He's speaking more from his own company's perspective than Apple's perspective.
For Apple, the release is massive because going through to the end of 2021 without 5G would have left the company embarrassed and killed sales in China.
They are already late to the party. Even with COVID it is estimated that 1 in 3 handset sales in China are already 5G and that number is increasing fast.
For iPhone users generally, it is also massive because this represents the first time 5G will be an option. Anyone who plans to keep their phone for three or more years should be thinking about 5G.
The dire situation in the US in terms of carrier infrastructure and the way the market is divided up make it an exception to some degree. Some people might be able to claim with relative certainty that 5G won't reach them within the lifespan of the phone.
I don't think the rest of the world will find itself in the same situation and many people will be making purchases with 5G in mind. Especially as 5G phones are now available in the lower cost bands. I'm confident that a sizeable chunk of iPhone users put off upgrading last year precisely because of 5G.
I live in a small town in the country and fibre is rolling out even here. The carrier installing everything will have to open its infrastructure to competitors for them to use. The same applies to those competitors too. The result is that I can switch to whatever company I choose in line with offers.
The same applies to 4 and 5G and 5G will reach me quicker than 4G took to reach me.
The big question is about disposable income around Christmas and job insecurity in 2021. Two COVID related factors that will obviously impact Apple to a degree.
Competitors will be in the same situation but will have 5G options at far lower price points.
No one is expecting a low cost 5G variant from Apple so if they produce one it will be a big surprise.
Yeah - I think the real problem is the cellular and internet infrastructure as a whole in the U.S. is behind. The U.S. is very different from Europe, so it's hard to draw direct comparisons, though. PC Magazine did some tests recently and 5G speeds were about on par with 4G LTE speeds with the exception of the handful of Verizon mm wave spots, and the 5G latencies in the US were better than 4G but not great. In contrast, 4G speeds in Canada were over twice as fast as anything in the U.S. - either 4G or 5G.
I think there's more to it than just speed. As has been pointed out, there's latency as well.
But, perhaps more important is coverage: There are vast swaths of the U.S. without coverage -- even near major cities. And, no carrier in their right mind will be rolling out new coverage using last year's technology.
In addition, the the AT&T guy says that cable will always outperform wireless and technically that is likely a true statement. But, the cable coming into my house is nearly 40 years old. All a Comcast competitor has to do to to replace it is put 5G transmitter on one of the three poles surrounding my house and I can pick it up with an antenna.
Those trying to hold onto the old technologies are increasingly sounding like those who defended horses 100 some years ago. Sure a horse can go places that a car can't. But....
You're assuming the carriers are going to magically put up 5G transmitters where they have no infrastructure at all while they have other existing towers still on 4G. probably not a safe assumption.
Ultimately speed will be limited by the backbone. If the backbone is bottlenecked, it makes no difference how fast the connection to the tower is. That cable may be 40 years old, but it is still capable of providing more bandwidth than the majority of people need and also more bandwidth than their wifi router can handle, so for most it simply doesn't matter. If Verizon or some other company goes and puts mm Wave 5G antennas up in a neighborhood they could start offering internet service to compete with the local cable provider, but people would have to have a clear line of sight, get an external antenna/modem and Verizon would have to offer the service at competitive prices. That assumes there are poles up - all of the neighborhoods around me have buried utilities so that's not even an option. I've seen no one suggest that 5G-based internet access will play a significant role any time in the near future.
You keep trying to use hyperbole and talking about 5G being the future jet plane and 4G being a horse and buggy, but it's more like 4G is a Toyota Camry and 5G is a Tesla. Sure the Tesla is the future and generally better but it has some limitations and currently doesn't do anything the Camry doesn't do. When it's time to trade in my Camry I'll get a Tesla, but so far no one has been able to give any reason to do so beyond "because it's the FUTURE!!!!"
So you suggest that we, and the carriers, should invest in horse & buggy technology?
"Always listen to the experts and cynics. They'll tell you exactly what can't be done and why. So, knowing the pitfalls to avoid, you can proceed full steam ahead."
Low band = broad coverage at 4G speeds, 5G about 20% improvement over 4G
Midband = half the coverage of 4G at speeds around 200Mbps T-Mobile has midband because Sprint owned the bulk of 2.5 Ghz spectrum, but most of that bandwidth is still at 4G technology
High band = the speeds and latency of mmwave that have been overhyped to sell users on 5G, very little buildout, or utility at this time, for the bulk of users.
" As T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray wrote mmWave 5G "will never materially scale beyond small pockets of 5G hotspots in dense urban environments." He has an axe to grind, but he's not wrong about that. Even with beamforming directing the signal right to your device, for practical purposes mmWave will only work in cities. On the road, in the suburbs, and the country, we'll never see mmWave."
Let's say, though, that you've got a 5G phone and you're sure you can get 5G service – what kind of performance can you really expect? According to Washington Post tech columnist Geoffrey A. Fowler, you can expect to see a "diddly squat" 5G performance. That sounds about right.
And, technically speaking what are diddly squat speeds? Try "AT&T with 32Mbps with the 5G phone and 34Mbps on the 4G one. On T-Mobile, I got 15Mbps on the 5G phone and 13Mbps on the 4G one." He wasn't able to check Verizon. That's not a typo, by the way. His 4G phone was faster than his 5G phone.
It wasn't just him, since he lives in that technology backwater known as the San Francisco bay area. He checked with several national firms tracking 5G performance. They found that all three major US telecom networks' 5G isn't that much faster than 4G."
Keep flogging that horse....
Keep spewing misinformation...
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too?
I use the word "hype" for good reason wrt 5G marketing,
You use "hoax" as a response because you don't actually have the understanding of what 5G is to actually make an intelligent argument.
Funny, you are exactly like your nemesis Donald Trump in that regard.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh! and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
There are, as the links noted, many flavors of 5G, and most of them today, are repurposed 4G lowland.
No hoax, just what the initial buildout is. All that "low latency" is wrt mmwave, not low or mid band, hence the hype that you bought into.
He's speaking more from his own company's perspective than Apple's perspective.
For Apple, the release is massive because going through to the end of 2021 without 5G would have left the company embarrassed and killed sales in China.
They are already late to the party. Even with COVID it is estimated that 1 in 3 handset sales in China are already 5G and that number is increasing fast.
For iPhone users generally, it is also massive because this represents the first time 5G will be an option. Anyone who plans to keep their phone for three or more years should be thinking about 5G.
The dire situation in the US in terms of carrier infrastructure and the way the market is divided up make it an exception to some degree. Some people might be able to claim with relative certainty that 5G won't reach them within the lifespan of the phone.
I don't think the rest of the world will find itself in the same situation and many people will be making purchases with 5G in mind. Especially as 5G phones are now available in the lower cost bands. I'm confident that a sizeable chunk of iPhone users put off upgrading last year precisely because of 5G.
I live in a small town in the country and fibre is rolling out even here. The carrier installing everything will have to open its infrastructure to competitors for them to use. The same applies to those competitors too. The result is that I can switch to whatever company I choose in line with offers.
The same applies to 4 and 5G and 5G will reach me quicker than 4G took to reach me.
The big question is about disposable income around Christmas and job insecurity in 2021. Two COVID related factors that will obviously impact Apple to a degree.
Competitors will be in the same situation but will have 5G options at far lower price points.
No one is expecting a low cost 5G variant from Apple so if they produce one it will be a big surprise.
Yeah - I think the real problem is the cellular and internet infrastructure as a whole in the U.S. is behind. The U.S. is very different from Europe, so it's hard to draw direct comparisons, though. PC Magazine did some tests recently and 5G speeds were about on par with 4G LTE speeds with the exception of the handful of Verizon mm wave spots, and the 5G latencies in the US were better than 4G but not great. In contrast, 4G speeds in Canada were over twice as fast as anything in the U.S. - either 4G or 5G.
I think there's more to it than just speed. As has been pointed out, there's latency as well.
But, perhaps more important is coverage: There are vast swaths of the U.S. without coverage -- even near major cities. And, no carrier in their right mind will be rolling out new coverage using last year's technology.
In addition, the the AT&T guy says that cable will always outperform wireless and technically that is likely a true statement. But, the cable coming into my house is nearly 40 years old. All a Comcast competitor has to do to to replace it is put 5G transmitter on one of the three poles surrounding my house and I can pick it up with an antenna.
Those trying to hold onto the old technologies are increasingly sounding like those who defended horses 100 some years ago. Sure a horse can go places that a car can't. But....
You're assuming the carriers are going to magically put up 5G transmitters where they have no infrastructure at all while they have other existing towers still on 4G. probably not a safe assumption.
Ultimately speed will be limited by the backbone. If the backbone is bottlenecked, it makes no difference how fast the connection to the tower is. That cable may be 40 years old, but it is still capable of providing more bandwidth than the majority of people need and also more bandwidth than their wifi router can handle, so for most it simply doesn't matter. If Verizon or some other company goes and puts mm Wave 5G antennas up in a neighborhood they could start offering internet service to compete with the local cable provider, but people would have to have a clear line of sight, get an external antenna/modem and Verizon would have to offer the service at competitive prices. That assumes there are poles up - all of the neighborhoods around me have buried utilities so that's not even an option. I've seen no one suggest that 5G-based internet access will play a significant role any time in the near future.
You keep trying to use hyperbole and talking about 5G being the future jet plane and 4G being a horse and buggy, but it's more like 4G is a Toyota Camry and 5G is a Tesla. Sure the Tesla is the future and generally better but it has some limitations and currently doesn't do anything the Camry doesn't do. When it's time to trade in my Camry I'll get a Tesla, but so far no one has been able to give any reason to do so beyond "because it's the FUTURE!!!!"
So you suggest that we, and the carriers, should invest in horse & buggy technology?
"Always listen to the experts and cynics. They'll tell you exactly what can't be done and why. So, knowing the pitfalls to avoid, you can proceed full steam ahead."
Low band = broad coverage at 4G speeds, 5G about 20% improvement over 4G
Midband = half the coverage of 4G at speeds around 200Mbps T-Mobile has midband because Sprint owned the bulk of 2.5 Ghz spectrum, but most of that bandwidth is still at 4G technology
High band = the speeds and latency of mmwave that have been overhyped to sell users on 5G, very little buildout, or utility at this time, for the bulk of users.
" As T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray wrote mmWave 5G "will never materially scale beyond small pockets of 5G hotspots in dense urban environments." He has an axe to grind, but he's not wrong about that. Even with beamforming directing the signal right to your device, for practical purposes mmWave will only work in cities. On the road, in the suburbs, and the country, we'll never see mmWave."
Let's say, though, that you've got a 5G phone and you're sure you can get 5G service – what kind of performance can you really expect? According to Washington Post tech columnist Geoffrey A. Fowler, you can expect to see a "diddly squat" 5G performance. That sounds about right.
And, technically speaking what are diddly squat speeds? Try "AT&T with 32Mbps with the 5G phone and 34Mbps on the 4G one. On T-Mobile, I got 15Mbps on the 5G phone and 13Mbps on the 4G one." He wasn't able to check Verizon. That's not a typo, by the way. His 4G phone was faster than his 5G phone.
It wasn't just him, since he lives in that technology backwater known as the San Francisco bay area. He checked with several national firms tracking 5G performance. They found that all three major US telecom networks' 5G isn't that much faster than 4G."
Keep flogging that horse....
Keep spewing misinformation...
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too?
I use the word "hype" for good reason wrt 5G marketing,
You use "hoax" as a response because you don't actually have the understanding of what 5G is to actually make an intelligent argument.
Funny, you are exactly like your nemesis Donald Trump in that regard.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh! and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
There are, as the links noted, many flavors of 5G, and most of them today, are repurposed 4G lowland.
No hoax, just what the initial buildout is. All that "low latency" is wrt mmwave, not low or mid band, hence the hype that you bought into.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those
carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh!
and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G
into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
He's speaking more from his own company's perspective than Apple's perspective.
For Apple, the release is massive because going through to the end of 2021 without 5G would have left the company embarrassed and killed sales in China.
They are already late to the party. Even with COVID it is estimated that 1 in 3 handset sales in China are already 5G and that number is increasing fast.
For iPhone users generally, it is also massive because this represents the first time 5G will be an option. Anyone who plans to keep their phone for three or more years should be thinking about 5G.
The dire situation in the US in terms of carrier infrastructure and the way the market is divided up make it an exception to some degree. Some people might be able to claim with relative certainty that 5G won't reach them within the lifespan of the phone.
I don't think the rest of the world will find itself in the same situation and many people will be making purchases with 5G in mind. Especially as 5G phones are now available in the lower cost bands. I'm confident that a sizeable chunk of iPhone users put off upgrading last year precisely because of 5G.
