Take it easy, the rest of Saudi Arabia(‘s politics) sucks.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
mmWave vs. Sub-6GHz 5G iPhones: What's the Difference?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The higher the frequency, the shorter the range. Unless we want the top of every skyscraper in the city turned into a cell tower, we should probably stay with the lower frequency tech so that our concrete jungle doesn't also turn into a cell tower jungle as well. We also don't know how that many cell tower to affect our carbon based bodies.
Looking at 5G and intelligence medicine—how the next generation of wireless technology will reconstruct healthcare - NCBI
The question has to do with ultra low lag is benefiting what? Medical services are not AI based and I doubt will ever be fully as you can ill afford a process you aren't monitoring 100% for a patient. 5G wireless RF propagation inside a building is used how much in medical centers compared to all devices using gigabit ethernet or faster?
A EMT transport or a medic helicopter would not have room for ultrasound or x-ray equipment, its takes up a lot of space, and for the helicopter additional weight. So this is not practical.
Comments are from a USA perspective.
Last edited:
1xRTT LMAO THATA LIKE 2G on Sprint or Verizon or Bell/Telus Mobility! I have no idea where you live and I’d half guess it’s in a heavily rural area on the fringe of the network.
carriers that built 5G mmWave are probably several burned up as there are no major sporting events to really get the use cases to bring in revenues.
I’m still waiting to see Sony Xperia 1 Mark II used on their high end cameras that feed live TV footage of NFL, NHL, NBA. I know the latter two sport began again but haven’t seen any games so I’m under if people are watching the games in stadiums at all.
eventually I can see ppl using their smartphones as modems on mmWave 5G sitting in Windows for brief moments. Can’t imagine how much heat the phone will have after 30mins of use connected to external power in such a situation. Laptops with embedded modems will use this as well or modems by Windows in major cities again sitting at a window or bolted to the outside wall like a satellite dish.
emergency crews may have their vehicles data connection set to both sub-6Ghz and mmWave bands getting priority connections and bandwidth when in use/need. At least that was the early pitch.
the bandwidths were seeing now doesn’t seem to better grant the promise of automated fleets of self driving cars or services any more than LTE. I’m more curious of any inherently better network security using 5G connections for such uses?
Actually I’m pointing out multiple experiences across the USA over the course of years. you're just pointing out your single experience.
5G isn’t going to magically fix the dozens of dead spots and no cell coverage from LA to LV. 4G didn’t fix it. I’ve done that drive.
Again, you're just pointing out your single experience.
If you experience such bad latency you might want to get that checked out bud
So you're going to completely ignore the opensignal report that measured millions of "experiences" and say your personal experience is more important? Your comment is extremely stupid.
Let me link it to you again https://www.opensignal.com/reports/2020/07/usa/mobile-network-experience
A sample size of 2 million experiences beats your cherry-picked 20 experiences.
No. My problems were due to over capacity, not dead spots. And 5G is specifically designed to accommodate more capacity than LTE. Nice try putting words in my mouth though.
Again, you're forgetting the opensignal report.
Why are you trying so hard to ignore that? Hmm?
Along with 2 million other reports. Here, let me link you to the report for the third time incase you forget to read it: https://www.opensignal.com/reports/2020/07/usa/mobile-network-experience
You're trying really hard to argue that your "personal experiences" speaks for everyone when in fact it certainly doesn't and your latest comment doesn't really bring any new to the table, so I'm going to assume we're done here. Feel free to reply, but I'm not going to waste anymore time with you.
California has more bad service than most states, although the area known as Appalachia beats all, plus the West Virginia no connection zone.
I'm still surprised that GPRS and 1xRTT are still available, but they're just integral parts of the voice networks.
You can be in Los Angeles/Orange County and be fine and suddenly, be without any signal. Most states are consistent and you just lose signal bar-by-bar. San Francisco is rough because of the hills but Santa Clara County/Silicon Valley is better but not great.
I remember Verizon touting how they support firefighters and other first responders, just a month after they cut off Santa Clara County firefighters during the wildfires.
Wow! I hadn’t known. That move by Verizon to cut off Santa Clara County firefighters during the wildfires is a really bad one. Not sure if it was liability avoidance (unreliable network), yet most likely just a horrible decision. I just don’t know.
Ridiculous. Glad that not everyone thinks like you, we’d have no progress at all in this world.
It won’t, but the again nobody was claiming it would. If you have an issue we those services than you need to demand that you public representatives do their job properly.
Besides it is possible to mix multiple generations of mobile phone networks.
"LTE networks are much slower. In fact, Tom's Guide recently looked at LTE speeds and saw top download speeds of 53Mb/s on Verizon, but most carriers were closer to 35Mb/s."
Wow guess I am lucky on ATT... pretty consistently in the 90Mb/s range and higher.
Wow guess I am lucky on ATT... pretty consistently in the 90Mb/s range and higher.
Attachments
It's probably more about more users using the same cell tower over a smaller area than about one individual using a faster connection. A single 4k stream only needs about 25 Mbps. 5G cells could negate the need to run fibre the last 100ft for home base gigabit service.
Yea I'd much rather have more consistent speeds. Does Sub6 penetrate better than 4GLTE? And is it the same as mm in that it can handle more users before it becomes pretty much useless?
That is the one pet peeve I have with cell phones is when you have "good" coverage, but you either get the poor speed or disconnects. Like someone said, if you don't have the coverage, you might be ok if you jump to 5G early, but eventually it will return to the same issue of undercoverage
[automerge]1599589737[/automerge]
Yea and the usage for medical is phenomenal.
That would be the person in Civ I that did 50 money 50 entertainment 0 science ans wondered why tanks rolled over their horsemen
I know medical use is an oft quoted application of 5G.... but I need a little clarification.
How exactly will 5G be used in these situations? Don't hospitals already have fiber connections? Or other dedicated data hard lines? I'd think those would be a lot more reliable than any kind of wireless.
And a snarky take... are we really gonna trust Verizon and AT&T for medical applications?
If my Instagram upload takes a couple extra seconds... it's not the end of the world.
But hospitals are on a whole other level.
And I think that's where 5G has value. Super densely populated areas. Like downtown cities where they have lots of difficulty with cellular because of the tall buildings, sports buildings, airports etc.
Not sure how 5G would be useful for replacing wired internet into people's homes since you need so many towers for mmWave anyway, you're already tearing up the street to add fiber for cell backhaul, just interconnect with the wired internet infrastructure and save the time of installing tons of equipment on towers and in everyone's homes.