Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread

[ase500]

Why would it take 10 years to take LTE and revise it for high bandwidth? Samsung built a 60GHz transmitter prototype in no time and got it working. They can build and finalize radios and we'll start to see deployment after 5 or 6, maybe 7 years. 2020-2022 is pretty much the expected time frame.

Because no one has built one yet. No one has setup and tested LTE at that frequency. Because you have debug the problems. You're talking about 3 years right there. Then you're into prototyping and fixing any problems that arise there. Then you have to go into production and field testing. That would all ad upto about another 3 years. Then you have to sell people on it and start contracts so you have the money to ramp up production. At least a year and a half. And at each turn updates to the protocols need to be tested. Then you need to start actual deployment. No network has even fully converted to LTE after 5 years. Since most fiber is only 10 Gbps at this point massive over haul of fiber across the country would need to be completed to support the backhauls needed to support what would have to be cells numbering into the millons per carrier. Even if the companies would spend that kind of cash needed to do it, we don't have the labor force to do it. And what would be the point? 4k streaming runs just fine on 60 Mbps. What exactly are you doing that you need more than 300 Mbps that 3CA will peak at? Data is exploding, yes, but that is going not going to continue and certainly not for cellphones. 8k is going to be about the peak for video streaming and vr is not going to require anymore than 8k. VR and 8k both will work just fine at 150 Mbps. I run what is essentially a small Datacenter on a 100 Mbps line in my home. There simply isn't anything that a cell phone is going to do in the next few years that is going to max out current round upgrades.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[ase500]

http://www.tp-link.com/en/products/details/AD7200.html

Your next router, sir

And despite a release date of April they haven't shipped a single unit.....

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[payturr]

And what would be the point? 4k streaming runs just fine on 60 Mbps. What exactly are you doing that you need more than 300 Mbps that 3CA will peak at? Data is exploding, yes, but that is going not going to continue and certainly not for cellphones. 8k is going to be about the peak for video streaming and vr is not going to require anymore than 8k. VR and 8k both will work just fine at 150 Mbps. I run what is essentially a small Datacenter on a 100 Mbps line in my home. There simply isn't anything that a cell phone is going to do in the next few years that is going to max out current round upgrades.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Trust me, I know I don't need 10Gbps. Give me 50Mbps and I'm a happy camper.

However, like I said, it's for the city. NYC,Chicago, LA, San Francisco, Houston, Jacksonville.. All populated markets with congestion issues. And the demand for data is constantly growing with increasing video consumption and live streaming. Even football stadiums with large DAS systems can't handle the crowd's consumption during a game. 5G's entire concept is to solve congestion issues. Crazy data speeds is just a byproduct.

[ase500]

Trust me, I know I don't need 10Gbps. Give me 50Mbps and I'm a happy camper.

However, like I said, it's for the city. NYC,Chicago, LA, San Francisco, Houston, Jacksonville.. All populated markets with congestion issues. And the demand for data is constantly growing with increasing video consumption and live streaming. Even football stadiums with large DAS systems can't handle the crowd's consumption during a game. 5G's entire concept is to solve congestion issues. Crazy data speeds is just a byproduct.

Then what you want is 2.5 ghz micro cell deployment. Because as I stated before the data link would be unreliable at the frequency you are talking about and would increase overhead thus decreasing the actual throughput and as you move further from the cell you get the worse it would become.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[payturr]

Then what you want is 2.5 ghz micro cell deployment. Because as I stated before the data link would be unreliable at the frequency you are talking about and would increase overhead thus decreasing the actual throughput and as you move further from the cell you get the worse it would become.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

As I said before, we have multiple papers on the propagation and coverage of mmW and of course the distance isn't great but it's only intended to cover places in a block by block basis sometimes more sometimes less depending on the type of traffic the area in question gets. And of course 2.5GHz small cell deployment! I'm talking more so long term for the other carriers who are running lower and lower on spectrum, Sprint's totally good right now (although if they can get some 28GHz as a failsafe, that would be nice)

[ase500]

As I said before, we have multiple papers on the propagation and coverage of mmW and of course the distance isn't great but it's only intended to cover places in a block by block basis sometimes more sometimes less depending on the type of traffic the area in question gets. And of course 2.5GHz small cell deployment! I'm talking more so long term for the other carriers who are running lower and lower on spectrum, Sprint's totally good right now (although if they can get some 28GHz as a failsafe, that would be nice)

Papers are great. I have paper from the 1970s on digital audio players. Papers are just that. You have to get to an actual product. That is simply just a lot harder than you understand. There just is no foreseeable future is those frequencies for cell phone use. This may change but for right now it makes no sense to even entertain the concept. No one has perfected any device for home use yet, let alone high availability services.