I live in a small town in the country and fibre is rolling out even here. The carrier installing everything will have to open its infrastructure to competitors for them to use. The same applies to those competitors too. The result is that I can switch to whatever company I choose in line with offers.
The same applies to 4 and 5G and 5G will reach me quicker than 4G took to reach me.
The big question is about disposable income around Christmas and job insecurity in 2021. Two COVID related factors that will obviously impact Apple to a degree.
Competitors will be in the same situation but will have 5G options at far lower price points.
No one is expecting a low cost 5G variant from Apple so if they produce one it will be a big surprise.
Yeah - I think the real problem is the cellular and internet infrastructure as a whole in the U.S. is behind. The U.S. is very different from Europe, so it's hard to draw direct comparisons, though. PC Magazine did some tests recently and 5G speeds were about on par with 4G LTE speeds with the exception of the handful of Verizon mm wave spots, and the 5G latencies in the US were better than 4G but not great. In contrast, 4G speeds in Canada were over twice as fast as anything in the U.S. - either 4G or 5G.
I think there's more to it than just speed. As has been pointed out, there's latency as well.
But, perhaps more important is coverage: There are vast swaths of the U.S. without coverage -- even near major cities. And, no carrier in their right mind will be rolling out new coverage using last year's technology.
In addition, the the AT&T guy says that cable will always outperform wireless and technically that is likely a true statement. But, the cable coming into my house is nearly 40 years old. All a Comcast competitor has to do to to replace it is put 5G transmitter on one of the three poles surrounding my house and I can pick it up with an antenna.
Those trying to hold onto the old technologies are increasingly sounding like those who defended horses 100 some years ago. Sure a horse can go places that a car can't. But....
You're assuming the carriers are going to magically put up 5G transmitters where they have no infrastructure at all while they have other existing towers still on 4G. probably not a safe assumption.
Ultimately speed will be limited by the backbone. If the backbone is bottlenecked, it makes no difference how fast the connection to the tower is. That cable may be 40 years old, but it is still capable of providing more bandwidth than the majority of people need and also more bandwidth than their wifi router can handle, so for most it simply doesn't matter. If Verizon or some other company goes and puts mm Wave 5G antennas up in a neighborhood they could start offering internet service to compete with the local cable provider, but people would have to have a clear line of sight, get an external antenna/modem and Verizon would have to offer the service at competitive prices. That assumes there are poles up - all of the neighborhoods around me have buried utilities so that's not even an option. I've seen no one suggest that 5G-based internet access will play a significant role any time in the near future.
You keep trying to use hyperbole and talking about 5G being the future jet plane and 4G being a horse and buggy, but it's more like 4G is a Toyota Camry and 5G is a Tesla. Sure the Tesla is the future and generally better but it has some limitations and currently doesn't do anything the Camry doesn't do. When it's time to trade in my Camry I'll get a Tesla, but so far no one has been able to give any reason to do so beyond "because it's the FUTURE!!!!"
So you suggest that we, and the carriers, should invest in horse & buggy technology?
"Always listen to the experts and cynics. They'll tell you exactly what can't be done and why. So, knowing the pitfalls to avoid, you can proceed full steam ahead."
Low band = broad coverage at 4G speeds, 5G about 20% improvement over 4G
Midband = half the coverage of 4G at speeds around 200Mbps T-Mobile has midband because Sprint owned the bulk of 2.5 Ghz spectrum, but most of that bandwidth is still at 4G technology
High band = the speeds and latency of mmwave that have been overhyped to sell users on 5G, very little buildout, or utility at this time, for the bulk of users.
" As T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray wrote mmWave 5G "will never materially scale beyond small pockets of 5G hotspots in dense urban environments." He has an axe to grind, but he's not wrong about that. Even with beamforming directing the signal right to your device, for practical purposes mmWave will only work in cities. On the road, in the suburbs, and the country, we'll never see mmWave."
Let's say, though, that you've got a 5G phone and you're sure you can get 5G service – what kind of performance can you really expect? According to Washington Post tech columnist Geoffrey A. Fowler, you can expect to see a "diddly squat" 5G performance. That sounds about right.
And, technically speaking what are diddly squat speeds? Try "AT&T with 32Mbps with the 5G phone and 34Mbps on the 4G one. On T-Mobile, I got 15Mbps on the 5G phone and 13Mbps on the 4G one." He wasn't able to check Verizon. That's not a typo, by the way. His 4G phone was faster than his 5G phone.
It wasn't just him, since he lives in that technology backwater known as the San Francisco bay area. He checked with several national firms tracking 5G performance. They found that all three major US telecom networks' 5G isn't that much faster than 4G."
Keep flogging that horse....
Keep spewing misinformation...
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too?
I use the word "hype" for good reason wrt 5G marketing,
You use "hoax" as a response because you don't actually have the understanding of what 5G is to actually make an intelligent argument.
Funny, you are exactly like your nemesis Donald Trump in that regard.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh! and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
There are, as the links noted, many flavors of 5G, and most of them today, are repurposed 4G lowland.
No hoax, just what the initial buildout is. All that "low latency" is wrt mmwave, not low or mid band, hence the hype that you bought into.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those
carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh!
and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G
into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
LOL!!!
You keep using that word "Hoax" like your pal Trump does; inappropriately, and incorrectly.
How's that working out for you?
You might want to look up the definitions for "hype", and "hoax". Not surprising to the rest of the world's population, these words have different meanings.
He's speaking more from his own company's perspective than Apple's perspective.
For Apple, the release is massive because going through to the end of 2021 without 5G would have left the company embarrassed and killed sales in China.
They are already late to the party. Even with COVID it is estimated that 1 in 3 handset sales in China are already 5G and that number is increasing fast.
For iPhone users generally, it is also massive because this represents the first time 5G will be an option. Anyone who plans to keep their phone for three or more years should be thinking about 5G.
The dire situation in the US in terms of carrier infrastructure and the way the market is divided up make it an exception to some degree. Some people might be able to claim with relative certainty that 5G won't reach them within the lifespan of the phone.
I don't think the rest of the world will find itself in the same situation and many people will be making purchases with 5G in mind. Especially as 5G phones are now available in the lower cost bands. I'm confident that a sizeable chunk of iPhone users put off upgrading last year precisely because of 5G.
I live in a small town in the country and fibre is rolling out even here. The carrier installing everything will have to open its infrastructure to competitors for them to use. The same applies to those competitors too. The result is that I can switch to whatever company I choose in line with offers.
The same applies to 4 and 5G and 5G will reach me quicker than 4G took to reach me.
The big question is about disposable income around Christmas and job insecurity in 2021. Two COVID related factors that will obviously impact Apple to a degree.
Competitors will be in the same situation but will have 5G options at far lower price points.
No one is expecting a low cost 5G variant from Apple so if they produce one it will be a big surprise.
Yeah - I think the real problem is the cellular and internet infrastructure as a whole in the U.S. is behind. The U.S. is very different from Europe, so it's hard to draw direct comparisons, though. PC Magazine did some tests recently and 5G speeds were about on par with 4G LTE speeds with the exception of the handful of Verizon mm wave spots, and the 5G latencies in the US were better than 4G but not great. In contrast, 4G speeds in Canada were over twice as fast as anything in the U.S. - either 4G or 5G.
I think there's more to it than just speed. As has been pointed out, there's latency as well.
But, perhaps more important is coverage: There are vast swaths of the U.S. without coverage -- even near major cities. And, no carrier in their right mind will be rolling out new coverage using last year's technology.
In addition, the the AT&T guy says that cable will always outperform wireless and technically that is likely a true statement. But, the cable coming into my house is nearly 40 years old. All a Comcast competitor has to do to to replace it is put 5G transmitter on one of the three poles surrounding my house and I can pick it up with an antenna.
Those trying to hold onto the old technologies are increasingly sounding like those who defended horses 100 some years ago. Sure a horse can go places that a car can't. But....
You're assuming the carriers are going to magically put up 5G transmitters where they have no infrastructure at all while they have other existing towers still on 4G. probably not a safe assumption.
Ultimately speed will be limited by the backbone. If the backbone is bottlenecked, it makes no difference how fast the connection to the tower is. That cable may be 40 years old, but it is still capable of providing more bandwidth than the majority of people need and also more bandwidth than their wifi router can handle, so for most it simply doesn't matter. If Verizon or some other company goes and puts mm Wave 5G antennas up in a neighborhood they could start offering internet service to compete with the local cable provider, but people would have to have a clear line of sight, get an external antenna/modem and Verizon would have to offer the service at competitive prices. That assumes there are poles up - all of the neighborhoods around me have buried utilities so that's not even an option. I've seen no one suggest that 5G-based internet access will play a significant role any time in the near future.
You keep trying to use hyperbole and talking about 5G being the future jet plane and 4G being a horse and buggy, but it's more like 4G is a Toyota Camry and 5G is a Tesla. Sure the Tesla is the future and generally better but it has some limitations and currently doesn't do anything the Camry doesn't do. When it's time to trade in my Camry I'll get a Tesla, but so far no one has been able to give any reason to do so beyond "because it's the FUTURE!!!!"
So you suggest that we, and the carriers, should invest in horse & buggy technology?
"Always listen to the experts and cynics. They'll tell you exactly what can't be done and why. So, knowing the pitfalls to avoid, you can proceed full steam ahead."
Low band = broad coverage at 4G speeds, 5G about 20% improvement over 4G
Midband = half the coverage of 4G at speeds around 200Mbps T-Mobile has midband because Sprint owned the bulk of 2.5 Ghz spectrum, but most of that bandwidth is still at 4G technology
High band = the speeds and latency of mmwave that have been overhyped to sell users on 5G, very little buildout, or utility at this time, for the bulk of users.
" As T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray wrote mmWave 5G "will never materially scale beyond small pockets of 5G hotspots in dense urban environments." He has an axe to grind, but he's not wrong about that. Even with beamforming directing the signal right to your device, for practical purposes mmWave will only work in cities. On the road, in the suburbs, and the country, we'll never see mmWave."
Let's say, though, that you've got a 5G phone and you're sure you can get 5G service – what kind of performance can you really expect? According to Washington Post tech columnist Geoffrey A. Fowler, you can expect to see a "diddly squat" 5G performance. That sounds about right.
And, technically speaking what are diddly squat speeds? Try "AT&T with 32Mbps with the 5G phone and 34Mbps on the 4G one. On T-Mobile, I got 15Mbps on the 5G phone and 13Mbps on the 4G one." He wasn't able to check Verizon. That's not a typo, by the way. His 4G phone was faster than his 5G phone.
It wasn't just him, since he lives in that technology backwater known as the San Francisco bay area. He checked with several national firms tracking 5G performance. They found that all three major US telecom networks' 5G isn't that much faster than 4G."
Keep flogging that horse....
Keep spewing misinformation...
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too?
I use the word "hype" for good reason wrt 5G marketing,
You use "hoax" as a response because you don't actually have the understanding of what 5G is to actually make an intelligent argument.
Funny, you are exactly like your nemesis Donald Trump in that regard.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh! and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
There are, as the links noted, many flavors of 5G, and most of them today, are repurposed 4G lowland.
No hoax, just what the initial buildout is. All that "low latency" is wrt mmwave, not low or mid band, hence the hype that you bought into.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those
carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh!
and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G
into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
LOL!!!
You keep using that word "Hoax" like your pal Trump does; inappropriately, and incorrectly.
How's that working out for you?
You might want to look up the definitions for "hype", and "hoax". Not surprising to the rest of the world's population, these words have different meanings.
So, you keep claiming that 5G is a hoax while claiming that reality is "hype". Got it. But, no need for you to feel bad: That kind of thing is the new normal.
He's speaking more from his own company's perspective than Apple's perspective.
For Apple, the release is massive because going through to the end of 2021 without 5G would have left the company embarrassed and killed sales in China.
They are already late to the party. Even with COVID it is estimated that 1 in 3 handset sales in China are already 5G and that number is increasing fast.
For iPhone users generally, it is also massive because this represents the first time 5G will be an option. Anyone who plans to keep their phone for three or more years should be thinking about 5G.
The dire situation in the US in terms of carrier infrastructure and the way the market is divided up make it an exception to some degree. Some people might be able to claim with relative certainty that 5G won't reach them within the lifespan of the phone.
I don't think the rest of the world will find itself in the same situation and many people will be making purchases with 5G in mind. Especially as 5G phones are now available in the lower cost bands. I'm confident that a sizeable chunk of iPhone users put off upgrading last year precisely because of 5G.
I live in a small town in the country and fibre is rolling out even here. The carrier installing everything will have to open its infrastructure to competitors for them to use. The same applies to those competitors too. The result is that I can switch to whatever company I choose in line with offers.
The same applies to 4 and 5G and 5G will reach me quicker than 4G took to reach me.
