Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. 5G - is it worth the premium?

5G - is it worth the premium?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
22 Posts 10 Posters 249 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • AxtremusA Axtremus

    If you still live in a big city, you will be more likely to be able to benefit from real 5G speeds sooner (e.g., Verizon already has mmWave 5G infrastructure in Chicago). But the further away you are from big cities, the longer you will have to wait to get real 5G service. It will take a while for true 5G to reach most of the nation.

    AT&T's "5GE" is merely a marketing label for a revision of 4G/LTE that Verizon and T-Mobile also have. T-Mobile's advertising claim about its 5G signals going miles and miles is also misleading in that by the time the signals go the distance you can no longer sustain the higher 5G speeds and have to tall back to 4G/LTE speeds anyway. Verizon's mmWave 5G will use very high frequencies that require different antenna module/design, and it will also be rather limited in range; but when it works, the speed will be very fast. I suspect it's this mmWave stuff that's requiring extra/different hardware that add substantial costs to the baseline iPhone.

    KlausK Offline
    KlausK Offline
    Klaus
    wrote on last edited by
    #13

    @Axtremus any improvements in latency with 5G?

    I also wonder whether the extremely short wave lengths (millimeters) enable new forms of antennas. I imagine that highly directional antennas, together with a rotation mechanism for the antenna, might be possible within a cell phone body. That could in part offset the shorter ranges of mm waves.

    AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
    • KlausK Klaus

      @Axtremus any improvements in latency with 5G?

      I also wonder whether the extremely short wave lengths (millimeters) enable new forms of antennas. I imagine that highly directional antennas, together with a rotation mechanism for the antenna, might be possible within a cell phone body. That could in part offset the shorter ranges of mm waves.

      AxtremusA Offline
      AxtremusA Offline
      Axtremus
      wrote on last edited by
      #14

      @Klaus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

      @Axtremus any improvements in latency with 5G?

      I also wonder whether the extremely short wave lengths (millimeters) enable new forms of antennas. I imagine that highly directional antennas, together with a rotation mechanism for the antenna, might be possible within a cell phone body. That could in part offset the shorter ranges of mm waves.

      Generally (at least in theory), there can be one order of magnitude's reduction in latency going from 4G to 5G air interface. In practice, apart from air interface technology, there are a lot in the wired parts of the overall network that contribute to latency. So how the service provider architect the overall network will significantly impact the latency actually experienced by the end users.

      As a matter of design, antenna dimension is always influenced by wavelengths. So yes, the significantly shorter wavelengths will allow designs that would not have been as effective for the longer wavelengths. Directional antenna is also a useful concept. Though I don't think mechanically rotated antennae will be in the cards inside consumer cellphones. Most likely it will be limited to DSP shaped "rotation" a la "beam forming" rather than mechanical rotation of the physical antennae.

      KlausK 1 Reply Last reply
      • CopperC Offline
        CopperC Offline
        Copper
        wrote on last edited by
        #15

        With democrats in power, the number of people spying on your phone will grow.

        You’ll need the bandwidth.

        1 Reply Last reply
        • AxtremusA Axtremus

          @Klaus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

          @Axtremus any improvements in latency with 5G?

          I also wonder whether the extremely short wave lengths (millimeters) enable new forms of antennas. I imagine that highly directional antennas, together with a rotation mechanism for the antenna, might be possible within a cell phone body. That could in part offset the shorter ranges of mm waves.

          Generally (at least in theory), there can be one order of magnitude's reduction in latency going from 4G to 5G air interface. In practice, apart from air interface technology, there are a lot in the wired parts of the overall network that contribute to latency. So how the service provider architect the overall network will significantly impact the latency actually experienced by the end users.

          As a matter of design, antenna dimension is always influenced by wavelengths. So yes, the significantly shorter wavelengths will allow designs that would not have been as effective for the longer wavelengths. Directional antenna is also a useful concept. Though I don't think mechanically rotated antennae will be in the cards inside consumer cellphones. Most likely it will be limited to DSP shaped "rotation" a la "beam forming" rather than mechanical rotation of the physical antennae.

          KlausK Offline
          KlausK Offline
          Klaus
          wrote on last edited by
          #16

          @Axtremus thanks. I know a little about radio waves (former ham radio operator). Wouldn't even the smallest barriers, such as walls, block mm waves?

          If phones could hook into external antennas, it would be cool to consider long wave communication, too. It would be nice if a cell phone would still work inside a submarine underwater.

          1 Reply Last reply
          • AxtremusA Offline
            AxtremusA Offline
            Axtremus
            wrote on last edited by
            #17

            Yes, shorter waves are more easily blocked, then you have to resort to reflections, which adds distance (further path loss) and multi path complications. Many transmittal disadvantages to short waves. The advantage is that there is typically more bandwidth with short waves.

            Suppose you say let’s cap the frequencies you use to below the 1 MHz, then the bandwidth you get to exploit will also be no more than 1 MHz.

            Take Wi-Fi, for example, in the 2.4GHz band, Wi-Fi is allowed to take advantage of up to 40 MHz bandwidth for a channel. At the 5GHz band, Wi-Fi is allowed to use up to 160MHz for a channel — all without crowding out TV/radio broadcasting or cellular communications.

