Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×
Wireless Networking Verizon

Verizon Vows To Build the First 5G Network In the US (networkworld.com) 103

alphadogg writes: Verizon says it will have the first 5G network in the U.S., a promise it probably can't fulfill until 2020 but will start working at this year. Verizon Chief Financial Officer Fran Shammo made the pledge Thursday on the company's fourth-quarter financial results call. He also repeated the company's plans for so-called 5G trials this year.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Verizon Vows To Build the First 5G Network In the US

Comments Filter:
  • by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Thursday January 21, 2016 @07:21PM (#51347329)

    at $15 a gig in overages they will pay off the cost fast.

    • by msauve ( 701917 ) on Thursday January 21, 2016 @08:42PM (#51347777)
      Sorry, your answer doesn't count unless you show the math.

      Verizon is consistently rated as having the best network in the US. That costs money to build out, maintain, and upgrade.

      Currently, Sprint is losing money, T-Mo's profit margin is 1.68%, ATT's is 3.68%. Verizon's is 7.86%. Companies which don't have infrastructure of that scale to build and maintain: Apple's margin is 22.85%, MSFT 13.52%, GOOG 22.86%.

      Your implication that VZW is vastly overcharging simply doesn't fit the facts, but does make a good populist sound bite.
      • A HUGE amount of Americans have absoloutely no idea in any level of how expensive and difficult it is to maintain a quality, low to mid bandwidth cellphone network, no CONCEPT at all.

        I've been seeing angry fist shaking posts about it for over a decade, "they have the audacity to charge me more than $10 for unlimited data!?!?!!?" kind of ridiculous bullshit.

        Obviously companies will try to squeeze you where they can but the amount of dumb shit people do on their phone in the US is mind boggling. I'm surprise

        • That would be great and all, except there are Verizon wireless towers here that haven't seen a maintenance truck for any repairs or upgrades in the last four years, to the point that the lock & chain they use on the security fencing is rusted shut. Please tell me more about how they spend tons of money on maintenance and upgrades.

        • by ndavis ( 1499237 )

          A HUGE amount of Americans have absoloutely no idea in any level of how expensive and difficult it is to maintain a quality, low to mid bandwidth cellphone network, no CONCEPT at all.

          I've been seeing angry fist shaking posts about it for over a decade, "they have the audacity to charge me more than $10 for unlimited data!?!?!!?" kind of ridiculous bullshit.

          Obviously companies will try to squeeze you where they can but the amount of dumb shit people do on their phone in the US is mind boggling. I'm surprised ATT is making any money with the grandfathered iPhone unlimited plans just milking many MANY gbs a month of data across their network

          They seem to think that it's exactly the same as a cabled network (fibre / dsl) for maintenance and upgrades, no goddamn idea.

          While I do agree with you that unlimited data needed to go away I think the big issue was how they removed it. They put up limits of around 1 or 2 GB at the same price as what people did pay for unlimited and acted like we should be grateful. They should have offered something reasonable for that price and not a slap in the face which is what it felt like. As someone who used very little data typically between 1 and 2 GB per month on unlimited the new plans became more expensive for a lot less service.

          Ye

        • by sims 2 ( 994794 )

          Why yes it would be nice if any other company would would be willing to so much as TAKE my money years ago I was paying wildblue $79.99/mo for internet out at the house for 1.5mbps down 256 up (17GB down 5GB up). Unreliable and the 500ms ping makes a lot of things unusable. Then I moved to twin unlimited alltel aircards for $59.99/ea (total 119.98 pretax) roughly the same speed much more reliable and most things are still usable with a 150 ms ping.

          Since then verizon bought alltel and i've dropped a 3g airca

        • If the federal government had not dropped helicopter money on Verizon to upgrade their fiber backhaul I would be more sympathetic.
    • Personally, I don't think they can do it. After all, bandwidth is so precious that we have to try and throw out Net Neutrality and we have to throttle back abusers of the network, and to charge extremely high overage fees for people who exceed the very, very small data amounts we allow on the network. God forbid your kid visits Youtube! Yeah, I seriously doubt that Verizon has the network capacity to handle 5G ... Unless someone is lying...
  • by FlyHelicopters ( 1540845 ) on Thursday January 21, 2016 @07:31PM (#51347373)

    Ok, maybe I'm missing it, but 4g seems fast enough to me.

    I can watch video, play games, use apps, browse the web, etc. on 4g now.

    I'm struggling to imagine what I'd need another big speed boost for?

    Not that I'm against it, I am just trying to see the need. If it solves other issues, such as allowing more total traffic in the same radio spectrum, then fair enough, but the summary doesn't say that.

    So what are you doing with your phones that needs more speed?