The big question is about disposable income around Christmas and job insecurity in 2021. Two COVID related factors that will obviously impact Apple to a degree.
Competitors will be in the same situation but will have 5G options at far lower price points.
No one is expecting a low cost 5G variant from Apple so if they produce one it will be a big surprise.
Yeah - I think the real problem is the cellular and internet infrastructure as a whole in the U.S. is behind. The U.S. is very different from Europe, so it's hard to draw direct comparisons, though. PC Magazine did some tests recently and 5G speeds were about on par with 4G LTE speeds with the exception of the handful of Verizon mm wave spots, and the 5G latencies in the US were better than 4G but not great. In contrast, 4G speeds in Canada were over twice as fast as anything in the U.S. - either 4G or 5G.
I think there's more to it than just speed. As has been pointed out, there's latency as well.
But, perhaps more important is coverage: There are vast swaths of the U.S. without coverage -- even near major cities. And, no carrier in their right mind will be rolling out new coverage using last year's technology.
In addition, the the AT&T guy says that cable will always outperform wireless and technically that is likely a true statement. But, the cable coming into my house is nearly 40 years old. All a Comcast competitor has to do to to replace it is put 5G transmitter on one of the three poles surrounding my house and I can pick it up with an antenna.
Those trying to hold onto the old technologies are increasingly sounding like those who defended horses 100 some years ago. Sure a horse can go places that a car can't. But....
You're assuming the carriers are going to magically put up 5G transmitters where they have no infrastructure at all while they have other existing towers still on 4G. probably not a safe assumption.
Ultimately speed will be limited by the backbone. If the backbone is bottlenecked, it makes no difference how fast the connection to the tower is. That cable may be 40 years old, but it is still capable of providing more bandwidth than the majority of people need and also more bandwidth than their wifi router can handle, so for most it simply doesn't matter. If Verizon or some other company goes and puts mm Wave 5G antennas up in a neighborhood they could start offering internet service to compete with the local cable provider, but people would have to have a clear line of sight, get an external antenna/modem and Verizon would have to offer the service at competitive prices. That assumes there are poles up - all of the neighborhoods around me have buried utilities so that's not even an option. I've seen no one suggest that 5G-based internet access will play a significant role any time in the near future.
You keep trying to use hyperbole and talking about 5G being the future jet plane and 4G being a horse and buggy, but it's more like 4G is a Toyota Camry and 5G is a Tesla. Sure the Tesla is the future and generally better but it has some limitations and currently doesn't do anything the Camry doesn't do. When it's time to trade in my Camry I'll get a Tesla, but so far no one has been able to give any reason to do so beyond "because it's the FUTURE!!!!"
So you suggest that we, and the carriers, should invest in horse & buggy technology?
"Always listen to the experts and cynics. They'll tell you exactly what can't be done and why. So, knowing the pitfalls to avoid, you can proceed full steam ahead."
Low band = broad coverage at 4G speeds, 5G about 20% improvement over 4G
Midband = half the coverage of 4G at speeds around 200Mbps T-Mobile has midband because Sprint owned the bulk of 2.5 Ghz spectrum, but most of that bandwidth is still at 4G technology
High band = the speeds and latency of mmwave that have been overhyped to sell users on 5G, very little buildout, or utility at this time, for the bulk of users.
" As T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray wrote mmWave 5G "will never materially scale beyond small pockets of 5G hotspots in dense urban environments." He has an axe to grind, but he's not wrong about that. Even with beamforming directing the signal right to your device, for practical purposes mmWave will only work in cities. On the road, in the suburbs, and the country, we'll never see mmWave."
Let's say, though, that you've got a 5G phone and you're sure you can get 5G service – what kind of performance can you really expect? According to Washington Post tech columnist Geoffrey A. Fowler, you can expect to see a "diddly squat" 5G performance. That sounds about right.
And, technically speaking what are diddly squat speeds? Try "AT&T with 32Mbps with the 5G phone and 34Mbps on the 4G one. On T-Mobile, I got 15Mbps on the 5G phone and 13Mbps on the 4G one." He wasn't able to check Verizon. That's not a typo, by the way. His 4G phone was faster than his 5G phone.
It wasn't just him, since he lives in that technology backwater known as the San Francisco bay area. He checked with several national firms tracking 5G performance. They found that all three major US telecom networks' 5G isn't that much faster than 4G."
Keep flogging that horse....
Keep spewing misinformation...
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too?
I use the word "hype" for good reason wrt 5G marketing,
You use "hoax" as a response because you don't actually have the understanding of what 5G is to actually make an intelligent argument.
Funny, you are exactly like your nemesis Donald Trump in that regard.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh! and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
There are, as the links noted, many flavors of 5G, and most of them today, are repurposed 4G lowland.
No hoax, just what the initial buildout is. All that "low latency" is wrt mmwave, not low or mid band, hence the hype that you bought into.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those
carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh!
and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G
into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
LOL!!!
You keep using that word "Hoax" like your pal Trump does; inappropriately, and incorrectly.
How's that working out for you?
You might want to look up the definitions for "hype", and "hoax". Not surprising to the rest of the world's population, these words have different meanings.
So, you keep claiming that 5G is a hoax while claiming that reality is "hype". Got it. But, no need for you to feel bad: That kind of thing is the new normal.
Georgie, boy - you really need to work on reading comprehension! You were actually the one who called 5G a hoax and then got all worked up about it! It's actually rather entertaining to read your threads and disjointed tangential rhetoric.
He's speaking more from his own company's perspective than Apple's perspective.
For Apple, the release is massive because going through to the end of 2021 without 5G would have left the company embarrassed and killed sales in China.
They are already late to the party. Even with COVID it is estimated that 1 in 3 handset sales in China are already 5G and that number is increasing fast.
For iPhone users generally, it is also massive because this represents the first time 5G will be an option. Anyone who plans to keep their phone for three or more years should be thinking about 5G.
The dire situation in the US in terms of carrier infrastructure and the way the market is divided up make it an exception to some degree. Some people might be able to claim with relative certainty that 5G won't reach them within the lifespan of the phone.
I don't think the rest of the world will find itself in the same situation and many people will be making purchases with 5G in mind. Especially as 5G phones are now available in the lower cost bands. I'm confident that a sizeable chunk of iPhone users put off upgrading last year precisely because of 5G.
I live in a small town in the country and fibre is rolling out even here. The carrier installing everything will have to open its infrastructure to competitors for them to use. The same applies to those competitors too. The result is that I can switch to whatever company I choose in line with offers.
The same applies to 4 and 5G and 5G will reach me quicker than 4G took to reach me.
The big question is about disposable income around Christmas and job insecurity in 2021. Two COVID related factors that will obviously impact Apple to a degree.
Competitors will be in the same situation but will have 5G options at far lower price points.
No one is expecting a low cost 5G variant from Apple so if they produce one it will be a big surprise.
Yeah - I think the real problem is the cellular and internet infrastructure as a whole in the U.S. is behind. The U.S. is very different from Europe, so it's hard to draw direct comparisons, though. PC Magazine did some tests recently and 5G speeds were about on par with 4G LTE speeds with the exception of the handful of Verizon mm wave spots, and the 5G latencies in the US were better than 4G but not great. In contrast, 4G speeds in Canada were over twice as fast as anything in the U.S. - either 4G or 5G.
I think there's more to it than just speed. As has been pointed out, there's latency as well.
But, perhaps more important is coverage: There are vast swaths of the U.S. without coverage -- even near major cities. And, no carrier in their right mind will be rolling out new coverage using last year's technology.
In addition, the the AT&T guy says that cable will always outperform wireless and technically that is likely a true statement. But, the cable coming into my house is nearly 40 years old. All a Comcast competitor has to do to to replace it is put 5G transmitter on one of the three poles surrounding my house and I can pick it up with an antenna.
Those trying to hold onto the old technologies are increasingly sounding like those who defended horses 100 some years ago. Sure a horse can go places that a car can't. But....
You're assuming the carriers are going to magically put up 5G transmitters where they have no infrastructure at all while they have other existing towers still on 4G. probably not a safe assumption.
Ultimately speed will be limited by the backbone. If the backbone is bottlenecked, it makes no difference how fast the connection to the tower is. That cable may be 40 years old, but it is still capable of providing more bandwidth than the majority of people need and also more bandwidth than their wifi router can handle, so for most it simply doesn't matter. If Verizon or some other company goes and puts mm Wave 5G antennas up in a neighborhood they could start offering internet service to compete with the local cable provider, but people would have to have a clear line of sight, get an external antenna/modem and Verizon would have to offer the service at competitive prices. That assumes there are poles up - all of the neighborhoods around me have buried utilities so that's not even an option. I've seen no one suggest that 5G-based internet access will play a significant role any time in the near future.
You keep trying to use hyperbole and talking about 5G being the future jet plane and 4G being a horse and buggy, but it's more like 4G is a Toyota Camry and 5G is a Tesla. Sure the Tesla is the future and generally better but it has some limitations and currently doesn't do anything the Camry doesn't do. When it's time to trade in my Camry I'll get a Tesla, but so far no one has been able to give any reason to do so beyond "because it's the FUTURE!!!!"
So you suggest that we, and the carriers, should invest in horse & buggy technology?
"Always listen to the experts and cynics. They'll tell you exactly what can't be done and why. So, knowing the pitfalls to avoid, you can proceed full steam ahead."
Low band = broad coverage at 4G speeds, 5G about 20% improvement over 4G
Midband = half the coverage of 4G at speeds around 200Mbps T-Mobile has midband because Sprint owned the bulk of 2.5 Ghz spectrum, but most of that bandwidth is still at 4G technology
High band = the speeds and latency of mmwave that have been overhyped to sell users on 5G, very little buildout, or utility at this time, for the bulk of users.
" As T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray wrote mmWave 5G "will never materially scale beyond small pockets of 5G hotspots in dense urban environments." He has an axe to grind, but he's not wrong about that. Even with beamforming directing the signal right to your device, for practical purposes mmWave will only work in cities. On the road, in the suburbs, and the country, we'll never see mmWave."
Let's say, though, that you've got a 5G phone and you're sure you can get 5G service – what kind of performance can you really expect? According to Washington Post tech columnist Geoffrey A. Fowler, you can expect to see a "diddly squat" 5G performance. That sounds about right.
And, technically speaking what are diddly squat speeds? Try "AT&T with 32Mbps with the 5G phone and 34Mbps on the 4G one. On T-Mobile, I got 15Mbps on the 5G phone and 13Mbps on the 4G one." He wasn't able to check Verizon. That's not a typo, by the way. His 4G phone was faster than his 5G phone.
It wasn't just him, since he lives in that technology backwater known as the San Francisco bay area. He checked with several national firms tracking 5G performance. They found that all three major US telecom networks' 5G isn't that much faster than 4G."
Keep flogging that horse....
Keep spewing misinformation...
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too?
I use the word "hype" for good reason wrt 5G marketing,
You use "hoax" as a response because you don't actually have the understanding of what 5G is to actually make an intelligent argument.
Funny, you are exactly like your nemesis Donald Trump in that regard.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh! and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
There are, as the links noted, many flavors of 5G, and most of them today, are repurposed 4G lowland.
No hoax, just what the initial buildout is. All that "low latency" is wrt mmwave, not low or mid band, hence the hype that you bought into.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those
carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh!
and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G
into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
LOL!!!
You keep using that word "Hoax" like your pal Trump does; inappropriately, and incorrectly.
How's that working out for you?
You might want to look up the definitions for "hype", and "hoax". Not surprising to the rest of the world's population, these words have different meanings.
So, you keep claiming that 5G is a hoax while claiming that reality is "hype". Got it. But, no need for you to feel bad: That kind of thing is the new normal.
Georgie, boy - you really need to work on reading comprehension! You were actually the one who called 5G a hoax and then got all worked up about it! It's actually rather entertaining to read your threads and disjointed tangential rhetoric.
It sounds like you are the one who needs to work on reading comprehension. Because I would never say something so silly.
But, nice try at discrediting me. Well actually, no, it wasn't. It was as weak and fabricated as your arguments against 5G.
He's speaking more from his own company's perspective than Apple's perspective.
For Apple, the release is massive because going through to the end of 2021 without 5G would have left the company embarrassed and killed sales in China.
They are already late to the party. Even with COVID it is estimated that 1 in 3 handset sales in China are already 5G and that number is increasing fast.
For iPhone users generally, it is also massive because this represents the first time 5G will be an option. Anyone who plans to keep their phone for three or more years should be thinking about 5G.
The dire situation in the US in terms of carrier infrastructure and the way the market is divided up make it an exception to some degree. Some people might be able to claim with relative certainty that 5G won't reach them within the lifespan of the phone.
I don't think the rest of the world will find itself in the same situation and many people will be making purchases with 5G in mind. Especially as 5G phones are now available in the lower cost bands. I'm confident that a sizeable chunk of iPhone users put off upgrading last year precisely because of 5G.
