Qualcomm Says Every Android Manufacturer Will Have 5G Flagship Phone by End of 2019

[Wowereit]

Anyone that thinks 5G will not be a game changer especially for people cutting the cord at home is crazy....

Nobody questions the general importance of 5G.
I question the importance of having a 5G capable phone years before there is any reasonable amount of coverage.

Germany's mobile networks are a complete trainwreck, even 4G coverage is pretty bad. I'd be surprised if we had any reason to care about 5G before 2023. Some US states are just as bad.

Realistically I will have switched phones about 3 times before 5G has any noticeable real life benefits, so I just don't care yet.

 

[SactoGuy18]

I think Apple is wise to stay away from 5G support for now. You KNOW the Qualcomm radio modem for 5G will go through battery life per charge like no tomorrow, and who knows will it support the 28, 38 and 60 GHz millimeter wave frequency ranges planned for 5G?

 

[Blaze4G]

I think Apple is wise to stay away from 5G support for now. You KNOW the Qualcomm radio modem for 5G will go through battery life per charge like no tomorrow, and who knows will it support the 28, 38 and 60 GHz millimeter wave frequency ranges planned for 5G?

How do you kbow this?:/

 

[Abazigal]

This is sad. People here don't see a benefit of having a new standard available when it will cost the same.

Meanwhile when Apple supports 5g it will be a monumental occasion and people will justify the extra $100 over last years model.

Seriously people something is wrong with supporting a new standard? Or is it only wrong because it's not Apple?

I think it's more that people ought to be realistic about just how beneficial this new 5g standard will be.

For one, there's a chance that 5g phones may see a significant price hike.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/5/...iew-qualcomm-snapdragon-855-technology-summit

Second, mass adoption is still likely some time off.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/5/18126951/iphone-5g-apple-development-roadmap-network

Third, I suspect Qualcomm is pushing it on android phones so aggressively partly to due to their current lawsuit with Apple. They want the public to perceive that Apple is possibly missing out on something huge by going with Intel over Qualcomm, and hope that this might pressure Apple into coming to a speedier (and more favourable) resolution.

They don't know Apple very well. In the short run, users are not going to switch from iPhones just because it lacks 5g (especially if the infrastructure in their area won't support it). Apple is waging war on Qualcomm's entire business model, both sides know what is at stake, and Qualcomm is painfully aware of just how much they stand to lose from a protracted battle.

The importance of being early in offering 5g have been way overblown, not least by Qualcomm, as part of a PR offensive against Apple.

 

[josephd]

That’s why IOS “just works”. They don’t need to be the first ones to the party.

 

[Ramchi]

I think it's more that people ought to be realistic about just how beneficial this new 5g standard will be.

For one, there's a chance that 5g phones may see a significant price hike.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/5/...iew-qualcomm-snapdragon-855-technology-summit

Second, mass adoption is still likely some time off.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/5/18126951/iphone-5g-apple-development-roadmap-network

Third, I suspect Qualcomm is pushing it on android phones so aggressively partly to due to their current lawsuit with Apple. They want the public to perceive that Apple is possibly missing out on something huge by going with Intel over Qualcomm, and hope that this might pressure Apple into coming to a speedier (and more favourable) resolution.

They don't know Apple very well. In the short run, users are not going to switch from iPhones just because it lacks 5g (especially if the infrastructure in their area won't support it). Apple is waging war on Qualcomm's entire business model, both sides know what is at stake, and Qualcomm is painfully aware of just how much they stand to lose from a protracted battle.

The importance of being early in offering 5g have been way overblown, not least by Qualcomm, as part of a PR offensive against Apple.

Historically, all new standards adoptions like EDGE, 3G, 3.5G, 4G,LTE, followed the same path where mobile modems with capable standards stated hitting first than the mobile towers with new standards. It takes many many years for complete rollout of them across big regions.

But in the spec comparison, speed tests, YouTubers will have field day against inferior modems. This affects PR image of Apple as the most premium and latest gadget worth $1500-$2500 (in 2019 when its going to release their new iPhone) if it doesn't have 5G.

If people think 5G is years away then Apple may not see a problem selling their expensive product portfolio. But if people start seeing 5G mobiles and Coverage in 2019 then it can affect their sales.

 

[mi7chy]

Nobody questions the general importance of 5G.
I question the importance of having a 5G capable phone years before there is any reasonable amount of coverage.

Do you also question the importance of filling up your tank full of gas before a trip versus just getting enough?

 

[jeremiah256]

what's the point of being the first with a 5G phone? if at first coverage for 5G will suck!!

Area coverage isn't the only thing Apple needs to factor into their decision on whether to go with 5G later than 2019.

If you buy a 5G phone in 2019, those on business travel will initially use their 5G phones at hotels, and convention and conference centers equipped with 5G stations. Regular consumers? Also at hotels, but additionally at sporting and entertainment events. 5G is not only about speed. The standards/protocols/tech being tested allows up to 100 times more connections per base station, much lower latency, and much better reliability and throughput. And while your phone is on 5G, since the technology outsources the vast majority of the processing burden to the towers, battery life is extended.

