5G Ultra Wideband Speed Test Thread

[bobdevnul]

I think they really should have evaluated what they were getting at said price, before jumping on board. Always a good idea to step back and look at the larger picture.

Do you really think that Vz doesn't have a bunch of very sharp business analysts and engineers that thoroughly evaluated it a whole lot better than we can as armchair analysts?

...

The 600MHz, will at least have better range and building penetration. It will be interesting to see how they plan to compensate the channel width and spacing, since it seems incapable of providing actual 5G speeds.

5G is not a speed standard. It is a range of capabilities. 1 Gbps fixed and 100 Mbps mobile speeds are design goals where the channel bandwidth allows it. 5G on 600 MHz will still be 5G.

[Guest539]

Do you really think that Vz doesn't have a bunch of very sharp business analysts and engineers that thoroughly evaluated it a whole lot better than we can as armchair analysts?

Nope. First to 5G says it all - we have to be first because we can’t be second, so whatever it takes at whatever cost, do it, even if it isn’t what we really will use in the end.


[QUOTE=bobdevnul;17023310
5G is not a speed standard. It is a range of capabilities. 1 Gbps fixed and 100 Mbps Speeds are design goals where the channel bandwidth allows it. 5G on 600 MHz will still be 5G.[/QUOTE]

According to some, Verizon’s 5G isn’t true 5G, because it doesn’t fit 5G NR to a T. So what is 5G? Whatever any provider determines it to be?

Lots of unanswered questions without clearly defined answers...

[bobdevnul]

Is it just me, or does Verizon stink at naming things? Oath? Really? I don't even remember what Oath is supposed to be. Extra Wide sounds like a condom model name. ;~>

[Guest539]

Is it just me, or does Verizon stink at naming things? Oath? Really? I don't even remember what Oath is supposed to be. Extra Wide sounds like a condom model name. ;~>

There is that... if they add titanium or magnum, I’ll laugh...

[bobdevnul]

Nope. First to 5G says it all - we have to be first because we can’t be second, so whatever it takes at whatever cost, do it, even if it isn’t what we really will use in the end.




According to some, Verizon’s 5G isn’t true 5G, because it doesn’t fit 5G NR to a T. So what is 5G? Whatever any provider determines it to be?

Lots of unanswered questions without clearly defined answers...

That's because there is no 5G standard fully ratified by the standards body yet (3GPP). It is not expected to be fully ratified until 2020. They have released what is called 5G NSA (non stand alone). That is a sort-of 5G that operates over the LTE infrastructure. It does not do everything 5G is supposed to do. Extremely low latency is probably one of the things that can't be done through LTE infrastructure.

What Verizon is probably trying to do with their sort-of 5G is become the defacto 5G standard or at least part of it and force as much of their standard into the final ratified standard as they can. You can bet your flagship phone that Verizon has slews of patents on their faux-5G tech and will be looking to collect big royalties on them.

[Guest539]

That would make sense. Also, the ability to throw copious amounts of $$$ at the problem can also help sway it their direction.

[techfranz]

Well I hope they read your post so they realize this before deploying it.

Yeah, so on the small cell transmitter you hook a coaxial cable and connect it to the fixed receiver draping the coaxial cable through the air. Cable has been proven successful up to 1000ft away from the transmitter!
It will especially work well in line of sight but the cable can achieve almost full bandwidth around obstacles as well like trees and buildings. What is phenomenal is the capacity of the cable! Since the cable is enclosed it can operate on any frequency necessary.
Tin cans and a string look out!
Here come modified VZW fixed wireless!
Sure it’s called wireless but marketing can fix that!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jack Hagar]

Nope. First to 5G says it all - we have to be first because we can’t be second, so whatever it takes at whatever cost, do it, even if it isn’t what we really will use in the end..

So you're more an expert then? Then how come you're not making the big bucks in the business world if you're such the expert?Attachment 159647

[hwertz]

5G is not a speed standard. It is a range of capabilities. 1 Gbps fixed and 100 Mbps Speeds are design goals where the channel bandwidth allows it. 5G on 600 MHz will still be 5G.

According to some, Verizon’s 5G isn’t true 5G, because it doesn’t fit 5G NR to a T. So what is 5G? Whatever any provider determines it to be?

Yeah, my thoughts on this are, you had this kind of thing with 3G and 4G too. With 3G, you had a brief period where Qualcomm was putting a big ol' 3G label on the stickers attached to the phones, this on 1xrtt-based phones that would offer a max of 144kbps; a few carriers dabbled wtih calling their EDGE (220kbps max) "3G". When 4G LTE was being rolled out, several carriers decided to get 4G-like speeds by channel bonding previous-gen HSPA+ technology and dubbed it 4G.

