Directv to shift away from Satellite?

[Jimbo]

Jimbo, first off I am jealous. We just got put on 6 days, wish me luck :/.

And 5G doesn’t require cell towers, the small cell cans are considered miniature cell towers. They require a lot of maintence too from what I’ve been hearing, get ready to start climbing telephone poles lol.

I've been climbing poles for 27 years now.

 

[Jimbo]

What about areas like mine where all utilities are under ground?

You have underground phone facilities already .... they will probably just add to it.
Particularly if there's no cable or fiber that needs to feed it.

 

[navychop]

Aren’t all the “cans” fed by fiber?

 

[Jimbo]

Aren’t all the “cans” fed by fiber?

By Cans, your talking the 5g stuff ?

I thought that too, but no one has confirmed ...
I can't as we don't have it hear yet, however I can see if being fed out of the existing VRad boxes. (Which Are fed by fiber).

 

[slice1900]

5G is oversold. For cells, of minimal use. Fixed, yes. But that costs money for “towers/antennas” AND antennas at EACH location.

I suspect T-Mobile has made a BRILLIANT move, with 600 (and some 700) MHz bands to use “5G.” Longer range, greater penetration. Fits both bills.

5G is not magic, it does nothing to improve the Mbps per MHz over LTE - which remember is the same for 150 Mbps LTE as it is for 1.2 Gbps LTE. LTE's current max is 256 QAM, but the latest 3GPP release adds 1024 QAM support to LTE. That's a 25% improvement in Mbps per MHz, though you don't quite get that much in the real world due to error correction, and it will obviously only work in areas where you have maximum bars today. That's also going to be the max for 5G. The only difference between 150 Mbps LTE and 1.2 Gbps LTE today is a single client getting to use a LOT more MHz at once, which is why people arguing over the difference in phones that support "faster" LTE are wasting their breath, since you don't need a gigabit to a phone and can't get it in busy areas where a single client won't be able to grab that much spectrum anyway.

5G attains its insane claimed future speeds by using LOTS of bandwidth, which will be opened up mostly at the very high frequencies in the 28-39 GHz range. Using 600 and 700 MHz bands for 5G will provide no bandwidth increase over what can be done with LTE. I'm not sure there is much of a business case for upgrading existing LTE bands to 5G since the major improvement of 5G will be in latency. 5G will be mostly greenfield spectrum deployments.

Upgrading 600/700 MHz bands from LTE to 5G doesn't make much sense, and even if it is done will not be useful for fixed broadband deployments at longer distances. So no, not a "brilliant" move at all (at least not in terms of broadband deployments with 5G, having lots of low end spectrum is worth just as much with LTE so there's no need for 5G) For phones 5G is little better - unless you are doing something that's latency sensitive like online gaming the difference isn't worth caring about.

 

[CSM]

What about just using 5g for mobile and Fiber for homes?

 

[navychop]

Because you want a 5G “can” every 1,000-2,000 feet? To gain next to nothing?

 

[Juan]

5G is not magic, it does nothing to improve the Mbps per MHz over LTE - which remember is the same for 150 Mbps LTE as it is for 1.2 Gbps LTE. LTE's current max is 256 QAM, but the latest 3GPP release adds 1024 QAM support to LTE. That's a 25% improvement in Mbps per MHz, though you don't quite get that much in the real world due to error correction, and it will obviously only work in areas where you have maximum bars today. That's also going to be the max for 5G. The only difference between 150 Mbps LTE and 1.2 Gbps LTE today is a single client getting to use a LOT more MHz at once, which is why people arguing over the difference in phones that support "faster" LTE are wasting their breath, since you don't need a gigabit to a phone and can't get it in busy areas where a single client won't be able to grab that much spectrum anyway.

