I don’t know much about how cellular connectivity works, but on it’s face 2 gigabits seems like huge overkill. In the US I normally get around 50 megabits per second download times on AT&T. Occasionally I’ll see higher speeds than that but nowhere near even 500 megabits per second.
Is there something non-obvious about a 2 gigabits per second modem that would show immediate benefit when that chip becomes available?
It's like you have a pipe with capability of 20 gal/min flow rate but can only get 1 gal/min from the upstream...lol. It's like the drainage system.
I don’t know much about how cellular connectivity works, but on it’s face 2 gigabits seems like huge overkill. In the US I normally get around 50 megabits per second download times on AT&T. Occasionally I’ll see higher speeds than that but nowhere near even 500 megabits per second.
Is there something non-obvious about a 2 gigabits per second modem that would show immediate benefit when that chip becomes available?
It's like you have a pipe with capability of 20 gal/min flow rate but can only get 1 gal/min from the upstream...lol. It's like the drainage system.
It's not 2GB anyway as @maestro64 ; kindly explained for us.
Okay, what am I missing here? Gigabit wireless makes sense in a fixed location situation like providing voice/data/video to a home or busines. But on a mobile device? Why? Downloading a movie might take just a minute or two but it still takes 2 hours to watch a 2 hour movie on your phone or tablet or laptop and you use up the same amount of your data plan no matter how fast or slow you go. As far as mobile goes this sounds like a solution in search of a problem no matter what the neckbeards say.
Use in car-to-car communications for autonomy and improved safety?
That's years away, and 5G, a protocol and standard for wireless communication, wouldn't be necessary for vehicle to vehicle communication, even though it would likely be in the vehicle; you want peer to peer devices so the communication protocol and hardware would be different, even if the underlying technology is the similar. Low latency would be the primary requirement, and likely over a mesh network.
Okay, what am I missing here? Gigabit wireless makes sense in a fixed location situation like providing voice/data/video to a home or busines. But on a mobile device? Why? Downloading a movie might take just a minute or two but it still takes 2 hours to watch a 2 hour movie on your phone or tablet or laptop and you use up the same amount of your data plan no matter how fast or slow you go. As far as mobile goes this sounds like a solution in search of a problem no matter what the neckbeards say.
Use in car-to-car communications for autonomy and improved safety?
That's years away, and 5G, a protocol and standard for wireless communication, wouldn't be necessary for vehicle to vehicle communication, even though it would likely be in the vehicle; you want peer to peer devices so the communication protocol and hardware would be different, even if the underlying technology is the similar. Low latency would be the primary requirement, and likely over a mesh network.
Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
The frequencies they are testing 5G on in the US are not good for mobile phone usage, as they using SHF bands that do not penetrate buildings/walls well at all. 5G might be good for residential wireless internet service using an external antenna for reception, and also be used for internet in cars, busses, trains, planes, etc.
Even if Apple was not in a feud with Qualcom, we wouldn't see 5G radios in an iPhone for a while, if ever. Apple has never been one to jump in on new radio technologies very quickly, especially since early versions of these modem chips tend to not be optimized for power usage. Unless they start transmitting 5G over some of the UHF bands that are being freed up from the TV frequency auction that recently occurred, we may never see this technology implemented in a mobile phone and be useful inside of homes and businesses.
Typical Qualcomm chest-thumping. It’s banking on the stupidity of the consumer to think these chips will even matter.
Who cares that networks in plave by then wont even operate at anywhere near those speeds.
The sooner QC gets sued into oblivion, the better. What a corrupt company. If I were in a position to hire execs, anyone from QC would head straight to the trash bin.
This is not a good argument. I can make a similar argument for Apple advancing the SoCs. A11 won't operate near its peak speeds most of the times, for most of the people. Does that mean Apple should stop improving the SoCs? No. Same with Qualcomm. They are moving the technology forward in a meaningful way, which should be appreciated/respected.
Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Huawei says
so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
/s
As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised.
Okay, what am I missing here? Gigabit wireless makes sense in a fixed location situation like providing voice/data/video to a home or busines. But on a mobile device? Why? Downloading a movie might take just a minute or two but it still takes 2 hours to watch a 2 hour movie on your phone or tablet or laptop and you use up the same amount of your data plan no matter how fast or slow you go. As far as mobile goes this sounds like a solution in search of a problem no matter what the neckbeards say.
