According to that Video above, they have it all figured out .... goes around buildings, thru walls ect .... well see ...
Directv to shift away from Satellite?
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 624
- Views 40K
- Status
Beam forming for how many simultaneous feeds? A square mile could be hundreds. Gonna be a nice fiber going to those towers.
Penetration is driven by frequency, regardless.
Be interesting to see if Charlie bites.
Penetration is driven by frequency, regardless.
Be interesting to see if Charlie bites.
You would still have the whole neighborhood streaming from 1 mini tower.
I don't see them placing one every 4 houses like phone and cable are.
Jimbo said: ?
You would still have the whole neighborhood streaming from 1 mini tower.
I don't see them placing one every 4 houses like phone and cable are.
They did What ?
Place a tower every 4 homes like phone and cable did back in the day ?
Aeriel plant ...
What did they use in Buried plant areas ?
Beamforming only helps with frequency re-use (more users per tower in different directions) it doesn't help penetration through obstacles. MIMO helps with obstacles by going around them where there is a clear path - i.e. if you have a tree between you and the tower, but the signal can bounce off the house across the street if there are no trees on that path.
Thinking about it a little more I think rain actually might not be too big of an issue. Satellite signals travel through miles of rain, but a 5G signal would only travel through whatever distance is between you and the tower. Not saying rain fade would be impossible - in heavy rain Ka can attenuate by over 100 db - but it might take the sort of rain that makes you pull over when driving because you can't see the taillights of the car in front of you. Foliage would be an issue - perhaps a bigger issue than with satellite since you aren't looking at the sky where only one or two trees might possibly be in the way, but perhaps dozens between you and the base station if it is located rather low like a telephone pole or street light. Depends on the sort of trees in your neighborhood, where I am the poles are dwarfed by trees, but if you have palm trees they aren't likely to be a problem.
If you are close enough to the transmitter 5G signals will be considerably more powerful than satellite, which will obviously help. Satellite is ~ -90 dbm at the LNB, while cellular transmitters are more like -55 db if you are very close, though unless you rent your backyard to a tower owner you won't see a signal that strong. With iOS 11 you get four bars for < -65 dbm, three bars 65-75, two bars 75-90, one bar 90 to 110, just for comparison. I don't really know what the 'per leaf' attenuation is, but if you are in one or two bar territory I don't think you'll have any more luck getting millimeter wave 5G through a tree than you would getting Directv through that same tree and even 3 or 4 bars might not be enough if your neighborhood looks like mine.
Thinking about it a little more I think rain actually might not be too big of an issue. Satellite signals travel through miles of rain, but a 5G signal would only travel through whatever distance is between you and the tower. Not saying rain fade would be impossible - in heavy rain Ka can attenuate by over 100 db - but it might take the sort of rain that makes you pull over when driving because you can't see the taillights of the car in front of you. Foliage would be an issue - perhaps a bigger issue than with satellite since you aren't looking at the sky where only one or two trees might possibly be in the way, but perhaps dozens between you and the base station if it is located rather low like a telephone pole or street light. Depends on the sort of trees in your neighborhood, where I am the poles are dwarfed by trees, but if you have palm trees they aren't likely to be a problem.
If you are close enough to the transmitter 5G signals will be considerably more powerful than satellite, which will obviously help. Satellite is ~ -90 dbm at the LNB, while cellular transmitters are more like -55 db if you are very close, though unless you rent your backyard to a tower owner you won't see a signal that strong. With iOS 11 you get four bars for < -65 dbm, three bars 65-75, two bars 75-90, one bar 90 to 110, just for comparison. I don't really know what the 'per leaf' attenuation is, but if you are in one or two bar territory I don't think you'll have any more luck getting millimeter wave 5G through a tree than you would getting Directv through that same tree and even 3 or 4 bars might not be enough if your neighborhood looks like mine.
Yeah. I made several posts on that topic, and where Verizon is heading with regard to TV service, on another forum here:
[Channels] What Verizon is doing - Verizon FiOS TV | DSLReports Forums
WOW! I don’t go to DSLReports often. This thread you linked makes me MUCH less inclined to switch to FiOS. Dropping HD and SD channels? Not investing in development? And they never used the full potential of fiber - they restricted it to coax cable norms.
Very bleak future projected there.
Fios tv isn’t going anywhere . They were making new boxes that streamed it over the internet but put them on hold . Maybe they will buy dish grab all of the spectrum and really make a run against Directv with sling .
The network they built in Boston is a hybrid fiber/cellular network...when they deployed fios to Boston ..they are calling it fixed 5g
Soooooo.
Where are these towers ?
Your telling me nothing ... Boston did it .... good for them.
How did they do it and is it reasonable for everyone to do it that way ?
It sounds like they did both .... probably originally was Cell delivered and then once they got enough fiber into places they turned them on at that point on fiber ... really 2 different things.
If he's saying that Boston did it, via 5g it cannot be fiber to the home as it wouldn't be 5g then.