I live in a small town in the country and fibre is rolling out even here. The carrier installing everything will have to open its infrastructure to competitors for them to use. The same applies to those competitors too. The result is that I can switch to whatever company I choose in line with offers.
The same applies to 4 and 5G and 5G will reach me quicker than 4G took to reach me.
The big question is about disposable income around Christmas and job insecurity in 2021. Two COVID related factors that will obviously impact Apple to a degree.
Competitors will be in the same situation but will have 5G options at far lower price points.
No one is expecting a low cost 5G variant from Apple so if they produce one it will be a big surprise.
Yeah - I think the real problem is the cellular and internet infrastructure as a whole in the U.S. is behind. The U.S. is very different from Europe, so it's hard to draw direct comparisons, though. PC Magazine did some tests recently and 5G speeds were about on par with 4G LTE speeds with the exception of the handful of Verizon mm wave spots, and the 5G latencies in the US were better than 4G but not great. In contrast, 4G speeds in Canada were over twice as fast as anything in the U.S. - either 4G or 5G.
I think there's more to it than just speed. As has been pointed out, there's latency as well.
But, perhaps more important is coverage: There are vast swaths of the U.S. without coverage -- even near major cities. And, no carrier in their right mind will be rolling out new coverage using last year's technology.
In addition, the the AT&T guy says that cable will always outperform wireless and technically that is likely a true statement. But, the cable coming into my house is nearly 40 years old. All a Comcast competitor has to do to to replace it is put 5G transmitter on one of the three poles surrounding my house and I can pick it up with an antenna.
Those trying to hold onto the old technologies are increasingly sounding like those who defended horses 100 some years ago. Sure a horse can go places that a car can't. But....
You're assuming the carriers are going to magically put up 5G transmitters where they have no infrastructure at all while they have other existing towers still on 4G. probably not a safe assumption.
Ultimately speed will be limited by the backbone. If the backbone is bottlenecked, it makes no difference how fast the connection to the tower is. That cable may be 40 years old, but it is still capable of providing more bandwidth than the majority of people need and also more bandwidth than their wifi router can handle, so for most it simply doesn't matter. If Verizon or some other company goes and puts mm Wave 5G antennas up in a neighborhood they could start offering internet service to compete with the local cable provider, but people would have to have a clear line of sight, get an external antenna/modem and Verizon would have to offer the service at competitive prices. That assumes there are poles up - all of the neighborhoods around me have buried utilities so that's not even an option. I've seen no one suggest that 5G-based internet access will play a significant role any time in the near future.
You keep trying to use hyperbole and talking about 5G being the future jet plane and 4G being a horse and buggy, but it's more like 4G is a Toyota Camry and 5G is a Tesla. Sure the Tesla is the future and generally better but it has some limitations and currently doesn't do anything the Camry doesn't do. When it's time to trade in my Camry I'll get a Tesla, but so far no one has been able to give any reason to do so beyond "because it's the FUTURE!!!!"
So you suggest that we, and the carriers, should invest in horse & buggy technology?
"Always listen to the experts and cynics. They'll tell you exactly what can't be done and why. So, knowing the pitfalls to avoid, you can proceed full steam ahead."
Low band = broad coverage at 4G speeds, 5G about 20% improvement over 4G
Midband = half the coverage of 4G at speeds around 200Mbps T-Mobile has midband because Sprint owned the bulk of 2.5 Ghz spectrum, but most of that bandwidth is still at 4G technology
High band = the speeds and latency of mmwave that have been overhyped to sell users on 5G, very little buildout, or utility at this time, for the bulk of users.
" As T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray wrote mmWave 5G "will never materially scale beyond small pockets of 5G hotspots in dense urban environments." He has an axe to grind, but he's not wrong about that. Even with beamforming directing the signal right to your device, for practical purposes mmWave will only work in cities. On the road, in the suburbs, and the country, we'll never see mmWave."
Let's say, though, that you've got a 5G phone and you're sure you can get 5G service – what kind of performance can you really expect? According to Washington Post tech columnist Geoffrey A. Fowler, you can expect to see a "diddly squat" 5G performance. That sounds about right.
And, technically speaking what are diddly squat speeds? Try "AT&T with 32Mbps with the 5G phone and 34Mbps on the 4G one. On T-Mobile, I got 15Mbps on the 5G phone and 13Mbps on the 4G one." He wasn't able to check Verizon. That's not a typo, by the way. His 4G phone was faster than his 5G phone.
It wasn't just him, since he lives in that technology backwater known as the San Francisco bay area. He checked with several national firms tracking 5G performance. They found that all three major US telecom networks' 5G isn't that much faster than 4G."
Keep flogging that horse....
Keep spewing misinformation...
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too?
I use the word "hype" for good reason wrt 5G marketing,
You use "hoax" as a response because you don't actually have the understanding of what 5G is to actually make an intelligent argument.
Funny, you are exactly like your nemesis Donald Trump in that regard.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh! and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
There are, as the links noted, many flavors of 5G, and most of them today, are repurposed 4G lowland.
No hoax, just what the initial buildout is. All that "low latency" is wrt mmwave, not low or mid band, hence the hype that you bought into.
LOL.... So 5G is a hoax too? You should really tell all those
carriers and countries investing billions and billions into it. Oh!
and don't forget to email Tim and tell him there's no need to add 5G
into the iPhone 12 -- it's all hoax.
LOL!!!
You keep using that word "Hoax" like your pal Trump does; inappropriately, and incorrectly.
How's that working out for you?
You might want to look up the definitions for "hype", and "hoax". Not surprising to the rest of the world's population, these words have different meanings.
So, you keep claiming that 5G is a hoax while claiming that reality is "hype". Got it. But, no need for you to feel bad: That kind of thing is the new normal.
Georgie, boy - you really need to work on reading comprehension! You were actually the one who called 5G a hoax and then got all worked up about it! It's actually rather entertaining to read your threads and disjointed tangential rhetoric.
It sounds like you are the one who needs to work on reading comprehension. Because I would never say something so silly.
But, nice try at discrediting me. Well actually, no, it wasn't. It was as weak and fabricated as your arguments against 5G.
I never stated that 5G was a "hoax", I stated that it was "hyped".
You don't seem to be able to figure that out, so we assume that it is only reading comprehension, but, who knows.
Arguing with you is like arguing with barely sentient marsh sludge; it stinks.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it is actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you understand Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
Like he said: The U.S. has been more successful in blocking 5G than in implementing it, while other places progress into the future. So, why are you condemning 5G because of the failure of one country?
(*But despite our failures, there is hope as T-Mobile continues to roll it out in underserved rural areas. While, as the article shows, U.S. major carriers make excuses)
Sorry, but by your claiming that 5G is all "hype" is just another version of your hero's favorite word: "Hoax".
No, despite the U.S.'s worst efforts, it is neither hype not hoax. It is, instead, the future and, increasingly, in some places, the present.
So why is it that you hate 5G so much? Is it because, once again, in yet another technical area, China succeeded while the U.S. failed?
Your support of the U.S. is admirable but misguided: You Trumpers try to support the U.S. by attacking, condemning and blocking other nations who are investing in the future. Instead of stock buybacks, dividends and Tax Scams for the wealthy the U.S. should be investing in its future. But it isn't. Instead it continues to fall further behind while it focuses on redistributing wealth from the poor and middle classes to the wealthy.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
That single tower is not 'repurposed'. It has been upgraded with 5G capacity. Yes, definitely NSA but not repurposed. It it still performing as a 4G tower but can now handle 5G because of the added modules.
I've seen videos of speed tests from here in Spain that see download 5G speeds 10 times the speed of 4G while standing in the same spot and yes, very probably coming from the same 'repurposed' tower!
Going off and mentioning size, GDP etc is not relevant. What is relevant is how countries plan and implement their roll outs. The US is behind China and not only with infrastructure but also with the services which run over it. That's why Trump has destroyed international relations because he can't allow China to take a technological lead 'on his watch' as he says. And not only him. Various high ranking officials have gone on record as saying that this cannot be allowed to happen. So what you are seeing is the US having to roll out 5G using equipment that most consider to be inferior to that of Huawei. Just accept that.
Here in Spain, Vodafone has a head start because it switched on its 5G network a year ago.
Also, in Spain (and some other countries), we have a central government map detailing every single cell tower in the country, who has equipment on it, what bands it covers and the energy ratings.
The only equipment on the tower that services my address is from Vodafone and Orange (4G only at present) but because of the setup here, Movistar has access to that equipment (along with the virtual carriers).
If we compare the move from 3G to 4G with the move from 4G to 5G, things are moving at light speed.
We'll see how long it takes for it to reach me but my next phone will definitely have 5G for street use. At home I'll have fibre.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
That single tower is not 'repurposed'. It has been upgraded with 5G capacity. Yes, definitely NSA but not repurposed. It it still performing as a 4G tower but can now handle 5G because of the added modules.
I've seen videos of speed tests from here in Spain that see download 5G speeds 10 times the speed of 4G while standing in the same spot and yes, very probably coming from the same 'repurposed' tower!
Going off and mentioning size, GDP etc is not relevant. What is relevant is how countries plan and implement their roll outs. The US is behind China and not only with infrastructure but also with the services which run over it. That's why Trump has destroyed international relations because he can't allow China to take a technological lead 'on his watch' as he says. And not only him. Various high ranking officials have gone on record as saying that this cannot be allowed to happen. So what you are seeing is the US having to roll out 5G using equipment that most consider to be inferior to that of Huawei. Just accept that.
Here in Spain, Vodafone has a head start because it switched on its 5G network a year ago.
Also, in Spain (and some other countries), we have a central government map detailing every single cell tower in the country, who has equipment on it, what bands it covers and the energy ratings.
The only equipment on the tower that services my address is from Vodafone and Orange (4G only at present) but because of the setup here, Movistar has access to that equipment (along with the virtual carriers).
If we compare the move from 3G to 4G with the move from 4G to 5G, things are moving at light speed.
We'll see how long it takes for it to reach me but my next phone will definitely have 5G for street use. At home I'll have fibre.
Your continued support of Communist China is noted, but there isn't any technical advantage to using Huawei. Perhaps you should join the rest of the world and condemn the prison complexes in Xinjiang, and now also in Tibet. Considering how much benefit Huawei gains from its close connection to the CCP, I expect that the next U.S. Administration will also continue sanctions against Mainland China.
If the towers are operating at the same frequency bands, but under 5G protocols, there are some efficiencies, but a user wouldn't see 10 time performance gains during peak hours. That's just physics.
Yes, towers can be upgraded to midband, and gain performance, and that's what Telefonica stated they were doing, but at what pace of buildout is that midband happening? that is what the link I posted questioned.
You seem unable to comprehend that most of the U.S. is rural, and of low population density, so in those areas, users will almost never see anything but low band, though at 5G, it will have a bit more range and efficiency. I assume Spain has areas that are also of low population density; maybe you live in one and don't yet have access to midband. If you purchased a 5G phone, you would see performance near what 4G already provides, an likely about 20% better.
Well, since 5G has so far been pretty much a non-event, why should a 5G iPhone be any different?
5G coverage is fair at best, bordering on abysmal for Verizon, and the performance of the 5G networks is essentially on par with the 4G LTE ones. Why should we pay extra for any of it? If and when (emphasis on the ‘if’) the utopia of self driving cars that talk to each other actually comes to pass then maybe 5G will be useful. Right now it’s all hype.
As we both concluded on the same thread months ago, 5G's biggest growth isn't going to come from mobile users, so the carriers need to hype it as much as possible. And now this article shows that CEO McElfresh is "softening expectations." Don't get me wrong - 5G is impressive technology on the infrastructure side, but sadly those gains won't be fully realised by mobile users.
And mmWave will work best on physically large phones due to the multiple mmWave antennas (diversity) that must be crammed in to overcome the shadowing.
yup. It's impressive, just not for phones. Fortunately, the backend infrastructure will benefit everyone, no matter what technology they're using.
In the mountains of Colorado, where I live, there is very little ATT or T-Mobile. Only Verizon works with anything close to an acceptable signal and only along main roads. My home requires a Network Extender. Local phone stores will tell complaining visitors that they should change their settings to 3G while in the area. A friend in the "cellular game" says that 5G and higher may never roll out in rural areas because it will require 5 times the number of towers and would take years to build. He says that the future is Starlink.
T-Mobile says your friend is wrong. They are rolling it out now. Not the mm-wave your friend is talking about but 5G nevertheless.
We've been through this before. T-Mobile may say his friend is wrong, but T-Mobile's maps are also wrong, so his friend is probably right. The other catch with coverage - often times when I have 2 bars of T Mobile coverage I still struggle to load a simple web page, so even though I have 2 bars, they are pretty useless bars. They're not the only ones though. Verizon got censured by the better business bureau for misleading claims of coverage, too.
