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

Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 250 posts

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#71

Post by Hendrikto »

alerighi wrote: post #63
kristofferR wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that simply fixed by shutting down the old 2G and 3G networks, like is happening in a lot of countries now?

You can't shut down 2G, because there are a lot of devices, mainly embedded systems like alarms, lift emergency call button, GPS trackers, etc. that still use 2G. Also 2G is the only reliable network connection in a lot of areas that are not otherwise reached by 3G/4G/5G, mainly because a 2G connection is more tolerant to low signal and noise, and also is low frequency, thus 2G is the only option available in situati…

You claim that they cannot be disabled, while this is already happening [0][1][2]. Some countries, like Switzerland, already completed the shutdown years ago [2].

[0]: https://newsroom.vodafone.de/2g-abschaltung-macht-lte-und-5g...

[1]: https://www.telekom.de/hilfe/2g-abschaltung

[2]: https://www.rosenberger-telematics.com/en/news/switching-off...

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#72

Post by aryonoco »

alerighi wrote: post #63
kristofferR wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that simply fixed by shutting down the old 2G and 3G networks, like is happening in a lot of countries now?

You can't shut down 2G, because there are a lot of devices, mainly embedded systems like alarms, lift emergency call button, GPS trackers, etc. that still use 2G. Also 2G is the only reliable network connection in a lot of areas that are not otherwise reached by 3G/4G/5G, mainly because a 2G connection is more tolerant to low signal and noise, and also is low frequency, thus 2G is the only option available in situati…

I can tell you that here in Australia we shut down 2G in 2011 and 3G in 2022-2023.

And yes many things broke, train ticket vending machines stopped working, smart meters stopped working, etc. But then the got replaced.

2G and 3G is a horrible waste of bandwidth compared to 5G. Keeping them on and wasting all that bandwidth is borderline negligence.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#73

Post by FridayoLeary »

alerighi wrote: post #63
kristofferR wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that simply fixed by shutting down the old 2G and 3G networks, like is happening in a lot of countries now?

You can't shut down 2G, because there are a lot of devices, mainly embedded systems like alarms, lift emergency call button, GPS trackers, etc. that still use 2G. Also 2G is the only reliable network connection in a lot of areas that are not otherwise reached by 3G/4G/5G, mainly because a 2G connection is more tolerant to low signal and noise, and also is low frequency, thus 2G is the only option available in situati…

I think you are wrong. 2g and 3g is slowly but surely being killed everywhere. Which is a shame because it's much easier on batteries then 4g, but they want that bandwidth.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#74

Post by fundatus »

ttoinou wrote: post #66
fundatus wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously, but in case the sarcasm of my comment didn't come through: I was trying to make the point that you can't draw lines between continents just because of geography (or tectonic plates for that matter). It's arbitrary - after all we can't even agree which continents do exist. Relevant watching: Map Men: How many continents are there? ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrsxRJdwfM0 )

Yes it is arbitrary (like most of things actually) but the distinction between Europe and Asia is the most arbitrary of all of them

It's an interesting topic since most people in a hypothetical Eurasia would probably never call themselves Eurasian, but would have a strong sense of being one or the other. But on the other hand there is also no universally agreed to boundary between the two as well. And maybe this imprecision the best representation of reality that we have for this.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#75

Post by wongarsu »

throwaway198846 wrote: post #50
fundatus wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To be really pedantic we should acknowledge there's no good reason to separate Europe from Asia, it's all one geographical continent. To be even more pedantic you have to throw in Africa as well, as that is connected by land to Asia just like Europe is! Now we have the supercontinent Afroeurasia which contains like 85% of the worlds population.

Suez Canal exists and cuts off Africa from Eurasia

So Africa separated from Eurasia in 1869? And if canals count then Northern Germany is its own continent, Great Britain is several continents, etc. Man-made canals forming a meaningful geographical separation is a weird concept on so many levels

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#77

Post by Bombthecat »

fguerraz wrote: post #60

This is just corporate greed! I live in a EU country in an apartment and 5GHz is completely crowded and pretty much unusable because of DFS (making your WiFi AP unexpectedly stop to do a complete scan and choose a new channel), so 6GHz is the only stable, high bandwidth option here, and we need more channels so that most peopole chan switch to it. The cellular networks operators can have that shitty 5GHz part of the…

And you think the same problem wouldn't exist with 6ghz?

It will be as crowded as 5

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#78

Post by trueismywork »

fguerraz wrote: post #60

This is just corporate greed! I live in a EU country in an apartment and 5GHz is completely crowded and pretty much unusable because of DFS (making your WiFi AP unexpectedly stop to do a complete scan and choose a new channel), so 6GHz is the only stable, high bandwidth option here, and we need more channels so that most peopole chan switch to it. The cellular networks operators can have that shitty 5GHz part of the…

Realn solution is to have houses not so close to each other.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#79

Post by matt-p »

fguerraz wrote: post #60

This is just corporate greed! I live in a EU country in an apartment and 5GHz is completely crowded and pretty much unusable because of DFS (making your WiFi AP unexpectedly stop to do a complete scan and choose a new channel), so 6GHz is the only stable, high bandwidth option here, and we need more channels so that most peopole chan switch to it. The cellular networks operators can have that shitty 5GHz part of the…

There's still a load of non-DFS channels you could be using? At least in an apartment you can run an ethernet cable for the most important devices.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#80

Post by wongarsu »

ttoinou wrote: post #67
fundatus wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To be really pedantic we should acknowledge there's no good reason to separate Europe from Asia, it's all one geographical continent. To be even more pedantic you have to throw in Africa as well, as that is connected by land to Asia just like Europe is! Now we have the supercontinent Afroeurasia which contains like 85% of the worlds population.

Tell me more how Europe is separated by a canal from Asia ? There are benefits splitting America in two, splitting Africa from Eurasia, splitting Australia from Eurasia. What's the benefit of splitting Eurasia into Europe and Asia, besides catering to europeans who believe they're unique in the world ? It only creates more problems

Europe and Asia are separated by mountains. Geographically that's at least as valid as splitting America on a canal, and splitting Africa from Asia on a canal. If anything the mountains are a more significant barrier to travel and migration than those canals

If we were to rearrange the continents if anything we should split up Asia further, and split Africa into Northern Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa (maybe giving Sub-Saharan Africa to the same new continent as the Arabian peninsula, but that's debatable)

Post reply on HN