• What evfect will 5G have on 4G?

    From micky@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 23 00:51:26 2024
    Since 5G cells are smaller than prior cells, 4G and earlier, when 5G is well-established, won't they still have to keep 4G to reach into the unpopulated woods, mountains, and deserts as far as cellular signals go
    now?

    Surely they don't plan to build even more 5G cell towers in unpopoulated
    areas where it hasn't been worth it to build a smallar number of 4G
    towers.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?J=C3=B6rg_Lorenz?=@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 23 08:27:13 2024
    Am 23.05.24 um 06:51 schrieb micky:

    Since 5G cells are smaller than prior cells, 4G and earlier, when 5G is well-established, won't they still have to keep 4G to reach into the unpopulated woods, mountains, and deserts as far as cellular signals go
    now?

    G4 is here to stay.

    Surely they don't plan to build even more 5G cell towers in unpopoulated areas where it hasn't been worth it to build a smallar number of 4G
    towers.

    ???

    --
    "Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andy Burns@21:1/5 to micky on Thu May 23 08:12:17 2024
    micky wrote:

    Since 5G cells are smaller than prior cells, 4G and earlier

    Cell sizes are inversely proportional to their frequency, The USA does
    have mmWave 5G which is far higher than traditional cell frequencies,
    most of Europe doesn't yet

    n257/n261 ~ 27,000 MHz

    but the USA also has lower frequency 5G too, so large cells are possible.

    n77 = 3,500 MHz
    n41 = 2,500 MHz
    n25/n2 = 1,900 MHz
    n5 = 850MHz
    n12 = 700MHz
    n71 ~ 650MHz

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to micky on Thu May 23 12:49:08 2024
    On 2024-05-23 06:51, micky wrote:

    Since 5G cells are smaller than prior cells, 4G and earlier, when 5G is well-established, won't they still have to keep 4G to reach into the unpopulated woods, mountains, and deserts as far as cellular signals go
    now?

    Surely they don't plan to build even more 5G cell towers in unpopoulated areas where it hasn't been worth it to build a smallar number of 4G
    towers.

    The other day I read that here (Spain) three companies have agreed to
    jointly use 5G on the 700 Mhz band on rural areas.


    https://www.adslzone.net/noticias/operadores/movistar-vodafone-masorange-acuerdo-historico-0524/

    Movistar, Vodafone and MasOrange sign a historic agreement that is unprecedented

    With a totally unexpected agreement in the telecommunications industry, Movistar, Vodafone and MasOrange are willing to make an impact in the
    Spanish market . The three operators have agreed to seal an alliance
    that will change the rules so that there is a radical change in the way
    in which customers access their services.

    There were many people who hoped that something like this would come
    true. Movistar, MasOrange and Vodafone have agreed to share the spectrum
    of their 5G frequencies so that a revolution can occur in the mobile
    telephone sector in our country. With this, they will share the 700 MHz frequency and will ensure that citizens living in rural areas can
    benefit from a notable improvement. Not only will they have more hiring capacity, but they will also enjoy better levels of connection. For the
    way in which 5G services are offered in Spain, it is a very high-level
    change.

    ...

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to micky on Thu May 23 08:23:12 2024
    On 5/23/2024 12:51 AM, micky wrote:

    Since 5G cells are smaller than prior cells, 4G and earlier, when 5G is well-established, won't they still have to keep 4G to reach into the unpopulated woods, mountains, and deserts as far as cellular signals go
    now?

    Surely they don't plan to build even more 5G cell towers in unpopoulated areas where it hasn't been worth it to build a smallar number of 4G
    towers.

    With urban cellphone users living on their cellphones it's
    easy to be unaware that much of the US has no cellphone
    access. I have a brother who's never had cellphone access
    at home and currently has to use one of Musk's satellite
    dishes for Internet. He doesn't live in the middle of the
    woods. But it is 100 yds to 1/4 mile between houses, and
    no one subsidizes towers. Verizon's not going to pay the
    costs to get a handful of new customers.

    At the other extreme, I have a friend who lives in
    a brick apt building built in the 1920s. The walls are mortar
    and metal lath. He often misses or loses the signal if he's
    not close to a window.

    There's a cabin I sometimes stay in that has electricity
    and phone... even nearby wifi... but no chance of cellphone
    connection.

    Cellphones are still officially optional, even if not in practice.
    In rural areas, landlines are strung with electricity to virtually
    every house. But cell towers are only installed if they provide
    maximum profit. In Europe and in cities that's not so obvious.
    But if you take a ride out to the country, in the US or Canada,
    you're in a different world. (Not just unpopulated, deep woods.
    Anyplace with low population density is left out.)

    I don't see any reason to think that that 1/4 to 1/3 of the
    land mass is going to get cellphone service. (Regardless of what
    Verizon and AT&T maps claim.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Danart@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 23 15:21:35 2024
    micky wrote:
    Since 5G cells are smaller than prior cells, 4G and earlier, when
    5G is
    well-established, won't they still have to keep 4G to reach into
    the
    unpopulated woods, mountains, and deserts as far as cellular
    signals go
    now?

    Surely they don't plan to build even more 5G cell towers in
    unpopoulated
    areas where it hasn't been worth it to build a smallar number of 4G
    towers.