I'm trashing AT&T because, well, they are trash. One of America's top carriers, they first pulled a scam telling us they had 5G in wide distribution (it was 4G relabeled to 5G-E) and now telling us that, "Yeh, much of the rest of the world is moving to 5G, but you don't need it and should instead wait for their 6G (or will that be 6G-E?)"
If the U.S. is going to continue leading the world it has to lead -- not bullshit about it -- or try to maintain its leadership by suppressing those who are leading the way.
(And yes, I know you claim that T-Mobile's maps are complete lies because you once drove through a spot that didn't have T-Mobile coverage. Got it).
Didn't TMobile get fined for deceiving customers with false ringtones.
T-Mobile USA has agreed to pay a $40 million fine after admitting that
it failed to complete phone calls in rural areas and used "false ring
tones" that created the appearance that the calls were going through and
no one was picking up.
T-Mobile admitted to inserting fake ring tones into “hundreds of millions” of the doomed calls,
presumably to make the caller believe either that the phone was ringing
at the receiver’s residence or business (and, presumably, that no one
was picking up), or that the local terminating carrier was at fault,
according to the agency.
I'd rather have some faked 5G symbol and be able to complete calls then
this nonsense. I am currently a TMobile customer who was a long time
former AT&T customer btw.
I live in a spot where TMobile coverage is horrendous! I am almost within eyeshot of a tower and my coverage is terrible inside my home and the surrounding area. Which is completely opposite of my coverage with the same phone same address when I was AT&T. I get false rings with TMobile ( it appears to ring on my end but the caller has no record of a call from me, same thing happens with sms texts)
I also have friends who use TMobile for business and have the same problem.. calls never received. Email documents never go through etc.. ) slow slow data speeds and loading webpages. Building penetration is a joke also compared to AT&T atleast where I live and work.. I have used both services when I was working from the office and after switching to TMobile there were spots in my one floor building that I had barely a bar of signal or was unable to load a page or make a call.
I live in the Lehigh Valley in PA with a population of about 841K so I am not in the middle of nowhere. Tm maps may not be a lie but the coverage isn't as complete as the map makes it seem in experience over the last 3 years.
Just for reference I get a new iPhone every year and my current phone goes to my GF who has AT&T. I have actually popped her SIM out recently and put it in my 11 Pro Max with the same results..
So, T-Mobile got a wrist slap? Ok....
For me, T-Mobile works great - I have had only great service from them! Plus, I'm saving a bundle over what AT&T would try to rip me off for. But, even if they charged the same as T-Mobile I wouldn't sign with those crooks: Previously, after I replaced my paid off phone with one I had purchased in full from Apple, they STILL INSISTED ON CHARGING ME FOR A PHONE I HAD PURCHASED!
And now they're making excuses because they never invested in modern technology and want us to keep using their out of date garbage -- at exorbitant prices.
It wasn't so much the fine as it was misleading customers by faking hundreds of millions of calls. I left AT&T on bad terms as well after 15 years as a customer so my post wasn't trying to prop them up in any way. Their prices and terrible customer service were enough to make me leave.
They are all the same.. they want to sell service. So your beef with AT&T is really over shitty customer service and prices. It can't be for misleading customer's.. can it?
It's just like politics NO politician gives a damn about you or yours unless you or yours somehow impact them.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
That single tower is not 'repurposed'. It has been upgraded with 5G capacity. Yes, definitely NSA but not repurposed. It it still performing as a 4G tower but can now handle 5G because of the added modules.
I've seen videos of speed tests from here in Spain that see download 5G speeds 10 times the speed of 4G while standing in the same spot and yes, very probably coming from the same 'repurposed' tower!
Going off and mentioning size, GDP etc is not relevant. What is relevant is how countries plan and implement their roll outs. The US is behind China and not only with infrastructure but also with the services which run over it. That's why Trump has destroyed international relations because he can't allow China to take a technological lead 'on his watch' as he says. And not only him. Various high ranking officials have gone on record as saying that this cannot be allowed to happen. So what you are seeing is the US having to roll out 5G using equipment that most consider to be inferior to that of Huawei. Just accept that.
Here in Spain, Vodafone has a head start because it switched on its 5G network a year ago.
Also, in Spain (and some other countries), we have a central government map detailing every single cell tower in the country, who has equipment on it, what bands it covers and the energy ratings.
The only equipment on the tower that services my address is from Vodafone and Orange (4G only at present) but because of the setup here, Movistar has access to that equipment (along with the virtual carriers).
If we compare the move from 3G to 4G with the move from 4G to 5G, things are moving at light speed.
We'll see how long it takes for it to reach me but my next phone will definitely have 5G for street use. At home I'll have fibre.
Your continued support of Communist China is noted, but there isn't any technical advantage to using Huawei. Perhaps you should join the rest of the world and condemn the prison complexes in Xinjiang, and now also in Tibet. Considering how much benefit Huawei gains from its close connection to the CCP, I expect that the next U.S. Administration will also continue sanctions against Mainland China.
If the towers are operating at the same frequency bands, but under 5G protocols, there are some efficiencies, but a user wouldn't see 10 time performance gains during peak hours. That's just physics.
Yes, towers can be upgraded to midband, and gain performance, and that's what Telefonica stated they were doing, but at what pace of buildout is that midband happening? that is what the link I posted questioned.
You seem unable to comprehend that most of the U.S. is rural, and of low population density, so in those areas, users will almost never see anything but low band, though at 5G, it will have a bit more range and efficiency. I assume Spain has areas that are also of low population density; maybe you live in one and don't yet have access to midband. If you purchased a 5G phone, you would see performance near what 4G already provides, an likely about 20% better.
I'm not supporting China. I'm providing information.
Huawei's gear is ahead of the pack and by some margin.
Take a look at some of the specialist videos from the UK where they measure the performance of different equipment from different vendors on the same tower.
Yes, they are far more efficient too, in practically every sense which leads to savings right from the installation process. A lot of this equipment was designed not only to be efficient but also be light and compact enough to be installed by a single operator.
The speeds I mentioned were taken from a video on 5G in Spain. They are not ficticious. The '10 times faster' was direct from the video.
The 'repurposing' as you like to call it is not what you paint it to be. Basically 4G is being used to help out with the backhaul.
The real backhaul is the strength of the fibre network available to the operators and you shouldn't be surprised to hear that Huawei stands out there too.
Are you incapable of seeing the technological level of Huawei in this field?
And adhering to the same standard DOES NOT mean performance can't vary.
Take a look at Huawei's WiFi 6+ which, while being fully certified for WiFi 6, can achieve better performance when paired with other Wi-Fi 6+ devices. That's because they have leveraged their 5G tech to produce a better product.
Not dissimilar to how Huawei claimed its Wifi 5 was faster than Apple's Wi-Fi 6. Why? Because their homegrown Wi-Fi 5 chipset was the fastest in the industry at launch.
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
That single tower is not 'repurposed'. It has been upgraded with 5G capacity. Yes, definitely NSA but not repurposed. It it still performing as a 4G tower but can now handle 5G because of the added modules.
I've seen videos of speed tests from here in Spain that see download 5G speeds 10 times the speed of 4G while standing in the same spot and yes, very probably coming from the same 'repurposed' tower!
Going off and mentioning size, GDP etc is not relevant. What is relevant is how countries plan and implement their roll outs. The US is behind China and not only with infrastructure but also with the services which run over it. That's why Trump has destroyed international relations because he can't allow China to take a technological lead 'on his watch' as he says. And not only him. Various high ranking officials have gone on record as saying that this cannot be allowed to happen. So what you are seeing is the US having to roll out 5G using equipment that most consider to be inferior to that of Huawei. Just accept that.
Here in Spain, Vodafone has a head start because it switched on its 5G network a year ago.
Also, in Spain (and some other countries), we have a central government map detailing every single cell tower in the country, who has equipment on it, what bands it covers and the energy ratings.
The only equipment on the tower that services my address is from Vodafone and Orange (4G only at present) but because of the setup here, Movistar has access to that equipment (along with the virtual carriers).
If we compare the move from 3G to 4G with the move from 4G to 5G, things are moving at light speed.
We'll see how long it takes for it to reach me but my next phone will definitely have 5G for street use. At home I'll have fibre.
Your continued support of Communist China is noted, but there isn't any technical advantage to using Huawei. Perhaps you should join the rest of the world and condemn the prison complexes in Xinjiang, and now also in Tibet. Considering how much benefit Huawei gains from its close connection to the CCP, I expect that the next U.S. Administration will also continue sanctions against Mainland China.
If the towers are operating at the same frequency bands, but under 5G protocols, there are some efficiencies, but a user wouldn't see 10 time performance gains during peak hours. That's just physics.
Yes, towers can be upgraded to midband, and gain performance, and that's what Telefonica stated they were doing, but at what pace of buildout is that midband happening? that is what the link I posted questioned.
You seem unable to comprehend that most of the U.S. is rural, and of low population density, so in those areas, users will almost never see anything but low band, though at 5G, it will have a bit more range and efficiency. I assume Spain has areas that are also of low population density; maybe you live in one and don't yet have access to midband. If you purchased a 5G phone, you would see performance near what 4G already provides, an likely about 20% better.
I'm not supporting China. I'm providing information.
Huawei's gear is ahead of the pack and by some margin.
Take a look at some of the specialist videos from the UK where they measure the performance of different equipment from different vendors on the same tower.
Yes, they are far more efficient too, in practically every sense which leads to savings right from the installation process. A lot of this equipment was designed not only to be efficient but also be light and compact enough to be installed by a single operator.
The speeds I mentioned were taken from a video on 5G in Spain. They are not ficticious. The '10 times faster' was direct from the video.
The 'repurposing' as you like to call it is not what you paint it to be. Basically 4G is being used to help out with the backhaul.
The real backhaul is the strength of the fibre network available to the operators and you shouldn't be surprised to hear that Huawei stands out there too.
Are you incapable of seeing the technological level of Huawei in this field?
And adhering to the same standard DOES NOT mean performance can't vary.
Take a look at Huawei's WiFi 6+ which, while being fully certified for WiFi 6, can achieve better performance when paired with other Wi-Fi 6+ devices. That's because they have leveraged their 5G tech to produce a better product.
Not dissimilar to how Huawei claimed its Wifi 5 was faster than Apple's Wi-Fi 6. Why? Because their homegrown Wi-Fi 5 chipset was the fastest in the industry at launch.
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
You seem to be the one that paints 5G performance with a single brush, not me. It depends completely on the band. 5G isn't magically going to make 4G low band existing buildout all that much faster.
As for your meme that Huawei is more performant than the competition, I don't see that at all, and Western Telecom Manufacturers actually have the bulk of useful IP. More to the point, why would the West allow Huawei to continue its mercantilists policies based on Government subsidies, and cheap loans, to create an unfair market advantage?
For the record, Germany and France are barely in the Huawei camp at all, and the UK is supporting a complete removal of Huawei by 2027, which kills any interest in installing Huawei 5G. One can imagine that Merkel's replacement could opt for a de facto Huawei ban by effect of security, or human rights concerns?
Oh for fuck's sake, and you follow up with this;
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
Do you still have a stick up your ass about something that was resolved over a year ago?
WTF?
Do you even understand how Apple's purchase of Intel's modem business that failed at 5G, and later, the situation where Apple had to deal with Qualcomm, has set up Apple for fully custom modem's, and what that brings to their entire product line integrated into Apple's SOC's?.
Do you really think that Apple, in the long run, is in an inferior position to Qualcomm or Huawei?
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
That single tower is not 'repurposed'. It has been upgraded with 5G capacity. Yes, definitely NSA but not repurposed. It it still performing as a 4G tower but can now handle 5G because of the added modules.
I've seen videos of speed tests from here in Spain that see download 5G speeds 10 times the speed of 4G while standing in the same spot and yes, very probably coming from the same 'repurposed' tower!
Going off and mentioning size, GDP etc is not relevant. What is relevant is how countries plan and implement their roll outs. The US is behind China and not only with infrastructure but also with the services which run over it. That's why Trump has destroyed international relations because he can't allow China to take a technological lead 'on his watch' as he says. And not only him. Various high ranking officials have gone on record as saying that this cannot be allowed to happen. So what you are seeing is the US having to roll out 5G using equipment that most consider to be inferior to that of Huawei. Just accept that.
Here in Spain, Vodafone has a head start because it switched on its 5G network a year ago.
Also, in Spain (and some other countries), we have a central government map detailing every single cell tower in the country, who has equipment on it, what bands it covers and the energy ratings.
The only equipment on the tower that services my address is from Vodafone and Orange (4G only at present) but because of the setup here, Movistar has access to that equipment (along with the virtual carriers).