 

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Trip]

I went to this:

 

https://www.fcc.gov/news-events/events/2016/03/spectrum-frontiers-workshop

 

Well, I skipped the talk and went to see the equipment demos.

 

Were they all hoaxes?

 

- Trip

[greenbastard]

I think something that is worth noting is that there is this ongoing belief that 5G networks will have to be something as ubiquitous as current networks are. Who's to say that they don't take the approach that many connected cities are with regard to their WiFi.

 

By this I mean having hotspots of incredibly fast network connections in a dense deployment where outdoors you're covered decently and able to get those speeds when necessary. Indoors one doesn't need as fast speeds and likely could be bumped down to a 4G network much the same way we used to think about 4G and 3G networks.

The costs of deploying and running these super incredibly small cells looks to be extremely high. Backhaul (for bandwidth that even Sprint doesn't currently get today), electricity, and rent add up. It's simply not worth anyone's time. It's a terrible return on investment since you would have to add millions of subscribers just to cover operating costs for an airlink that will be so unreliable and degrade as soon as you start walking away from it (which you would want to if you don't want to get burned).

 

Ultra High band 5G is all a pipe dream for mobile users. I can maybe believe that it could work for fixed locations if they were to set up a complex antenna in their roof. But not mobile.

 

For 5G, wireless providers will probably just end up repurposing their current spectrum for a new standard of wireless that is more efficient than LTE.

[greenbastard]

As I said before, we have multiple papers on the propagation and coverage of mmW and of course the distance isn't great but it's only intended to cover places in a block by block basis sometimes more sometimes less depending on the type of traffic the area in question gets.

And who's going to pay the operating expenses of this new equipment and cells? You do realize that densifying a network for 60 Ghz is nothing like densifying for 2.5 Ghz? The costs and operating expenses will add up. Backhaul isn't cheap, neither is rent. Especially if these small cells won't be used that much since they are outdoors only.

Talking more so long term for the other carriers who are running lower and lower on spectrum, Sprint's totally good right now (although if they can get some 28GHz as a failsafe, that would be nice)

No, they are not good right now. In its current state, Sprint's network is not dense enough for 2.5 GHz to work. Speeds on B26 are still sub 1 Mbps even though most towers now have B41. If you think blanketing a town with 60Ghz 5G is so easy, then you haven't kept up with the rollout of B41. There are too many gaps in so many places and Sprint has yet to replace Clearwire equipment with 8T8R panels.

 

Ultra High Band wireless is not the future. Operators are just going to have to get together and invest in a new wireless standard that will make better use of their current spectrum. That's how it's been done since the analog days and will probably continue to be done.

[nexgencpu]

Let's forget about all this "faux 5G" talk and concentrate on the real deal!

Check this out!!!

Sprint small cell install with UE Relay backhaul in SoCal..

https://twitter.com/RFtelecomGuy/status/730545078263894016

[payturr]

And who's going to pay the operating expenses of this new equipment and cells? You do realize that densifying a network for 60 Ghz is nothing like densifying for 2.5 Ghz? The costs and operating expenses will add up. Backhaul isn't cheap, neither is rent. Especially if these small cells won't be used that much since they are outdoors only.

No, they are not good right now. In its current state, Sprint's network is not dense enough for 2.5 GHz to work. Speeds on B26 are still sub 1 Mbps even though most towers now have B41. If you think blanketing a town with 60Ghz 5G is so easy, then you haven't kept up with the rollout of B41. There are too many gaps in so many places and Sprint has yet to replace Clearwire equipment with 8T8R panels.

 

Ultra High Band wireless is not the future. Operators are just going to have to get together and invest in a new wireless standard that will make better use of their current spectrum. That's how it's been done since the analog days and will probably continue to be done.

The carriers can deploy a small cell a block, and 1 out of every 5 or so can be fed fiberoptic while the others that are in LoS can pick up back haul via UE Relay from the fiber optic fed small cell. There's many ways to feed the small sites.

 

When I said Sprint's good, I meant with their spectrum holdings. I know their deployment isn't good I'm in the city every day dealing with hit or miss speeds!

