Slashdot Mirror


Samsung Testing 5G Phones With 1gbps Download Speed

Gumbercules!! writes "While many smartphone users are still on 3G and are waiting for 4G to be available, Samsung is now testing 5G networks, capable of getting speeds up to 1gbps. Obviously, we're years away from seeing these in the wild (the company is shooting for 2020) but it's still an amazing improvement over what many people are experiencing now."

128 comments

  1. Spectrum? by thatkid_2002 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wouldn't a small amount of these phones flood a wireless spectrum? It would not take many people in an area until the speed is chopped down significantly.

    Or do they have poor range and expect femtocells everywhere? But why not just WiFi at that point?

    1. Re:Spectrum? by ls671 · · Score: 1

      I do not know what is the limit of the "wireless spectrum" if there is any. Before this limit is reached, I guess just updating all hardware gears that transmit/route more efficiently is all that is needed.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    2. Re:Spectrum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have lots of towers and can keep power low then you can have lots of users locally using up tons of bandwidth that don't interfere with each other.

    3. Re:Spectrum? by rossdee · · Score: 5, Informative

      "I do not know what is the limit of the "wireless spectrum" if there is any"

      There is legal limits (controlled by the FCC)

      There is technology limits

      The atmospere absorbs some frequencies

      There are practical limits - sure you can theoretically get lots of bandwidth in the X-Ray and gamma ray end of the spectrum, but do you really want one of those next to your ear?

    4. Re:Spectrum? by tyrione · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't a small amount of these phones flood a wireless spectrum? It would not take many people in an area until the speed is chopped down significantly.

      Or do they have poor range and expect femtocells everywhere? But why not just WiFi at that point?

      What do you think? They sure as hell expect the Telcos to pony up the spectrum mesh and not themselves. Testing at an R&D facility is fine, but to start spreading 5G around is ludicrous and a bad business strategy.

    5. Re:Spectrum? by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      There are other things we can do. For example, transmit in quadnary instead of binary (4 possible values per timeslice, instead of 2. Basically doubles your bandwidth). Remember that frequency is only one of the factors in bandwidth. There will be technical limits on that too (requires new hardware, increased problems from noise) but I think there's a lot of room there that we haven't been forced to try yet.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    6. Re:Spectrum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      4G already supports 64QAM (6 bits per timeslice)
      Going up to 256QAM will only give you a 33% increase of bitrate and make it a lot more sensitive to noise.
      1024QAM and 4096QAM is as far as I know only used in cable bound communication where signal to noise ratio can be kept to a minimum.

    7. Re:Spectrum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Later generations are designed to be scaled after population density.
      In high density areas you use a lot of small low power cells. In rural areas you increase the power and use less cells.
      Ideally you should keep the number of people per cell as constant as possible.

    8. Re:Spectrum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I have seen what people here says is that if something emits energy at a lower frequency and less power than things around you that you don't have a problem with then it is pretty likely that your problem with that device is psychological rather than medical.

    9. Re:Spectrum? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Don't know they are not doing this already too but seems you could go asymmetric. The handsets could send to the tower with 64QAM and the tower could use more radiated power to send 256QAM back to the handset.

      Phones are no longer symmetric data entities it probably is the case most smart phone users pull down much more than they send now. Of course you can crank the radiated power from the towers up to much or you are just going to start competing with the neighboring cells more. So I don't know how big the gains would be.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    10. Re:Spectrum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they have a range of 300 meters and require a constant connection of the "power cord".

    11. Re:Spectrum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Asymmetry is also already implemented.
      My point was that you have a law of diminishing returns here. Increasing from 1bit to a 2, 3 or 4-bit encoding is nice and gives you a significant increase in throughput. From 64QAM and up your increased packet loss will probably offset the increased bitrate.
      The step from 128QAM to 256QAM increases the bitrate with less than 15% and makes the signal a lot more sensitive to noise. (Introduces more packet loss.)

    12. Re:Spectrum? by WhiteDragon · · Score: 5, Informative

      I do not know what is the limit of the "wireless spectrum" if there is any. Before this limit is reached, I guess just updating all hardware gears that transmit/route more efficiently is all that is needed.

      The limit is given precisely by Shannon's Law, which gives a mathematical limit on the amount of data that can be sent over a given amount of bandwidth. Spectral Efficiency is the amount of bandwidth available in a given wireless spectrum.

      --
      Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
    13. Re:Spectrum? by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nah, because everyone will reach their data caps in about 80 seconds. There will be plenty of bandwidth for the rest of the month.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    14. Re:Spectrum? by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      Don't know they are not doing this already too but seems you could go asymmetric. The handsets could send to the tower with 64QAM and the tower could use more radiated power to send 256QAM back to the handset.

      Phones are no longer symmetric data entities it probably is the case most smart phone users pull down much more than they send now. Of course you can crank the radiated power from the towers up to much or you are just going to start competing with the neighboring cells more. So I don't know how big the gains would be.

