No Huawei, America: Samsung scores $6.6bn for 5G at US giant Verizon Samsung Electronics has won a $6.6bn contract to supply 5G infrastructure to Verizon in the US, beating out more established and traditional telco suppliers Nokia and Ericsson. The deal, which was finalised on Friday, is likely one of Samsung's biggest 5G contracts to date, equaling 3.43 per cent of the firm's total sales for …
When it comes to 5G, Samsung is right up there with the rest of them. 4G and 5G were introduced earlier and more extensively in Asia than in the West because the need for them in their huge, densely populated cities was greater. And Samsung has for years being developing and supplying telephone network kit to the networks in Korea. Being able to design and manufacture its own silicon can't hurt either.
Still waiting for Govt. handouts to rip out the minimal 5G Huawei equipment ! Seriously, where can you get decent 5G coverage? One street to another becomes a blackspot. Even 4G sucks. Networks are just not investing. Lesser countries are stealing a march on us. I would be happy, even if only they improve the 4G capacity and maximise its benefits/potential. Dont care what G they call it.
Ersatz UK.
> where can you get decent 5G coverage?
Of all of them, EE (and any 5G enabled MVNO sitting on EE) seem to be the more advanced in their deployments. As usual, look to major population centres for actual coverage, and of course YMMV
https://www.nperf.com/en/map/GB/-/-/signal/
At present, from what I can tell, 5G is being deployed in tandem with 4G sites on the lower frequencies so that the coverage from 5G site is about the same as a 4G site. This is used to augment the bearer channels to the used in addition to the 4G channels so probably won't get the really really high speeds from the higher frequencies (6GHz+) yet.
By its very nature and frequency range, 5G needs more masts (many thousands) and Micro cells to be a meaningful deployment. 5G signals dont travel very far & doesnt penetrate walls/houses easily and hence the need for more antennae. (ergo infrstaructure build). Which is missing in this whole malarkey.
UK always given a short shrift by the greedy networks and the square mile's bankers.
> By its very nature and frequency range, 5G needs more masts (many thousands) and Micro cells to be a meaningful deployment
You are ill-informed. For sure in the high frequencies (e.g. >6GHz) this is the case, but 5G is currently being deployed at much lower frequencies so that coverage matches the underlying 4G network (and doesn't give the highest data rate or lowest latency which is possible at the high frequencies). Even with a bit of disparity, though, the addition of beam forming on the 5G layer gives more range gain to make it a match in range with 4G. Lastly, you will not only be on 5G, but also on 4G at the same time.
Caveat - your "meaningful deployment" may not be what I'd call a meaningful deployment. You might be demanding ubiquitous gbps coverage, which is unreasonable, imho.
But if you trust the hype (esp Three network with all its spectrum holdings for >4 years) , you would be forgiven for believing that 5G (band n78 only at the moment) will make your morning cuppa and also give you a blow job in the bargain !
Nothing of the sort is happening and they are not investing even the bare minimum, to match their lying claims.
If anything (if you read other forums), Three has nosedived in their speeds and signals to abysmally low levels, almost unusable in Central London, and pathetic CS.
The networks have all lost the 5G plot.
Having worked on 3, 4 and now 5G for the last 20 years, I pay no attention to the hype. Headline grabbing data rates are probably theoretical numbers, at the physical layer, and give one mobile the entire cell capacity with perfect transmission. In practice, user experience is about 60-70% of those numbers due to protocol overheads and variability in radio.
mmWave feels like the new 3D TV.
Apart from narrow area’s in inner cities, stations, airports, hotels and conference/event centres where tall building will screw with signals anyway the ROI of hundred’s of mini-masts will never allow them to be deployed so mmWave will be just marketing puff unrealised in most places.
Apart from narrow area’s in inner cities, stations, airports, hotels and conference/event centres where tall building will screw with signals anyway the ROI of hundred’s of mini-masts will never allow them to be deployed so mmWave will be just marketing puff
However, those are the places that will truly benefit from it. Pre-covid rush hour, or at sports/concert arenas have been historically poor for connectivity because of all the people. Out in the woop woops, you don't need that sort of service, regular 4G/5G would suffice.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
