Forums - General Discussion - I have 5G internet now

John2290 said:
15 mbps (small m, is doing me fine atm) I only long for better internet when a file is something ridiculous like 90gigs but anyrhing below 50ish is an easy overnight DL. I don't want the skin burned off me by them 5g signals and end up with ass cancer.

This will never happen.  Anybody you read or hear that are making claims like this are either lying their ass off or don't know what they hell they are talking about.  Probably both.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Around the Network
John2290 said:
15 mbps (small m, is doing me fine atm) I only long for better internet when a file is something ridiculous like 90gigs but anyrhing below 50ish is an easy overnight DL. I don't want the skin burned off me by them 5g signals and end up with ass cancer.

I really wish they would offer a slower package like 15mbps, but offset that with more data, like a 500GB cap, since unlimited seems like a no go period. 500GB data would be enough that it wouldn't be a worry about going over, for a while anyway. 100GB+ games for PS5 would be the next problem eventually with a data cap. At least 15mbps would be a 3X increase in speed, along with 25% more data. That I could live with for 3 maybe 4 years.

I wonder how much 5G would effect you on the ground from a tall tower? Unless you have clear line of sight to the tower from the ground, you're going to have to put the dish on the roof or antenna tower to get decent signal. That being the case, the signal must be pretty weak near the ground, once you're far enough away or blocked by foliage, and since the large majority of us aren't much higher than 6 feet off the ground, I can't see it being a major concern in general. Now when there's a hot spot every 100 ft along the street in the city so it's completely blanketed, well that might be another story.



SpokenTruth said:

With power intensities so low that it can't penetrate deeper than a layer or two of epidermis.  No need to panic.

Those frequencies sucks anyways for coverage ... 

I'm irritated enough that I don't get ANY signal (not even 2G) on my phone in some parts where I go around and I'm far away from rural places so I wonder what 24GHz and above will do for most people ? 



fatslob-:O said:
SpokenTruth said:

With power intensities so low that it can't penetrate deeper than a layer or two of epidermis.  No need to panic.

Those frequencies sucks anyways for coverage ... 

I'm irritated enough that I don't get ANY signal (not even 2G) on my phone in some parts where I go around and I'm far away from rural places so I wonder what 24GHz and above will do for most people ? 

Depending on your carrier, you can't get 2G anymore anyway.  Some decommissioned it as far back as 2012.  2017 for several in the US.  Even 3G is being decommissioned by many in 2020.

5G also still has sub-6GHz frequencies.  It's not all 24 GHz and up.  Sprint are only offering it in 2.5 GHz in the US, for example. Most carriers around the world are currently only deployed at 3.5 GHz.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

SpokenTruth said:

Depending on your carrier, you can't get 2G anymore anyway.  Some decommissioned it as far back as 2012.  2017 for several in the US.  Even 3G is being decommissioned by many in 2020.

5G also still has sub-6GHz frequencies.  It's not all 24 GHz and up.  Sprint are only offering it in 2.5 GHz in the US, for example. Most carriers around the world are currently only deployed at 3.5 GHz.

Sprint has terrible coverage even with sub-6GHz bands ... 

2G will still be needed for vending machines and other IoT devices, the new baseline might very well be LTE in the future ... 



Around the Network

Wireless ISP sales rep stopped by yesterday since we're in the new '5G' coverage zone. Not a lot of new or hopeful info though.

He told me 350GB was likely to remain the cap until next year if not longer, but that there were ongoing internal talks about offering unlimited, but that will definitely cost over $100 per month based on existing services and package pricing so he tells me. I asked about if free downloading throughout the early morning hours would ever be offered and he said no, not from their company ever, which isn't a surprise because they are top dog here in Canuckistan. I then suggested since they have a 100GB base package for $69, and 350GB for $79, that they should offer something like 500GB for another $10 maybe, because many around here won't pay over $100, even for unlimited. He said a higher fixed data cap was quite unlikely. He followed that up by telling me slower speeds aren't happening either due to mandates to increase base speeds to a min of 25mbps. So basically pay overages over $100 per month now, or eventually get unlimited for over $100 per month later. While too many options aren't good, just a couple isn't cutting it here.

