I expect that neither Google or Facebook will become a next generation ISP:
Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
31–40 of 64 posts
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone got a resource that explains the relationship between spectrum/frequency/modulation-tech/etc and bandwidth in an understandable way for someone not-so-physics/signal-processing-literate? My [uninformed] intuition tells me that you can have theoretically infinite bandwidth over any spectrum or modulation scheme, but the cost/size/energy-requirement quickly gets prohibitively high because of the "sensitivity" su…
That's why they call it "bandwidth" - the width of the spectrum band is what determines the information throughput. Wikipedia might work as a primer. See Nyquist & Shannon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampli... For example, in order to sample the FM radio signals in the frequency range of 100-102 MHz, it is not necessary to sample at 204 MHz (twice the upper frequency), but rather it is suff…
Also take a look at spectrum efficiency, which is the "practical implementation" of all this.
It really helps to understand how spectrum is a limited public resource. For example, a carrier with 20MHz of spectrum each way and a tower covering 1km2 in 3 sectors could offer at most 60Mbps down over 3G.
If you have 6000 customers in that same area (remember that some cities have densities in the 10+k/km2), that means ~10Kbps per customer on average, which is enough for 1.5 GB/month/customer.
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#33I have been toying with one fantastic idea lately. I know why it would seem like a pure fantasy, and I'm not pretending that it's anything more at the moment, but give it some benefit of a doubt. It's quite simple. Imagine, just for a second, that current trillion evaluations for all the unicorns will turn out to be true in some point in the future. How can it be? What will be going on in this fantastic world? There'…
You know you could've condensed that entire post down to "I think Internet will eventually be free and subsidized by the companies that profit from the usage of it."? Hell, Facebook's already doing it with Internet.org.
Didn't have enough time to write it shorter, I'm afraid.
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bandwidth doesn't depend on the frequency you're occupying, but on the amount of spectrum available: you "usually" get in the order of 1 bps for every Hz of spectrum available for mobile: a 20Mz chunk of spectrum will give you ~20Mbps, no matter if it is 700MHz or 5 GHz. (Please notice that YMMV, LTE gets several times that, illustrative, bla bla bla, etc.). Higher frequencies have awful penetration and range, th…
Cellular network capacity is a function of channel width, modulation, and spatial reuse. Because there are many more low-frequency channels of a given width than high frequency ones, it's much easier to justify very wide channels at higher frequencies. The better propagation of lower frequencies is also a double edged sword. It's much easier to build a very dense cellular network if cell sites far apart can't hear ea…
> because higher frequencies propagate more directionally
Again, right conclusion but wrong premise. The don't propagate more directionally, but as they have limited penetration and high attenuation, they are more useful for point-to-point with line-of-sight than for broadcast.
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#35I expect that neither Google or Facebook will become a next generation ISP: http://vita.mcafee.cc/PDF/feint.pdf
I agree - the entire purpose of this is to threaten other companies into providing better service. Same exact thing with Google Fiber.
"If you don't provide service to our expectations, we will step in."
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cellular network capacity is a function of channel width, modulation, and spatial reuse. Because there are many more low-frequency channels of a given width than high frequency ones, it's much easier to justify very wide channels at higher frequencies. The better propagation of lower frequencies is also a double edged sword. It's much easier to build a very dense cellular network if cell sites far apart can't hear ea…
> there are many more low-frequency channels of a given width than high frequency ones, it's much easier to justify very wide channels at higher frequencies. Right conclusion, wrong (mis-stated?) premise. There are more high-frequency channels of a given width than low-frequency ones. 700-800 MHz is a whopping 12.5% change, and it gets you 100 MHz to work with, but 5.725-5.875 is only a 2.5% change and gets you 150 M…
Yeah, meant that the other way around.
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#37This can't get here fast enough. To people who don't really get why they're doing this, or who think it only makes sense in undeveloped regions with no cell towers, I wrote about this here: http://collectiveidea.com/blog/archives/2016/01/15/wisp-tria... Basically, if you think that in developed areas cell tower density has or should have an inverse correlation with the cost of bandwidth, then you don't live in the re…
I share your general optimism on sky-based broadband, but I have to admit that I do not follow your argument about rent-seekers.
All physical space, even space in the sky, is in limited supply. So why does the rent-seeking nature of cell towers make sky-based broadband inevitable?
I can see why sky-based broadband affords a huge competitive advantage, allowing Google to beam 1gbps for $5/mo to the 15 million people who live in Northern California.
But why does that make it more likely to come to pass? Are balloon/drone flight plans inevitably easier to file than zoning permits for cell towers? Won't altitude eventually be auctioned off by the FCC? I fear that part of what makes sky-based broadband attractive is the perhaps naïve notion that government will always control the skies in the relatively light-handed way in which it currently controls the skies.
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#38This can't get here fast enough. To people who don't really get why they're doing this, or who think it only makes sense in undeveloped regions with no cell towers, I wrote about this here: http://collectiveidea.com/blog/archives/2016/01/15/wisp-tria... Basically, if you think that in developed areas cell tower density has or should have an inverse correlation with the cost of bandwidth, then you don't live in the re…
But how would they combat a storm/rain/hail?
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#39In the mean time, I am stuck at slow 3G. Are there regulations for the frequencies at which they can transmit their services? Err?
It's very strange that "3G" networks are so slow. HSPA+ supports 22 Mb/s and has better spectral efficiency than LTE, so why do we never see anything approaching that in real life?
Re: Google plans to beam 5G internet from solar drones
#40If your payload is power generation equipment, and you are able to stay airborne for an indefinite period, is that not perpetual motion?
The usual preventative physics apply; friction, efficiency.