Use in car-to-car communications for autonomy and improved safety?
That's years away, and 5G, a protocol and standard for wireless communication, wouldn't be necessary for vehicle to vehicle communication, even though it would likely be in the vehicle; you want peer to peer devices so the communication protocol and hardware would be different, even if the underlying technology is the similar. Low latency would be the primary requirement, and likely over a mesh network.
Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Huawei says
so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
/s
As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised.
Says who?
I gave that information:
"These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro"
Yes, Huawei says so. Are you suggesting the information they gave was false? It's not as if anybody couldn't carry out the same tests to compare results.
Maybe it isn't true that dual simultaneous VoLTE is really possible on the Mate 10 Pro either. Where do we stop?
Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Huawei says
so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
/s
As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised.
Says who?
I gave that information:
"These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro"
Yes, Huawei says so. Are you suggesting the information they gave was false? It's not as if anybody couldn't carry out the same tests to compare results.
Maybe it isn't true that dual simultaneous VoLTE is really possible on the Mate 10 Pro either. Where do we stop?
It's a nice technical achievement, but otherwise, who cares?
For most people, even sending photos is quite fast enough with LTE.
It will be a sales driver for a very small set of smartphone buyers.
Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Huawei says
so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
/s
As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised.
Says who?
I gave that information:
"These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro"
Yes, Huawei says so. Are you suggesting the information they gave was false? It's not as if anybody couldn't carry out the same tests to compare results.
Maybe it isn't true that dual simultaneous VoLTE is really possible on the Mate 10 Pro either. Where do we stop?
Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Huawei says
so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
/s
As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised.
Says who?
I gave that information:
"These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro"
Yes, Huawei says so. Are you suggesting the information they gave was false? It's not as if anybody couldn't carry out the same tests to compare results.
Maybe it isn't true that dual simultaneous VoLTE is really possible on the Mate 10 Pro either. Where do we stop?
I think that you missed his /s aka snark tag.
They do recognize snark in Spain, don't they?
Yes. Sorry ksec. I've been getting some weird problems lately with layout and also Gboard.
The strange thing is they only seem to affect this board. I wonder if things got tweaked recently.
At first I thought it was Chrome/Gboard but then realised that they are working fine on other sites and WhatsApp, email, docs etc.
Autocorrect is unusable when posting here and sometimes the insertion point will jump into the quoted text when replying and it's impossible to get it back out of there.
I haven't mentioned it before as I'm sure most posters don't use Chrome anyway. I always have to double check who I am quoting as sometimes the nesting gets screwed up and I reply to someone only to find the posted final comment sometimes shows a different person had made the comment I was replying too.
Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Huawei says
so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
/s
As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised.
Says who?
I gave that information:
"These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro"
Yes, Huawei says so. Are you suggesting the information they gave was false? It's not as if anybody couldn't carry out the same tests to compare results.
Maybe it isn't true that dual simultaneous VoLTE is really possible on the Mate 10 Pro either. Where do we stop?
It's a nice technical achievement, but otherwise, who cares?
For most people, even sending photos is quite fast enough with LTE.
It will be a sales driver for a very small set of smartphone buyers.
Depends on use cases. Dual SIM phones are very popular in some countries.
In some countries high speed rail networks also compete with air travel. This is where those technical achievements can become key.
For example, in the original presentation of the Mate 10, a lot of emphasis was put on the modem's ability to manage hundreds of cell tower handovers at high speed. It was tested extensively in both Germany and China.
The modem (along with other technologies) was also the best at holding signal and position in difficult navigational settings (tunnels, complex road systems, shade etc).
Technical achievements that perhaps aren't your typical tentpole selling points but can be deal-breakers for some.
Right now I really wish Apple improves their Antenna design in iPhone. Because it is severely lacking behind its competitors, namely Samsung.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Samsung says so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
Well, obviously it's better to have a good modem/antenna setup working in harmony and the faster the better in a future proofing sense. Of course, it's also true that if your network can't actually handle the highest possible speeds today, you won't see much benefit in the short term.
