Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Verizon Communications Network The Internet United States Wireless Networking

Verizon Will Launch 5G Home Internet Access In 2018 (engadget.com) 115

Posted by BeauHD from the answered-prayers dept.
wyattstorch516 writes: Real competition may finally be on the way for the residential broadband market. Verizon will be the first company to introduce 5G wireless broadband in a select number of cities. This will give residential customers an alternative to cable/fiber offerings. 5G wireless can offer speeds in the range of hundreds of megabits per second. Full technical specifications as well as pricing plans have yet to be determined. The launch is scheduled for the second half of 2018.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Verizon Will Launch 5G Home Internet Access In 2018 More

Verizon Will Launch 5G Home Internet Access In 2018

Comments Filter:

  • Latency and Monthly Bandwidth (Score:5, Insightful)

    by corychristison ( 951993 ) on Thursday November 30, 2017 @08:34PM (#55655139)

    This will depend on monthly bandwidth allotments, and, to a lesser extent, latency.

    If you can't pull down 500GB a month at a reasonable cost, there will be no competition. End of story.

    • Re:Latency and Monthly Bandwidth (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Darinbob ( 1142669 ) on Thursday November 30, 2017 @09:36PM (#55655433)

      It will be like cable. Lots of bandwidth at the start, user is very happy. Later everyone uses it, more and more of the fixed bandwidth gets used by the neighbors, original user is pissed that performance has gone down.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Desler ( 1608317 )

        Good joke. This is Verizon so you’ll get 2 GB of data to start off with at teice the cost of a landline ISP.

      • Re:Latency and Monthly Bandwidth (Score:4, Interesting)

        by leonbev ( 111395 ) on Thursday November 30, 2017 @10:23PM (#55655633) Journal

        He's right, you know... Verizon's 4G LTE network was pretty awesome early on, until Apple released an iPhone with an LTE radio and the network slowed down for awhile due to all of the extra traffic. I think that was around the same time they started killing off the grandfathered $30 a month unlimited data plans as well.

        I'd imagine that the first handful of 5G home subscribers will have a similar experience until 5G smartphones become popular. Then they will probably start cutting data plans for people "abusing" the system by downloading 300+ GB of a data a month from 4K Netflix streaming and a few game downloads.

        • Re:Latency and Monthly Bandwidth (Score:5, Insightful)

          by mysidia ( 191772 ) on Friday December 01, 2017 @02:40AM (#55656335)

          first handful of 5G home subscribers will have a similar experience until 5G smartphones become popular.

          So in exchange for being fixed endpoints and not allowed to move; give the 5G home users priority on the network and apply all the restrictions and throttling to the actual smartphones. Because of the additional capacity 5G provides it should be fine providing they build out their networks adequately.

          • So a possible solution here, particularly in the case of rural areas would be to use directional antennas that are trained on locations, and then, yeah, give them either priority on that tower, or even exclusive access. It's much cheaper to add and orient a new antenna on an existing tower than it is to run new fiber out to remote locations. Of course, that was already possible going back as far as 3G, and would be able to deliver usefully decent quality service in 4G. Keep in mind, the move from 4G to 5G l

    • Competition? What do you think this is? A polyopoly market?

  • Great. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ScentCone ( 795499 ) on Thursday November 30, 2017 @08:34PM (#55655143)
    But it's not cities where this is needed. It's the places outside the cities where there's no high speed access of any kind, and never will be if it involves pulling cable/fiber down winding roads in less densely populated areas.

    • the MBA's need upto $10/GB overages with the base packing starting at about $40-$60/mo for 20GB-50GB

    • Re: Great. (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Ajit Pai says this will happen next year as despite all the evidence contrary, after net neutrality is abolished Verizon will be running to spend as much as they can do develope infrastructure to rural America.

    • You could install a WiMax basestation rural areas and have a line of sight microwave link to the nearest place you can get a wired internet connection, or to the next base station.

      https://www.tutorialspoint.com... [tutorialspoint.com]

      A WiMAX tower station can connect directly to the Internet using a high-bandwidth, wired connection (for example, a T3 line). It can also connect to another WiMAX tower using a line-of-sight microwave link.

      Problem is of course that you'd need to make sure you had enough subscribers to make it profitable before you did it. On the upside you could spread out quite fast this way - so long as the base stations are either in WiMax or microwave range they can talk to each other. So initially you'd put th

    • 4G is better for BFE. 5G has more bandwidth, but shittier range and weather tolerance. Just based on carrier frequency. 3G is better still, it's a tradeoff between range and bandwidth. The best for you will be the highest bandwidth you can actually make work with reasonable height tower(s) (at 100 feet total height the FAA gets involved, basically requires lights.)

