By then, we may all have settled on exactly what 4G means.
And someone will be claiming to have 5 or 6G.
If you find yourself a bit unsure as to exactly what marketeers mean when they use the term "4G", you're not alone – telecom and research execs are equally unhappy with the fog surrounding that term. "I'm not sure there is an exact definition," Mike Nielsen, Ciena's VP for Carrier Ethernet and Switching Solutions told The Reg …
"It's what you promised but failed to deliver with 3G".
So, for instance, I should be able to have a video call in reasonably high definition and with no lag, or watch a live tennis match and be able to follow the ball, wherever there is coverage for audio calls, and whilst in a moving vehicle.
You can even re-use all the old marketing. Just change the 3 to a 4.
Mexico's Iusacell carrier is outright lying, boasting its 4G network. Except they are a CDMA carrier (thus no 4G there) which has deployed a parallel GSM/EDGE/UMTS/HSPA+ network. The HSPA+ part is what they call "4G".
Of course, the few users who have HSPA+ capable, or even UMTS handsets feel the speed... because nobody's using the network yet. FAIL
4G won't deliver broadband performance in the real world either. They will not have enough towers or enough spectrum. HSPA is already near the Shannon Boundary.
So in reality to have entry level Broadband performance you nedd about x9 more masts and about x6 more spectrum. That's never going to happen. No economic argument for it.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019