5G; Do we really need it?

[Climb14er]

I remember being on very remote Colorado and Wyoming 14ers and 13ers with the analog phones, was able to get a signal, sometimes very clear, which blew my mind. When the carriers ditched analog to full digital, man 'o man, the signal dropped big time and just couldn't get a connection, or a very weak one.

Same thing with penetration into downtown Denver offices... analog would rule the airwaves.

That's how I currently view the 5G rollout. Until the carriers get their you know what together, LTE on a good carrier will rule over 5G. The old adage I've always subscribed to with cell phones is... get a signal FIRST... especially in the rural West... and don't worry about lower priced plans! Cause if you can't get a signal, saving a few bucks a month is meaningless.

 

[jameny5]

What? For making phone calls and texting? You have to be joking. It's just another excuse for the big tech companies to prize more more cash from your pocket.

He meant - " pry or take more " from our pockets. You can guarantee it.

 

[dangerousfen]

He meant - " pry or take more " from our pockets. You can guarantee it.

Thanks for the correction. Slip of the finger.

 

[Ry]

I don't need it today. Maybe I will in a year or so. I wouldn't buy a phone today just to have access to it. But I wouldn't not buy a phone today if it had it.

 

[bembol]

I don't think I've ever wished I had 5G. If it's free, sure I have no problems using but I doubt, especially up here in Canada carriers will be giving it away.

I see 5G like 1080P vs 4K in televisions. Sure 4K is amazing, I upgraded two televisions in our house with Samsung QLED Q60R & Q60T series not because to take advantage of 4K content, even though basically non-existence up here and Rogers has like 4 4K channels, I can't even watch a single NFL game on it.

I bought them because of overall picture quality, features and design...

Just like my phones.

Off topic & curious. How long has 4K been available, not going to bother with Canada as we're always behind but how's the content down there?

 

[jameny5]

I asked what the big deal was about getting 5G or What is so great about it somewhere on Tapatalk. Maybe on AnandTech or Howard Forums. Can't really remember. A person replied that it was about "CAPACITY" and not "SPEED". So I looked up the term CAPACITY:

[The maximum amount that something can contain.]

[Fully occupying the available area or a space]

I take issue with the second meaning. What does it do for 5G? If the occupied area gets congested by multiple users and faster speeds is that capacity going to keep people connected and ease the congestion in that area? I doubt it. A carrier will probably tell you it would to extract those all mighty dollars from your hands. I saw some 5G speeds for example: 1178 mbps up 678 mbps down screen shot on a phone. Those are like gigabit speeds. Does a cell phone really need all that speed? I've seen more screenshots of different 5G speeds. I don't see anybody jumping for joy or saying it is a revolutionary achievement. I just don't understand the hoopla or this technological advancement. Why do I need a fully covered space and faster speeds. Is 4GLTE not sufficient enough? Who has a 5G phone or router? What is this service doing for you at home or out and about?

 

[Morty2264]

Personally, I could do without 5G. I think my "speeds" on my devices are just fine, and I don't really see the need to pay more for a device that has 5G. Will I get one in the future? Maybe. But it's not a requirement now.

 

[anon(10728938)]

If 5G was actually available it might be worth it. Most carriers seem to be peddling glorified LTE disguised as 5G.

 

[the_boon]

If 5G was actually available it might be worth it. Most carriers seem to be peddling glorified LTE disguised as 5G.

To me it sounds just like a desperate attempt to try to keep people buying new hardware when said mobile hardware isn't really exciting anymore.

 

[Mike Dee]

If 5G was actually available it might be worth it. Most carriers seem to be peddling glorified LTE disguised as 5G.

Give it time.....it not just about faster speeds.

 

[dangerousfen]

Give it time.....it not just about faster speeds.

Maybe, but in the meantime we have to shell out an extra £100 on phones because of greedy carrier's/manufacturers.

 

[anon(10728938)]

Maybe, but in the meantime we have to shell out an extra £100 on phones because of greedy carrier's/manufacturers.

Wait a minute...5G is also good for bogus conspiracy theories and Chinese military backdoor access to our networks and data via Huawei equipment.

If I think of any other beneficial uses to add to rebranded LTE, I'll let you know.

