71–80 of 115 posts
Carriers don't even fully provide what 4G is capable of, yet still advertising so-called 5G. I would be okay with 50gbit 4G LTE with an unlimited plan for the next 5 years at least until they figure out their new gimmicks.
Are there rules for enforcing (and by whom?) the term “5G”? Or is it like the word “natural” for health food?
4G was supposed to achieve 100mbit peaks and I have yet to see speeds even approaching this with 4G LTE. So if somebody is enforcing advertising rules they're doing a shit job...
Carriers don't even fully provide what 4G is capable of, yet still advertising so-called 5G. I would be okay with 50gbit 4G LTE with an unlimited plan for the next 5 years at least until they figure out their new gimmicks.
That would be awesome. I could blow through my monthly data cap in 0.68 seconds...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you think the FCC doesn't have jurisdiction over deceptive marketing?
What makes you think they do? IANAL, but Truth in Advertising[1] enforcement is a FTC affair, not FCC. On the other hand, rayiner is, so there a benefit-of-the-doubt element that I'm inclined to respect. EDIT: ...and I humbly stand corrected. [1] https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consume...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ITU IMT standards are dumb and meaningless. They just set aspirational targets, but don’t define any technology for meeting those targets. ITU jumped from 200 kbps for 3G to 1 gigabit for 4G. That was not a useful definition and the market correctly ignored it. Imagine if we had “3G” wired networking defined as 100 mbps and “4G” wired networking aspirationally defined as 10 gigabit. What would you do when the IEE…
Without any sort of backing specification, the terminology of 3G vs 4G vs 5G is dumb and meaningless, as we see with AT&T calling their network 5G (E), even though it's no better than what their competitors call 4G. Also, it's disingenuous to describe the jump as from 200kbps to 1Gbps, since HSDPA offering 14Mbps was already being deployed prior to when this particular ITU standard came out. ( https://www.gsma.com/ab…
The problem here appears to be not that AT&T is departing from the ITU monikers, or using 5G to refer to LTE Advance Pro, but that it’s selling something as “5G” that’s not faster than “4G.”
Carriers don't even fully provide what 4G is capable of, yet still advertising so-called 5G. I would be okay with 50gbit 4G LTE with an unlimited plan for the next 5 years at least until they figure out their new gimmicks.
That would be awesome. I could blow through my monthly data cap in 0.68 seconds...
Also, haven't we all learned yet that the publicity and discussion this is generating reenforces the connection between AT&T and 5G in people's minds, even if it's technically incorrect? The facts don't really matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be awesome. I could blow through my monthly data cap in 0.68 seconds...
I've never understood that line of reasoning... Does this mean anything at all? I want to watch videos, stream music and load pages as fast as possible. This is, occasional downloads. The fact that I have 50 Gbps doesn't mean I will spend all day using 100% of it.