5G attains its insane claimed future speeds by using LOTS of bandwidth, which will be opened up mostly at the very high frequencies in the 28-39 GHz range. Using 600 and 700 MHz bands for 5G will provide no bandwidth increase over what can be done with LTE. I'm not sure there is much of a business case for upgrading existing LTE bands to 5G since the major improvement of 5G will be in latency. 5G will be mostly greenfield spectrum deployments.

Upgrading 600/700 MHz bands from LTE to 5G doesn't make much sense, and even if it is done will not be useful for fixed broadband deployments at longer distances. So no, not a "brilliant" move at all (at least not in terms of broadband deployments with 5G, having lots of low end spectrum is worth just as much with LTE so there's no need for 5G) For phones 5G is little better - unless you are doing something that's latency sensitive like online gaming the difference isn't worth caring about.

So what lab do you work at?..might want to compare notes with Verizon

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[Juan]

Because you want a 5G “can” every 1,000-2,000 feet? To gain next to nothing?

They eliminate the last mile which save millions in maintenance costs

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[navychop]

For Internet. But seemingly not of great value for cell phones.

 

[Juan]

For Internet. But seemingly not of great value for cell phones.

That's the plan..internet of things...its about eliminating truck rolls and employees..the cell phone market is saturated..no more growth..there is more money to be made in home internet services...will it work?..probably not as advertised

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[Juan]

That's the plan..internet of things...its about eliminating truck rolls and employees..the cell phone market is saturated..no more growth..there is more money to be made in home internet services...will it work?..probably not as advertised

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

Wireless 4g was a disaster in NJ

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[navychop]

That's the plan..internet of things...its about eliminating truck rolls and employees..the cell phone market is saturated..no more growth..there is more money to be made in home internet services...will it work?..probably not as advertised

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

I was responding to CSM post 506.

If they need to put a fixed 5G antenna on each house, that will not eliminate truck rolls.

 

[navychop]

Maybe the thread title would be more accurate as “Directv to drift away from satellite “

 

[Juan]

I was responding to CSM post 506.

If they need to put a fixed 5G antenna on each house, that will not eliminate truck rolls.

When the wire breaks and they have to fix it..that will be eliminated..they still have to install..just not fix as much...or so the theory goes

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[navychop]

Don’t you love “theory?”

 

[Tampa8]

Two more pieces of the puzzle. Is Directv "drifting" away from providing satellite service to RV's, boats etc? If they are they must feel the technology will be what they provide.

End of the line for satellite TV in RVs? - The Solid Signal Blog

And this would allow them to provide the same service Satellite gets but online.

DIRECTV and DIRECT NOW Streaming Merger Complete? - The Solid Signal Blog

 

[Juan]

Don’t you love “theory?”

They attempted to do something similar with 4g after hurricane sandy..large antenna in a cement bucket..failed miserably

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[CSM]

I was responding to CSM post 506.

If they need to put a fixed 5G antenna on each house, that will not eliminate truck rolls.

Sorry I didn't mean 5g for the home I meant just have all homes be upgraded to FTTH and just use 5g for mobile devices.

However, if they still plan on using 5g for the home they would still need a truck roll to install the 5g antenna on the roof. It sounded to me like AT&T's CEO wants to get rid of the truck roll. Then would it just be WIFI from the 5g antenna to the WIFI on the 5g gateway in the home? Or would they run ethernet from the 5g radio to the 5g gateway? Or could you have a choice of WIFI or running Ethernet to the 5g gateway?

 

[Jimbo]

Sorry I didn't mean 5g for the home I meant just have all homes be upgraded to FTTH and just use 5g for mobile devices.

However, if they still plan on using 5g for the home they would still need a truck roll to install the 5g antenna on the roof. It sounded to me like AT&T's CEO wants to get rid of the truck roll. Then would it just be WIFI from the 5g antenna to the WIFI on the 5g gateway in the home? Or would they run ethernet from the 5g radio to the 5g gateway? Or could you have a choice of WIFI or running Ethernet to the 5g gateway?

IF that would happen, they would eliminate 1/2 thier work force and a ton of people would be out of work.