5G Is On Its Way, But Approaching Slowly

New submitter CarlottaHapsburg writes: Ericsson and Nokia are leading the pack when it comes to developing 5G, but there are some major complicating factors: flexible architecture, functioning key standards, the U.S.'s lethargy in expanding mmWave, and even the definition of what 5G is and can do. It'll get here, but not soon: "5G networks are widely expected to start to roll out by 2020, with a few early debuts at such global events as the 2018 Winter Olympics in South Korea. It is an ambitious deadline given what is expected from 5G -- no less than the disruption of the communications market in general, and telecom in particular, as well as related sectors such as test equipment." The FCC's Tom Wheeler says 5G is different for every manufacturer, like a Picasso painting. It should be an exciting five years of further developments and definitions — and, hopefully, American preparedness.

Comments

Who cares?

[Karmashock]

The bandwidth caps are so low that at 5G speeds you'd blow through your monthly allotment in seconds.

If the carriers want to impress anyone, then increase capacity enough that you can raise the caps or remove them entirely and offer unlimited wireless internet... at speeds you can handle.

5G? They're not really letting people enjoy 4G as it is.

And on top of that, you have google's announcement that they're going to be offering a Wifi cellphone that connects through the wifi when possible to make phone calls... where only cellular service even costs... ANYTHING. And they're contracting with all the cell phone carriers to provide coverage.

YEARLY fees for some people might drop as low as 5 dollars per YEAR under a system like that.

Now... you like your wireless internet? But how much do you like it? First off, you can't buy most smartphones from most carriers unless you have a data plan. They literally won't let you connect unless you sign up for data as well. And for those that say "well that's just because the data plan pays for the reduced price you paid for the phone."... Nope. Because they won't even let you bring your own phone or buy the phone outright and then not have the data plan. They don't care. You have a smartphone? You must have data.

I've currently got my MONTHLY cell phone bill down to about 8 dollars per month. The price of that was that I do not have data on my phone. Which you would think sucks, only people don't appreciate how ubiquitous free wifi is everywhere. When I want data, I turn on my wifi and connect to any number of free wifi hotspots that are everywhere. The only place it could suck would be on the road but my actual needs to connect to the internet on the freeway are pretty limited. I use a map program on my phone that stores the maps in internal memory. And I have plenty of space left over for music, movies, and games.

Don't get me wrong... internet would be nice... but what am I willing to pay for it? 20 dollars a month? Literally tripling my monthly rate... for that? No. I don't care that much.

I like paying 8 bucks a month. And I look forward to paying 5 bucks a year.

Re:Who cares?

[Guspaz]

In 2008, Rogers introduced a 6GB data plan for $30 as part of the launch of the iPhone 3G.

7 years later, the equivalent 6GB plan costs roughly $10-15 more.

Considering that cellular bandwidth caps have effectively shrunk over the past 7 years, despite speeds increasing by 40x, please explain why I should expect caps to be dramatically higher 5 years from today?

Re:Who cares?

[Karmashock]

There are a couple companies including google talking about about doing things differently.

Last I checked their concept was this:

1. text messages are free
2. You are only billed for calls made through cell towers. You are able to make them through wifi instead and encouraged to do so. They estimate that roughly 80 percent of calls happen within wifi hotspots.
3. Calls made through wifi are free.
4. You can make calls through cell towers are normal rates and are billed for time used. google specifically wants to contract with ALL GSM providers so that you can use any GSM tower.

That was the concept. There is another company out of New York doing a similar thing though not quite as generous as google.

Here is the thing, the calls all happen through the internet. And the fees that providers are charged by tower operators are not per text or per phone call or even in minutes. They're charged by the kilobit.

Its just data. And once you untethered the data from the towers you can put additional leverage on the tower operators to charge a more reasonable fee.

Most of the time when I get a call, I am at home or at work. Those minutes on that system will be free. I'll only be billed for the minutes when I'm out and about. Think about that.

I don't use my phone much. Most conversations on the phone are over in 30 seconds. I get a lot of texts but so what?

Think about how great this is for a kid as well.

The texts are free. You can buy a phone for the kid, get him by text any time at no cost. And if you need to talk to him, you say "connect to wifi and call me"... again... if you're cost conscious and want what amounts to a free cell phone. Then consider international calling. No need to fuck around with skype. You just connect to the wifi with your phone can make a call. No bullshit international calling fees... no additional accounts. And you can call someone's actual phone number at no charge.

Re:Who cares?

[Karmashock]

You're forgetting that they don't have to lower costs... at least in their minds. They think they're building monopolies.

The google concept of wifi calling which is coming will annihilate this business model. I can't wait.

My bill is about 8 dollars a month. I can't wait for it to go to 5 dollars a year.

Enough with the 'G' already

[ichthus]

Just tell me how fast it is -- give me the stationary and moving data rates. With every other marketable metric I can think of, there's at least some idea of what to expect (DPI, storage capacity, home internet service speed, etc.)

Re:PLEASE make it the same globally

[Guspaz]

It's not possible for a single phone to support every possible LTE band simultaneously (read: no such cellular radio exists). As such, manufacturers have to pick the most common bands in a given region. It's not due to lack of standardization.

Pure vaporware

[Cafe Alpha]

the wikipedia article makes it clear that 5g is pure vaporware. It's not even a specific technology it's the expectation that new technologies will be invented.

FCC should mandate interoperability

[swb]

I don't know if they have the authority, but the FCC should mandate carrier level interoperability.