AT&T Promises Low-Band 5G for 5 Cities in Weeks, 15 by Early 2020 (venturebeat.com) 35
Normally, major 5G network expansion news has been exciting enough for carriers to announce first thing in the morning, but AT&T just continued its already confusing 5G story by revealing a big change in the dead of night: It's launching a low-band 5G network across five cities in "the coming weeks," with promises to cover at least 15 cities by February 2020. From a report: This will be the carrier's first 5G launch targeted at regular customers. The good news: Some form of AT&T 5G service will soon be available in Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, Providence, Rochester, and San Diego, followed by Birmingham, Boston, Bridgeport, Buffalo, Las Vegas, Louisville, Milwaukee, New York City, San Francisco, and San Jose early next year. Initial service maps actually cover wide swaths of each city, in some cases extending into suburbs, and the carrier suggests the low-band 5G will work at roughly two-mile distances from towers, including "on the go," residential," "suburban," and "rural" usage.
low band 5G == 4G (Score:3)
Nobody is going to notice a difference. Sure, at the beginning when early adopters are going to be alone on a tower it may be fast. But after everybody joins, it will be much like current 4G.
Re: (Score:3)
I guarantee you 70000 people in a baseball stadium will be able to instantly tell the difference. 5G dramatically improves the very thing you are complaining about, air-interface congestion.
Re: (Score:2)
You are talking about high band 5G (aka "real" 5G). This article is about low band 5G
Re: (Score:2)
No I'm talking about the technology changes involved in the 5G radio, the software at either end, the new specs for the radio components, and the changed passband modulation scheme being used.
Please read up about a technology before you comment on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Below 6 GHz, 5G is expected to be at most 20% faster than 4G. Nobody is going to notice that. With higher expected usage, performance could even be worse.
The real advantage of 5G is going to be in the high band, where more spectrum is available, and therefore channels can be wider.
The actual bit per second per Hz of 5G is not that much different from 4G.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.lightreading.com/m... [lightreading.com]
My take-away:
Re: (Score:2)
Lowband 5G: un-interesting, uses 5G infrastructure to probably provide some benefit to carriers
Actually this is more interesting since as I said, 5G has better coding and software that gets massive improvements in congested scenarios.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Below 6 GHz, 5G is expected to be at most 20% faster than 4G.
It's almost like you read letters put to a page and purposefully put effort into not understanding them. Try again.
Re: (Score:2)
false advertising (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that's the problem, the full 5G spec include speeds comparable to 4G in the low band (under 6 GHz)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it isn't the full 5G spec
It is the full 5G spec. Just because you never read the spec doesn't mean they are falsely advertising.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A single paragraph does not make an article. The article is about low-band 5G which is perfectly in spec. 5GE was shit they pulled at the start of this year. No one has sued them yet, why would anyone start now?
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are partially right. currently my phone says 5Ge and not a 5g tower for hundreds of miles. It is fooling a lot of people into thinking they got 5g.
not 5G (Score:3)
If it works more than two blocks from the tower, it's not really 5G.
Re: (Score:2)
If it works more than two blocks from the tower, it's not really 5G.
Just what is it do you think that 5G is? If you answer some mm band, you'd be wrong. If you answer 4G with less range, you'd be wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
By the same logic, AT&T really is rolling out 5G.
Erm. Yes. *golf clap*
Re: (Score:2)
That depends. There's several forms of 5G. There's low-band 5G that is below 1GHz, similar to the 700, 800, 850MHz were for cellphones. These are great for large area coverage.
There's the middle band in the GHz somewhere, which can go anywhere from a block to a mile (a block downtown or a mile in the country) which gives you the bandwidth for your tasks.
Then there's mmWave 5G that works in the 30-60GHz range. Immensely fast since the bandwi
So Much for Dopler Radar Weather Reports (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Marketing people are going to ram 5G up America;s wazoo, no matter what the cost.
Huh? Did Dopler Radar stop working when 4G and 3G were rolled out? What makes you think using the same band for 5G is going to affect Doppler radar? What makes you think the benefit of the technology is "marketing"?
What the hell happened to Slashdot as a tech site?
What is wrong with Slashdot? (Score:1)
Several posts in on a tech site for nerds about an new technology being deployed in a lower frequency and we have posts that consist entirely of:
- FUD about weather radar being affected by something not at all in its band.
- Complaints about 5G that it will act like 4G with the only example being one of the things that 5G actually dramatically improves.
- Some garbage about 5G only being 5G if it works in short range.
- Other garbage about 5G not being 5G unless it is in the mm-band.
It's like this site has giv
Re: (Score:2)
sub-5G? (Score:2)
It's launching a low-band 5G...
So... 4G?
How many phones are actually ready anyway? (Score:2)
With that said, I do agree with the posters that asked. Who will notice the difference?
Re: (Score:2)
Who will notice the difference?
Maybe read the reply to those posters. Everyone with a 5G phone in a densely congested airspace. The underlying technology provides many improvements even on low bands.
Yeah, well I'm rolling out 6G (Score:2)
When that overheats and sets you on fire, it falls back 4G so you can call 911 on whatever rickety bullshit that's still made out of.
I could care less (Score:2)
I don't want faster internet speeds on my phone, and I don't think many people do either. What I would like to see is more coverage, better service and less cost. The biggest problem is in 20 years from now, there will be very little innovation in phones, computers, ect. At some point in time people need to make devices that last and services that cost less.
Re: (Score:1)
I could care less too. Much less. Which is why I'm excited for 5G.
I assume your understanding of 5G and it's benefits is as good as your grasp of the English language since it almost seems like you *couldn't* care less and think the only thing 5G gives you is speed.
Re: (Score:1)
"I don't want faster internet speeds on my phone, and I don't think many people do either."
The assumption that one's own needs and desires are representative of the vast majority of others is a common failing. You can hear it all the time: "Everyone thinks ..."
I've lived and worked in places where if you can't get it on your phone you simply can't get it. There are countries where communications infrastructure is based on fixed wireless terminals. There are statistically significant numbers of people for wh