My thoughts on this 5G from Verizon. It's not "real" 5G, but will get much higher speeds for their current limited deployment area. I think this is a very sensible move... it lets the network engineers kind of tackle one thing at a time. They will already have engineers that know LTE in and out, so they can focus on getting a handle on what kind of network tuning is needed to handle mmwave's very different propgation and so on (while providing 5G-like speeds), instead of having to figure out a new band and new radio standard at the same time. I'm guessing once they get good performance data (and some 5G NR hardware actually exists to install...), they'll probably deploy 5G NR for new deployments, and either run 5G NR and 5G LTE side-by-side in these few markets, or replace their "5G LTE" hardware with 5G NR and shut the 5G LTE down. Could be wrong though! With that much spectrum they may simply not need NR and opt to run LTE at mmwave.

[cycledude]

No speed test yet ?

[techfranz]

OK pardon my attempt at satire above.

I currently use a Wisp surface to my house and really like it.

Fixed wireless has the advantage of not needing to arrange or lease pole space from current providers like cable. So if Verizon can get a small cell permit they could potentially provide fixed wireless internet service to a couple hundred customers.
I really hate that the frequency is so high and Verizon is spectrum starved but since they have such a wide band I guess it makes up for the limited range by using a bigger pipe.

After further thoughts AT&T is getting flack about comments about deploying pucks (mobile hotspots) and downing Verizon as being fixated on fixed. I think both comments are equally funny.

But I guess neither carrier has a real idea what 5G will work out to be so it’s kind of like competing for a market that doesn’t exist yet.

I personally like the idea AT&T seems to be touting of 5G sort of just being interwoven on all devices Hotspots and Fixed included right along with phones and tablets and mobile devices. Sounds a lot better thanVerizon saying we connected up a couple people’s houses in a few cities.

But fixed wireless would have great potential in rural areas where many places are still stuck with last mile copper.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest539]

So you're more an expert then? Then how come you're not making the big bucks in the business world if you're such the expert?Attachment 159647

Because I am smart enough to not go work for a cellular company.

I get to do all the things I like everyday and I get paid for it. Lots of computers, tech, radios and RF equipment.

Just because a company does something doesn’t automatically make it right... Just ask Sprint about WiMax...

[bobdevnul]

...Fixed wireless has the advantage of not needing to arrange or lease pole space from current providers like cable. So if Verizon can get a small cell permit they could potentially provide fixed wireless internet service to a couple hundred customers....

I hope Verizion and the others can do that. They are all going to see what they can do to make the best profit with the spectrum resources they have. Profit is what it is all about. The reason that cable companies don't serve many rural areas is that it is not profitable.

Just permitting a small (or macro) cell is only part of the picture. The cells need broadband backhaul run to them to get to the Internet. That will be lacking in many places. Some backhaul over mobile data is possible, but at mm-wave it doesn't travel far, adding to the expense and decreasing profitability. Some will be done and some is better than none. How much is done will be a long story.

T-Mobile may have an advantage in rural areas for providing fixed wireless if they are able to buy Sprint and all of Sprint's 2.5 GHz spectrum. They could service small towns and some rural area with that. T-Mo's and Sprint's combined spectrum is not enough to provide fixed wireless in metro areas. Of course, T-Mo will try to buy some broadband mm-wave spectrum in the upcoming auctions.

It will be interesting to see how mm-wave will work with multi-path, refraction, structure and substance penetration, and weather effects. I know my LTE hotspot speed varies quite a bit depending on the weather and leaves on the trees. IIRC, mm-wave is much worse about that.

Fixed wireless will not fare well with customers if the service goes out with every rain or snow storm, or half the year for leaves on trees. Wasn't this a problem with satellite TV?

I have fixed (and mobile) wireless now with an unlimited LTE hotspot. It is a wonderful thing to have. I don't need Gbps for email, web browsing, and streaming a Prime video. That all works fine at 3 Mbps if it is solid. The hotspot gets 1-25 Mbps depending on the location, weather, etc. It is usually 3 or better.

[techfranz]

Fixed wireless will not fare well with customers if the service goes out with every rain or snow storm, or half the year for leaves on trees
.

Our Wisp works fairly well in rain and Snow.
In heavy rain we can notice a difference. It really is not too big of deal, since Comcast, Windstream and Frontier also go down in rainy weather storms etc...Actually our rural Wireless ISP might be more reliable than the local cable competitors. I am not sure but I am assuming they are using 5ghz to go from our house to the Wisp tower.

I will also say antenna alignment and being free of obstacles is really important as slightly off alignment or some leaves or corn stalks can result in a reduction in speeds and drops.

[@TheRealDanny]

It's avaialble today. Let's see some speedtests!

Unfortunately Verizon's version of fixed 5G isn't available in my neighborhood just yet to try out.