      But by the time you need towers, you're almost certainly, out of 5G range. Especially if you don't want uncle Charlie hunting you...kilowatt l

      • I've been out of things for a little while, but as far as I can tell, this is not quite right. 3G 4G and the currently proposed 5G all allow for a wide range of carrier frequencies. It merely depends on what providers in your region has selected to implement; though certain ranges do tend to get agreed upon by providers so that handsets work across mobile carriers. It is not a tradeoff of range and bandwidth, it's an inverse relationship between signal penetration and frequency, and a direct relationship be

        • Extra details. Hold power constant and you, more or less, get down to my analysis. I did mention a kilowatt linear for the outlaws.

          Fixed directional antenna's improve 5G, but don't do much for the higher frequencies weather tolerance. As you say 'direct relationship between frequency and maximum bandwidth.' Not exactly true, spread spectrum, anyhow. Whatever frequencies 5G runs on they (will be/are) higher than 4G and do worse through rain (all other thing being equal).

    • Well, those rural folks decided to vote for an administration which is about to kill net neutrality, so F 'em.

      • The rural folks don't spend all day wishing they had faster internet access and think there are issues allot more important than this.

        I mean really, lets have the government - whose regulations are the reason we have these monopolizes to begin with - add even more rules to "protect" the internet.

        And how do you think this is going to be enforced? By giving the government complete access to what you are doing online to make sure you are not "throttled."

    • It won't work in rural areas. It just eliminates the need to fiber to the home. You still need fiber in the road. These connections are short range.
      • The reason why telecom hates installing fiber in rural areas is that last mile. They don't mind running fiber to the occassional tower NEARLY as much. Further, the towers don't all require fiber. Multiple towers can bounce signals to a centralized location via microwave.

    • Re: Great. (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      It is needed in cities for actual competition

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kohath ( 38547 )

      It’s a line-of-site service. It will eventually be available in rural areas with line of site to a mobile phone tower.

  • It's not competition.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Z80a ( 971949 ) on Thursday November 30, 2017 @08:36PM (#55655155)

    If it's verizon offering it.
    Wake me up when another company like google is allowed to even try.

    • Wake me up when another company like google is allowed to even try.

      Try? Google is already providing 1GB down/up fixed wireless service in seven major metro areas [telecompetitor.com].

      Wake up.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Desler ( 1608317 )

        Wow seven whole cities?

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          And not even to 15% of any of those cities. And given they have pulled back from some announced plans, they are about as reliable as Google has ever been. I am not sure I would sign up with them only because I have no guarantee they'll be in a location a year from now. I'm 100% sure Comcast will be.

        • * whoosh *

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kohath ( 38547 )

      Anyone with wireless spectrum is allowed. Did Google buy spectrum at the spectrum auction?

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Z80a ( 971949 )

        In theory you can.
        In practice Verizon/AT&T/Comcast will just pay the local government and block your efforts with a freaking law.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Kohath ( 38547 )

          Local governments don't control wireless comms.

          • Local governments don't control wireless comms.

            They can block who can put up a tower.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Kohath ( 38547 )

              Lots of the towers already exist and are owned by 3rd parties like American Tower. It makes more financial sense for one tower company to rent antenna space to many companies than for comms companies to put up many redundant towers.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Agripa ( 139780 )

                And then the large monopoly ISPs buy up the tower space or in the case of WISPs using the ISM bands, place Canopy modems at strategic locations exchanging fake traffic to block point to point WiFi.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by Kohath ( 38547 )

                  And then the large monopoly ISPs buy up the tower space or in the case of WISPs using the ISM bands, place Canopy modems at strategic locations exchanging fake traffic to block point to point WiFi.

                  It's a better conspiracy story if there are shadowy assassins though.

  • My phone doesn't work in my basement, and I live in my basement. No, not my mom's basement, my wonderful, fully furnished basement. The cats live upstairs...

  • I can't believe they are going to put caps on monthly BW. I am paying for 100Mb/s. Or... My ping times when everyone gets home and starts streaming netflix are terrible.

  • Wow! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    There is a reason why Comcast was so eager to make me sign a new 12-year agreement. Hell, they even gave me the new customer price! Imagine that, comcast treating old (supposedly-loyal) paying customers as well as they treat new customers!

  • It amazes me how many people on here don't seem to realize this has nothing to do with cell phones.

    • It's a service delivered over the RF spectrum, so it is subject to the same vagaries as your cell phone. Interference, multipath reflection fading, overloaded hubs/sites all await. If it's this "5G" (whatever that is) or nothing that might be a viable choice, but it won't stand up well against any wired network, even Comcast's disaster of a network.

      • Depends on how you define "stand up". It doesn't have the capacity or reliability of a wired network but if it can be sold at a much cheaper rate than cable it will stand up quite well.