If we compare the move from 3G to 4G with the move from 4G to 5G, things are moving at light speed.
We'll see how long it takes for it to reach me but my next phone will definitely have 5G for street use. At home I'll have fibre.
Your continued support of Communist China is noted, but there isn't any technical advantage to using Huawei. Perhaps you should join the rest of the world and condemn the prison complexes in Xinjiang, and now also in Tibet. Considering how much benefit Huawei gains from its close connection to the CCP, I expect that the next U.S. Administration will also continue sanctions against Mainland China.
If the towers are operating at the same frequency bands, but under 5G protocols, there are some efficiencies, but a user wouldn't see 10 time performance gains during peak hours. That's just physics.
Yes, towers can be upgraded to midband, and gain performance, and that's what Telefonica stated they were doing, but at what pace of buildout is that midband happening? that is what the link I posted questioned.
You seem unable to comprehend that most of the U.S. is rural, and of low population density, so in those areas, users will almost never see anything but low band, though at 5G, it will have a bit more range and efficiency. I assume Spain has areas that are also of low population density; maybe you live in one and don't yet have access to midband. If you purchased a 5G phone, you would see performance near what 4G already provides, an likely about 20% better.
I'm not supporting China. I'm providing information.
Huawei's gear is ahead of the pack and by some margin.
Take a look at some of the specialist videos from the UK where they measure the performance of different equipment from different vendors on the same tower.
Yes, they are far more efficient too, in practically every sense which leads to savings right from the installation process. A lot of this equipment was designed not only to be efficient but also be light and compact enough to be installed by a single operator.
The speeds I mentioned were taken from a video on 5G in Spain. They are not ficticious. The '10 times faster' was direct from the video.
The 'repurposing' as you like to call it is not what you paint it to be. Basically 4G is being used to help out with the backhaul.
The real backhaul is the strength of the fibre network available to the operators and you shouldn't be surprised to hear that Huawei stands out there too.
Are you incapable of seeing the technological level of Huawei in this field?
And adhering to the same standard DOES NOT mean performance can't vary.
Take a look at Huawei's WiFi 6+ which, while being fully certified for WiFi 6, can achieve better performance when paired with other Wi-Fi 6+ devices. That's because they have leveraged their 5G tech to produce a better product.
Not dissimilar to how Huawei claimed its Wifi 5 was faster than Apple's Wi-Fi 6. Why? Because their homegrown Wi-Fi 5 chipset was the fastest in the industry at launch.
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
You seem to be the one that paints 5G performance with a single brush, not me. It depends completely on the band. 5G isn't magically going to make 4G low band existing buildout all that much faster.
As for your meme that Huawei is more performant than the competition, I don't see that at all, and Western Telecom Manufacturers actually have the bulk of useful IP. More to the point, why would the West allow Huawei to continue its mercantilists policies based on Government subsidies, and cheap loans, to create an unfair market advantage?
For the record, Germany and France are barely in the Huawei camp at all, and the UK is supporting a complete removal of Huawei by 2027, which kills any interest in installing Huawei 5G. One can imagine that Merkel's replacement could opt for a de facto Huawei ban by effect of security, or human rights concerns?
Oh for fuck's sake, and you follow up with this;
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
Do you still have a stick up your ass about something that was resolved over a year ago?
WTF?
Do you even understand how Apple's purchase of Intel's modem business that failed at 5G, and later, the situation where Apple had to deal with Qualcomm, has set up Apple for fully custom modem's, and what that brings to their entire product line integrated into Apple's SOC's?.
Do you really think that Apple, in the long run, is in an inferior position to Qualcomm or Huawei?
I understand it very well. Apple took some strategic decisions which backfired. You can't always get every decision right. It doesn't matter in what timeframe these things happened. The consequences are here now.
They are late to the party. They are not going to ship the modem they planned to. They have abandoned a multi billion patent gamble to have a solution 'now'. You should understand that going without 5G until they could brew their own modem, was never even a option. That would have been an even bigger error and was never going to happen.
'The bulk of useful IP' ? What?
Now you are trying with 'bulk' and 'Western' because you cannot bring yourself to admit that Huawei leads (and by a large margin! ) the core 5G patents.
These are patents that are largely due to their own R&D which you cannot admit to either because it destroys that tired 'Huawei steals' meme.
As for loans and the other claims, a while back I posted a simple video from Huawei itself debunking that claim and it was probably posted in response to another of your affirmations. Repeating yourself won't change the facts. Do you want me to repost that video?
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
That single tower is not 'repurposed'. It has been upgraded with 5G capacity. Yes, definitely NSA but not repurposed. It it still performing as a 4G tower but can now handle 5G because of the added modules.
I've seen videos of speed tests from here in Spain that see download 5G speeds 10 times the speed of 4G while standing in the same spot and yes, very probably coming from the same 'repurposed' tower!
Going off and mentioning size, GDP etc is not relevant. What is relevant is how countries plan and implement their roll outs. The US is behind China and not only with infrastructure but also with the services which run over it. That's why Trump has destroyed international relations because he can't allow China to take a technological lead 'on his watch' as he says. And not only him. Various high ranking officials have gone on record as saying that this cannot be allowed to happen. So what you are seeing is the US having to roll out 5G using equipment that most consider to be inferior to that of Huawei. Just accept that.
Here in Spain, Vodafone has a head start because it switched on its 5G network a year ago.
Also, in Spain (and some other countries), we have a central government map detailing every single cell tower in the country, who has equipment on it, what bands it covers and the energy ratings.
The only equipment on the tower that services my address is from Vodafone and Orange (4G only at present) but because of the setup here, Movistar has access to that equipment (along with the virtual carriers).
If we compare the move from 3G to 4G with the move from 4G to 5G, things are moving at light speed.
We'll see how long it takes for it to reach me but my next phone will definitely have 5G for street use. At home I'll have fibre.
Your continued support of Communist China is noted, but there isn't any technical advantage to using Huawei. Perhaps you should join the rest of the world and condemn the prison complexes in Xinjiang, and now also in Tibet. Considering how much benefit Huawei gains from its close connection to the CCP, I expect that the next U.S. Administration will also continue sanctions against Mainland China.
If the towers are operating at the same frequency bands, but under 5G protocols, there are some efficiencies, but a user wouldn't see 10 time performance gains during peak hours. That's just physics.
Yes, towers can be upgraded to midband, and gain performance, and that's what Telefonica stated they were doing, but at what pace of buildout is that midband happening? that is what the link I posted questioned.
You seem unable to comprehend that most of the U.S. is rural, and of low population density, so in those areas, users will almost never see anything but low band, though at 5G, it will have a bit more range and efficiency. I assume Spain has areas that are also of low population density; maybe you live in one and don't yet have access to midband. If you purchased a 5G phone, you would see performance near what 4G already provides, an likely about 20% better.
I'm not supporting China. I'm providing information.
Huawei's gear is ahead of the pack and by some margin.
Take a look at some of the specialist videos from the UK where they measure the performance of different equipment from different vendors on the same tower.
Yes, they are far more efficient too, in practically every sense which leads to savings right from the installation process. A lot of this equipment was designed not only to be efficient but also be light and compact enough to be installed by a single operator.
The speeds I mentioned were taken from a video on 5G in Spain. They are not ficticious. The '10 times faster' was direct from the video.
The 'repurposing' as you like to call it is not what you paint it to be. Basically 4G is being used to help out with the backhaul.
The real backhaul is the strength of the fibre network available to the operators and you shouldn't be surprised to hear that Huawei stands out there too.
Are you incapable of seeing the technological level of Huawei in this field?
And adhering to the same standard DOES NOT mean performance can't vary.
Take a look at Huawei's WiFi 6+ which, while being fully certified for WiFi 6, can achieve better performance when paired with other Wi-Fi 6+ devices. That's because they have leveraged their 5G tech to produce a better product.
Not dissimilar to how Huawei claimed its Wifi 5 was faster than Apple's Wi-Fi 6. Why? Because their homegrown Wi-Fi 5 chipset was the fastest in the industry at launch.
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
You seem to be the one that paints 5G performance with a single brush, not me. It depends completely on the band. 5G isn't magically going to make 4G low band existing buildout all that much faster.
As for your meme that Huawei is more performant than the competition, I don't see that at all, and Western Telecom Manufacturers actually have the bulk of useful IP. More to the point, why would the West allow Huawei to continue its mercantilists policies based on Government subsidies, and cheap loans, to create an unfair market advantage?
For the record, Germany and France are barely in the Huawei camp at all, and the UK is supporting a complete removal of Huawei by 2027, which kills any interest in installing Huawei 5G. One can imagine that Merkel's replacement could opt for a de facto Huawei ban by effect of security, or human rights concerns?
Oh for fuck's sake, and you follow up with this;
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
Do you still have a stick up your ass about something that was resolved over a year ago?
WTF?
Do you even understand how Apple's purchase of Intel's modem business that failed at 5G, and later, the situation where Apple had to deal with Qualcomm, has set up Apple for fully custom modem's, and what that brings to their entire product line integrated into Apple's SOC's?.
Do you really think that Apple, in the long run, is in an inferior position to Qualcomm or Huawei?
I understand it very well. Apple took some strategic decisions which backfired. You can't always get every decision right. It doesn't matter in what timeframe these things happened. The consequences are here now.
They are late to the party. They are not going to ship the modem they planned to. They have abandoned a multi billion patent gamble to have a solution 'now'. You should understand that going without 5G until they could brew their own modem, was never even a option. That would have been an even bigger error and was never going to happen.
'The bulk of useful IP' ? What?
Now you are trying with 'bulk' and 'Western' because you cannot bring yourself to admit that Huawei leads (and by a large margin! ) the core 5G patents.
These are patents that are largely due to their own R&D which you cannot admit to either because it destroys that tired 'Huawei steals' meme.
As for loans and the other claims, a while back I posted a simple video from Huawei itself debunking that claim and it was probably posted in response to another of your affirmations. Repeating yourself won't change the facts. Do you want me to repost that video?
Gaslighting again, I see;
from the comments of your link;
"If you removed all the 5G essential patents and only used in RAN networks then the chart will drop Huawei, Samsung, LG and Qualcomm. Ericsson does not manufacture consumer devices. You need another chart to show patent related to only running 5G radio base stations as well as 5G mobile operator’s Mobil Core."
...
"This article is rather misleading to your readers. Your article should actually break down the 5G patent tallies across the different 5G domains ( Core network , RAN, Transport, Terminals & Devices), that makes it more representative of the current vendor demographics."
...
"How China’s Mercantilist Policies Have Undermined Global Innovation in the Telecom Equipment Industry
An interesting read here to understand how the telco industry has been hurt and distorted for the pas decades
Without unfair, mercantilist Chinese government policies and programs for its telecom giants, China would lack a globally competitive telecom equipment industry. Neither Huawei, nor ZTE, would have more than minor market shares, even in China.
Chinese market-share gains have come at the expense of innovative telecom equipment providers in other countries. By artificially taking market share from more innovative companies, the latter have had less revenue to invest in cutting-edge R&D.
As a share of sales, leading non-Chinese equipment companies invest more in R&D, and patent and contribute more to international standards when compared to Huawei and ZTE.
Beijing’s policies dramatically limit foreign access to China’s huge telecom markets, providing them with a guaranteed source of revenue to attack foreign competitors.
We estimate that if Ericsson and Nokia took all of Huawei and ZTE sales, there would be 20 percent more global telecom equipment R&D and 75 percent more essential 5G patents.
Democratic market-based nations should no longer purchase equipment from Huawei and ZTE and should encourage other nations to not buy Chinese telecom gear.
This will send a clear message to China that, going forward, systemic innovation mercantilism that hinders global technological innovation will no longer be tolerated.
Oh, and Apple isn't late to the party; they haven't lost any sales, but have only seen sales delayed, but you certainly come across as a fucking hypocrite for still not owning a 5G smartphone that you claim is unparalleled in its abilities.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
I see. You are simply cherry picking quotes in very specific scenarios and then applying your opinion in a generalised fashion to all of 5G.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you speak Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
Yet, when I argue that "low band" 5G is barely better performing than 4G, it's all about "the future" for the counterarguments. The "hype" is that it is here now, widespread, and massively over performing 4G. None of that is true, for the most part, other than for select urban areas. Maybe there is actually more midband available to date in Spain than the U.S., but at least in the U.S., there is still to be an auction in 2021 for those bands (3.5 Ghz), and Verizon and AT&T, for the most part, have to wait for that auction to upgrade to midband 5G.
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof. I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G. I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
That single tower is not 'repurposed'. It has been upgraded with 5G capacity. Yes, definitely NSA but not repurposed. It it still performing as a 4G tower but can now handle 5G because of the added modules.
