupid.
I found on Tom's Guide this information:
"When I tested AT&T's 5G network in Las Vegas, I hit 900 Mbps over 5G. LTE can't compare, but I clocked over 200 Mbps on an iPhone running on AT&T's 5G E (advanced LTE) network. That's exponentially better than AT&T's existing LTE network, which averaged download speeds of 32.91 Mbps earlier this year."
Less in basically every way. Energy consumption, installation, maintenance rents etc
This is without mmWave, using a live commercially deployed network and commercially available 5G phones. The Sunrise 5G gaming platform of course doesn't use mmWave either.
The rest is all politics and tacit admissions that Huawei is leading the way. Of course the word 'alleged' is ever present in the absence of actual proof. Lots of bluster and very little more. Except maybe for fear and paranoia. Take a look at this as a prime example:
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/how-chinas-5g-ascent-could-herald-the-end-of-us-big-tech/
Someone should remind him that huge chunks of the internet have been running over Huawei infrastructure for decades and there hasn't been a problem.
Bring on the competition! Competition is what counts.
Sadly for the U.S, and according to WSJ, U.S companies aren't able to compete due to purely political reasons and are losing billions in revenues (needed for investment into future products) as a result. A result which is seeing those billions pumped into their foreign competitors.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/huawei-manages-to-make-smartphones-without-american-chips-11575196201
You shouldn't believe that a Huawei test is going to demonstrate normal consumer performance of 5G, and it won't. Just more Huawei marketing.
As for the losses to American component manufacturers, be aware that they will have the remaining market for 5G telecom to compete in, and as far as handsets, Huawei is going to run into problems if they don't support Google services, which plays right into Samsung's advantage.
Who I shouldn't believe is you. These results are obviously where we are heading and supported by the carriers. Sunrise is just one. Other speed milestones have been set in other countries and also verified by the carriers. None of them using mmWave which is what you said was needed to achieve those speeds. Clearly you were wrong because the carriers have verified the speeds. These are NOT lab settings.
If you think U.S companies can simply shrug off multi billion revenue losses by looking elsewhere for business you are seriously missing the point.
Independently of what business they may (or may not) pick up, losing Huawei is lost business whichever way you look at it.
Have you considered the fact that the Huawei Mobile Services Genie is already out of the bottle and its not going back?
Google pleaded with Trump not to do what he did because they know full well what the consequences are. It's too late now though. It won't appear overnight but HarmonyOS/Huawei Mobile Services will develop to become a major challenge to Android/Google Mobile Services.
Trump lit the fuse to the dynamite but he hasn't realised he is still holding it!
That's not necessarily true. I just ran a 5Ge test and I got 139mbps. Second time over 100mbps. That's much different than this article, which I assume you're referencing: https://www.tomsguide.com/us/att-5ge-5g-verizon-lte,news-30163.html
Now, AT&T's 5GE is really LTE-Advanced. We know that. So it can't be slower than 4G LTE because that's what it is. If you mean slower than Verizon's LTE, that's very possible. It probably depends on where you are, obviously network conditions, etc. In my experience, Verizon has broader and more consistent coverage, but AT&T can be faster in some locations.
Eh, I'm with Mike on this one. What you're saying is true from a technical, theoretical standpoint. Real-world latency and capacity improvements will take years, as will promised speeds.
See for yourself. This time London but three months ago so not the same speeds but a valid comparison to 4G+ nevertheless.
Or this. Now in Spain and from June this year. The exact same phone for comparative purposes:
And just for good measure, a short comparison of Nokia, Ericsson and Huawei 5G solutions in London and Leeds.