      Yes you can do some of that but even broadcasting from a tower at higher power levels will not fix issues. Multipath it one issue that will not go away with more power, if you are standing next to a metal building your phone will get two signals the direct one and the signal that bounces off the metal wall at 256QAM the modulation could easily get washed out by the reflected signal. A SNR of 30dB is needed for 256QAM there are many areas that fall short of that requirement.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    15. Re:Spectrum? by hierophanta · · Score: 2

      there are also biological limits - we dont wanna microwave ourselves whilst using a phone

    16. Re:Spectrum? by hierophanta · · Score: 1

      binary is preferable because of error correction. anything higher is significantly more susceptible to lost packets (exponentially by number of possible states).

      (and anything lower is error proof)

    17. Re:Spectrum? by hierophanta · · Score: 1

      OP was talking about characteristics of a bit vs. an advanced modulation scheme

    18. Re:Spectrum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends if the "things around you" are right next to your head. Power is inversely proportional to the square of the distance so the 2W phone is microwaving your brains much more than the 100W cell tower a half mile away.

    19. Re:Spectrum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.ieee802.org/3/bn/public/oct12/dai_01b_1012.pdf

      DOCSIS3.0 can pull off QAM256 with only 19.97SNR because of CDMA.

    20. Re:Spectrum? by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Y E A H.....we have shitty data plans and phones that can consume 12 movies at once. We are in a bandwidth hole.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    21. Re:Spectrum? by RulerOf · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the most sensible approach be to carve out the physical area the spectrum occupies into different three-dimensional "slices" then?

      Consider a more focused triangulation of the individual handsets, to the point where you can get within a meter or so of accuracy. Use low bandwidth, non-hogging links to determine a phone's location, and then migrate the data channel to a number of dedicated antennas that are dynamically aimed at a handset. Boost the power and constrain the FoV to what's appropriate for a device at a given distance, and hand off between focusable antennas on the same tower as the target moves.

      Literally just shoot people with high-bandwidth spectrum they can have all to themselves.

      --
      Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
  2. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  3. Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Just what do you need 1gps on your phone for?

    1. Re:Point? by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2

      You're assuming that the only use is on phones.. Tablets and computers are edging into the spectrum that was normally used for just cell phones.

      You ask "Just what do you need 1gps on your phone for?"

      Let the developers have a field day... if you build it, they'll find a use for it

    2. Re:Point? by AHuxley · · Score: 0

      A nice interactive chart at http://howfastisthenbn.com.au/
      You can click on the examples to show what a faster download internet would feel like with a ~5g device connected.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re: Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the point is to make bandwidth cheap. Unfortunately they probably won't pass on much of the savings to us... you know because of the capitalist agenda and all.

    4. Re:Point? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2

      As a 4g hotspot user let me tell you that even now the limiting factor for me is only the allowed bandwidth on my plan (12GB per month). The 4G speed is plenty fast to do pretty much all the work I need and will even run games if they aren't absolutely latency dependent (basically anything but FPS). Even with four or five devices connected 4G is fast enough for most business uses and I would say for most people's internet use. In fact oftentimes the limits on the download speed is the server on the other side.

      I have the hotspot to connect my WiFi tablet and laptop when I'm out on the road or in meetings, especially meetings where the client has a secured wifi and either doesn't know the password or can't grant guest access, etc..

      I mean hell, we have a 100MB/s line into our office and we are only tapping a fraction of that on a daily basis.

      So 1Gb/s sounds cool, but device and access speed now isn't my problem. Bandwidth cap is the problem.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    5. Re:Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that we pay all those extra fees and absurd amounts for texting/data plans to the cell phone giants. I can't be the only one wondering, at least in the US, if I'm paying so much for standard internet (DSL, cable, etc...), why the hell aren't they doing anything to upgrade the technology and catch us up to the EU?

    6. Re:Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just what do you need 1gps on your phone for?

      Porn.

  4. Actually 4G According to ITU-R by mentil · · Score: 4, Informative

    The technical definition of 4G requires 1Gbps stationary and 100Mbps while moving. The network tech mentioned in the article is thus 4G.
    Notice that current '4G' technologies are usually called '4G LTE' in advertisements, to try to get around the established non-marketing definition.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:Actually 4G According to ITU-R by Cenan · · Score: 1

      Definitions of technical terms never stopped marketing from mangling them. Nobody in that office gives a shit what 4G means, as long as they can sell it. 4G LTE just might sound better in a commercial than 4G. More three letter acronyms just communicates "we're smart; we know our shit; trust us".

      --
      ... whatever ...
  5. I've had 4G (50/5) since 2009. People still wait? by acidfast7 · · Score: 0

    was is this?

  6. I will ask the question everyones really pondering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I guess I will ask the question every ones really about....
    So how is this going to help with the progress of boner pill technology or say make my iPad faster?

