Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service • Hacker News Board

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#91

Post by kalleboo » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 1:49 AM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #61

nradov wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cell phones and mobile devices in general have always been disposable items with limited expected lifespans. Instead of worrying about keeping obsolete devices working we should focus on clean disposal and recycling that minimizes waste and pollution.

Cell phones and mobile devices in general have always been disposable items Only if you define "always" as post-2010. Cell phones were for a very long time considered long-term purchases, along the lines of washing machines and refrigerators. It was only when they became fashion accessories and certain companies started relying on pushing out new models every year for no reason other than to boost the balance sheet t…

> Only if you define "always" as post-2010

They were already disposable items in 1999 when I got my first GSM phone. Every other year carriers would push you to upgrade to the latest and greatest with "free phone with contract extension" to get you onto the hot new technologies like WAP, color screens, cameras, MMS, 3G video calling, etc.

> It was only when they became fashion accessories

Nokias with Xpress-on covers were totally a fashion accessory! And there was always that d-bag with a Vertu phone.

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#92

Post by jtbayly » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 3:20 AM UTC

treesknees wrote: post #82

jtbayly wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why use such an indirect and backwards method? If you were in power, you could just tax non-green cars, rather than promote cars that become useless in 5 years when technology moves on.

3G has been mainstream in the US since the mid 2000s. Granted it depends on when you purchase your car, but getting almost 20 years out of the technology is pretty good. Most cars will be scrap after that long. I'm not sure where you came up with 5 years.

Did you miss that cars are still being made that are 3g-only? And I’d be willing to bet that cars didn’t have 3g modems until long after 3g was first available.

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#93

Post by darksaints » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 3:53 AM UTC

anthomtb wrote: post #48

rubylark wrote: post #3

I worked very very briefly in the wireless service industry on UAPs and large scale cell antenna receivers. To me, this doesn't seem as much a conspiracy to obsolete old phones as a practical stance to not need to have two copies of antennas on every tower. The old antennas used in 3G don't go up to the frequencies needed by true 5G, so they need new ones. If they're developing new ones, they don't want to have to ke…

Something here doesn’t make sense to me. The retired 3G spectrum will be used for 4G and 5G (per the FCC article) so the antennas could be reused as the carrier frequency will not change. For a concrete example, if you’re running 3G at 900 MHz, why would running 5G at 900 MHz require a different antenna? On that note, saying the antennas don’t go up to true 5G frequencies is a bit…misleading? Because while the freque…

Antennaes can be reused, but radio units and baseband units cannot, and those are by far more expensive. For example, a C-band array of radio units and baseband unit can cost upwards of $80k, while the antennae are a few thousand at most.

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#94

Post by darksaints » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 3:58 AM UTC

rubylark wrote: post #65

anthomtb wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something here doesn’t make sense to me. The retired 3G spectrum will be used for 4G and 5G (per the FCC article) so the antennas could be reused as the carrier frequency will not change. For a concrete example, if you’re running 3G at 900 MHz, why would running 5G at 900 MHz require a different antenna? On that note, saying the antennas don’t go up to true 5G frequencies is a bit…misleading? Because while the freque…

That's fair. Unfortunately I don't know the specifics of the hardware involved, and I wasn't there long enough to get a good understanding. I hope someone with more knowledge or industry experience can chime in. All I know that the company I worked for sold a completely new antenna assembly that supported 5G and that our customers were moving to using those antennas. As far as the size, all of the units we sold have…

The FR2 hardware requires phased array antennaes for beamforming capability. While it technically could be used without beamforming, it would be extremely inefficient and have even less range than their already limited range. And those MIMO phased array antennaes are crazy expensive...it's still a technology with several active patent encumbrances.

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#95

Post by rootsudo » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 5:45 AM UTC

wlesieutre wrote: post #86

btgeekboy wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, look at the upside - “unplugging” your car from the Internet may make it more secure.

In the Leaf's case, anyone with your VIN (ie anyone who can walk up to you car and look through the windshield) could turn on your car's AC over the internet and run the battery down. Whoops. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/nissans-connected-car-a...

