Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 339 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#101

Post by ilyt »

spookthesunset wrote: post #96
kjellsbells wrote: post #45

Having the 5G logo on your phone doesnt necessarily mean your phone is speaking 5G. It's...complicated. - Most US operators do not have ubiquitous 5G radio coverage, so, they do what is called 5G NSA where your traffic ultimately ends up veing processed by the 4G core infrastructure that they have. Which is already overloaded and a bit creaky. - Some operators can do real 5G, "5G SA", where the whole flow end to end…

The “real” 5g isn’t for your phone, it is to replace your home internet. For that, you want fast and low latency and that means a dense amount of cell towers. The fact that “real 5g” has a shorter range is actually a positive. It means you can make your shit super dense.

In dense permanent environments a bunch of cables will most likely be cheaper than having enough 5G cells to give everyone few hundred Mbits of transfer.

In scattered environment the range is too short to excuse the cost of covering it with 5G

There is no niche for it except for "my landlord didn't install proper internet so I use 5G" coz it happened to be alreadhy in range

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#102

Post by tremere »

spookthesunset wrote: post #96
kjellsbells wrote: post #45

Having the 5G logo on your phone doesnt necessarily mean your phone is speaking 5G. It's...complicated. - Most US operators do not have ubiquitous 5G radio coverage, so, they do what is called 5G NSA where your traffic ultimately ends up veing processed by the 4G core infrastructure that they have. Which is already overloaded and a bit creaky. - Some operators can do real 5G, "5G SA", where the whole flow end to end…

The “real” 5g isn’t for your phone, it is to replace your home internet. For that, you want fast and low latency and that means a dense amount of cell towers. The fact that “real 5g” has a shorter range is actually a positive. It means you can make your shit super dense.

Why would I want to replace my home internet with something less secure, less reliable, lossier, and slower?

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#103

Post by gmokki »

guhidalg wrote: post #99
headsoup wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost like we could just go back to cables and have a plenty good experience again...

But why? If you had the choice of EQUIVALENT (bandwidth, latency, jitter, reliability, etc…) network connectivity, why pick a wire over wireless?

Wireless consumes more energy. So it is more enironmentally friendly to go with wires, especially fiber. Personally I like to have both, wired main connection and wireless as backup.

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#104

Post by raverbashing »

tremere wrote: post #102
spookthesunset wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “real” 5g isn’t for your phone, it is to replace your home internet. For that, you want fast and low latency and that means a dense amount of cell towers. The fact that “real 5g” has a shorter range is actually a positive. It means you can make your shit super dense.

Why would I want to replace my home internet with something less secure, less reliable, lossier, and slower?

The same arguments apply to wireless headphones. (And I'm not disagreeing with you)

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#105

Post by mrjin »

For me I don't really need 5G at all as 4G already fast enough. I did not realize my phone was actually 5G until noticed the battery could barely make the day.

So I looked the battery statistics, and it seemed the radio ate lots of battery. It turned out that my mobile provider turned on 5G silently for me. So I forced the phone to connect to 4G or below and everything returned to where it was.

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#106

Post by raverbashing »

spookthesunset wrote: post #96
kjellsbells wrote: post #45

Having the 5G logo on your phone doesnt necessarily mean your phone is speaking 5G. It's...complicated. - Most US operators do not have ubiquitous 5G radio coverage, so, they do what is called 5G NSA where your traffic ultimately ends up veing processed by the 4G core infrastructure that they have. Which is already overloaded and a bit creaky. - Some operators can do real 5G, "5G SA", where the whole flow end to end…

The “real” 5g isn’t for your phone, it is to replace your home internet. For that, you want fast and low latency and that means a dense amount of cell towers. The fact that “real 5g” has a shorter range is actually a positive. It means you can make your shit super dense.

So whoever doesn't live in the city center gets a poor signal?

Sounds like short sighted view of the decade

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#107

Post by mattmaroon »

gmokki wrote: post #103
guhidalg wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why? If you had the choice of EQUIVALENT (bandwidth, latency, jitter, reliability, etc…) network connectivity, why pick a wire over wireless?

Wireless consumes more energy. So it is more enironmentally friendly to go with wires, especially fiber. Personally I like to have both, wired main connection and wireless as backup.

Is it though? What’s the environmental footprint of manufacturing, installing, and maintaining all of those wires?

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#109

Post by dilyevsky »

krackers wrote: post #72
dilyevsky wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh you can get one except us providers have turned off their 2g base stations

It's 3G that they've disabled, 2G/Edge still works and they're probably not going to actively tear it down since I recall it e doesn't use up any additional bandwidth (something about how 2G exists in the guard bands). That said I doubt they're going to pay to replace the infrastructure for it as it begins to fail.

Nope, not just 3g. Both verizon and tmobile shut down their cdmaOne stations (along with cdma2000) last year and att I think a while before that.

Re: Ask HN: Is it just me or is 5G strictly worse than LTE?

#110

Post by JohnFen »

guhidalg wrote: post #99
headsoup wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost like we could just go back to cables and have a plenty good experience again...

But why? If you had the choice of EQUIVALENT (bandwidth, latency, jitter, reliability, etc…) network connectivity, why pick a wire over wireless?

If it costs more, I wouldn't pick wireless. Losing the wire for my home internet gains me nothing.
Post reply on HN