        I think if they can sell a $30/month plan with reasonable data limits then they will find a lot of takers.

  • Wat (Score:4, Insightful)

    by XSportSeeker ( 4641865 ) on Thursday November 30, 2017 @08:53PM (#55655243)

    "Verizon Will Launch" "Real competition"
    Does not compute

  • I hope they won't use this as an excuse to cut back on fiber availability. Fiber is stable, isn't affected by interference, weather conditions (outside of damage to poles), etc, etc. It also provides a somewhat more secure channel.

    Also: this should come first in rural areas that don't have any Internet options other than satellite -- this is the perfect tech for rural area where rolling out fiber infrastructure is expensive.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I hope they won't use this as an excuse to cut back on fiber availability.

      They don't need another excuse, Verizon has rescheduled all new FIOS installations until never.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Desler ( 1608317 )

      Verizon already halted fiber expansion and has been selling off parts of their landline installations. You’re quite behind the times.

      • Fiber availability is still expanding in NYC. Thankfully. Having a glorified cell antenna is a sorry excuse for Internet access.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Fiber availability is still expanding in NYC. Thankfully.

          Only because they are forced to. Thank your government and elected officials for doing their job.

          • Yep, the city and state attorney generals' offices are pretty bad ass in NY as far as consumer advocacy.

  • 5G is the nickname for the technology... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    your 5 gigabyte monthly usage limit,

    and....

    the 5 grand you'll pay in overages if your windows 10 system gets into a failed-update-redownload loop.

  • I'm not sure about the Verizon flavor but (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nehumanuscrede ( 624750 ) on Thursday November 30, 2017 @09:16PM (#55655345)

    I believe the AT&T flavor of this is going to run somewhere in the 30ghz band ?

    I -think- DirecTv works in the 18ghz band and anyone who has ever tried to watch the damn thing
    during a rainstorm can see where my next question is going . . . . .

    I am curious how well this technology is going to work when the weather decides not to play nice.
    ( Rain, fog, snow, etc )

    Can one of you radio types enlighten me ?

    • Re:I'm not sure about the Verizon flavor but (Score:5, Informative)

      by FrankHaynes ( 467244 ) on Thursday November 30, 2017 @09:33PM (#55655423)

      The closer it gets to light, the more it acts like light.

    • You've got it right. Rain fade.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      Verizon's 30 GHz radio signal should work the same as physic's 30 GHz radio signal.

    • On average it'll go ~ 100'. From the pole to a window. Fiber or something else on the poles.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jon3k ( 691256 )
      I understand that it will affect it, but it doesn't affect my cellphone in any perceptible way (maybe I just never noticed?). I think cellphones are operating around what, 800-1200Mhz these days? Does going to something like 30Ghz cause a significant difference and should we expect the rain to cause serious interference at that frequency?
    • 30ghz is reserved for microwave ovens, but yeah, there are bands reserved a little bit below and above that range in the US. That said, 5G compliant systems can potentially go down as low as 4Ghz or so (the standard isn't actually finalized yet). But yeah, above around 10Ghz, rain/snow is going to lower your data rate. But if it's implemented correctly (and I'm under the impression that it will be), then it won't kill your signal or make your calls sound bad, it'll just lower your transfer rates, such that
  • So they haven't even established procedures for evaluating human exposure of 5G radiation (6 GHz-100 GHz) [www.iec.ch] but hey don't let a little microwave radiation get in the way of 'progress'

  • Scuttle The Launch!!! (Score:3)

    by ohnocitizen ( 1951674 ) on Friday December 01, 2017 @03:14AM (#55656407)
    Verizon keeps fighting to kill Net Neutrality despite people consistently fighting it off. Time to punish them. Make this fail. They are surely investing lots of money into it. The only way large corporations stop abusing their power is by being regulated, broken up, or losing a significant amount of money. Since Trump's Ajit Pai lead FCC is in a state of regulatory capture thanks to Verizon - we need to fight back.

  • It's cell service not broadband (Score:3)

    by oh_my_080980980 ( 773867 ) on Friday December 01, 2017 @10:15AM (#55657539)
    It's fucking cell service so stop with the bullshit. Broadband is guaranteed up/down speeds and no data caps. Cell service is nothing like that. Speeds are not guaranteed and there are data caps. So no your fucking cell phone does not provide you with broadband. Your cell phone provides you with an VERY EXPENSIVE alternative to connecting to the internet.
    • Unfortunately, the definition of broadband is set by the FCC, and Pai is changing it so that potentially even 4G service on the high end satisfies as broadband. Naturally, this is a load of crap.

Slashdot Top Deals

Swap read error. You lose your mind.

Close