That is interesting, you can walk through all the VINs since it's not really private.

Sure, someone could walk up to your leaf and target you, but much easier to run through the entire string of VIN's, which, is 17 characters.

GET https://[redacted].com/orchestration_1111/gdc/BatteryStatusR...

That's so cool, but also, no more. :) wonder what else is out there...

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#96

Post by DenseComet » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 6:13 AM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #60

KronisLV wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a side effect, anyone still using a 3G device needs to buy a new one, but I don't think that is the main driver for the move. Despite the positives, this feels kind of sad. If you look at software, many of the older browsers out there can't even open simple modern webpages. After years, i grow weary of the churn, i've gone from Windows 98 to Windows 10 now, through numerous versions of Debian/Ubuntu and CentOS/F…

Use old and sadly insecure hardware/software? I think "security" is used as a crutch and an excuse too much. As a retro hardware enthusiast, very often the hardware isn't insecure. It's just that someone somewhere got lazy or greedy or both and decided to do something that makes the hardware not work right anymore. Things like billion-dollar game companies that shut down servers that cost them all of $5,000 a year to…

Sure the server hardware itself might cost only $5,000 a year, but it can't just be left there on its own forever, as seen with the ongoing log4j vuln. Either it costs that much and puts their entire network at risk, or it costs a lot more due to engineering costs for maintenance.

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#97

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Dec 11, 2021, 4:54 PM UTC

tomxor wrote: post #70

xnyan wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...3G has another 12 years ahead of it "Assembly Research founder Matthew Howett told BBC News the change would probably come sooner than the government's 2033 deadline." 12 years is the deadline by which it must be done, not how long it will be around. 3G will be shut off in as as little as a year in some cases: "BT revealed plans to phase out 3G by 2023, and 2G later in the decade."

Well that sucks. Also a strange quote from BT since they don't actually have a mobile network.

[deleted]

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#98

Post by superkuh » Sun, Dec 12, 2021, 12:00 AM UTC

mdasen wrote: post #55

superkuh wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. 4G can stuff 300% more data hertz for hertz bandwidth compared to 3G. But 5G only does about 15-20% more data hertz for hertz than 4G. It really is a very minor increase in speed. All advertisements about 5G speed are really advertising for limited availability 3.5 GHz and mm-wave deployments in new spectrum... but of course the telcos are now realizing this spectrum, even the half gigahertz they stole of C band…

> 5G only does about 15-20% more data hertz for hertz than 4G At low-band, it's often quoted as 20%, but when you get to mid-band it's a lot more. That's one of the reasons there's been a mad-dash for mid-band spectrum. I'd also note that the radio standards are made to evolve. LTE wasn't nearly as efficient as it was when it was introduced which is why, for a time, HSPA+ networks were able to compete with LTE. > but…

>At low-band, it's often quoted as 20%, but when you get to mid-band it's a lot more.

That's an interesting claim. What aspect of the 2-4 GHz stuff gives 5G spec a greater relative spectral efficiency up there? The only thing I can think of would be tighter specifications for equipment phase noise and phase noise going up with frequency and becoming the main problem.

Re: Plan Ahead for Phase Out of 3G Cellular Networks and Service

#99

Post by usrbin » Mon, Dec 13, 2021, 12:37 AM UTC

xwdv wrote: post #73

usrbin wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cell phones and mobile devices in general have always been disposable items with limited expected lifespans. I agree with your second point, but I want to push back on this first point a bit. While it seems like manufacturers benefit from devices being disposable, I don't see a strong reason why they should be. The reality is that extending the lifespan of devices is one of the best ways to lower consumption. When…

I see a very strong reason. It’s not lifespan that matters, it’s attention span. You could build a device with a 1000 year lifespan, but it’s a waste of effort if the consumer wants a new one after 5 years. It’s optimal to build a device with a lifespan that will only be as long as a consumer’s interest in it.

Fair. Keeping in mind real-world consumer behavior matters to the equation.

That said I don't know that we should assume that "build for longevity" and "build for effective disposal" are mutually exclusive.