    Lets be realistic. 4G -> 5G is literally akin to
    32-bit -> 64-bit computing. That 32-bit power is barely a grain of
    sand from the greater whole. Like if you took a cracker and hit it to
    make a tiny piece fall off. That is how much power is 64-bit.

    The towers are smaller because the technology to make them smaller has
    become cheaper. So these smaller towers in fact could be more powerful
    and have multiple functions outside the regular towers.

    The problem with this is the fact that most people do not use the
    bandwidth at all. Which means phone companies ( or cable ) have all
    this extra space that is not being used at all. This is why they could
    offer you services with all these extras because it is not costing
    them anything to run.

    However a danger with 5G outside the radiation awareness. Because
    radiation = signal. Is the lack of privacy. Right now from the days of
    the "Star Wars" ( Regan Era Satellite photos ) and FCC
    triangulating control over the air-waves. Is privacy. Take Princess
    Latifa. With a just one phone call they were able to zero in on the
    probably position of the boat, and take her back captive.

    The same with smart cars with cameras, that talks to guidance systems.
    Imagine your on the run and your car stops and locks the doors on you.
    Next thing you know your surrounded by police officers.

    Then again your going to compare yourself to an dating-scammer or
    young-mother and say "How could this happen to me, I am a coward
    I depend on others" ? Not think anything of it. But the flat fact
    remains, things do happen. Your device should not ask to "report
    images" let alone dictate if "rape" is occurring in
    your vehicle. This is a world being engulf into fear street.

    It is the same argument with carbine-technologies. If people would
    STFU about them. nobody would care. I am more aware then ever and
    probably would purchase a couple just because of that. However
    disarming people is more or less a direct threat duet to marketing (
    wrongly influencing ). However by talking about it, we have tweens (
    11-12 year olds ) arming themselves. That being said creates a greater
    problem.

    If anything is wrong it is the fact that with 5G towers we could give
    everybody extra fast 4G speeds and not limit everybody.

    Honestly building towers in the middle of nowhere is acceptable. Even
    if it is 4G towers but the cost of the 5G towers is just as good.
    Using a combine conglomerate of companies to construct and share the
    tower would work to every-bodies advantage


    This is a response to the post seen at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=665827038#665827038

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to AJL on Thu May 23 11:44:03 2024
    On 5/23/2024 11:20 AM, AJL wrote:
    On 5/23/24 5:23 AM, Newyana2 wrote:

    There's a cabin I sometimes stay in that has electricity
    and phone... even nearby wifi... but no chance of cellphone
    connection.

    Get WiFi calling. It made my sketchy around the house (and yard) cell
    service as good as as my landline, which I then promptly got rid of...


    I don't have a problem myself. (And the cabin doesn't have Internet.
    I just see wifi nearby if I run a computer.) I have no trouble making
    calls because I live near a city. I was only pointing out that up to
    1/3 of the country doesn't have cell service at home or even in
    the neighborhood, and they're not likely to in the future. Perhaps my
    brother could get wifi calling over Musk's satellite dish, but then that
    also wouldn't work if he wanders too far from the house. And it won't
    work in much of the area where he lives. It's a different way of life in
    the country. Landlines are critical. Cellphones are impractical.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to Danart on Thu May 23 11:50:15 2024
    On 5/23/2024 11:21 AM, Danart wrote:

    Lets be realistic. 4G -> 5G is literally akin to
    32-bit -> 64-bit computing. That 32-bit power is barely a grain of
    sand from the greater whole. Like if you took a cracker and hit it to
    make a tiny piece fall off. That is how much power is 64-bit.


    I don't know about 5G, but 64-bit computing is not increased
    "power". What makes it 64-bit is that the standard data package
    is 8 bytes instead of 4. Pointers are 8 bytes, so memory beyond
    4 GB can be accessed. It's an important development, but has
    limited practical effect on computing.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AJL@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 23 15:20:10 2024
    On 5/23/24 5:23 AM, Newyana2 wrote:

    There's a cabin I sometimes stay in that has electricity
    and phone... even nearby wifi... but no chance of cellphone
    connection.

    Get WiFi calling. It made my sketchy around the house (and yard) cell
    service as good as as my landline, which I then promptly got rid of...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andy Burns@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 23 18:05:17 2024
    TmV3eWFuYTIgd3JvdGU6DQoNCj4gIMKgwqAgSSBkb24ndCBrbm93IGFib3V0IDVHLCBidXQg NjQtYml0IGNvbXB1dGluZyBpcyBub3QgaW5jcmVhc2VkDQo+ICJwb3dlciIuDQoNCjVHIGhh cyBiZXR0ZXIgc3BlY3RyYWwgZWZmaWNpZW5jeSwgZS5nLg0KDQo0RyBkb3dubGluayA9IDE1 IGJpdHMvc2Vjb25kL0h6DQo1RyBkb3dubGluayA9IDIzIGJpdHMvc2Vjb25kL0h6DQoNCjxo dHRwczovL3d3dy41Zy1uZXR3b3Jrcy5uZXQvNWctdGVjaG5vbG9neS9zcGVjdHJhbC1lZmZp Y2llbmN5LTVnLW5yLWFuZC00Zy1sdGUtY29tcGFyZWQvPg0K

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)