Can rural iPhone users manually disable mmWave radios on their local devices, since there will be no use for the beamforming receiver outside of urban areas?
> Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, HP, Qualcomm, Intel, Broadcom, and Marvell ... are petitioning the FCC to approve a new Very Low Power (VLP) category of Wi-Fi where small, low-power devices like smartphones that transmit below a certain power threshold (14 dBm EIRP) could traverse the 6GHz spectrum ... short-range, point-to-point connections between two devices — think within a room, not across your house. The letter suggests they could deliver 2Gbps at a distance of 3 meters
Short-range 6Ghz VLP WiFi would reduce WiFi congestion in urban areas, where dozens of 2.4Ghz WiFi routers can be visible.
There won't be any need to disable the radio for unused bands. Powering down unused hardware is literally the first thing the engineers do to save battery life.
Edit: can't reply due to rate-limiting, but in principle, all they have to do to search for service is power up the receiver briefly, running at a very low duty cycle. This has no noticeable impact on battery life or any other aspect of the phone's operation.
From practical experience, it’s very common for people to find their phone (iPhone or other) burning through tons of battery when they go out in the sticks, and this is reliably fixed by turning off cellular data. So either it’s not as easy as you say, or they haven’t bothered solving the problem.
A clear indicator that Apple is focusing on markets other than the US.
5g is deploying in China and India and soon in a lot of countries in SE Asia.
The consumption of mobile bandwidth is literally through the roof. Netflix having a 2.5$ monthly mobile-only plan in India is a clear signalling of that.
> A clear indicator that Apple is focusing on markets other than the US. 5g is deploying in China and India and soon in a lot of countries in SE Asia.
I don't see how you reach that conclusion. 5G is deploying across the US right now and has been throughout 2019.
Verizon and AT&T will each have 5G deployed to two dozen major US cities this year. They'll cover dozens more in 2020. The US will rapidly be blanketed with 5G over the next 12-24 months by the three major carriers.
I’m not so sure that most consumers will think “5g is a necessary function.” Without millimeter wave 5g is only slightly faster than 4g, and millimeter wave coverage will be worse than WiFi pretty much everywhere but the most densely populated regions.
With flagship phone sales plummeting, the industry hopes 5g will save them. I really don’t know anyone that has told me they want or need 5g. With current draconian data plans of just a few gb what use would 5g be to the average consumer?
> With current draconian data plans of just a few gb what use would 5g be to the average consumer?
I have no idea where this argument comes from. Was 4G useless because carriers stuck with the same data caps we had from the 3G era? Today, the average U.S. smartphone subscriber uses 6GB/month of cellular data, well below the 20GB+ soft-cap of every provider's unlimited plan: https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/10/28/heres-how-much-sma....
I'm on gigabit fiber and can't saturate it most of the time since now servers become the bottleneck (speed limited since they can't serve everyone at a nice 300Mbps+), I get 40Mbps on 4G, which I never saturate either.
It's good for the evergrowing number of users though, average speed for everyone should improve once most people use 5G. Plus, far future with AR/VR and whatnot.
>Without millimeter wave 5g is only slightly faster than 4g
Yes and no, while technically 5G is only slightly faster on paper in Sub 6Ghz, In Reality 5G brings much improved capacity to the network, which translate to much better utilization and faster speed. And since most people don't upgrade their phone as quickly as they used to, there will be those who would rather have an 5G phone now rather than wait 3 - 4 years til their next upgrade.
5G is clearly not necessary yet, but it's also nowhere near close to being widely deployed (that will happen over the next 3-5 years). AR, and pervasive computing in general, will eventually make 5G more than a novelty however.
in any case, i personally doubt apple will add 5G in 2020, as they tend to be conservative on wireless tech (including wifi, bluetooth, etc.), waiting 1-2 years after the first rollouts by early adopters (like samsung), to make sure the kinks are worked out all around (equipment makers and carriers too). 2021 is probably more likely for the first 5G iphone, and 2022 will likely be the year you'll want to buy it.
> Without millimeter wave 5g is only slightly faster than 4g, and millimeter wave coverage will be worse than WiFi pretty much everywhere but the most densely populated regions.
> AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon’s networks, which rely on high-band millimeter-wave spectrum.
Just sharing the obligatory cancer scare articles. It's obvious to me that radiation of all kinds has an effect on us, whether that is non-ionizing or not. I think a lot more independent research needs to be done in this area, lest we look back on this time in a similar way to doctors endorsing cigarettes.
If you want to know why America has such shitty infrastructure (especially cities like San Francisco where the density should warrant it), here is Exhibit A. Environmental studies, aesthetic objections,[1] fake health concerns, etc. In the 4.6 years Americans spend to prepare the average Environmental Impact Statement for an infrastructure project, Europeans can build city-wide subway systems or tunnel through mountains.
