Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 65

Thread: First mentions of nationwide 5G

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,678
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by macher52 View Post
    I agree. Wonder how much Verizon paid for the PR and / or what they had to give


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Verizon was "late" because band 5 was being used for 3G still. How much did T-Mobile pay Linus Tech Tips to take dump all over Verizon's 5G last year? Low band 5G is stupid to begin with. T-Mobile did it to win a court case. Not sure how someone can be "late" so something that wasn't suppose to take off until 2021 at the earliest anyway. Like 5% have 5G phones. Maybe by the end of 2022 it'll be up to 1/3

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    2,270
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Verizon was "late" because band 5 was being used for 3G still. How much did T-Mobile pay Linus Tech Tips to take dump all over Verizon's 5G last year? Low band 5G is stupid to begin with. T-Mobile did it to win a court case. Not sure how someone can be "late" so something that wasn't suppose to take off until 2021 at the earliest anyway. Like 5% have 5G phones. Maybe by the end of 2022 it'll be up to 1/3
    Like I said I wonder what was in it for Verizon. Apple just didn’t invite them to have a huge PR venue.

    I have to say it was a like a commercial.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,678
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by macher52 View Post
    Like I said I wonder what was in it for Verizon. Apple just didn’t invite them to have a huge PR venue.

    I have to say it was a like a commercial.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Doesn't matter companies do this stuff all the time. More legit than the Linus Tech Tips video which was clearly one long T-Mobile commercial. Lost a lot of respect for him after that stunt

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,790
    Device(s)
    Iphone XR
    Carrier(s)
    Tmobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sheytoon View Post
    I don't think you understand how DSS works. There's massive overheads for DSS, especially in narrow channels. Even if there's zero 5G users, LTE capacity is reduced when DSS is enabled. That's because 5G PDCCH and SSB need to be transmitting in specific locations while avoiding LTE CRS and PDCCH.

    Also, DSS has nothing to do with SA. It operates largely the same, whether 5G is NSA, SA or mixed mode. Only 5G SIB would be different, and that is a fraction of the overall impact.

    See here for more info on DSS:
    https://www.mediatek.com/blog/mediat...ectrum-sharing
    https://www.sharetechnote.com/html/5G/5G_DSS.html
    Everything I read says that spectrum penalty for DSS comes when using it with 4G core. There is a 15-20% efficiency gain when using a 5G core so any penalty for DSS becomes moot when used with a 5G core. Neither of those links appear to address that at all. If you want to look at DSS as if it exists apart from the network it is being used with well that is putting blinders on to make a case.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    2,270
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hagar View Post
    Doesn't matter companies do this stuff all the time. More legit than the Linus Tech Tips video which was clearly one long T-Mobile commercial. Lost a lot of respect for him after that stunt
    Well Apple has to cater to all the carriers. But in this instance it was odd that there was one carrier either invited and / or paid to be there and no mention of other carriers. It was a advertisement stunt.

    I’m curious if Verizon paid for this or Apple sees the potential of Verizon’s network and therefore showcased what Apple thinks is the best carrier to get an iPhone on.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    96
    Carrier(s)
    Sprint/T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by macher52 View Post
    Well Apple has to cater to all the carriers. But in this instance it was odd that there was one carrier either invited and / or paid to be there and no mention of other carriers. It was a advertisement stunt.

    I’m curious if Verizon paid for this or Apple sees the potential of Verizon’s network and therefore showcased what Apple thinks is the best carrier to get an iPhone on.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Who says apple has to cater to all carriers? It's not like tmobile and at&t will stop selling the iphone if they feel their feelings were hurt or something. It's not like apple is one plus or even google with the pixel line (i know phone nerds love the pixels, but let's be real, the general public don't care). Apple and samsung doesn't have to cater to all carriers at all, as there isn't a carrier out there that would survive if they pulled iphones or the s series from their lineup.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,313
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by offthegrid View Post
    Everything I read says that spectrum penalty for DSS comes when using it with 4G core. There is a 15-20% efficiency gain when using a 5G core so any penalty for DSS becomes moot when used with a 5G core. Neither of those links appear to address that at all. If you want to look at DSS as if it exists apart from the network it is being used with well that is putting blinders on to make a case.
    Can you explain how 5G core makes the radio access air interface more efficient?

    And no, Verizon will not abandon NSA yet. They will deploy their base stations in dual mode NSA+SA for a few years, so the gNodeB will be offering NSA and SA services concurrently. Obviously a phone will use one mode or the other, but the network will support both. Regardless, even if Verizon went to SA only, you need to explain how there would be 15-20% efficiency gain from 5G NSA to 5G SA strictly from DSS.
    Last edited by sheytoon; 10-20-2020 at 07:36 AM.
    Want to learn more about how LTE works?
    https://productioncommunity.publicmo...ls/td-p/130581

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    19
    Feedback Score
    0

    First mentions of nationwide 5G

    If we look at capacity before and after DSS is there an increase?

    For example, can the network now handle twice as many data sessions for instance by shifting the users onto different frequencies with DSS?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    5,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sheytoon View Post
    Can you explain how 5G core makes the radio access air interface more efficient?

    And no, Verizon will not abandon NSA yet. They will deploy their base stations in dual mode NSA+SA for a few years, so the gNodeB will be offering NSA and SA services concurrently. Obviously a phone will use one mode or the other, but the network will support both. Regardless, even if Verizon went to SA only, you need to explain how there would be 15-20% efficiency gain from 5G NSA to 5G SA strictly from DSS.
    I assumed that this was just using imprecise terminology about the system. Isn't there something about 5G where the better spectral efficiency would offset the throughput loss imposed by DSS? If it winds up being a wash or close to it might as well use DSS for the transition period (of years)?