 

There just isn't much more that can be done with current spectrum. If there was a newer tech to deploy current spectrum on, everyone would be experimenting on it. We'd have more research papers on what it may be. But so far all the research and vendors and carriers are looking at EHF frequencies to do build high capacity networks. If we were to make a whole new tech with a brand new modulation method that would take much longer than any high band deployment.

[payturr]

Let's forget about all this "faux 5G" talk and concentrate on the real deal..

 

Check this out!!!

 

Sprint small cell install with UE Relay backhaul in SoCal

 

https://twitter.com/RFtelecomGuy/status/730545078263894016

Hey nice! SoCal needs these so it's really good to see them be installed. Hopefully hundreds more pop up down there

[bigmachine]

Let's forget about all this "faux 5G" talk and concentrate on the real deal!

 

Check this out!!!

 

Sprint small cell install with UE Relay backhaul in SoCal..

 

https://twitter.com/RFtelecomGuy/status/730545078263894016

 

 

That doesn't look like an ALU MetroCell.  Any idea what it is?

[nexgencpu]

That doesn't look like an ALU MetroCell.  Any idea what it is?

NSN B41 Flexi

 

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/topic/6789-band-41-pico-cells-nokia-networks/

[utiz4321]

Let's forget about all this "faux 5G" talk and concentrate on the real deal!

 

Check this out!!!

 

Sprint small cell install with UE Relay backhaul in SoCal..

 

https://twitter.com/RFtelecomGuy/status/730545078263894016

How do you know it is sprint's?

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

[nexgencpu]

How do you know it is sprint's?

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

You mean besides the fact that guy works for Sprint, and that its Sprint equipment? I dont know, just a hunch! 

[bigmachine]

You mean besides the fact that guy works for Sprint, and that its Sprint equipment? I dont know, just a hunch!

And his tweet says Sprint/Mobilitie.

[avb]

You mean besides the fact that guy works for Sprint, and that its Sprint equipment? I dont know, just a hunch! 

 

And his tweet says Sprint/Mobilitie.

 

But still, how do you really know???

 

/s

[lilotimz]

That doesn't look like an ALU MetroCell. Any idea what it is?

Nokia finalized the purchase of Alcatel-Lucentin January.

 

Alcatel-Lucent is Nokia now.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

[lilotimz]

How do you know it is sprint's?

 

Sent from my LGLS992 using Tapatalk

In California, the three other carriers exclusively use Ericsson.

 

 

Northern half sprint uses samsung. Southern half sprint uses formerly Alcatel-Lucent CDMA LTE equipment and now Nokia LTE equipment.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

[RedSpark]

In California, the three other carriers exclusively use Ericsson.

 

 

Northern half sprint uses samsung. Southern half sprint uses formerly Alcatel-Lucent CDMA LTE equipment and now Nokia LTE equipment.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5X

 

Why the geographical split for equipment type in CA?

 

Why didn't Sprint go with one equipment provider (i.e. Samsung, etc.) for nationwide deployment? Wouldn't that be easier for network management?

[caspar347]

Why the geographical split for equipment type in CA?

 

Why didn't Sprint go with one equipment provider (i.e. Samsung, etc.) for nationwide deployment? Wouldn't that be easier for network management?

I think it's about equipment failure risk spreading. (Asset diversity now that I think about it.) The regions were probably auctioned.

[Terrell352]

I read about that. What's the deal with Sprint not adding any more 2.5 antennas on existing cell sites for now. Is this legit or is it just people throwing out rumors

 

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

I also want to know about this.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[JustinRP37]

http://www.tp-link.com/en/products/details/AD7200.html

Your next router, sir

 

And exactly WHAT ISP will support speeds even remotely close to that?

[WiWavelength]

Why the geographical split for equipment type in CA?

 

Why didn't Sprint go with one equipment provider (i.e. Samsung, etc.) for nationwide deployment? Wouldn't that be easier for network management?

 

Infeasible.  Not one of the big four domestic operators uses the same infrastructure vendor across all markets.  Supply chain.  Not enough equipment to go around quickly.

 

And, in some cases, Network Vision, for example, certain vendor infrastructure plays more nicely with certain legacy infrastructure as some sites are upgraded, others remain legacy during the lengthy network overhaul process.  Ericsson CDMA2000 is Nortel legacy intellectual property.  Alcatel-Lucent CDMA2000 is Lucent legacy intellectual property.  Samsung CDMA2000, on the other hand, still is Samsung intellectual property.  But Sprint had only one or two Samsung legacy markets. 

 

AJ