He also informed me that it's actually some hybrid 4G LTE tech that's easily upgradeable to 5G in the future when they feel they need faster speeds and the pricing can be more reasonable. He also said this tech was much more capable in terms of penetrating foliage and their actual serviceable coverage is extremely high. He was using his company phone and some app to check signal which fluctuated between 3 and 4 bars on the side of the house facing the direction of the tower. He actually let me take it up the TV antenna tower to check up there, and at second story roof level I already had consistent 5 bars even though there's a ton of tree tops blocking the cell tower. There's another 20 ft of tower above that as well so signal strength likely wouldn't ever be a problem.

Just going to have to wait and see. I'm not all the hopeful though since odds are good most homes around here will be fine with a 350GB cap, so offering a higher data package won't really be necessary, unless it's a much larger problem elsewhere, and they decide to offer a data increase everywhere or unlimited.



The fiber network program that's using Gov money to bring fiber to rural area's in my province, just had a few updates about new fiber coming to our area. Sure enough, it's not coming here. Instead of tapping off the line that's about 1.5km to the west and going through our area and picking up about 60 customers along the way to the town just southeast of us, they are tapping off a line 3km northwest, going about 2km north, 4km east, then 5km south, to get to that town. While that route travels along main roads, the amount of homes along that route wouldn't be any more than the 60 or so it would travel through here, if they went through here instead. It's the same company doing all the construction work as last year, and the same ISP who's providing internet through the lines. The work is scheduled to be completed by the end of this year. At that point, my little area will be completely surrounded by fiber, because why not?

Over the last couple of months, the large ISP that brought 4G LTE wireless internet to the area has been calling or stopping by every couple of weeks trying to get us to sign up. The only thing they've changed, is the 3 month slightly cheaper price they use to get you on board, which has been extended to 6 months. Apparently the message hasn't gotten through that a 350GB cap simply isn't enough.

At least ever since the 4G LTE came to the area, our DSL connection has been getting worse and clearly throttled again. Can't catch a break it seems.



I really don't get how they get away with calling that 5G.

We had wireless 3-5 mb internet to my parents rural house (the closest town has like 250 people and only dial up was available before this) in like...2005-2006. This was about 2-3 miles from the tower the dude put up on his lot. This was comparable to 3G service available at the time.

I'd expect anything labeled as 5G to get like 250+ mb



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

Am I missing something or is that speed pretty slow for 5G? I thought 5G was supposed to be like Gigabit speeds (or 100+ MB/s). I'd cancel my 5G service if that was the speed I was getting.



Baalzamon said:
I really don't get how they get away with calling that 5G.

We had wireless 3-5 mb internet to my parents rural house (the closest town has like 250 people and only dial up was available before this) in like...2005-2006. This was about 2-3 miles from the tower the dude put up on his lot. This was comparable to 3G service available at the time.

I'd expect anything labeled as 5G to get like 250+ mb
NobleTeam360 said:
Am I missing something or is that speed pretty slow for 5G? I thought 5G was supposed to be like Gigabit speeds (or 100+ MB/s). I'd cancel my 5G service if that was the speed I was getting.

Most of the time what I've seen is it's typically mentioned somewhere as "up to" whatever speed. Meaning the tech is capable of 5G, even if it's not true 5G now because it needs an upgrade to be true 5G, and the speed you could get could be up to their highest advertised speed, even if during the hours you really require it, it's half that.

They get away with it pretty easy, especially around places like here, because here you have little option. If you want a reasonable higher speed, you have to go with the single ISP that's able to offer you something better than you already have. Many of those area's have such poor quality service or such slow speeds, they'll basically take anything you throw at them for the most part.