payturr

You're right, we haven't heard anything or seen anything in 2 years. I'm not gonna say they're cooking up something. But I'm not gonna say it's just hype. If it was just hype, no one else who's seriously invested in industry would look at it; they'd just move on. That's not the case, and I'll say it again - everyone is looking into this. It's not a niche group, it's literally the whole industry; there is something here and everyone acknowledges it, and that's why everyone is going to be playing with it this year and next year. AT&T and Verizon are bent to find pre-standard solutions, they have the finances to support their moonshots so they're gonna find a way and ultimately, it could be one of their proposals that makes it to the standardization committees. I don't know who's concept will make it, but I'm gonna stick to what I've been saying: The chances 5G uses EHF is very likely as everyone is looking at it and research backs potential This would require massive small cell deployment, MIMO, and beamforming This is best fit for urban deployment and not much else We'll see a standard in the next 6 years with rollout in the next 6-10 years

28GHz is still mmW and it's right next door to 30GHz. I've been mentioning 39GHz for the most part, the only time I mentioned 60GHz was for 802.11ad. I don't really have an opinion about 60GHz, but I would like to have a reason to talk about it so I'm waiting for one of the big manufacturers to make it happen. And yes it's not point to multi point but it was the first major test. Multi point will come with the trials this year. So what if it's 2 years old? You asked for proof, I gave you proof, and it's a sign that people are working on it and that it's more than just a paper. Listen, maybe the companies working with 802.11ad had manufacturing issues. But now with announcements of actual consumer tech and consumer modems, eventually we'll have access to the hardware, hopefully before the year's over.

It's not really the most professional video, but it's better than nothing

I never said it was simple, I'm not an engineer. But it's not as impossible as you guys are making it out to be if literally most engineers and basically every company is backing these trials.

I said next few years. I never said anything about standardizing. They're gonna be figuring out the tech over the course of the next few years.

Major gaps because they're collocated on MACRO SITES with B26 and B25. If you don't understand that EHF won't be on any macros, then I give up.

I actually posted a link or two yesterday, namely to NYU's 5G paper. But you're right, costs is important. Ultimately in the next few years Nokia, Ericsson, Intel, Qualcomm have to work with carriers to make an affordable solution that can be deployed widespread and offer a reasonable return on investment.

Again, talking about more than Sprint. Sprint is the worse carrier to use talking about mmW use in 5G. AT&T and VZ can get their own band, yes, but chances are it'll find it's way in a superset like Band 17. The only special band here is VZ's B13 because they hold a monopoly on it. I know everything published doesn't happen, like CDMA Rev. C. But until someone suggests a better idea, mmW is 5G as far as we can tell, and it makes a lot of sense. Every engineer who has a good understanding of physics are the ones preaching that high band will be perfect for 5G networks. So I do not believe I'm ignoring the physics, especially since a lot of articles suggest that EHF wouldn't be awful for 5G, but instead, very good. B41 doesn't relieve B26 or B41 because it's not block by block like I'm suggesting 5G will be. B41 comes and goes with major gaps in between. It's not a good example to denounce a 39GHz network. That's where small cells come in for 5G, and to fix Sprint's network. I'm a strong believer in mmW because there's science behind it and the entire industry is backing it. I'd be more hesitant if it was just one group suggesting it, but it's literally everyone. It's hard to say an entire industry with scientific papers and engineers backing it are wrong.

Oh we're quite aware, we both know 802.11ad isn't for general public. Only for tech guys and, in my opinion, DAS systems for wifi in stadiums and colleges

Well the point of 802.11ad isn't to necessarily improve your internet speeds but improve your home networking speeds, so for example making your file server deliver 4K video to your set top box faster without a wire.