  7. The catch is... by toejam13 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The second article notes that the 5G tests are being conducted on the 28GHz Ka microwave band. They also note that they're using a 64 element antenna array.

    While those upper microwave bands are great in that you can get very wide channels (possibly hundreds of megahertz wide), their downfall is that they are incredibly line of sight restricted. This is compounded by significant atmospheric absorption. That's why many broadcasters on the band tend to use highly directional antennas. For omnidirectional use, you're going to have to deploy a lot of picocells.

    Also for their tests, are they using the large number of antennas for MIMO beamforming (additive RF amplification), MIMO spacial multiplexing (parallel RF feeds slightly out of phase of each other) or old fashioned directional transmission (or a combi of all three?). How much additional cost is that? Even with fractal antennas on short wavelengths, how many of them can you fit in a handset?

    1. Re:The catch is... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      So when a police uses his radar gun in a speed trap, everyone loses data signal because they operate in the same frequency.

      Win / Win!

      (Yes, I know that the Ka band is like 15Ghz wide, and that phones could work around existing devices)

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:The catch is... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Even with fractal antennas on short wavelengths, how many of them can you fit in a handset?

      You tell me, but before you do put yourself in the shoes you wore back in the 80s. Back before chip antennas were widely used, back when antennas were long whips. Then take a brief look at where we are now with the average smart phone having multiple antennas on multiple frequencies for multiple purposes in a device that is no more than a few mm thick.

      I'm not going to pretend to be able to predict what technology will look like in 8 years.

    3. Re:The catch is... by chihowa · · Score: 1

      (Yes, I know that the Ka band is like 15Ghz wide, and that phones could work around existing devices)

      Maybe not, though. Non-communication gear in bands that are mostly empty tend to shit all over their band. Especially old police kit that you just know is well maintained and calibrated.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    4. Re:The catch is... by Entropius · · Score: 1

      I'd be okay with that so long as motorists are allowed to, in turn, shit all over the bands used by radar guns.

    5. Re:The catch is... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      A phone with a battery will never put out the amplitude that a radar gun wired into the car's electrical can put out. The radar gun would win that one every time.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    6. Re:The catch is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He never said anything about using a phone to "shit all over the bands used by radar guns", he could be talking about some other hypothetical device.

  8. Thinking of Australia in 2020 by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    With 5g we can use 500mb of months data in a few days as we wait for our 25mb copper line to be fixed.
    Just think of the speed over a few days.... and the per mb fines if you go over :)

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:Thinking of Australia in 2020 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      With 5g we can use 500mb of months data in a few days as we wait for our 25mb copper line to be fixed.

      Just think of the speed over a few days.... and the per mb fines if you go over :)

      Its Not too late !
      A Vote for Labor ahead of the Conservatives (Coalition) is the only way to guarentee this future will not happen.
      The sad thing is the biased conservatve private media have the fuckwitt vote pretty much stiched up.

    2. Re:Thinking of Australia in 2020 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A vote for labor is the only sure way Australia has NO FUTURE. The coalitions NBN plan sucks, but better a shitty internet they an entire basketcase where no one can even afford internet.

    3. Re:Thinking of Australia in 2020 by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      If you are only looking at using 500mb over a few days then you are hardly going to notice any difference from 25mb connection. that is literally only 3 mins or so of use at 25mbps.

    4. Re:Thinking of Australia in 2020 by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      More a comment on been 2020 and the same monthly data plans ;)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:Thinking of Australia in 2020 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rubbish! they won't be the same monthly data plans! the NBN plans are MUCH more expensive!

  9. What is this 5G thing? by ras · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Must we really publish brain farts from a fanboi on slashdot's front page? This "news item" is completely substance free. No description of technology, no links, no science, no official announcement from someone you might believe. It uses terms that don't exist - there is no 5G - or at least the mob responsible for naming GSM, 3G, 4G, LTE, LTE Advanced doesn't have one yet. And there is nothing particularly special about 1Gbps download speed. LTE Advanced already does that if is has around 67MHz of bandwidth available, and you are the only one using the cell.

    So let me see, what is there that could justify its position on the front page? Oh I see now - a baseless jibe at a Apple. That's OK then.

    1. Re:What is this 5G thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the proper term is "Slashvertisement".

    2. Re:What is this 5G thing? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      They also mention a 10G upload from a mobile device by NTT DoCoMo. So he's not just talking about 1 Gbps down, but a different test that did 10 Gbps up.

      Is 10 Gbps up interesting enough for you?