    • by alvinrod ( 889928 ) on Thursday January 21, 2016 @07:38PM (#51347421)
      Speed isn't an issue for me, it's bandwidth.

      With the current caps and bandwidth limits in place, adding more speed is like dropping a bigger engine in a Ferrari that can only be driven on a quarter-mile track with a giant brick wall at the end. What's the point besides getting to crash into the wall that much sooner?

      However, given how bloated websites are getting due to so much javascript, shitty advertising, and other cruft, they may need the speed boost just to keep the page load times reasonable.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      It's not a speed boost in most cases, but a boost in bandwidth. It's very possible that 5G will have to be rolled out alongside 4G. That's because 5G is likely to use much higher frequencies in order to achieve the higher bandwidth. As a consequence, the effective range of 5G will probably be quite a bit lower than 4G. That means more access points and towers to achieve similar coverage to 4G, which presents a lot of issues. It's far from mature, and I think Verizon is making a mistake by trying to roll out

    • by swb ( 14022 )

      If they could figure out how to eliminate the caps and ridiculous bandwidth charges, which I don't foresee happening in my lifetime, it could be a reasonable alternative to land based Internet, or at least enough of a competitor to Comcast, et al, that they might be slightly less monopolistic in their behavior.

      Although it would take a real change in how they cap and charge for bandwidth. I just checked, and I've used 2.1 TB of downloads in the last 12 months. That'd be about my mortgage payment in cellula

      • 10 years ago Verizon was selling data plan with per Kb charges. I think it was a nickel per kilobyte. 5G they will probably figure out how to cram more devices per tower and wireless will turn into the next home internet. the issue now is that at peak times my AT&T is virtually useless. i live close to a major road in NYC and during rush hour everyone is probably streaming music in their car
      • Smaller local companies that offers normal internet over cellphone radio waves exist. It usually seem to involve a Parabolic antenna pointed at the radio tower. And since its a parabolic antenna, it seems to be less affected by weather degrading the signal.

        A friend of mine moved to the middle of nowhere, and since there was no cable laid there, they had to consider their option. Turns out the broadband provide in the next county had their broadband tower in plain sight from the house, so they contacted them

      • by sims 2 ( 994794 )

        Assuming that's a 175 GB monthly usage
        $710 for 100GB data only plan (highest plan listed on verizon's site)
        $1125 for 75GB overage @ $15/GB
        $20 for device access

        So your bill should be around $1,855/mo How much is your mortgage payment?

        • by swb ( 14022 )

          Right around that amount.

          What's amusing is that it would be cheaper to buy a second device than to pay the overages. Either load balance across both devices simultaneously or just watch the data consumption and switch over to the second device.

          • by sims 2 ( 994794 )

            Across 3 unlimited lines I used an average of 270GB last month That's a bit higher than normal but it is worth noting that not one line used less than 100GB.

            If I were to switch to a current plan and keep my current layout
            $2,130 for 3 accounts with 100GB
            $7,500 for 500GB overage
            $60 for 3 devices
            =
            $9690 for last month

            If I did as you suggested I would need
            $6,390 for 9 accounts 100GB
            $180 for 9 devices
            =
            $6570

            Keep in mind the 3 unlimited lines only cost $2279.64/yr
            Even a year of service for the whole account with al

    • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Re 'So what are you doing with your phones that needs more speed?"
      Too many users packed in using a limited amounts of bandwidth will be an issue that makes a brand look slow. To free up or allow a smarter use of a limited network options, upgrades need to try and keep pace with users needs and demands.
      The options are to restrict people with expensive plans (fine if all users are wealthy or a company is paying), data caps, reduce speeds or allow slow network usability issues to spread and be commented on.
    • by GuB-42 ( 2483988 )

      Good 3G is actually more than enough in most cases, you can stream 1080p video with it... if you are alone with a very good signal.
      The only real benefit I got from 4G is access to another frequency band with more capacity in crowded areas. I think the same is true for 5G.

      The massive speed argument is just marketing. Telling you that you may finally get the bandwidth that they advertised a decade ago doesn't sell as well.

    • by tnk1 ( 899206 ) on Thursday January 21, 2016 @08:30PM (#51347703)

      I need a fifth G. I have an iPhone with a 6, which means my G's are two behind. I can tolerate maybe being one G behind, but this is getting ridiculous.

    • by msauve ( 701917 )
      "maybe I'm missing it"

      Yep. Wireless is a shared medium, so more bandwidth allows not only higher speed for one user, but more users at the same performance. If demand stays the same, then more supply will lower prices. Just conjecture, but it may also increase battery life, since less time will be needed per bit.

