Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Verizon yesterday announced that its 5G service is available in 13 NFL stadiums but said the network is only able to cover "parts" of the seating areas. Verizon 5G signals will also be sparse or non-existent when fans walk through concourses and other areas in and around each stadium.
The rollout of 5G is more complicated than the rollout of 4G was because 5G relies heavily on millimeter-wave signals that don't travel far and are easily blocked by walls and other obstacles. While Verizon is trying to build excitement around 5G, its announcement for availability in NFL stadiums carried several caveats.
"Verizon 5G Ultra Wideband service will be available in areas of the [13] stadiums," Verizon said. "Service will be concentrated in parts of the seating areas but could be available in other locations in and around the stadium as well."
Notice the phrase "could be available" in that last sentence. Verizon isn't promising any 5G coverage outside the seating areas, and the seating-area coverage will only be available in some sections.
[...] 5G can work on any frequency used by mobile networks, including the lower-band frequencies Verizon uses for its nationwide 4G network. But Verizon has said that customers will only notice small speed increases on 5G when it's delivered over low-band frequencies. The big speed increases will come on millimeter-wave deployments, which will be concentrated in densely populated areas.
The 13 stadiums where Verizon 5G is partially available include those used by the Carolina Panthers, Denver Broncos, Seattle Seahawks, Detroit Lions, New England Patriots, Miami Dolphins, Indianapolis Colts, New York Giants and New York Jets (they share a stadium in New Jersey), Baltimore Ravens, Houston Texans, Chicago Bears, and Minnesota Vikings. That's only 12 stadiums, so there's a 13th that Verizon hasn't revealed. There are another 18 other NFL stadiums without Verizon 5G service.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @12:47PM (7 children)
With 5G you can burn through your data cap in 50 seconds.
Who watches NFL games on small screens anyway.
Deploy Wi-Fi instead because I'm old and I prefer 1997 technology.
(Score: 3, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 09 2019, @12:55PM (2 children)
More importantly, who watches NFL games on screens while they're at the bloody game?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ledow on Monday September 09 2019, @01:06PM (1 child)
And in the tunnels.
And on a phone.
And where they can't just watch it on 4G if they have a 4G signal but absolutely must watch it on 5G?
People really expect far too much of the hype, where 5G is just like 4G was... in the right place you get a better signal. And when you're not, you'll get the same signal you always used to deem adequate anyway. And eventually everywhere will get 5G, but by then 6G will come along... in select areas... etc. etc. etc.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday September 09 2019, @10:16PM
The ISP's where I live are advertising 5G as being some sort of magical realm, which will "enable new technologies like driverless cars", as if all it takes is extra bandwidth.
My suspicion is that they are trying to get people enthusiastic about 5G, then will tell the government it is too expensive, and taxpayers will need to put their hands in their pockets again.
Fortunately the last time they did that the answer was that if taxpayers are going to pay for a new network, then that new network was going to be nationalized.
They backed off pretty quick.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday September 09 2019, @01:04PM (1 child)
802.11ax is 2016 technology.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @01:25PM
802.11ax is too fast for my data cap. You need to deploy 802.11-1997 instead.
(Score: 3, Funny) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday September 09 2019, @02:02PM
If they're going to do that, can't they just pipe an RJ-11 landline phone service? I still have a TRS-80 Model 100 lying around somewhere and I think 300 baud is all I'll need. What's the number of the nearest Compuserve node to the stadium?
This sig for rent.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by hwertz on Monday September 09 2019, @05:08PM
"Deploy Wi-Fi instead because I'm old and I prefer 1997 technology."
Don't know if you're joking or not; but wifi is actually awful in crowded situations. Rather than having the APs be able to coordinate access to the medium in any meaningful way, it is essentially random access. If you look up Aloha, you'll find that means roughly 50% maximum capacity, and speeds cratering as more users try to use the channel. 802.11ax is supposed to address this, but just came out this year so it's not really deployed yet.