    3. Re:What is this 5G thing? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Okay, I'll try to bring it back on topic for you. Samsung are presumably developing this tech so that they can patent it and then charge other companies license fees. It will all be under FRAND rules, but we have seen an unwillingness from some companies to pay the typical percentages required. Most cross-licence but some don't have anything to cross-license with.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:What is this 5G thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it has to do with the deterioration with what or who qualifies as nerd. Back in the days you were a nerd, when you had a used PDP 11 and programmed it in assembler. In the nineties, one qualified as nerd with a few lines of bash on linux. Post 2k, having played through zelda on a game boy scored you the geek card. Today, everyone sympathizing a little with Sheldon of Big Bang Theory thinks he's a nerd without realizing he's probably just a little gay/bi

      Slashdot appears to be catering to the ever-broadening definition of nerd.

    5. Re:What is this 5G thing? by timbo234 · · Score: 1

      LTE Advanced already does that if is has around 67MHz of bandwidth available, and you are the only one using the cell.

      This. Correct me if I'm wrong here but I thought the quoted maximum speeds for mobile networks are always *per-tower* not *per-user*, so you could only ever get those speeds in the real world if a virus wipes out 95+% of the local population in your area, leaving you the only one using the tower.

      --
      Pre-canned Evolution Links for all those Slashdot holy wars.
    6. Re:What is this 5G thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even then. If 95% of users died the tower would become unprofitable and would be shut down.

      So you will never, under any circumstances see anything close to the per-tower numbers.
      However, an improvement in the per-tower number may result in an improvement in the per-user number, so it's still progress.
      But using the per-tower number in your slashvertisement is still pretty much fraud.

    7. Re:What is this 5G thing? by tlambert · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Samsung testing was in the LMDS frequency band, which the FCC has auctioned off already in the US to cable providers:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Multipoint_Distribution_Service

      The FCC has already licensed this band for satellite downlink:

      http://spectrumwiki.com/wiki/display.aspx?From=disp&f=28499999999

      Which means it can't be used for 5G in the US like they are doing with NTT DoCoMo in the Samsung experiments.

    8. Re: What is this 5G thing? by PixetaledPikachu · · Score: 1

      Only if I'm allowed to host web and counter strike servers from my phone

    9. Re:What is this 5G thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct. LTE-Advanced requires 100Mbit to the sole Mobile user of a _sector_ on the tower, and 1Gbit to a sole Stationary user of a sector on the tower.

      Of course, there is no LTE-Advanced in the US, just LTE, which is quite a bit slower.

    10. Re:What is this 5G thing? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      LTE Advanced already does that if is has around 67MHz of bandwidth available, and you are the only one using the cell.

      Don't forget "and the cell mast has the backhaul to actually support 1Gbps."

      My guess is that the majority of LTE towers deployed (at least in North America) have multi linked 100Mbps metro ethernet as the backhaul, because the telcos are incapable of seeing past a horizon of about 6 months.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    11. Re:What is this 5G thing? by Entropius · · Score: 1

      No, because I don't foresee the ability to generate data that fast. What am I going to do, upload uncompressed 4K video signals in realtime, taken with a lens the size of a pinhead?

      What I'd rather have is stability. I would be far happier with 256kbps with low, stable pings (and no packet loss) than 8Mbps that sometimes works and constantly dropped and unintelligible calls.

  10. Re:I've had 4G (50/5) since 2009. People still wai by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    was is this?

    what you have is faster 3g.

    sure, the marketer might have called it 4g though. blame him. and if he had his way, we would be at 8g.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  11. Re:I've had 4G (50/5) since 2009. People still wai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "4G" since 2009? Or "4G LTE?"

  12. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by ls671 · · Score: 5, Funny

    From TFS: "capable of getting speeds up to 1gbps"

    That's 0.125 GBps so 8 seconds for a GB. You need at least 80 seconds to hit your 10GB cap which is more than one minute. This sounds much fairer now.

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  13. Vaporware much?? by kiwirob · · Score: 1

    These Samsung guys are the new Microsoft with all the hype about non existing products. Can't they just tell us when they have a product for sale? I want to know what I can buy today, not what I might or might not be able to buy in 7 years time!

    1. Re:Vaporware much?? by KingMotley · · Score: 4, Informative

      Then perhaps you should stop reading slashdot, and instead go to amazon.com and newegg.com?

  14. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Xicor · · Score: 1

    lol, when 5g comes out... it will be almost guaranteed that the dumb wireless companies will realize the error of their ways and start offering unlimited data again.(im still grandfathered on my at&t phone)

  15. AT&T Soon To Announce Launch of 1GBPS Network by MrEdofCourse · · Score: 3, Funny

    In similar news, AT&T is expected to soon launch it's 5G 1Gbps network nationwide with speeds expected to reach *up to* 10Mbps. Rollout is expected to begin as soon as 5G/1GBps icons and logos are complete.

  16. Utter nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a marketing ploy - like so many technologies - to convince people to buy the "next best thing."

    3g speeds are crap.
    4g speeds will be crap.
    5g speeds will be crap.

    idiots who believe they'll see anything NEAR the speeds being gushed about deserve to be milked.