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,313
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tekfranz View Post
    If we look at capacity before and after DSS is there an increase?

    For example, can the network now handle twice as many data sessions for instance by shifting the users onto different frequencies with DSS?
    Let's say you have 3 scenarios on a given frequency:
    1) 100 LTE users
    2) 50 LTE + 50 NR users
    3) 100 NR users

    If an operator wants to transition from #1 to #3, they can do static re-farming or DSS, which is #2, but it's not going to provide more total capacity. At the end of the day, it's the same OFDM resources being shared by both technologies. If the LTE DSS cell is congested, the NR user isn't going to get full speeds. They'll have to fight with the LTE users for their share of resources and speed.

    Number of active users depends on 4G and 5G traffic distribution, so it might help gracefully transition traffic over a period of time by avoiding static re-farming. This is really the main appeal of DSS for operators.
    Last edited by sheytoon; 10-22-2020 at 07:59 PM.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,313
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bobdevnul View Post
    I assumed that this was just using imprecise terminology about the system. Isn't there something about 5G where the better spectral efficiency would offset the throughput loss imposed by DSS? If it winds up being a wash or close to it might as well use DSS for the transition period (of years)?
    5G spectral efficiency, regardless of NSA or SA, will be about 10-15% higher than LTE once it's a mature technology, but interestingly, during initial deployments, LTE is still more efficient. What I mean by that, is if you deploy a 10 MHz LTE channel, and compare the single user peak speed to 10 MHz NR, it's higher on LTE. That's because the RAN vendors haven't developed some features to dynamically rate-match for overheads like SSB, PDCCH, CSI-RS, DMRS. The overheads due to PDCCH and DMRS will have the biggest impact. Over time this will get better and 5G will be slightly more efficient for small channel bandwidths.

    5G's main advantage is new spectrum and larger channel bandwidths. These will obviously be better for capacity and speeds, but efficiency won't be impacted too much since it's defined as bps/Hz.

    One thing that I believe will help 5G with spectral efficiency is multi-user MIMO. But this will only work on mid/high bands where massive MIMO antennas like 64T64R units are used, and users are spatially separated with a good signal (high SINR).

    So to answer your question, I would say that 5G's eventual efficiency will definitely not make up for the overhead of DSS.
    Last edited by sheytoon; 10-22-2020 at 08:03 PM.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Posts
    18
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by offthegrid View Post
    The new iphones will support C-band 5G spectrum a smart move on Apple's part. The C-band auction begins in December and Verizon is expected to be bid very aggressively in it.

    T-mobile attempted to have C-band auction winnings capped at 100mhz to ensure their spectrum dominance which was denied by the FCC.
    So iphone 12 will but what about other phones?

    Sent from my SM-F916U using Tapatalk

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    19
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sheytoon View Post
    Let's say you have 3 scenarios on a given frequency:
    1) 100 LTE users
    2) 50 LTE + 50 NR users
    3) 100 NR users

    If an operator wants to transition from #1 to #3, they can do static re-farming or DSS, which is #2, but it's not going to provide more total capacity. At the end of the day, it's the same OFDM resources being shared by both technologies. If the LTE DSS cell is congested, the NR user isn't going to get full speeds. They'll have to fight with the LTE users for their share of resources and speed.

    Number of active users depends on 4G and 5G traffic distribution, so it might help gracefully transition traffic over a period of time by avoiding static re-farming. This is really the main appeal of DSS for operators.
    My thought was DSS would work in such a way that if for example Band 13 would get full of LTE users but band 66 would have very few, DSS would favor putting users on 66. In that way if a band was under utilized DSS could favor putting people on that band as other bands get congested. I would imagine that would give more capacity if users would be made to dynamically hop bands whenever needed.

    But to your point that logic is in place today to favor some frequencies over others today and the underlying infrastructure is the same. I just imagined a faster switching would create more capacity.

    For example a car on a highway might be in the fast lane, but another sports car zips dangerously from lane to lane and gets ahead. The sports car has more capacity than the car in the fast lane because it can navigate around random, unexpected obstructions. DSS would be like filling the highway with zig-zagging sports cars, but in the end the highway is only so wide with so many lanes.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    898
    Device(s)
    iPhone, iPad, Netgear Nighthawk mobile hotspot
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon Wireless, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    I wonder how Verizon will classify C-Band in their data plan terms & conditions. They could score so much C-band spectrum that it would be feasible to allow totally unlimited access to it like with mmWave, but it would be more at risk of congestion if everyone used it as home internet. However it wouldn’t make much sense to classify it the same as other sub-7 spectrum because it has considerably more capacity. Hmm

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    5,158
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tekfranz View Post
    My thought was DSS would work in such a way that if for example Band 13 would get full of LTE users but band 66 would have very few, DSS would favor putting users on 66. In that way if a band was under utilized DSS could favor putting people on that band as other bands get congested. I would imagine that would give more capacity if users would be made to dynamically hop bands whenever needed....
    That's not the way DSS works. DSS is about sharing the same band between LTE and 5G. What you described is a band selection scheme. They have been doing that since more than one band started being used - something like the 1990s.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-28-2018, 10:52 PM
  2. not a good first impression of fido.
    By beanzforme in forum Fido
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-04-2001, 11:49 AM
  3. First minute of a call....
    By onepointoh in forum Fido
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-25-2001, 08:39 PM
  4. First impressions of the 8100
    By edalzell in forum TELUS/Koodo/Public Mobile
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-04-2001, 06:28 AM
  5. My first impressions of Panasonic TX220
    By dgorecki in forum Rogers/Fido/Chat-r
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-16-2001, 11:32 PM

Bookmarks