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

5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 376 posts

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#331

Post by lozf »

ksec wrote: post #319
rsynnott wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5G is (at least on paper) _very_ low latency; couple of ms.

It is not on paper. Couple of ms ( 4ms ) is real, except it is not normal 5G but specific superset / version of 5G. Your network needs to be End to End running on 5G-A ( 3GPP Rel 18 ) with full SA ( Stand Alone ) using NR ( New Radio ) only. Right now AFAIK only Mobile networks in China has managed to run that. ( Along with turning on VoNR ) Most other network are still behind in deployment and switching.

On that note, the BBC deployed a temporary 5G SA non-public-network to broadcast King Charles' Coronation, giving over 1Gbps uplink over 1km of the procession route. More details are in the award-winning white paper linked from this[0] blog post.

[0]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/blog/2023-05-5g-non-public-network-...

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#332

Post by ksec »

I have been arguing since 2020 ( That is before majority of 5G being deployed ) that we need 6G not as another 10 - 1000x bandwidth / capacity improvement. We have enough within 5G roadmap already. 6G should make it cheaper for both devices and carrier, more efficient and simplified because current 5G is overly complex.

For those criticising 5G, most mobile network has yet to move to Stand Alone network with NR yet. And after that they will have to refarm all the 4G spectrum to 5G. They could also replace equipment that were 4G / 5G to 5G+ / 5G-A, allowing cheaper Massive MIMO hence much higher capacity. Doing all that while continue to tune the network both front and backend. Despite 5 years into 5G we are still behind in many aspect. Most likely due to COVID.

But it seems some network has NO interest to further improve on current tech. I assume they would do minimum investing once they force everyone to 5G.

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#333

Post by vel0city »

theshackleford wrote: post #308
sureIy wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't ask someone today to see what they're not used to see. I expect a future of screens that are natively subtly 3D and where you could see someone's nose hair without focusing. Only then they will notice "why do they look blurry and flat" when comparing it to an old TV. Today if you get closer to a TV you will see blur. Tomorrow you will see the bird's individual strands of feathers. "Good enough" is temporary…

> Only then they will notice "why do they look blurry and flat" when comparing it to an old TV. They either won’t notice or won’t care and even if they do, it takes far longer than enthusiasts expect for the line to move. Large numbers of people still say in 2025 that ‘4K is a gimmick,’ so I’m not holding my breath. ‘Good enough’ lasts much longer for the majority than most realise. Look at displays today: I can’t ev…

It reminds me back when HDTV was starting to roll out to things like cable television. Often cable companies kept the standard def versions of the channels on the normal channel numbers while the HD version of the channel would be that number +500 or +1000 or whatever.

I would constantly see friends and family just tune to the standard def 4:3 version of the channel often being terribly stretched despite having a new widescreen HDTV. I'd ask why they're watching the SD channel instead of the HD version, and it seemed like most people didn't even notice it. I'd often suggest/go ahead and change the channel to the HD version and talk about where these HD channels are, but the next time I'd visit it would be on standard def 4:3 again.

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#334

Post by encom »

gambiting wrote: post #265
yieldcrv wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m all for advancements in the size of various models able to be loaded onto devices, and the amount of fast ram available for them

Sure, but why is my Samsung tumble dryer "enhanced with AI" now? You know what it does? You turn it on, it shows "optimising with AI" on the screen....to show you the most used programme. That's not AI, that's a counter in a text file somewhere. But of course everything has to have AI now so my tumble dryer now has AI. The market has spoken.

What "programs" does a tumble dryer even need? You press the ON button, and it should continue until its contents are dry.

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#335

Post by vel0city »

throw0101c wrote: post #174
Marsymars wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd figure that would incentivize cell operators not to market segment higher speeds behind higher prices. It's like I'm paying them extra for the privilege of increasing their network efficiency.

4G (AIUI) uses different frequencies, is a sunk cost, and 5G needs new gear, so someone has to pay for upgrades and the 5G frequency auctions.

4G and 5G can use the same frequencies, but they don't coexist on the same frequencies like the different revisions of WiFi can.

5G can also operate on additional higher frequencies than regular 4G deployments. But often a lot of 5G you see deployed are in the same 700-1900MHz-ish kind of range.