I've seen videos of speed tests from here in Spain that see download 5G speeds 10 times the speed of 4G while standing in the same spot and yes, very probably coming from the same 'repurposed' tower!
Going off and mentioning size, GDP etc is not relevant. What is relevant is how countries plan and implement their roll outs. The US is behind China and not only with infrastructure but also with the services which run over it. That's why Trump has destroyed international relations because he can't allow China to take a technological lead 'on his watch' as he says. And not only him. Various high ranking officials have gone on record as saying that this cannot be allowed to happen. So what you are seeing is the US having to roll out 5G using equipment that most consider to be inferior to that of Huawei. Just accept that.
Here in Spain, Vodafone has a head start because it switched on its 5G network a year ago.
Also, in Spain (and some other countries), we have a central government map detailing every single cell tower in the country, who has equipment on it, what bands it covers and the energy ratings.
The only equipment on the tower that services my address is from Vodafone and Orange (4G only at present) but because of the setup here, Movistar has access to that equipment (along with the virtual carriers).
If we compare the move from 3G to 4G with the move from 4G to 5G, things are moving at light speed.
We'll see how long it takes for it to reach me but my next phone will definitely have 5G for street use. At home I'll have fibre.
Your continued support of Communist China is noted, but there isn't any technical advantage to using Huawei. Perhaps you should join the rest of the world and condemn the prison complexes in Xinjiang, and now also in Tibet. Considering how much benefit Huawei gains from its close connection to the CCP, I expect that the next U.S. Administration will also continue sanctions against Mainland China.
If the towers are operating at the same frequency bands, but under 5G protocols, there are some efficiencies, but a user wouldn't see 10 time performance gains during peak hours. That's just physics.
Yes, towers can be upgraded to midband, and gain performance, and that's what Telefonica stated they were doing, but at what pace of buildout is that midband happening? that is what the link I posted questioned.
You seem unable to comprehend that most of the U.S. is rural, and of low population density, so in those areas, users will almost never see anything but low band, though at 5G, it will have a bit more range and efficiency. I assume Spain has areas that are also of low population density; maybe you live in one and don't yet have access to midband. If you purchased a 5G phone, you would see performance near what 4G already provides, an likely about 20% better.
I'm not supporting China. I'm providing information.
Huawei's gear is ahead of the pack and by some margin.
Take a look at some of the specialist videos from the UK where they measure the performance of different equipment from different vendors on the same tower.
Yes, they are far more efficient too, in practically every sense which leads to savings right from the installation process. A lot of this equipment was designed not only to be efficient but also be light and compact enough to be installed by a single operator.
The speeds I mentioned were taken from a video on 5G in Spain. They are not ficticious. The '10 times faster' was direct from the video.
The 'repurposing' as you like to call it is not what you paint it to be. Basically 4G is being used to help out with the backhaul.
The real backhaul is the strength of the fibre network available to the operators and you shouldn't be surprised to hear that Huawei stands out there too.
Are you incapable of seeing the technological level of Huawei in this field?
And adhering to the same standard DOES NOT mean performance can't vary.
Take a look at Huawei's WiFi 6+ which, while being fully certified for WiFi 6, can achieve better performance when paired with other Wi-Fi 6+ devices. That's because they have leveraged their 5G tech to produce a better product.
Not dissimilar to how Huawei claimed its Wifi 5 was faster than Apple's Wi-Fi 6. Why? Because their homegrown Wi-Fi 5 chipset was the fastest in the industry at launch.
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
You seem to be the one that paints 5G performance with a single brush, not me. It depends completely on the band. 5G isn't magically going to make 4G low band existing buildout all that much faster.
As for your meme that Huawei is more performant than the competition, I don't see that at all, and Western Telecom Manufacturers actually have the bulk of useful IP. More to the point, why would the West allow Huawei to continue its mercantilists policies based on Government subsidies, and cheap loans, to create an unfair market advantage?
For the record, Germany and France are barely in the Huawei camp at all, and the UK is supporting a complete removal of Huawei by 2027, which kills any interest in installing Huawei 5G. One can imagine that Merkel's replacement could opt for a de facto Huawei ban by effect of security, or human rights concerns?
Oh for fuck's sake, and you follow up with this;
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
Do you still have a stick up your ass about something that was resolved over a year ago?
WTF?
Do you even understand how Apple's purchase of Intel's modem business that failed at 5G, and later, the situation where Apple had to deal with Qualcomm, has set up Apple for fully custom modem's, and what that brings to their entire product line integrated into Apple's SOC's?.
Do you really think that Apple, in the long run, is in an inferior position to Qualcomm or Huawei?
I understand it very well. Apple took some strategic decisions which backfired. You can't always get every decision right. It doesn't matter in what timeframe these things happened. The consequences are here now.
They are late to the party. They are not going to ship the modem they planned to. They have abandoned a multi billion patent gamble to have a solution 'now'. You should understand that going without 5G until they could brew their own modem, was never even a option. That would have been an even bigger error and was never going to happen.
'The bulk of useful IP' ? What?
Now you are trying with 'bulk' and 'Western' because you cannot bring yourself to admit that Huawei leads (and by a large margin! ) the core 5G patents.
These are patents that are largely due to their own R&D which you cannot admit to either because it destroys that tired 'Huawei steals' meme.
As for loans and the other claims, a while back I posted a simple video from Huawei itself debunking that claim and it was probably posted in response to another of your affirmations. Repeating yourself won't change the facts. Do you want me to repost that video?
Gaslighting again, I see;
from the comments of your link;
"If you removed all the 5G essential patents and only used in RAN networks then the chart will drop Huawei, Samsung, LG and Qualcomm. Ericsson does not manufacture consumer devices. You need another chart to show patent related to only running 5G radio base stations as well as 5G mobile operator’s Mobil Core."
...
"This article is rather misleading to your readers. Your article should actually break down the 5G patent tallies across the different 5G domains ( Core network , RAN, Transport, Terminals & Devices), that makes it more representative of the current vendor demographics."
...
"How China’s Mercantilist Policies Have Undermined Global Innovation in the Telecom Equipment Industry
An interesting read here to understand how the telco industry has been hurt and distorted for the pas decades
Without unfair, mercantilist Chinese government policies and programs for its telecom giants, China would lack a globally competitive telecom equipment industry. Neither Huawei, nor ZTE, would have more than minor market shares, even in China.
Chinese market-share gains have come at the expense of innovative telecom equipment providers in other countries. By artificially taking market share from more innovative companies, the latter have had less revenue to invest in cutting-edge R&D.
As a share of sales, leading non-Chinese equipment companies invest more in R&D, and patent and contribute more to international standards when compared to Huawei and ZTE.
Beijing’s policies dramatically limit foreign access to China’s huge telecom markets, providing them with a guaranteed source of revenue to attack foreign competitors.
We estimate that if Ericsson and Nokia took all of Huawei and ZTE sales, there would be 20 percent more global telecom equipment R&D and 75 percent more essential 5G patents.
Democratic market-based nations should no longer purchase equipment from Huawei and ZTE and should encourage other nations to not buy Chinese telecom gear.
This will send a clear message to China that, going forward, systemic innovation mercantilism that hinders global technological innovation will no longer be tolerated.
Oh, and Apple isn't late to the party; they haven't lost any sales, but have only seen sales delayed, but you certainly come across as a fucking hypocrite for still not owning a 5G smartphone that you claim is unparalleled in its abilities.
Wow! That man has a problem with China.
The piece is literally full of pot holes.
So, he is promoting that the rest of the world stop purchasing Chinese technology (his bias is clear, btw) and at the same time admitting that current dominance by the Chinese was brought about by Western ICT companies admitting that they couldn't NOT do business with China!
He deliberately ignores how the US raped and pillaged the 'IP' landscape to even have a chance to become what it is now (or was, because a lot of his thinking is squarely anchored in a period of over 20 years ago.
He tip toes through the minefield which is the Trump administration today and policy making (largely doing - now - what the Chinese have done before) and can't get away from the fact that Huawei is NOT China!
He has the nerve to say that China restricting access to its ICT market (the biggest on the planet) is basically evil while ignoring the fact that the US hasn't 'restricted' access to its (also huge) market by Chinese ICT firms but outright banned them!
5G is not 3G! Huawei is where it is through very good management and R&D.
And let's not forget (something that I think he fluffs over too - I got tired of reading the bias) that there was a time - not long ago - when ALL governments were protectionist. Those nationalised industries had direct 100% state backing and many examples still exist all over the place.
The man set out to paint a picture and did it. More interesting is what he didn't say or simply skimped over.
Anyway, once again take the debate into the purely political sphere.
And on patents you pick this from the article:
"if you removed all the essential 5G patents..."
What? That was the whole point of posting the link! Yes, the 'essential' patents!
And yes. IMO Apple committed some strategic errors with 5G. And I've stated why.
Comments
No hoax, just what the initial buildout is. All that "low latency" is wrt mmwave, not low or mid band, hence the hype that you bought into.
You keep using that word "Hoax" like your pal Trump does; inappropriately, and incorrectly.
How's that working out for you?
You might want to look up the definitions for "hype", and "hoax". Not surprising to the rest of the world's population, these words have different meanings.
So, you keep claiming that 5G is a hoax while claiming that reality is "hype". Got it. But, no need for you to feel bad: That kind of thing is the new normal.
You don't seem to be able to figure that out, so we assume that it is only reading comprehension, but, who knows.
Arguing with you is like arguing with barely sentient marsh sludge; it stinks.
It is being used now for low latency mobile gaming. It's rolling out on cars. It's getting into IoT. Network slicing is providing many structural improvements that have a direct impact on mobile users. It is being combined with WiFi to improve on standards etc. Handsets will remain the hub for much of this.
It seems little of this is happening in the US though and when you move from 5G in a consumer setting and into an industrial setting, you begin to understand the concern of US strategists and how the US could fall (is falling) behind.
I've just finished reviewing Huawei's Connect 2020 show and new industrial 5G projects are coming online daily and these solutions are being exported.
Here is just one example:
https://www.huawei.com/my/publications/winwin-magazine/37/worlds-first-5g-smart-port-economic-recovery
I actually saw the remote crane operation in real time (not a simple demo) and this has now reached maturity as these 5G projects began on site a couple of years ago.
Now projects are ready for deployment in science, health, logistics, education, energy, farming, heavy industry, aviation etc and it becomes not only 5G but 5G plus its supporting services.
So while the US scurries to fend off China at every 5G turn, China is just ploughing on with finding uses for the infrastructure (which is already deployed in key areas).
Pulling Huawei Smart Inverters out of solar energy plants in the US has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with protectionism and trying to slow China down.
The US (and Apple) are late to 5G but it could have been far worse. Better late than never but 5G isn't 'hype' (not even with the half baked approach to infrastructure that seems to plague telecommunications deployment in the US) and with a little luck US purchasers of these new iPhones will see the advantages well within the lifetime of the phones.
There seems to be little real competition.
And now we are seeing non-ICT companies purchasing spectrum in places like Germany. The big car manufacturers for example. Could that happen in the US?
Whichever way you look at it, Apple absolutely needs 5G in China now.
“With 5G everything happens in a millisecond. A millisecond is what makes remote surgery, autonomous cars, the smart management of energy resources and cities and highly advanced entertainment possible. A millisecond is much more than a new response time. It’s Telefónica’s response to the new times. It’s Telefónica’s commitment to the country’s future.”
There was even more of this hyperbolic gushing from Álvarez-Pallete, but you get the message: Telefónica to the rescue! He is entitled to crow a bit with such a substantial 5G build-out, but the proof of the putting will be in the speeds. It’s not difficult to provide a lot of coverage using small amounts of low frequency spectrum but, as we’ve seen in the US, if it’s not much faster than 4G then there’s not much point. <<(note that's the hype that I am speaking of).
Telefónica says it’s using 1800-2100 MHz and 3.5 GHz bands for its 5G coverage, neither of which qualify as low frequency, so that makes the coverage claim even more impressive. Whether or not the use of those bands will translate to good capacity and proper 5G speeds remains to be seen, but if it does then Álvarez-Pallete will be entitled to gloat some more."
Where exactly have I misstated the hype of 5G?
The low bands that are prevalent in rural / suburban areas are a little better than current 4G in performance. in the U.S., T-Mobile due of it's merger with Sprint, now owns a lot of the 2.5 Ghz spectrum, which would be fairly defined as midband.
Here's a link to T-Mobiles midband buildout to date:
https://www.lightreading.com/5g/t-mobile-is-dragging-its-feet-with-5g-buildout-tower-cos-warn/d/d-id/762865
"What's going on here?
If you listen to T-Mobile's executives, the company is moving heaven and Earth to upgrade its network to 5G following the close of its merger with Sprint.