      Are you still happy with your 640K of memory, which should be enough for anyone?
    • You're sharing the airwaves with everyone in range of a tower. Have you ever had success getting directions, much less watching video, while at a concert or conference with thousands of people in attendance? Faster speeds mean less congestion, among other benefits.
    • If the 3G -> 4G transition fiasco is anything to go by, their 5G will just be 4G redefined so they can market it as 5G. So if 4G is sufficient then (cough) "5G" should be fine as well.

      We could also get it well before 2020, depending on how up-to-speed their marketing department is.

    • Ok, maybe I'm missing it, but 4g seems fast enough to me.

      Do a search on slashdot for "seems fast enough to me" for any article 5 years or older, and have a laugh.

      • Do a search on slashdot for "seems fast enough to me" for any article 5 years or older, and have a laugh.

        While that is a totally fair point, it is also reasonable to ask when something really IS good enough...

        The joke, of course, is "640K ought to be good enough for anyone"... which he claims he never said...

        How about 640TB of RAM? Would that be good enough for anyone (personal use computer)?

        There has to be some number where it becomes true

        ---

        Car example:

        My 2014 Ford Taurus has a 3.5L V6 engine that makes 290HP, it does zero to 60 "fast enough".

        They make an SHO version with a Twin Turbo version of that engin

        • I think a better analogy is a 500 HP engine with a one-gallon fuel tank and special fuel that costs $1000 a gallon.
    • Ok, maybe I'm missing it, but 4g seems fast enough to me.

      Do you need it? No. Is it nice not waiting on your phone for anything? Most definitely. I was happy with my 20/5 internet at home and 4G mobile. Moving to the Netherlands I'm super impressed about no longer having to wait for anything with 200/40 and LTE-A (4G+ as it's called here).

      There's no content on the market that requires the bandwidth, but it is nice having access to everything instantly (or as fast as the phone can render the screen which is the bottleneck now for web browsing).

      • LTE networks are useful for more than "consuming content". The reason these networks aren't used more widely in an infrastructure setting is that their reliability is poor and they are expensive currently, so you see custom wireless solutions a lot, which ironically are often cheaper than what the telco provides once you account for bandwidth charges. There's a huge untapped market that is very elastic to price. In the US the major players are protected by fences of regulation, so they aren't interested
    • I imagine they are looking to target wireless internet as a replacement for cable/fiber/etc. I imagine the infrastructure is a good bit cheaper to service an area compared to running cable. And given people's solid hatred of cable companies, they might be able to make some serious inroads. Isn't that part of the reason they've stopped rolling out FIOS?

      Now to seriously compete, they're going to have to seriously bump data allowances because I don't give two shits how fast your data is if I'm paying $100/mont

    • You can run Gigabit over wireless with the right transmitters, but if you don't have the backhaul capacity then the air bitrate is irrelevant.
  • After my unsuccessful experience trying to get around my old Verizon smartphone's jacked up bootloader to try to get Cyanogen on it, I don't care if they have 6 or 7 G's in their network. I'm not going back to them.

  • by darkain ( 749283 ) on Thursday January 21, 2016 @07:47PM (#51347467) Homepage

    Why is it called 5G? Because that's how much throughput you're allowed each month.

  • by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Thursday January 21, 2016 @08:33PM (#51347715) Homepage Journal
    Screw it. We are going with 6G.
  • by Dorianny ( 1847922 ) on Thursday January 21, 2016 @08:36PM (#51347731) Journal
    Perhaps they should define what 5G is before pledging to build it
  • build a gsm, 2g, 3g or LTE network that doesn't suck first.

    I dread travelling to the states for fear of US broadband
  • I have been worried that using encryption will attract attention of law enforcement who will know I something to hide. What a tremendous relief that I will now look just like another law abiding citizen using escrow crypto. While at the same time, I will use this escrow crypto for 99% of my communications, including my embarrassing but legal porn collection. And then, just when I hatch my evil plots, I will encrypt a small amount of data with my own crypto, before stamping escrowed one on top.

    Now the govern

  • Well that's nothing... I vow to sleep with every supermodel in California. And I think my chances are probably on par with Verizon's.

  • This is the same Verizon who promised FIOS for everyone and failed to deliver on it.

    Deeds, Verizon. Not words.

  • I'd much prefer no caps as opposed to faster internet. I'll even take really high caps over the craziness we have now.

    If we labeled home broadband the same way as cellular broadband, we'd be calling it 9G or something. And it would mean just as little to the consumer. It makes it harder to compare speeds/carriers. Just call it by what it is, peak speeds you're allowed to pull on their network.

    It also seems that 5G can be arbitrarily defined. Whatever Verizon wants to call 5G, they can. Marketing.

  • So when they selling off their FIOS division....
  • i mean, it's not like they have broken any promises before. [google.com]

  • Verizon is still using 4G LTE, which does not always qualify as true 4G spec.

To stay youthful, stay useful.

Working...