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#336

Post by wcoenen »

madwolf wrote: post #322
gerdesj wrote: post #214

OK so someone has noticed that you "only" need 15MBs-1 for a 4K stream. Jolly good. Now let's address latency - that entire article only mentioned the word once and it looks like it was by accident. Latency isn't cool but it is why your Teams/Zoom/whatevs call sounds a bit odd. You are probably used to the weird over-talking episodes you get when a sound stream goes somewhat async. You put up with it but you really s…

A decent quality stream is not 256 kilobytes per second (1/4 megabyte), as you write. You probably meant 256kilobits, which is only 32 kilobytes. For speech that’s VERY high quality. Teams actually uses either G.722 or SILK codec, which is just 40kbit/s. That’s 5 kilobytes per second.

Tangentially related to the topic of the bandwidth efficiency of Teams: screen sharing in Teams has a very low framerate of about 3 to 4 fps. It is driving me insane, especially when the presenter starts relentlessly scrolling up and down and circling things with the mouse cursor.

I think Microsoft took bandwidth efficiency a bit too far here.

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#337

Post by ofcrpls »

Zigurd wrote: post #328
ksec wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not on paper. Couple of ms ( 4ms ) is real, except it is not normal 5G but specific superset / version of 5G. Your network needs to be End to End running on 5G-A ( 3GPP Rel 18 ) with full SA ( Stand Alone ) using NR ( New Radio ) only. Right now AFAIK only Mobile networks in China has managed to run that. ( Along with turning on VoNR ) Most other network are still behind in deployment and switching.

Although the deployments are very limited, wouldn't the 5G mmWave coverage, in NFL stadiums for example, need to have both New Radio (NR) and Stand Alone (SA)? Or is there some bodge for down-rating your mmWave experience to a non-Stand Alone network? I understand you won't get SA end-to-end calling an endpoint on an LTE network, but, with 5G FWA also needing SA to achieve full performance, SA should be pretty widesp…

US Stadium mmW deployments and showcases at marquee sporting events happened well before SA was ever out of the labs.

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#338

Post by HDThoreaun »

rstuart4133 wrote: post #231
protocolture wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your second and third paragraph are contradictory. Common carriers become the barrier to network upgrades. Always. Without fail. Monopolies are a bad idea, whether state or privately owned. Let me give you 2 examples. In australia we had Telstra (Formerly Telecom, Formerly Auspost). Testra would resell carriers ADSL services, and they stank. The carriers couldn't justify price increases to upgrade their networks and…

Yeah, I've noticed the same things with roads. They are common carriers owned mostly by the government, so they never get upgraded. That freeway near my house is always clogged. Oh wait ... the reason that freeway is always clogged is they are ripping it up, doubling it's width. And now I think about it, hasn't the NBN recently upgraded their max speeds from 100 Mb/s, to 250Mb/s, and now to 1Gb/s. And isn't the NBN c…

Things don’t improve without competition. Roads have to be a monopoly because they take up so much space but we should endeavor to have as few monopolies as possible because they breed complacency every single time. At least here in Chicago the roads are horribly mismanaged but we just have to put up with it.

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#339

Post by richardwhiuk »

lambdaone wrote: post #311
rsynnott wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5G is (at least on paper) _very_ low latency; couple of ms.

It is until you congest it. Then, like all other network technologies, performance collapses. You can still force traffic through with EDC, buffering, and re-tries, but at massive cost to overall network performance.

Cellular technologies can be configured to degrade differently to WiFi. The device gets fewer assigned slices, so the bandwidth reduces, but latency should remain static.

Re: 5G networks meet consumer needs as mobile data growth slows

#340

Post by kittikitti »

After reading this, I can't help but point out the misinformation about 5G coverage. At least in America, 5G coverage is at best around 50% of the country. I distrust the carrier claims and maps about their coverage because even in covered areas I'm not able to get advertised speeds.

It could be that mobile applications have hesitated to rollout features like 4K streaming video because most users don't have true 5G coverage. We might not see mobile data growing because we've failed in our 5G infrastructure goals. The political atmosphere might not support building out more 5G networks either.

Post reply on HN