"So far so good," said T-Mobile CTO Neville Ray in May, noting the operator has been hanging new 2.5GHz 5G radios on its existing cell towers at the rate of roughly 1,000 towers per month. "We are ramping up in this [pandemic] environment, not actually slowing down."
Overall, T-Mobile has committed to adding 15,000 new cell towers to its network in a 5G upgrade program totalling $60 billion over the next five years.
Regardless, the operator won't make it very far without the aid of companies like Crown Castle and American Towers. As Inside Towers notes, the two companies collectively own around 81,000 of the roughly 200,000 cell towers in the US. Any major network upgrade by T-Mobile would likely need to pass under their noses.
Not surprisingly, some Wall Street analysts are taking the situation seriously. "Crown Castle admitted New T-Mobile [the company that emerged from the combination of T-Mobile and Sprint] had only recently started its build activity, but remained hopeful it would continue ramping in 2H and reiterated its 2020 guide," wrote the Wall Street analysts with Wells Fargo in a note to investors this week. "We appreciate Crown Castle's optimism that New T-Mobile might ramp activity in 2H but are revising our estimates to the low end of its guide."
It's possible that T-Mobile's initial 5G upgrade work has focused on towers owned by other companies, but the situation is nonetheless perplexing given the extra year T-Mobile's 5G buildout plan received due to the opposition it faced over its Sprint merger. Indeed, at least one executive at the company privately hinted to Light Reading of a surprisingly chaotic merger process currently taking place between the two companies."
Show me that there isn't any hype wrt to the buildout; it's going slowly in mid band, and in your own previous arguments, mmwave has poor utility except with a massive density or radios for coverage. Adding a midband radios to only a thousand towers a month when there are 200,000 towers in the U.S, and more needed is absolute hype.
As for China, 5G buildout is easy for an Authoritarian government that has incorporated surveillance in all of its communication strategies, and controls the manufacturers of telecom and surveillance systems.
I tire of your constant support of China, given their military expansionism in the Indo-Pacific, a absolute National Security concern for all Westen Nations, and China's expansion of their minority "retraining" facilities into Tibet, which are prisons.
As for your comment on the iPhone and 5G, Apple isn't late to the party simply because they haven't lost sales to Android OEM's that delivered 5G earlier; it's just delayed sales until this fall.
I'll bet you still are waiting to purchase a 5G smartphone, which belies your argument that Apple is late to the party. People have no problem waiting to buy into 5G.
For most networks, latency is still in the range of 25-30 ms, not "a ms". That too is hype.
As is becoming patently clear, the US is looking to be a poor competitor in 5G. Not surprising really when, out of the three major 5G providers, it chose to eliminate the one that could offer massive improvements to US infrastructure. Then it appears that on top of that decision it does not really provide a competitive environment for its carriers to compete against each other. So let's forget the US. Then, at the opposite end of the same spectrum, we have China which is not only ramping up its rollout like there's no tomorrow but it is actually bringing mature services to market across all walks of life and exporting them.
Why not actually put that 'millisecond' line back into its correct context:
If you understand Spanish you will see that that line had zero to do with the actual technical specifications of any given use case. It was a very broad summary of 5G and what it offers and how Telefonica and Spanish digital infrastructure is leading the way in the EU with digital communications. You will also note how he says 'each and every person' will have access to 5G and practically in the same breath says the rollout will cover 75% percent of the population before Christmas! Reading that literally is taking it out of context.
The roll out of 5G in Spain is going to be incredibly fast, not only because of 4G backhaul in some cases but because Spain has the most extensive network of fibre in the EU. It won't happen with a flick of a switch. That was never ever the intention. It will still take years but it isn't 'hype'. Expect Spain to follow China's lead in making use of 5G services across the board, and especially in Smart Cities like Barcelona.
https://venturebeat.com/2020/08/10/u-s-will-reallocate-military-3-5ghz-spectrum-for-consumer-5g-in-2021/ ;
and
https://telecoms.com/504445/verizon-starts-toying-around-with-mid-band-spectrum/
In the U.S., most 5G buildout is just repurposed 4G, and that buildout isn't all that fast, and has noting to do with the telecom equipment provider (in the U.S., and many other countries, it won't be Huawei), but all about the task of upgrading radios, antennas, and backhaul, on and to the towers, all of that being non trivial. 5G mmwave is available, again only in selected urban areas.
But again, I feels safe in reiterating; if 5G is so great, why haven't you upgraded yet? Look at all the benefits you are missing out on, by your own arguments.
I'lll be purchasing the iPhone 12, after deciding to pass on the iPhone 11 (I really wanted the LIDAR) feature, with the result that I will choose the Pro Max model which will come with latest the generation 5G modem, the X60, which includes mmwave. Future proof.
I am on Sprint, which means T Mobile today, and there is only a single 5G tower in my town of 55,000, and it is adjacent to a freeway. It's most likely repurposed 4G.
I'm throwing this link in to give you a comparison of the land area of the U.S. vs Spain (the U.S. is 19 times larger, and larger than China), and given that the population of Spain is approximately 47 million, and the U.S. is 332 million, that's 1/7 the population of the U.S., so overall, Spain has a higher population density by a factor of 2.5.
https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/spain
Spain is 1.2 times the size of California, and also with about 1.2 times the population of California, with half the GDP.
I've seen videos of speed tests from here in Spain that see download 5G speeds 10 times the speed of 4G while standing in the same spot and yes, very probably coming from the same 'repurposed' tower!
Going off and mentioning size, GDP etc is not relevant. What is relevant is how countries plan and implement their roll outs. The US is behind China and not only with infrastructure but also with the services which run over it. That's why Trump has destroyed international relations because he can't allow China to take a technological lead 'on his watch' as he says. And not only him. Various high ranking officials have gone on record as saying that this cannot be allowed to happen. So what you are seeing is the US having to roll out 5G using equipment that most consider to be inferior to that of Huawei. Just accept that.
Here in Spain, Vodafone has a head start because it switched on its 5G network a year ago.
Also, in Spain (and some other countries), we have a central government map detailing every single cell tower in the country, who has equipment on it, what bands it covers and the energy ratings.
The only equipment on the tower that services my address is from Vodafone and Orange (4G only at present) but because of the setup here, Movistar has access to that equipment (along with the virtual carriers).
If we compare the move from 3G to 4G with the move from 4G to 5G, things are moving at light speed.
We'll see how long it takes for it to reach me but my next phone will definitely have 5G for street use. At home I'll have fibre.
If the towers are operating at the same frequency bands, but under 5G protocols, there are some efficiencies, but a user wouldn't see 10 time performance gains during peak hours. That's just physics.
Yes, towers can be upgraded to midband, and gain performance, and that's what Telefonica stated they were doing, but at what pace of buildout is that midband happening? that is what the link I posted questioned.
You seem unable to comprehend that most of the U.S. is rural, and of low population density, so in those areas, users will almost never see anything but low band, though at 5G, it will have a bit more range and efficiency. I assume Spain has areas that are also of low population density; maybe you live in one and don't yet have access to midband. If you purchased a 5G phone, you would see performance near what 4G already provides, an likely about 20% better.
T-Mobile Continues To Push Fake 4G Branding
T-Mobile Calls HSPA+ 4G, Introduces 'Largest 4G Network
T-Mobile ironically scorches AT&T for updating 4G phones with a fake 5G icon
Huawei's gear is ahead of the pack and by some margin.
Take a look at some of the specialist videos from the UK where they measure the performance of different equipment from different vendors on the same tower.
Yes, they are far more efficient too, in practically every sense which leads to savings right from the installation process. A lot of this equipment was designed not only to be efficient but also be light and compact enough to be installed by a single operator.
The speeds I mentioned were taken from a video on 5G in Spain. They are not ficticious. The '10 times faster' was direct from the video.
The 'repurposing' as you like to call it is not what you paint it to be. Basically 4G is being used to help out with the backhaul.
The real backhaul is the strength of the fibre network available to the operators and you shouldn't be surprised to hear that Huawei stands out there too.
Are you incapable of seeing the technological level of Huawei in this field?
And adhering to the same standard DOES NOT mean performance can't vary.
Take a look at Huawei's WiFi 6+ which, while being fully certified for WiFi 6, can achieve better performance when paired with other Wi-Fi 6+ devices. That's because they have leveraged their 5G tech to produce a better product.
Not dissimilar to how Huawei claimed its Wifi 5 was faster than Apple's Wi-Fi 6. Why? Because their homegrown Wi-Fi 5 chipset was the fastest in the industry at launch.
Apple screwed up strategically speaking with their 5G plans. The only way they could save the day was by jumping back into bed with QC and dropping the legal battle.
Time will tell us how dramatic that situation really was, but IMO it had the makings of a massive strategic error until they gained access to QC's latest modem tech.
As for your meme that Huawei is more performant than the competition, I don't see that at all, and Western Telecom Manufacturers actually have the bulk of useful IP. More to the point, why would the West allow Huawei to continue its mercantilists policies based on Government subsidies, and cheap loans, to create an unfair market advantage?
For the record, Germany and France are barely in the Huawei camp at all, and the UK is supporting a complete removal of Huawei by 2027, which kills any interest in installing Huawei 5G. One can imagine that Merkel's replacement could opt for a de facto Huawei ban by effect of security, or human rights concerns?
Oh for fuck's sake, and you follow up with this;
Do you still have a stick up your ass about something that was resolved over a year ago?
WTF?
Do you even understand how Apple's purchase of Intel's modem business that failed at 5G, and later, the situation where Apple had to deal with Qualcomm, has set up Apple for fully custom modem's, and what that brings to their entire product line integrated into Apple's SOC's?.
Do you really think that Apple, in the long run, is in an inferior position to Qualcomm or Huawei?
They are late to the party. They are not going to ship the modem they planned to. They have abandoned a multi billion patent gamble to have a solution 'now'. You should understand that going without 5G until they could brew their own modem, was never even a option. That would have been an even bigger error and was never going to happen.
'The bulk of useful IP' ? What?
Now you are trying with 'bulk' and 'Western' because you cannot bring yourself to admit that Huawei leads (and by a large margin! ) the core 5G patents.
https://telecoms.com/505169/huawei-leads-the-5g-patent-race/
These are patents that are largely due to their own R&D which you cannot admit to either because it destroys that tired 'Huawei steals' meme.
As for loans and the other claims, a while back I posted a simple video from Huawei itself debunking that claim and it was probably posted in response to another of your affirmations. Repeating yourself won't change the facts. Do you want me to repost that video?
from the comments of your link;
"If you removed all the 5G essential patents and only used in RAN networks then the chart will drop Huawei, Samsung, LG and Qualcomm. Ericsson does not manufacture consumer devices. You need another chart to show patent related to only running 5G radio base stations as well as 5G mobile operator’s Mobil Core."
...
"This article is rather misleading to your readers. Your article should actually break down the 5G patent tallies across the different 5G domains ( Core network , RAN, Transport, Terminals & Devices), that makes it more representative of the current vendor demographics."
...
"How China’s Mercantilist Policies Have Undermined Global Innovation in the Telecom Equipment Industry
An interesting read here to understand how the telco industry has been hurt and distorted for the pas decades
https://itif.org/publications/2020/06/22/how-chinas-mercantilist-policies-have-undermined-global-innovation-telecom
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Oh, and Apple isn't late to the party; they haven't lost any sales, but have only seen sales delayed, but you certainly come across as a fucking hypocrite for still not owning a 5G smartphone that you claim is unparalleled in its abilities.
The piece is literally full of pot holes.
So, he is promoting that the rest of the world stop purchasing Chinese technology (his bias is clear, btw) and at the same time admitting that current dominance by the Chinese was brought about by Western ICT companies admitting that they couldn't NOT do business with China!
He deliberately ignores how the US raped and pillaged the 'IP' landscape to even have a chance to become what it is now (or was, because a lot of his thinking is squarely anchored in a period of over 20 years ago.
He tip toes through the minefield which is the Trump administration today and policy making (largely doing - now - what the Chinese have done before) and can't get away from the fact that Huawei is NOT China!
He has the nerve to say that China restricting access to its ICT market (the biggest on the planet) is basically evil while ignoring the fact that the US hasn't 'restricted' access to its (also huge) market by Chinese ICT firms but outright banned them!
5G is not 3G! Huawei is where it is through very good management and R&D.
And let's not forget (something that I think he fluffs over too - I got tired of reading the bias) that there was a time - not long ago - when ALL governments were protectionist. Those nationalised industries had direct 100% state backing and many examples still exist all over the place.
The man set out to paint a picture and did it. More interesting is what he didn't say or simply skimped over.
Anyway, once again take the debate into the purely political sphere.
And on patents you pick this from the article:
"if you removed all the essential 5G patents..."
What? That was the whole point of posting the link! Yes, the 'essential' patents!
And yes. IMO Apple committed some strategic errors with 5G. And I've stated why.