• cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 day ago

    The cell carriers don’t need more bandwith. 5G is already quite fast with the existing allocations. The only times I’ve used 5G and thought it’s too slow has been in rural areas where the issue is a lack of nearby cell towers, not a lack of bandwidth. The cell carriers already have loads of millimeter wave bandwidth available for use in densely packed, urban areas where the lower frequency bands are insufficient.

    It’s WiFi that should be getting more bandwidth. Home internet connections keep getting faster. Multi gigabit speeds are now common in areas with fiber.

    • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      and on top of that, 5G afaik is specifically made so that if you need more density, you can turn down the cell power and install more cell sites rather than take more spectrum

      it was designed for venues like sports stadiums so you could keep installing more and more cell towers inside stadiums etc to accommodate huge crowds

    • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      This exactly. Wifi is damn near unusable in dense residential settings. It’ll cut it for streaming and web browsing, but much more than that and you’ll feel the pain of interference from all the other wifi APs in the area.

      Especially with most of them defaulting to 80MHz on 5GHz and many of those defaulting away from UNII-2. which leaves 4 non-overlapping channels (with one of them giving trouble with a lot of devices). We’re right back to where we were in 2.4. Even worse, I think, since wifi is more ubiquitous.