Re: 5G roadblock: labor

[Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>]

On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 2:41 PM Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 4:11 PM Brian J. Murrell <brian () interlinx bc ca>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-12-30 at 09:50 -0500, Shane Ronan wrote:
> > > Also, keep in mind that 10 years ago, you didn't know you would want
> > > or
> > > need 25mbits to your phone,
> >
> > Who needs 25mbits to their phone?
>
> this is the wrong argument to make... or at the least it distracts
> from the conversation about: "Why 5g?" because everyone can come up
> with a reason for/against N mbps to Xthing. (I think this is sort of
> shane's point, actually)
>
> 4G/LTE:
>   o started the migration/consolidation of voice/video/data to a
> single bearer (well, IP anyway).
>   o moved the (ideally) IP endpoint closer to the tower base
>   o removed some latency, jitter, intermediaries between 'End-User'
> and "thing on the network"
>
> 5G:
>   o supposedly reduces latency 'more' (brings more of the IP
> connection and routing closer to the tower/radio?)


Latency to what? Latency between your handset and a front-end web server at
Google or AWS is likely unchanged. Physic did not change for 5G.

Just random samples of what people post online....

Vzw 5g 19 ms

https://twitter.com/donnymac/status/1164491035503976448

Att 5ge 34ms
https://twitter.com/joelouis77/status/1196651360185462784

Sprint , this guy shows 27ms on LTE vs 34ms on 5g
https://twitter.com/robpegoraro/status/1202705075535257600



>   o simplifies management? (maybe?)

Hahahaha. No. Because 5g does not replace anything. It is yet another
thing.


> keeping speed out of the conversation, the footprint for MANY 5g
> deploymetns in the US (and elsewhere) is likely 'hundreds of feet
> circles', where 4G is 'miles'.
> (yes you can beam-form and make ovals and such...)


This is still a physics thing. Most purest will says 5G = new radio (NR).
NR can run in any band. And, the distance is a function of the band.
Tmobile is big on 600mhz NR, Sprint is big on 2500mhz NR and VZW has 28ghz
NR.

There is an relation between the available spectrum bandwidth and the mhz.
Meaning, there is only little 600mhz but there is a lot of 28ghz mmwave.
That said, 600mhz can drive for miles, while 28ghz needs line of sight.

Horses for courses. No silver bullet.  All the best mid-band spectrum ,
balanced volume and propagation, got deployed in the 90s as pcs / gsm, and
re-deployed in the 10s as umts and LTE.  Low band is great for penetration
and coverage with a few cells, mmwave is great with line of sight...
midband is the sweet spot in the middle.

The future requires all tools available.


> It'd be nice to see what benefits 5g really has for carriers and
> consumers/users... It looks, to me, like a bunch of the 5g hype is
> really: "uhm, we need to sell these carriers on the G++ ... spin up
> the hype machine about speed!" never mind the cost to deploy, range of
> deployment, changes in handset/radio gear / etc... more $ to the
> vendors!
>
> -chris


NR does operationalize more spectrum and allows bigger aggregate pools
(like LACP) The new mmwave spectrum is the last to come to market because
it’s value is limited in the general case.


>