 

[Houston Cyclephones]

Give it time.....it not just about faster speeds.

People are so quick to dismiss new tech because they can only see it from the lens of the present and not the future. They don't see how it opens up doors to new possibilities: higher data caps, faster speeds, lower latency blurs the lines between hardware and software. With unlimited data and better connectivity, you could download computing power from the cloud, which then lowers the cost of smartphones and makes it way more accessible for poorer regions.

It's like the famous example from Ford: if he asked what customers wanted, they would've said they wanted a faster horse!

 

[dangerousfen]

People are so quick to dismiss new tech because they can only see it from the lens of the present and not the future. They don't see how it opens up doors to new possibilities: higher data caps, faster speeds, lower latency blurs the lines between hardware and software. With unlimited data and better connectivity, you could download computing power from the cloud, which then lowers the cost of smartphones and makes it way more accessible for poorer regions.

It's like the famous example from Ford: if he asked what customers wanted, they would've said they wanted a faster horse!

Maybe, but they didn't have to pay extra for the horse before the car arrived.

 

[Houston Cyclephones]

Maybe, but they didn't have to pay extra for the horse before the car arrived.

That's true, but the car was more expensive than a horse at first.

The cost of phones were rising before 5G. A 5G RF chip really doesn't add much to the BOM of a phone, maybe $20 max. The manufacturers know that people are willing to pay for more features and gimmicks.

I actually think it's a good thing that some people are willing to pay, because they are allowing companies to innovate and bring these new technologies to scale. Without them, we might never get 5G

 

[dangerousfen]

That's true, but the car was more expensive than a horse at first.

The cost of phones were rising before 5G. A 5G RF chip really doesn't add much to the BOM of a phone, maybe $20 max. The manufacturers know that people are willing to pay for more features and gimmicks.

I actually think it's a good thing that some people are willing to pay, because they are allowing companies to innovate and bring these new technologies to scale. Without them, we might never get 5G

I hear what you say, but I still don't believe we need 5g. For the foreseeable future 4g is quite sufficient to achieve anything we need from a phone.

 

[Mooncatt]

People are so quick to dismiss new tech because they can only see it from the lens of the present and not the future. They don't see how it opens up doors to new possibilities...

I don't disagree about future possibilities, but why should one care about future possibilities when trying to buy a phone today, limited to today's technology?

I think that is the crux of the argument from those of us not falling for the marketing hype. There is nothing a current 5G phone can do that a similar 4G LTE phone can't. We see it from the lens of that present because you have to in this discussion.

By the time the hypothetical advancements come close to being truly advantageous to phone use, this discussion will have died out, and people with existing phones will be upgrading. At that point, yes those advancements will be worth considering when buying a phone.

 

[dangerousfen]

I don't disagree about future possibilities, but why should one care about future possibilities when trying to buy a phone today, limited to today's technology?

I think that is the crux of the argument from those of us not falling for the marketing hype. There is nothing a current 5G phone can do that a similar 4G LTE phone can't. We see it from the lens of that present because you have to in this discussion.

By the time the hypothetical advancements come close to being truly advantageous to phone use, this discussion will have died out, and people with existing phones will be upgrading. At that point, yes those advancements will be worth considering when buying a phone.

Yes, and it's us users that are currently paying for it and funding the hype and greed.

 

[anon(50597)]

People are so quick to dismiss new tech because they can only see it from the lens of the present and not the future. They don't see how it opens up doors to new possibilities: higher data caps, faster speeds, lower latency blurs the lines between hardware and software. With unlimited data and better connectivity, you could download computing power from the cloud, which then lowers the cost of smartphones and makes it way more accessible for poorer regions.

It's like the famous example from Ford: if he asked what customers wanted, they would've said they wanted a faster horse!

I agree it's more about building out for the future and bringing access to more people.

The problem is the cost. I'm not a large data user so get access pretty cheap. To get a 5g plan with my carrier would add $240 per year to my plan. I'm not willing to do that.

 

[Houston Cyclephones]

I agree it's more about building out for the future and bringing access to more people.

The problem is the cost. I'm not a large data user so get access pretty cheap. To get a 5g plan with my carrier would add $240 per year to my plan. I'm not willing to do that.

Wow that is some BS. where are you located and who is your carrier?