As for 5G... yep it's largely hype. The advertisers want to imply 5G will allow huge speeds all over the place. The reality.. do I expect 5G all over the place? Yeah, but it'll be low and mid-band that brings a 20% speed increase. Especially since vendors have figured out how to run 5G in existing 4G spectrum, this makes running 5G almost a no-brainer. (Some clever engineers realized both 4G and 5G use timeslots, and figured out how to have a site be able to run 4G one timeslot and 5G the next, so instead of shutting down some 4G service to run 5G, the site can simply run more and more 5G timeslots as more and more 5G phones are on the service.) Do I expect widespread mmwave 5G, which brings huge speeds by running like 100-500mhz blocks? Nope. I expect it to be strategically deployed to areas where the existing spectrum is all slowed down by heavy usage (i.e. congestion.)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Monday September 09 2019, @12:54PM (5 children)
As a consumer, I don't really care if I get "faster than 4G" speeds... I assume this is actually a by-product of wanting to provide the ability for every cell phone subscriber to simultaneously stream two Netflix HD streams to their phones - because: who doesn't love those sweet unlimited data $100/month subscription fees? (BTW, Google Fi unlimited data is $60 per month, but Verizon still has customers... go figure.)
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @01:18PM
Verizon still has customers because google fi doesn't have the same coverage - they only give you select parts of the t-mobile, spring, and us cellular networks. I'm in the process of leaving google fi due to coverage and trying a verizon-based mvno.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Monday September 09 2019, @01:39PM (3 children)
The data for Google Fi unlimited is $60, but that is on top of the $25 basic fee, so its really $85. Which is still a good price, since you pay less if you use less data, as little as $35.
That is the real reason I use it, as I don't feel the need to guess how much data I might need in a given month.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday September 09 2019, @03:20PM (2 children)
My monthly Google Fi bill comes in just under $30, because my monthly total data usage is just under 500MB - this across three devices, two with the zero monthly fee data only SIM. And, coverage in and around my home is as good or better than the Verizon coverage we had when we moved here, then dropped because: Verizon. Previous home couldn't get coverage from anyone other than Verizon, so... hello monopoly provider, what will I be paying you this month?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Monday September 09 2019, @07:17PM (1 child)
Yeah, I had forgotten about the 6GB thing because I would never use that amount. Even last month when I was away from the usual wifi of home for a week I did not come close to 6G. (Had to download the mp3s for Fear Inoculum over Fi, was the only big thing I did.)
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday September 09 2019, @07:35PM
Seems like over half my usage comes on 3 or 4 days a month, probably when I'm away from WiFi sharing pictures or something... at $4.50 a month, I'm not concerned.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by takyon on Monday September 09 2019, @01:02PM (3 children)
Just the stands, not the field.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 09 2019, @01:15PM
What's the place kicker supposed to do for most of the game if he can't watch pornhub?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday September 09 2019, @03:22PM (1 child)
The QB has had wireless coms to the coaches' box for decades... wouldn't be surprised if the better teams have more coaches than players and a sophisticated command/control system to shout in the players' ears when they could be making better choices...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @05:00PM
Yeah, but why would they use 5G when what they have works, doesn't require new equipment, and doesn't need to involve cellular service providers by design?
(Score: 4, Touché) by pkrasimirov on Monday September 09 2019, @01:13PM (2 children)
So the 5G technology cannot work from one room to the other but will send meteorology 30 years in the past? Goes well with thousands of glittering satellites in the sky, global warming and oceans full of trash.
(Score: 2) by dry on Tuesday September 10 2019, @01:43AM (1 child)
Generally there are no ceilings outside to interfere with the signal.
(Score: 2) by pkrasimirov on Tuesday September 10 2019, @01:44PM
Ka band? Outside? Oh yes, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rain_fade [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 09 2019, @01:14PM (12 children)
The faster the speed, the less penetration of solid objects you get. 2.6GHz has passable but not good solid object penetration and 5GHz has shitty penetration 802.11ad at 60GHZ? Yeah, pretty cocktastic penetration; basically nothing more signal-blocking than your clothes will get passed through at all.
Now go over to "millimeter-wave" 5g and you're talking a range of around 30-300GHZ. Fast as fuck for data transfer but unlikely to even penetrate thin cardboard at the high end. Antenna placement within your phone had to be a pretty big issue because your hand will be more than enough to block signal entirely if you hold it in a manner the designers hadn't anticipated.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday September 09 2019, @01:21PM (4 children)
Their response seems fine to me. If they want to offer more coverage, they'll put more "nanocells" near the concessions stands, bathrooms, or whatever.