That said, the 5g will be fed by fiber in the long run, probably from the offices to a vrad type device and then to the towers, would be my guess, much like the att service is ran now.
Chances are, att will get the 5g towers fed by fiber from the vrads, seeing they are already in place.
Then again, many years ago when vrads started popping up, we were told that they were wireless capable at that point.
On te
fixed 5g is really just a marketing term...it doesn't really mean anything until the actual standard is released...which is being written by att and verizon ...verizon is building a similar network in Los Angeles..but wait they sold that state...Verizon business..aka MCI has a large presence in that area..along with other major cities..they will be using the verizon business network in L A...don't get hung up on 5g..because it's just a name
AT&T and Verizon might be part of the group writing the 5G standards, but they are not in charge. An international body is in charge, the same standards organization that created LTE and GSM in the past.
No, FiOS TV isn't going away anytime in the foreseeable future. But Verizon's comments earlier this week make it clear that they don't see much future in traditional linear pay TV (i.e. "cable TV"), so you definitely should NOT expect them to dump more money and time into improving FiOS TV.
Those new boxes that would "stream" FiOS TV that you're referring to, that was going to be a new Verizon managed IPTV service (the same kind of TV transmission technology as used by AT&T Uverse TV and Google Fiber TV, both of which are getting phased out). It was developed out of the OnCue technology that Verizon acquired years ago from Intel. This new service was beta tested last year. For whatever reasons, Verizon shut down the beta test months ago and decided to completely kill that project. I think they realized that managed IPTV's moment is quickly passing, and the future of video is OTT (which can be accessed over the open internet, via any provider's connection, while managed IPTV can only be deployed over a provider's own network connections).
It will be interesting to see what happens with Dish and all of that spectrum they have. I don't think that Sling TV fits the bill for what Verizon wants and needs in an OTT TV partner, although if they ended up acquiring all of Dish (not just their spectrum), then I guess they'd get Sling TV too. But of course, an acquisition like that would take a long time to put in place. And Verizon needs an OTT TV partner PRONTO because they have to have something set up and in place by 4Q18 when they launch 5G home broadband service.
I still think that Sony's PS Vue service makes the most sense as a partner for Verizon. Sony noted in a presentation this week that the "market and future business model" for PS Vue "remains uncertain". Which is understandable since, after 3 years in business, they reportedly still don't yet have 1 million subscribers (despite the fact that they seem to get good all-around reviews from users, and the service seems to have few flaws, other than having fewer locals on board nationwide than other vMVPDs and also lacking Viacom cable channels). But fear of becoming an also-ran behind the three big boys (AT&T, Google and Hulu) should make Sony all the more willing to partner with Verizon on a co-branded version of the service. And unlike YouTube TV, Hulu and DirecTV Now, PS Vue doesn't yet (AFAIK) have their own targeted digital ad system in place or in development, so they could use Verizon's/Oath's. The partnership could make a lot of sense for both companies. Perhaps Verizon would even want to provide a capital infusion into PS Vue and turn it into a jointly owned venture between Sony and Verizon: call it Vue TV from Verizon + Sony.
Right. That's what I was referencing in my prior post above. It seems to me that, if Sony continues on its current path, going it alone and insisting that Vue remain under their PlayStation branding umbrella (which misleads lots of consumers into thinking that it will only work on PlayStation video game consoles, BTW), then I don't see much of a future for it. Despite being tied with Netflix (!) among streaming services as #1 in customer satisfaction, Vue just isn't building a big enough subscriber base. They need to reboot the brand and strike a strategic alliance with a powerful distributor like Verizon, who could actually make the service competitive with DTV Now, Hulu Live and YouTube TV. Think of the new subscribers that Verizon could drive if they advertised and bundled "Vue TV by Sony + Verizon" with their home internet and mobile phone services. They could also showcase it in every Verizon store. PS Vue is a good product, it just needs more weight behind it (and a clearer brand name).
And Verizon clearly needs an OTT TV partner right now, as they just stated, since they apparently can't create their own from scratch. (And even if they could, there's simply not time now to get it done before they launch 5G home internet in 4Q18.)
Ultimately, Verizon's CEO is right that the future of video consumption will NOT be linear channels as we've had for nearly a century of TV now. It's going to be on-demand (like Netflix) for everything except stuff that's actually happening live (e.g. sports, news, contest shows, award shows, music concerts, etc.), and that sort of stuff can clearly be streamed OTT too, as YouTube does it all the time. So I get why they don't want to spend a lot more money in developing a new linear TV business when that business model is destined to wither away.
But the hard thing for Verizon right now is that it hasn't withered away YET and it won't for several more years. In the meantime, they still have to offer some kind of "cable TV" service with linear channels to their home internet customers. The challenge is coming up with a decent product they can offer that requires the least up-front investment. I can't see any better option on the table for them than partnering with Sony on PS Vue.
- Status
Similar threads