    1. Re:Utter nonsense by thephydes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Quite. To quote Monty Python ( and show my age) " ...... as long as you realise that "up to" clearly includes the number zero"

  17. Re:I will ask the question everyones really ponder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What's an iPad?

    I've heard people mention it. Is it some kind of antique Android tablet for old people and Americans?

  18. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by KingMotley · · Score: 1

    I am still grandfathered on my AT&T phone, but I can hit 5GB in a day, then the rest of the month I'm throttled down to less than edge speed.

  19. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Nobody likes a smart ass. Now go to your room. God help me if I hear you using your abacus.

  20. Ya well the ITU is a little silly with this by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The standard set for 4G was way too high. It isn't like you can just say "We want something to work at this speed!" It is complex, and it is getting harder with wireless because you are working in an environment where you only have so much frequency and shitty SNR. You can't just throw more spectrum at the problem generally.

    The thing is 4G, as it is marketed today, or 3GPP LTE as the ITU would like it is a big step up. If you've played with it on a network that implements it well, it is major. I was amazed at how much faster things were when Verizon turned it on in my area (I already had a phone that was ready for it). It is a generational kind of upgrade, not an incremental one, to consumers. So it makes sense to call it something they understand.

    Remember labeling isn't all just "marketing" it is also about having shit people can understand. The concept of a wireless "generation" got introduced with 3G phones and people understood it pretty well: 3G phones were a lot faster than their old phones that they now knew were 2G. Makes sense. So it also follows that 4G phones will be faster still.

    I really don't like it when new standards get set arbitrarily high and then there's a hissing match over naming and so on. Part of naming should be something to keep it clear to consumers. Don't ask them to go do a ton of research and understand arcane acronyms and so on.

    I think it is reasonable to say "Every time we have a big increase in speed due to a change in technology for mobile phones, we'll call it a 'G' increase." LTE really is a new generation of phones. It is much faster, requires new consumer equipment, requires new tower equipment, etc. That it wasn't as fast as the ITU hoped is kinda silly.

    1. Re:Ya well the ITU is a little silly with this by Almir43 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's funny you should say that, since the entire point of LTE is that it is a Long-Term Evolution platform. It isn't that the "standard was set too high" - it's more that the standard was designed to support high speeds so the wheel would not have to be re-invented as technology progressed.

      You can either create a new set of supporting standards and technologies every few years, or you can develop a set of standards that scales up as hardware allows better speeds. So it's only if one entirely misunderstands the purpose of LTE, that the standard would appear to be set too high. The gradual progression that Samsung demonstrates in the article is what LTE-Advanced was all about and is still firmly in 4G territory. 5G is just horrible marketing.

    2. Re:Ya well the ITU is a little silly with this by thegarbz · · Score: 0

      The gradual progression that Samsung demonstrates in the article is what LTE-Advanced was all about and is still firmly in 4G territory. 5G is just horrible marketing.

      Actually 5G is simply marketing. Nothing horrible about it. People in general don't understand LTE, LTE Advanced, HDSPA and crap like that. They understand simple numbers and always have. The problem is that the standards system mixes simple numbers with complex acronyms. EDGE, 3G, HSDPA, LTE, 4G doesn't sound anywhere near as simple as 2G, 3G, 3.5G, 4G, and 5G that people can simply understand. Try it. Go to some random person in the street and just shout in his face "Quick what's faster HSDPA or LTE?" If you're lucky they'll think you're a crazed system admin, if you're unlucky they'll shoot in self defence.

      The standards should be set in a way that either makes sense to begin with or has nothing to do with a numbering scheme which has goal posts set so far apart that carriers need to make shit up just so their customers can understand.

    3. Re:Ya well the ITU is a little silly with this by Almir43 · · Score: 1

      Sure and that`s a fair observation, but they could have gone for 4.5 G or such (in a similar fashion as when 3.5 G was used). That way they would have still remained technically correct as well, while being able to communicate a significant technology jump to customers.

  21. Battery backup. by cute_orc · · Score: 1

    With 2 hours of stunning battery backup!

  22. 28GHz... thats WiMAX... how about 1.05 Petabit/s by johnjones · · Score: 1

    its 2 Kilometres distance so its a repackaging of WiMAX... and we all know how well that turned out...

    now personally I prefer the 1.05 Petabit/s that fibre will provide... though thats in development oh wait thats what this wireless speed is in "development"

    cheers

    John

  23. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by ls671 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I use a Yupana, it does calculations with the help of Fibonacci numbers and it doesn't make any noise.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abacus#Native_American

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yupana

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  24. What's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the point of 5G?

    My current 3G already gives me 42Mbps - until I hit the cap. Then I get stuck with "fair use" speeds for the rest of the month.

    When I look for my next mobile internet provider, the "top speed" isn't of any interest to me. All I care about is the speed that I get unlimited access at, once my top speed allowance has been used up, and the price.

