“At present, mobile networks do not offer tiered speeds outside of the use of different connectivity technologies.”
This isn’t true. Verizon and AT&T often impose speed caps on MVNOs that use their networks, including MVNOs they own. Verizon owned MVNO Visible offers unlimited data but limits speeds to 5Mbps. AT&T owned Cricket offers two unlimited tiers. One limited to 3Mbps, for less money, and one with no speed cap.
Is there anyone who will be surprised that non 5G service will cost more as well?
I can see the carriers explanation that due to the ongoing expense of deploying 5G, they have to raise the cost of LTE and 4G service to be able to provide adequate 5G service.
Starting to look like 5G is going to have a tough go at becoming ubiquitous. Verizon nows says 5G will almost certainly be limited to dense urban areas. 5G looks like a solution in search of a problem. Range will be a big issue. The techies touting this technology are scamming us.
Hey, I could be wrong ... but isn't it the case that 5G is intended for almost line of sight situations as its signal is blocked by most anything? If true then it's an additional wavelength along with 4G intended for intelligent appliances etc. not the typical use of 4G.
I hope they’ll keep LTE around for a good long while, because as shown in this series of comments, most “power users” reserve our “heavy” data use for Wi-Fi, and leave LTE for lighter duty for the most part. The good news about 5G is even if it’s priced like broadband, for some urban dwellers it might be worth “cutting the cord” and not having home Wi-Fi, if the caps are similar to broadband.
The bad news about 5G is, as I’ve said elsewhere: a) you aren’t getting it anytime soon, b) your phone can’t handle it anyway right now, c) when you and your phone CAN handle it, you won’t see the top speeds because that will be too expensive, and d) I predict that caps will be more generous than they are now under LTE, but not as generous as existing broadband.
So most people (especially rural people who will not even have a 5G option) will just stick with the existing system for as long as possible, since there won’t be any real cost savings for consumers until going all-5G in your home and phone is less per month than the current system. Also of note: the heads of at least three of the big US carriers (everyone but T-Mob at present) say that 5G just isn’t going to see a big rollout outside high-density urban centers (one quote sums it up: “it’s not our coverage technology”). 5G is very fast (20gbps at present compared to LTE’s 1gbps peak, and 5G will scale up) and efficient, but it’s very short-range relative to LTE — so there will need to be some significant changes and improvements on other parts of the spectrum before the full speed promise of 5G becomes a routine reality for most people.
Instead of all this effort going to 5G, there is something that telecoms should work on that a lot of people would really be happy about - It's time to put an end to "call spoofing" that allows false phone numbers to show for ROBO Calls. It is outrageous that this continues and a mockery is being made of the phone systems. It may require new chipsets for phones and/or software updates, but whatever it takes it needs to happen.
Speed is mostly good... except in school zones. And I've heard some concerns about a health-risk aspect of 5G... near-field wireless modem signals and, potentially, ear-devices... may affect the brain... in not good ways.
I'd like to see some biological reference articles before I buy in... I don't need to save a few seconds to shorten my life by years.
Sounds like the anti-vaxxer FUD we hear about.
Whats your evidence? Cite, please, from reputable scientific journals.
Faster speed for customers, huge investments in infrastructure, of course the telcos will charge more. My prior argument for why I can wait for 5G chips in my phone. Apple had to pay Qualcomm simply due to the marketing muscle behind 5G, to check off a box in the features list, even though it will take 3 years before any significant US market adoption.
It's funny how AT&T (et.al.) push junk "good enough" smart phones to their consumers, but somehow think these same consumers will want to pay a premium for cell service that will only realistically be marginally better for them. (Especially when those 5G "good enough" phones won't offer much in the way of useful 5G experiences.)
For most consumers the change from 4G to 5G will be a little number in the corner of their screen reading a "5" where it used to be a "4". While they go about fiddling on social media, texting one another and generally doing no more with their device than what was already possible with an iPhone 3GS.
In short AT&T's plan is laughable because they've spent the last 10 years lowering the expectations of, and underdelivering what's possible with a smart phone.
The 5G hype is unbelievable as there are no uses that require it now. Everything the vast majority of people use their phone for does not require anymore speed with the possible exception of extreme gamers.
Exactly. It is like car nuts complaining that their car only does 0-60 in 5 seconds when another brand car does it in 1.8 seconds.
Outside the drag strip or racetrack when are you going to use that performance?
When was the last time you took your car to a track day?
Those demanding 5G phones this year are just silly. As has been said, mmWave devices won't be here until next year and neither will a decent amount of infrastructure that would allow you to use it.
But hey... Bragging rights are everything ain't they?
Comments
This isn’t true. Verizon and AT&T often impose speed caps on MVNOs that use their networks, including MVNOs they own. Verizon owned MVNO Visible offers unlimited data but limits speeds to 5Mbps. AT&T owned Cricket offers two unlimited tiers. One limited to 3Mbps, for less money, and one with no speed cap.
Is there anyone who will be surprised that non 5G service will cost more as well?
I can see the carriers explanation that due to the ongoing expense of deploying 5G, they have to raise the cost of LTE and 4G service to be able to provide adequate 5G service.
They’re not going to make any money off of 5G 😢.
🙄
I pay $65 for 50Mpbs broadband and $50 for 4G mobile.
The bad news about 5G is, as I’ve said elsewhere: a) you aren’t getting it anytime soon, b) your phone can’t handle it anyway right now, c) when you and your phone CAN handle it, you won’t see the top speeds because that will be too expensive, and d) I predict that caps will be more generous than they are now under LTE, but not as generous as existing broadband.
So most people (especially rural people who will not even have a 5G option) will just stick with the existing system for as long as possible, since there won’t be any real cost savings for consumers until going all-5G in your home and phone is less per month than the current system. Also of note: the heads of at least three of the big US carriers (everyone but T-Mob at present) say that 5G just isn’t going to see a big rollout outside high-density urban centers (one quote sums it up: “it’s not our coverage technology”). 5G is very fast (20gbps at present compared to LTE’s 1gbps peak, and 5G will scale up) and efficient, but it’s very short-range relative to LTE — so there will need to be some significant changes and improvements on other parts of the spectrum before the full speed promise of 5G becomes a routine reality for most people.
Whats your evidence? Cite, please, from reputable scientific journals.
For most consumers the change from 4G to 5G will be a little number in the corner of their screen reading a "5" where it used to be a "4". While they go about fiddling on social media, texting one another and generally doing no more with their device than what was already possible with an iPhone 3GS.
In short AT&T's plan is laughable because they've spent the last 10 years lowering the expectations of, and underdelivering what's possible with a smart phone.