And this doesn't even take into account travel to the other nations rushing to roll out 5G. Both businesses and frequent travelers should factor 5G into their 2019 buying decisions.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Area coverage isn't the only thing Apple needs to factor into their decision on whether to go with 5G later than 2019.

If you buy a 5G phone in 2019, those on business travel will initially use their 5G phones at hotels, and convention and conference centers equipped with 5G stations. Regular consumers? Also at hotels, but additionally at sporting and entertainment events. 5G is not only about speed. The standards/protocols/tech being tested allows up to 100 times more connections per base station, much lower latency, and much better reliability and throughput. And while your phone is on 5G, since the technology outsources the vast majority of the processing burden to the towers, battery life is extended.

And this doesn't even take into account travel to the other nations rushing to roll out 5G. Both businesses and frequent travelers should factor 5G into their 2019 buying decisions.

Good points.

How soon will 4G transmitters be turned off though?

From my understanding... a single 5G station doesn't provide as much coverage as a single 4G station. So there will need to be more 5G stations per a given area.

I'm guessing there will be quite a long period where 5G and 4G coexists considering it might be a lengthy rollout.

And let's be honest... falling back to 4G won't be that bad. (versus falling back to 3G or Edge today... shudders...)

We're travelling around with *only* 4G phones right now. I don't think that's terrible.

 

[jeremiah256]

Good points.

How soon will 4G transmitters be turned off though?

From my understanding... a single 5G station doesn't provide as much coverage as a single 4G station. So there will need to be more 5G stations per a given area.

I'm guessing there will be quite a long period where 5G and 4G coexists considering it might be a lengthy rollout.

And let's be honest... falling back to 4G won't be that bad. (versus falling back to 3G or Edge today... shudders...)

We're travelling around with *only* 4G phones right now. I don't think that's terrible.

I have to do some research, but different nations will keep 4G around longer than others. Some need the frequencies now and so there is a government push to switch over sooner than later (I think South Korea is in this situation). The U.S.? Who knows.

And you're correct about there being many more stations, but the stations are also much smaller. Yes, falling back on 5G won't be bad, I'm just worried that if Apple is relying on Intel, they might be later than just one year in getting to market with 5G phones.

 

[Ramchi]

I have to do some research, but different nations will keep 4G around longer than others. Some need the frequencies now and so there is a government push to switch over sooner than later (I think South Korea is in this situation). The U.S.? Who knows.

And you're correct about there being many more stations, but the stations are also much smaller. Yes, falling back on 5G won't be bad, I'm just worried that if Apple is relying on Intel, they might be later than just one year in getting to market with 5G phones.

In my place all the underlying infrastructure for a backbone connectivity, gigabit fiber-optic lines connecting all corners, microwave transmitting stations with IP telephony etc...built over a period of time.

Once spectrum auction process gets over, upgrading them to newer standards becomes easier than it was for 3G or 4G.

For this reason alone many providers waited long enough for 4G rollouts. Because the management already made critical observations on frequent upgrade of expensive infrastructure.

 

[jeremiah256]

In my place all the underlying infrastructure for a backbone connectivity, gigabit fiber-optic lines connecting all corners, microwave transmitting stations with IP telephony etc...built over a period of time.

Once spectrum auction process gets over, upgrading them to newer standards becomes easier than it was for 3G or 4G.

For this reason alone many providers waited long enough for 4G rollouts. Because the management already made critical observations on frequent upgrade of expensive infrastructure.

Yeah, I'm betting a bunch of countries will be ahead of the U.S. when it comes to rolling out comprehensive 5G coverage.

The many of the important internet companies today would be a fraction of their sizes, if they even existed at all, without mobile 4G/LTE speeds. And 5G will spawn at least as many internet millionaires and billionaires. Asia is going to be the place to be (if it isn't already).

 

[H2SO4]

A few years ago Three UK had this tariff and I have it ever since. It's still available but it costs more now than it costed then, but who got it then can retain it at the old price. It also includes free roaming (capped to 15GB) in 71 countries

Ah, well then you're lucky I had that too and they took it away from me.

 

[Bacillus]

I think Apple is wise to stay away from 5G support for now. You KNOW the Qualcomm radio modem for 5G will go through battery life per charge like no tomorrow, and who knows will it support the 28, 38 and 60 GHz millimeter wave frequency ranges planned for 5G?

How do you kbow this?:/

That sounds like a mere fatalist attitude towards innovation
(Dagobert Tim playing safe with a new Gold color instead...)

 

[SactoGuy18]

How do you kbow this?:/

Because the technology is so new that nobody really knows how much battery life a phone will get per charge once they incorporate 5G radios that support the 28, 38 and 60 GHz frequency ranges planned by the likes of Verizon, AT&T, etc.

 

[spiddyman007]

All in favor of letting android users be guinea pigs, “smash that like button”.

Apple users are never guinea pigs unless it’s for software glitches in every new iOS. Why can’t apple ever be the first to do something