    Without my provider investing heavily in backbone infrastructure, they could offer me 100G internet and it wouldn't make any difference. As far as real-life usage patterns go, (X)G is just a silly buzzword designed to sell electronics and expensive limited data packages that I don't want or need.

  25. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

    Interesting, What kind of third world country do you live in that has a Data Cap? Don't you have companies (Here (Ireland) we have Three (that's the company name)) that offer unlimited data?

  26. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by WizardFusion · · Score: 1

    Yes, I am on Three, also with unlimited data. Their support page tells you about it.

  27. Re:28GHz... thats WiMAX... how about 1.05 Petabit/ by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

    Silly human. When your mind is the Internet, you don't have to worry about bandwidth anymore. This message was brought to you at the cost of only a few Yottobits of autonomous SPAM relays.

    Personally I prefer the unlimited bandwidth quantum computing provides -- when you make each atom in the universe part of the calculation. What's this "technology" of yours that is "in development"?

  28. Re:I've had 4G (50/5) since 2009. People still wai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    was is this?

    No you didn't. 4G is a technology, not only a speed. I too had high-speed 3G+, which some "clever" marketeers (including Apple) started claiming to be 4G. It's like saying you have Firewire because you have a faster USB..

  29. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    unlimited? not a chance in hell.

    but they will sell larger packages...

    now: $25 for 2gb, $50 for 5gb (approx/typical)

    soon: $100 for 10gb, $200 for 25gb, $500 for 100gb -- per month, no rollover.. and of course, 24 month contract required with penalty for downgrading data package during the contract term.

    and dont forget that the fastest speeds will only be available in the largest, most densely-populated (and/or affluent) areas (new york city, chicago, dc/nova, etc.. in north dakota or wyoming, they'll still sell those bigger packages, even though with constant 24/7 downloading it could take a half-year or more to use up 100gb.

  30. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    5GB in a day on your phone? WTF are you doing on it?

  31. Backhaul. by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    The spectrum isn't the issue. Yay, a phone that can do 1Gbps. Now get 10 of them doing that on the same tower. Then 100. Then do 100 on 50 different towers. Then do that in 100 metro service areas.

    At least here in North America, the telco's barely have the backhaul to deliver service that could be classified as 4G. They aren't going to be dropping in multi-link 10GbE into every cell tower just because people want to browse the FaceTubes that much faster.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  32. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot about network overhead.

  33. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by tgd · · Score: 2

    From TFS: "capable of getting speeds up to 1gbps"

    That's 0.125 GBps so 8 seconds for a GB. You need at least 80 seconds to hit your 10GB cap which is more than one minute. This sounds much fairer now.

    Holy crap, what is the magical carrier you speak of that has a 10GB cap!?

  34. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 1

    You're both wrong. A bit of common sense here; you need to consider the media to which this data is written. It's too much data for RAM on a phone, and if you stream video it will possibly be a hundred times too fast. So you cannot write to RAM and discard anything over your total free amount... So you're still limited by roughly 30MB/sec of your high quality nand flash phone storage. So...your 5G, 1Gbps download (125MB/sec theoretical) would slow down to 30MBps (IF you're lucky) and you would saturate your 10GB allowance (if you have the space) in just over 5:40 minutes. Now...factor in real life and you'll realise that it's "up to 1Gbps" and only in certain areas, in good weather, when you're not death gripping your phone. So as I said, you're both wrong.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
  35. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

    A couple movies on Netflix will do that.

  36. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    My carrier offers unlimited with tethering too!

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  37. Dont test the speed! (if you have quota) by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    I recently got a 500 MB per month high speed data plan. I used the speed test app to test the speed. I blew through half my quota in speed tests alone. The test was for a fixed duration, not the fixed amount of data. At 1Gbps speed, I would have gone over the limit in just test!

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  38. No data plan parity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    5G, 4G, it matters not. 5G would just allow one to blow through one's data plan allotment that much faster. I can see the carriers foaming at the mouth now in gleeful anticipation of millions of ignorant "subject" eating through their data plans and incurring the dreaded overcharges (or the lesser evil of throttled speeds).

    High speeds are great for consumers, but what people don't realize is that data is cheap, cheap, cheap for carriers to offer. Most of it is peering networks anyway, and it cost them pennies to the dollars they spend to provide it.

    What is so evil about giving high speeds for a relatively inexpensive price? The notion that profit should be limitless has to stop.

    I almost wish the federal government was the ISP/carrier. For the tinfoil-headed among you, they already know about you what they want and can get the balance with an alacrity and ease that would stun you. You have more to fear from Google than you do from Uncle Sam. Really.

  39. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When they implement this it will only take my kids 6 seconds to chew through my data cap.

  40. What aboutt broadband speed? by valnar · · Score: 0

    Maybe by 2020, I'll have a home broadband connection that is 100Mb.

    1. Re:What aboutt broadband speed? by Anarchduke · · Score: 2

      Of you could move to South Korea and have it now...