First of all I'm not saying Sprint's gonna do this. Sprint has their own problem but as we all know they're experimenting with 5G. Maybe in a decade if their finances allow it they can expand into high band but until then 2.5 is solid. Second Sprint had a hard time deploying 2.5GHz because of their WiMAX network, the fact it's a boutique frequency in the US which means it's equipment isn't an affordable commodity like AWS and PCS equipment, ESPECIALLY since it's 8T8R. Everyone wants to use high band so the price will come down with mass production. Third, everything starts with papers. You think processors and wired telephones were just made and worked? No it took research and study. Just cause there's a G instead of an M for the Hertz doesn't mean it's impossible. It will be hard but that's the point of this market. All these carriers and manufacturers have to innovate and experiment to make an affordable fast high capacity solution. To just give up without trying is crazier than trying. Last, since capacity and speeds will be so high and LTE bandwidth will be heavily freed up, all carriers could offer consumers unlimited data for a fee in markets where 5G is deployed. This is industry doing the best they can with their finances to make things happen, and you're gonna sit and just say it's not possible because we don't use that frequency now? That's what's ridiculous. Watch how the Sprint 5G trial goes - watch Marcelo say it was a success and we'll be offering more trials across the nation.

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

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.

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)

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.

http://www.tp-link.com/en/products/details/AD7200.html Your next router, sir

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.

This is exactly what I've been suggesting, thank you very much! I strongly believe 5G will be limited to cities and only for outdoors use, and that 4G will be the indoors network.

I said this before, but from the looks of it 5G will be LTE with all the antenna and channel techniques we've been using & talking about with support for larger carriers. That's nothing too far fetched and complex. It's just putting it together in a box. Can we put 39GHz into already existing tech and have it live hanging on a pole in 6-10 years? I think so

It does not need to equal 2.5GHz in distance. If we learned anything from Sprint, it's that operating 2.5GHz on a macro works, but what makes better sense is to slap a small cell on a pole and use shorter ranges. That's the entire goal. TP-Link took 60GHz and put it into a tiny regular sized router. Sure, it's signal doesn't get far. But these small cells will be bigger than a router.

First of all, what does age have to do with anything? By that idea, any person of 50 should be smarter than any person of 20. While in some cases thats true, it's not always. Second, this isn't just a marketing side show by Verizon. Intel, Samsung, Qualcomm are all experimenting with it. So is every major carrier INCLUDING Sprint. FCC is aware this spectrum is viable for 5G so they're kicking off the repurposing this summer. This is more than just fantasy idea; it's completely plausible. Third, in the span of 6 years we brought phone technology from 500Kbps to 100Mbps. In 6 years we can figure out, build, and create technology to efficiently harness high band frequency for data at a reasonable cost with reasonable coverage. Last but not least, and certainly most important, NYU's 5G Research Department did a paper covering the usage of mmW in cellular and came to the conclusion it's completely doable, and that coverage can spand several hundred meters (paper here: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6515173). It's ridiculous to claim 39GHz is not usable in cellular just like it was ridiculous to say 2.5GHz isn't usable in cellular. Will it be difficult? Yes, but technology constantly advances. I can see this happening in the next decade.

Again, this isn't for indoor use, strictly outdoor data consumption. LTE-A will be relieved of congestion at that point because of 5G, so that most users will probably have at least 50Mbps for in office use. 5G will be using higher level MIMO, higher level QAM, and beamforming with new antenna techniques to boost signals, so we're looking at reasonable coverage from a small cell/DAS. Of course it'll need new equipment, but the point is the era of the macro with major planning permits will be a thing of the past, and at that point carriers will only need a simple pole permit to get the network up. I know we haven't hit the peak of 4G, but we will be soon as there isn't that much spectrum left to use. Could we hit 600Mbps? Yeah in some markets but never in NYC or LA. That's the point of 5G - provide ridiculous bandwidth to serve ridiculous numbers of people to ensure our LTE networks are clear for indoor use.

Yeah they got a lot of Links deployed across NYC now! There's 3 on the same block as my campus, they're incredibly nice to have. The range and speeds are extremely impressive. Most of them are on 3rd and 8th avenue, and run very extensively. The ones by my college are by 24th and 3rd, so right there it covers 60 blocks on 3rd. It's really the future for NYC, I'm very happy this became a thing.

The point is these high band networks have so much free spectrum, a carrier can be 160x160. That allows for major speeds and heavy capacity on small cells which allow major data flow. 5G is not meant for the entire country, just cities. It'll relieve mass congestion on the streets while LTE becomes unloaded for indoor operation. I used WiGig as an example because it is tech that shows high band operation in compact devices is achievable; it is also alive as new WiGig equipment was shown in CES. I'd never use it though, it's not necessary in homes. In public arenas and colleges however..

High band is gonna be meant for the streets, not in buildings. LTE will be relieved so it'll be stronger for indoor use.