Other countries are not going to hold up 5G deployment over fake health concerns. If we don't want 5G to be yet another area, like transit and roads, where the US lags woefully behind Europe and Japan, we must fight such distractions.
> If we don't want 5G to be yet another area, like transit and roads, where the US lags woefully behind Europe and Japan
I don’t necessarily disagree with the crux of your point about infrastructure. However, in the case of 5G, why do we need to “beat” other countries? What’s the rush?
Readit News
On a related topic, 6Ghz WiFi (unlicensed and unmetered) is needed for AR glasses which won't have the battery power for cellular service, https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2019/7/23/20707456/6...
> Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, HP, Qualcomm, Intel, Broadcom, and Marvell ... are petitioning the FCC to approve a new Very Low Power (VLP) category of Wi-Fi where small, low-power devices like smartphones that transmit below a certain power threshold (14 dBm EIRP) could traverse the 6GHz spectrum ... short-range, point-to-point connections between two devices — think within a room, not across your house. The letter suggests they could deliver 2Gbps at a distance of 3 meters
Short-range 6Ghz VLP WiFi would reduce WiFi congestion in urban areas, where dozens of 2.4Ghz WiFi routers can be visible.
Edit: can't reply due to rate-limiting, but in principle, all they have to do to search for service is power up the receiver briefly, running at a very low duty cycle. This has no noticeable impact on battery life or any other aspect of the phone's operation.
60 GHz (802.11ad/802.11ay) is better suites for AR/VR, is already out, and doesn't have interference issues due to physics.
6 GHz should be focusing on devices that need to work at range not ones that can already be served via in-room frequencies.
5g is deploying in China and India and soon in a lot of countries in SE Asia.
The consumption of mobile bandwidth is literally through the roof. Netflix having a 2.5$ monthly mobile-only plan in India is a clear signalling of that.
Being 18 months late to the party will really hurt Apple.
I don't see how you reach that conclusion. 5G is deploying across the US right now and has been throughout 2019.
Verizon and AT&T will each have 5G deployed to two dozen major US cities this year. They'll cover dozens more in 2020. The US will rapidly be blanketed with 5G over the next 12-24 months by the three major carriers.
https://www.cnet.com/features/we-ran-5g-speed-tests-on-veriz...
I have no idea where this argument comes from. Was 4G useless because carriers stuck with the same data caps we had from the 3G era? Today, the average U.S. smartphone subscriber uses 6GB/month of cellular data, well below the 20GB+ soft-cap of every provider's unlimited plan: https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/10/28/heres-how-much-sma....
With 5G, those caps will go up further. Verizon isn't even applying the 22GB 4G throttling limit to 5G yet: https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/13/18263593/verizon-5g-servi....
It's good for the evergrowing number of users though, average speed for everyone should improve once most people use 5G. Plus, far future with AR/VR and whatnot.
Yes and no, while technically 5G is only slightly faster on paper in Sub 6Ghz, In Reality 5G brings much improved capacity to the network, which translate to much better utilization and faster speed. And since most people don't upgrade their phone as quickly as they used to, there will be those who would rather have an 5G phone now rather than wait 3 - 4 years til their next upgrade.
in any case, i personally doubt apple will add 5G in 2020, as they tend to be conservative on wireless tech (including wifi, bluetooth, etc.), waiting 1-2 years after the first rollouts by early adopters (like samsung), to make sure the kinks are worked out all around (equipment makers and carriers too). 2021 is probably more likely for the first 5G iphone, and 2022 will likely be the year you'll want to buy it.
Except it will be prohibitively expensive for most Americans thanks to only three major carriers competing in the US.
https://www.tomsguide.com/features/5g-vs-4g
> AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon’s networks, which rely on high-band millimeter-wave spectrum.
So while not as big a jump as 3g->4g still some improvements there.
Deleted Comment
"Bay Area city blocks 5G deployments over cancer concerns" https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/10/bay-area-city-blocks-5g-de...
"Don’t keep cell phones next to your body, California Health Department warns" https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/15/dont-keep-cell-phones-next...
Other countries are not going to hold up 5G deployment over fake health concerns. If we don't want 5G to be yet another area, like transit and roads, where the US lags woefully behind Europe and Japan, we must fight such distractions.
[1] Remember when San Francisco held up AT&T fiber deployment in the city for years with a lawsuit about ugly fiber boxes? https://stopthecap.com/2011/06/29/san-francisco-still-in-sta...
I don’t necessarily disagree with the crux of your point about infrastructure. However, in the case of 5G, why do we need to “beat” other countries? What’s the rush?
Great article from The Verge titled “Wait, why the hell is the ‘race to 5G even a race?” https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/23/18637213/5g-race-us-leade...
If you can't see that these are totally unrelated, then I don't know what to say.
Fiber lines are completely different than "hey these rats that are constantly exposed to 5G radiation that's 20 yards away are acting all messed up".