      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    2. Re:What aboutt broadband speed? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but then you'd have to live in South Korea. ;-)

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  41. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by chrish · · Score: 1

    Fido in Canada just started bragging about doubling their data cap... to 400MB/mo. We seriously need some competition up here.

    --
    - chrish
  42. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by temcat · · Score: 1

    What is the typical cap in North America? 20GB at $23 here in St. Petersburg, Russia, from Megafon (http://spb.megafon.ru/tariffs/options/skidki_na_internet/mobile_internet.html). This is 3G though.

  43. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live in a Third World Country called "America" where AT&T & Verizon no longer sell unlimited (Some smaller carriers like Sprint/TMobile still have it as an option... or "Grandfathered" plans on Verizon/AT&T). Downside, is that Sprint/TMobile have crappy networks with lots of holes. Where I live, they aren't options unless I want to have no signal as often as not.

  44. 1gbps?!?! Poor in seconds now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This makes me laugh. (Tiered Data Plans) Ã-- (Teen) + (1gbps speed) = Ability to send mom and dad to the poor house in a matter of seconds without the time to intervene in high usage situation.

  45. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Krojack · · Score: 1

    2GB/month but if you're a good talker you may get 4GB/month at the same cost. I myself am still on Verizon unlimited from being grandfathered in 2 years ago. They did away with unlimited 2 months after I got my contract. There are two other carriers that still offer unlimited data but one of them (T-Mobile) still has limited coverage in outlying areas. Sprint being the other, well in my area they are pure shit. A guy I work with has a hard time making or receiving calls from mid-late afternoon due to over selling in this area.

  46. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Krojack · · Score: 1

    I still can't understand why anyone would want to watch movies on their cell phone. Tethered to a tablet maybe but why not just wait till you're at home and watch it on your big screen TV.

    I still have unlimited on Verizon and my average monthly usage is about 3-4gigs most of which is streaming music via tethering to my tablet while driving. I think some people just try to use as much as they can for shits and giggles.

  47. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Krojack · · Score: 1

    That company name sounds like a Who's On First skit in the making.

  48. I call it waste by tatman · · Score: 1

    This is rant (you've been warned) I'm so frustrated with 4G. I get charged $10 more a month, and it rarely works well, if at all. I live, literally, in the middle of a major city (1M+ citizens).

    No joke, if I'm facing south while sitting on the left side of my couch, I have 4G, if I turn east, I do not. The worst part is most of the apps that are running get into a mucked state if its in the middle of doing something when the phone context switches between 3G and 4G. Text messages wont send (fail, not stay in a queue) while its switching. Many times I have to reboot the phone to fix the app problems (killing them in the task manager doesn't work all the time).

    I want the carries and cell mfg to fix 4G and give me something that works, reliably

    --
    I've always said English was my second language. Had Romeo and Juliet been written in C, I might have understood it.
    1. Re:I call it waste by skelly33 · · Score: 1

      Ditto. I'm completely beside myself with this Droid and just want to drop-kick it half the time. Until there is ubiquitous, reliable service on any basic level, technology advancements are almost pointless.

      And on top of it, I am completely fed up with Android rearranging how the entire user interface and basic applications function every time they update my damn phone. I went into the Verizon store and complained about my earlier Android phone, (the LG Ally) and how slow it was and the salesman showed me how blazingly fast the new droid 4 was for even basic functions like dialing. It has been all down hill ever since leaving the store. Sometimes the damn thing won't even answer an incoming call. I have literally downloaded like three small games for this thing too, so it's not like I'm loading it down with a bunch of crap. Back up all your contacts to Google and then restore and have it automatically import a phone book entry for everyone you've ever emailed in the last 10 years - yay!

      The current consumer-facing model is completely asinine and I'm just about ready to go back to 1992 and get a pager.

    2. Re:I call it waste by tatman · · Score: 1

      I'm slightly relieved that I'm not the only one. I feel like an idiot when I try telling this to the carrier representatives.

      --
      I've always said English was my second language. Had Romeo and Juliet been written in C, I might have understood it.
  49. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly.

    The way the US market is setup, the fact that such amazing speeds are available, yet not available, pretty much makes it non-news to those in the US.
    It's like opening a Ferrari dealership in a very poor section of town. Yeah the capability is out there, the local folks just can't have one :D

    For the rest of the planet, outstanding. I will envy your blazing fast speeds. The US won't see it until the major carriers can figure out a way to squeeze more
    money out of its customer base prior to deploying it. Hell, our infrastructure ( if you believe the carriers ) can barely handle the existing speeds as it is.

  50. Fast but battery will be the deal breaker by Cherubim1 · · Score: 1

    Great! Now we can download porn at speeds up to 1gbps wireless before the battery runs flat after 1 hour :) Seriously, what fool *needs* link speeds up to 1gbps for a mobile device ?