Heaven forbid you drop back to 4G.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 09 2019, @04:10PM
The stands? The only viable place, since it's essentially line-of-sight-only what with the people sitting in front of or behind you able to completely block the signal, to put it would be almost directly overhead. That's all fine and good for domes but completely useless for open stadiums.
As usual, if an ethernet cord is at all a viable option, it is the best option by a damned sight.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 10 2019, @04:04AM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday September 10 2019, @11:33AM (1 child)
They're turning the freaking frogs gay.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 10 2019, @01:48PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Monday September 09 2019, @02:22PM (3 children)
5G also has sub-5GHz, sub-1GHz, MU-MIMO and beamforming:
https://www.qualcomm.com/news/onq/2019/06/20/how-5g-massive-mimo-transforms-your-mobile-experiences [qualcomm.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G_NR_frequency_bands [wikipedia.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday September 09 2019, @03:24PM (2 children)
All the tricks... does it also transfer data via audio-modem when RF interference is too high?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday September 09 2019, @03:32PM (1 child)
Only when the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. want it to.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday September 09 2019, @03:52PM
There are covert systems to monitor data transfer via audio signatures of electronic equipment- they can tell more than you might imagine from the patterns of the whine...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Funny) by Freeman on Monday September 09 2019, @03:34PM (2 children)
So, quite literally, "you're holding it wrong".
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @08:35PM (1 child)
But, thanks to bluetooth, you don't hold the phone anymore, you leave it in your pocket/purse/whatever ... so now "whatever" just needs to be an aerial mount to hold your phone up where reception is good, and no more problems.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday September 10 2019, @02:15PM
Then, excuse me for wanting to hold my phone at all.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Monday September 09 2019, @01:22PM (3 children)
x thousands of densely packed people connecting to the network. I'm sure it'll make for a really speedy download for everybody...
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Monday September 09 2019, @02:15PM (2 children)
https://www.qualcomm.com/news/onq/2019/06/20/how-5g-massive-mimo-transforms-your-mobile-experiences [qualcomm.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by NateMich on Monday September 09 2019, @03:18PM (1 child)
Yes, but they have to supply that station with sufficient bandwidth in the first place.
Imagine if 20,000 people are connecting with awesome 5G to a tower that has a 1Gb uplink.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday September 10 2019, @12:29AM
I am an industry insider with this, I believe the figure is a density of being able to handle 1 million devices per square kilometer, 20 Gbps per device downlink speed with 10 Gbps uplink speed for ideal connections.
Of course the real truth is that 5G is being totally improvised in a ridiculously half-ass manner as they go along, and anybody who believes this is even close to finished being realized will be sorely disappointed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @04:10PM
take a knee for 5g?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Monday September 09 2019, @07:09PM (2 children)
this will in the future be seen as some wildly obscene high point of pointless technology.
they are basically saying 'we can cover all of the upper class areas' which is indicative, 5g will be something available exactly where the rent rises above a very exactly calculated figure.
there are more important things to be working on than this crap and our emf is very likely killing insects one way or another.
I support a moratorium on new wireless services, what we have now is enough. Wires aren't that bad and too much emf may well be.
thesesystemsarefailing.net
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @10:29PM
Insect die-offs are due to pesticides. The problem we have that 5g is a prime example of is decision making by hype and greed rather than utility and need. This applies to all aspects of modern society and is killing us by degrees.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 10 2019, @01:02AM
Do you have any actual evidence that the EMF is killing insects or causing other harm? Or is this one of those, "it feels like the two are correlated" things?
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Tuesday September 10 2019, @12:50PM
Is this one of those 'we have altered the habitate of 100,000 species by increasing emf in their environment across 10,000 frequencies by a factor of 1000 but even though these species are dying off since these changes were made I see no reason to form any hypotheses or do any experimentation and I will mock anyone outright who is not ready to crank it up a few notches while shouting 'merica.?' comments?
Any morally sane person would recognize that by changing the environment of 100,000 organisms(more im sure) without doing experiments across any of them, you are declaring those species expendible and yourself a standalone apex species who gives 0 fucks about anyone but yourself.
A constructive comment might have been, 'how can we test this.' Or, 'why the hell have we made these changes without testing.'
Same goes for monsanto, they are experimenting on humans and insects alike. It is difficult for me to believe anyone making these decisions lives on the surface of our planet frankly, but that is the official story.
thesesystemsarefailing.net