            Cellular 5G’s mmWave specifications go beyond 6GHz, more room to play with wider channels to allow higher bandwidth. The trade offs are shorter distance and weaker penetration. Wi-Fi’s 802.11ax extends also to 6GHz and faces similar tradeoffs as a matter of physics. 802.11ad/ay pushes Wi-Fi into the 60GHz territory with 2GHz channel bandwidth. The speed vs. range tradeoffs there will be even more acute.

            George KG KlausK 2 Replies Last reply
            • AxtremusA Axtremus

              Yes, shorter waves are more easily blocked, then you have to resort to reflections, which adds distance (further path loss) and multi path complications. Many transmittal disadvantages to short waves. The advantage is that there is typically more bandwidth with short waves.

              Suppose you say let’s cap the frequencies you use to below the 1 MHz, then the bandwidth you get to exploit will also be no more than 1 MHz.

              Take Wi-Fi, for example, in the 2.4GHz band, Wi-Fi is allowed to take advantage of up to 40 MHz bandwidth for a channel. At the 5GHz band, Wi-Fi is allowed to use up to 160MHz for a channel — all without crowding out TV/radio broadcasting or cellular communications.

              Cellular 5G’s mmWave specifications go beyond 6GHz, more room to play with wider channels to allow higher bandwidth. The trade offs are shorter distance and weaker penetration. Wi-Fi’s 802.11ax extends also to 6GHz and faces similar tradeoffs as a matter of physics. 802.11ad/ay pushes Wi-Fi into the 60GHz territory with 2GHz channel bandwidth. The speed vs. range tradeoffs there will be even more acute.

              George KG Offline
              George KG Offline
              George K
              wrote on last edited by
              #18

              @Axtremus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

              Wi-Fi’s 802.11ax

              You just made that up, didn't you?

              "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

              The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

              AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
              • AxtremusA Axtremus

                Yes, shorter waves are more easily blocked, then you have to resort to reflections, which adds distance (further path loss) and multi path complications. Many transmittal disadvantages to short waves. The advantage is that there is typically more bandwidth with short waves.

                Suppose you say let’s cap the frequencies you use to below the 1 MHz, then the bandwidth you get to exploit will also be no more than 1 MHz.

                Take Wi-Fi, for example, in the 2.4GHz band, Wi-Fi is allowed to take advantage of up to 40 MHz bandwidth for a channel. At the 5GHz band, Wi-Fi is allowed to use up to 160MHz for a channel — all without crowding out TV/radio broadcasting or cellular communications.

                Cellular 5G’s mmWave specifications go beyond 6GHz, more room to play with wider channels to allow higher bandwidth. The trade offs are shorter distance and weaker penetration. Wi-Fi’s 802.11ax extends also to 6GHz and faces similar tradeoffs as a matter of physics. 802.11ad/ay pushes Wi-Fi into the 60GHz territory with 2GHz channel bandwidth. The speed vs. range tradeoffs there will be even more acute.

                KlausK Offline
                KlausK Offline
                Klaus
                wrote on last edited by
                #19

                @Axtremus any chance we'll see subspace communication anytime soon?

                AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
                • George KG George K

                  @Axtremus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                  Wi-Fi’s 802.11ax

                  You just made that up, didn't you?

                  AxtremusA Offline
                  AxtremusA Offline
                  Axtremus
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #20

                  @George-K said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                  @Axtremus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                  Wi-Fi’s 802.11ax

                  You just made that up, didn't you?

                  Marketed as “Wi-Fi 6”, 802.11ax is already present in the latest iPad Pro, and you can buy “W-Fi 6” routers from the typical consumer electronics outlets today. Your new iPhone and future new Macs will have it too. There is no escaping it, 802.11ax will take over the world.

                  MikM 1 Reply Last reply
                  • KlausK Klaus

                    @Axtremus any chance we'll see subspace communication anytime soon?

                    AxtremusA Offline
                    AxtremusA Offline
                    Axtremus
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #21

                    @Klaus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                    @Axtremus any chance we'll see subspace communication anytime soon?

                    The pointy eared bastards have it since 1957 but won’t share with us. It will be 2151 before we figure it out ourselves.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • AxtremusA Axtremus

                      @George-K said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                      @Axtremus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                      Wi-Fi’s 802.11ax

                      You just made that up, didn't you?

                      Marketed as “Wi-Fi 6”, 802.11ax is already present in the latest iPad Pro, and you can buy “W-Fi 6” routers from the typical consumer electronics outlets today. Your new iPhone and future new Macs will have it too. There is no escaping it, 802.11ax will take over the world.

                      MikM Away
                      MikM Away
                      Mik
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #22

                      @Axtremus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                      @George-K said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                      @Axtremus said in 5G - is it worth the premium?:

                      Wi-Fi’s 802.11ax

                      You just made that up, didn't you?

                      Marketed as “Wi-Fi 6”, 802.11ax is already present in the latest iPad Pro, and you can buy “W-Fi 6” routers from the typical consumer electronics outlets today. Your new iPhone and future new Macs will have it too. There is no escaping it, 802.11ax will take over the world.

                      😆

                      “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Don't have an account? Register

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users
                      • Groups