  51. Why? by GigaBurglar · · Score: 1

    Why? just why? Why?? Why Why Why Why Why Why?? Just why though why?? I don't get it why? 1Gbps??? Why? How many mobile devices can even write data at that speed? 6G next? What speed will that be? Realise that this is what you call an unregulated market - useless shit sold at extortionate prices. Maybe in twenty years - for now 4G is WAAAAAAAY more than I need. I'm sure 5G has it uses - but to be effective it will need to be rolled out to consumer networks otherwise it is just a technology that will sit on the proverbial shelf.

    1. Re:Why? by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      Because the ultimate goal is for all Internet service to be provided wirelessly, to avoid the enormous installation cost and eminent domain / easement issues that go with physical plant.

    2. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because bursting 200KB of data @ 1Gb is easier on the network than lower speeds.

    3. Re:Why? by GigaBurglar · · Score: 1

      Fair point. I like being slightly cooked anyway.

  52. Re:AT&T Soon To Announce Launch of 1GBPS Netwo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You got it in 1.

    I thought it was going to be Apple to screw us by developing the next technology into their handsets that the providers will deem too expensive to implement, yet market the hell out of.

    I guess Samsung is pulling ahead . . .

  53. 4G Lite by tepples · · Score: 1

    4G LTE just might sound better in a commercial than 4G.

    "For years, $competitor and $competitor have been advertising what they call '4G LTE' that doesn't even meet the 4G standard. Give them a break; it turns out they just can't spell 'lite'. Switch to $our_brand and leave 4G Lite behind."

  54. Miller Lte, Nintendo DS Lte, Lte-Brite by tepples · · Score: 1

    People in general don't understand LTE

    They'll understand it when the "i" is restored to its rightful place. A carrier could contrast its "Advanced 4G" to its competitors' "4G Lite".

  55. Bandwidth by justthinkit · · Score: 1
    Bandwidth, according to wiki, is expressed in "bits per second, or multiples thereof".
    .

    Your "12 GB per month" is an artificial plan limit and not a bandwidth limit.

    --
    I come here for the love
    1. Re: Bandwidth by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

      Same thing - this is just bandwidth expressed in bits/month (with peak speeds a bit higher).

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    2. Re: Bandwidth by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      If it was an actual limit then it would indeed be the width (i.e. limit) of your communication band. But it is a cap -- an ISP playing God. "This much and no more" where bandwidth is "This much now and at any time until the end of time".

      --
      I come here for the love
    3. Re: Bandwidth by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

      It is indeed an "actual" limit, just imposed by your ISP instead of by physics. The ISP allocates you a virtual channel to the Internet backbone that supports X bits per month, just like how your cell tower or wi-fi access point allocates you a physical frequency channel with a data rate of Y bits per second (discounting contention).

      The only difference is that the ISP channel's data allowance is accounted for over a month - you can have higher peak speeds, and if you don't use your maximum channel capacity (i.e. reach your cap) on a given day, you can use it on a later day. To use your example, "bandwidth" is "this much per second until the end of time", and the ISP is "this much per month until the end of time" (both assuming you maintain your service until the end of time, naturally).

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  56. Great! by scarboni888 · · Score: 1

    Now I can blow my monthly bandwidth cap in 30 seconds or less.

  57. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    It's okay, for a fee, Verizon or AT&T will reinforce the "up to" part and will set your phone to limit how fast it can download.

    The fee will be bigger for not restricting the download rate of your phone, so it's in your best interests to do so!

    I'm just kidding: 5G won't be coming here. The mobile companies will demonstrate how when you look at their books, they're not actually profitable, so they can't build 5G towers. Hollywood accounting? What? You're talking crazy, these are phones, not movies!

  58. Meanwhile... by Entropius · · Score: 1

    ... I can't even reliably place voice calls in most of Washington DC, since so many frames are dropped that it's hard to understand the other party. I have 4G in places, 3G in most, and when it works it's pretty fast ... if you measure "bits transmitted per ten seconds". But there is a lot more to data service than that: if all I cared about was bandwidth I'd sneakernet CF cards around. But omg speed!" is not what cellphones lack now. It's stability. Fix that, and then we can talk about speed.

  59. Re:5G with 10GB/mo cap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have 100gb and unlimited speech, SMS/MMS for 68$.
    http://telia.dk/mobil/abonnement

  60. Re:I've had 4G (50/5) since 2009. People still wai by mjwx · · Score: 1

    was is this?

    what you have is faster 3g.

    sure, the marketer might have called it 4g though. blame him. and if he had his way, we would be at 8g.

    Screw this, we're going straight to 11g.

    According to the US definition of "4g" Australia has had it since 2006.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  61. I am Still On Edge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "While many smartphone users are still on 3G and are waiting for 4G to be available"

    I live in Pakistan and I am still waiting for 3G, you insensitive clods :(