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
Says who? You? Because some website said so? Just because? Huawei says
so? Blathering idiocy presented as fact is what your claim is.
/s
As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised.
Says who?
I gave that information:
"These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro"
Yes, Huawei says so. Are you suggesting the information they gave was false? It's not as if anybody couldn't carry out the same tests to compare results.
Maybe it isn't true that dual simultaneous VoLTE is really possible on the Mate 10 Pro either. Where do we stop?
It's a nice technical achievement, but otherwise, who cares?
For most people, even sending photos is quite fast enough with LTE.
It will be a sales driver for a very small set of smartphone buyers.
When faster device is present on a network, other users are benefited to.
Yes. Sorry ksec. I've been getting some weird problems lately with layout and also Gboard.
Its ok. Your information is much appreciated and I was at the Huawei announcement so i know it wasn't some false info. I am sorry for using your post to dent some idiot who doesn't like any constructive discussion.
Comments
Hmm. Quick google search:
https://www.pts.se/globalassets/startpage/dokument/icke-legala-dokument/rapporter/2016/radio/mobilephonetest2016-augusti-2016.pdf
https://5g.co.uk/guides/5g-and-the-connected-car/
https://newsroom.intel.com/newsroom/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2017/01/why-5G-for-ad-fact-sheet.pdf
http://www.telecomtv.com/articles/automotive/connected-cars-could-drive-the-need-for-5g-technologies-12115/
AFAIK, Huawei has the only shipping Cat 18 download, dual simultaneous VoLTE modem.
These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro:
Testing carried out on phones in San Francisco
Apple iPhone X: 151 Mbps
Samsung Note 8: 347 Mbps
Huawei Mate 10 Pro: 536 Mbps
Huawei shipped an update last week improving download efficiencies even further.
Even if Apple was not in a feud with Qualcom, we wouldn't see 5G radios in an iPhone for a while, if ever. Apple has never been one to jump in on new radio technologies very quickly, especially since early versions of these modem chips tend to not be optimized for power usage. Unless they start transmitting 5G over some of the UHF bands that are being freed up from the TV frequency auction that recently occurred, we may never see this technology implemented in a mobile phone and be useful inside of homes and businesses.
/s
As much as I dislike Huawei, but credit where credit's due, their Networking stuff are pretty damn impressive. Given their TeleCo Equipment market share is now larger then Nokia and Ericsson combined, I am not surprised.
https://www.rcrwireless.com/20170414/policy/industry-weighs-in-on-dsrc-for-v2v-communications-part-1-tag6
NTSHA is asking for a dedicated system, not for a chromed out 5G system. Of course, Intel, et al, want the system as part of 5G for marketing reasons.
I gave that information:
"These are the official download speeds presented during the US presentation of the Mate 10 Pro"
Yes, Huawei says so. Are you suggesting the information they gave was false? It's not as if anybody couldn't carry out the same tests to compare results.
Maybe it isn't true that dual simultaneous VoLTE is really possible on the Mate 10 Pro either. Where do we stop?
For most people, even sending photos is quite fast enough with LTE.
It will be a sales driver for a very small set of smartphone buyers.
I think that you missed his /s aka snark tag.
They do recognize snark in Spain, don't they?
The strange thing is they only seem to affect this board. I wonder if things got tweaked recently.
At first I thought it was Chrome/Gboard but then realised that they are working fine on other sites and WhatsApp, email, docs etc.
Autocorrect is unusable when posting here and sometimes the insertion point will jump into the quoted text when replying and it's impossible to get it back out of there.
I haven't mentioned it before as I'm sure most posters don't use Chrome anyway. I always have to double check who I am quoting as sometimes the nesting gets screwed up and I reply to someone only to find the posted final comment sometimes shows a different person had made the comment I was replying too.
So apologies in advance if the problems persist.
In some countries high speed rail networks also compete with air travel. This is where those technical achievements can become key.
For example, in the original presentation of the Mate 10, a lot of emphasis was put on the modem's ability to manage hundreds of cell tower handovers at high speed. It was tested extensively in both Germany and China.
The modem (along with other technologies) was also the best at holding signal and position in difficult navigational settings (tunnels, complex road systems, shade etc).
Technical achievements that perhaps aren't your typical tentpole selling points but can be deal-breakers for some.