Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Message icon:


shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Topic Summary

Posted by: heffeque
« on: January 05, 2019, 01:47:27 »

Isn't this the infamous AT&T's 5G E ? Or should I say LTE ?
Yep, it could be that false 5G they announce.
Posted by: Superguy
« on: January 03, 2019, 17:38:55 »

I'd like to see how it compares with Verizon's 5G implementation in places like Sacramento.  If the results are similar, there could be some legs to this story.  If Verizon's a lot better, well, we know where to place the blame ...
Posted by: skoda9635
« on: January 03, 2019, 14:22:40 »

Isn't this the infamous AT&T's 5G E ? Or should I say LTE ?
Posted by: Oliver Max
« on: January 03, 2019, 08:02:04 »

If this entire article is based on one users experience, that’s pretty ridiculous. Let’s see what happens with one hundred or a thousand users before criticizing
Posted by: Redaktion
« on: January 03, 2019, 05:59:59 »

If user tests are to be believed, the initial rollout of AT&T's 5G home internet network may be disappointing to most. Download and upload speeds aren't much better than those on 4G LTE. These tests raise concerns about the viability of 5G in its current state. Numerous problems associated with wavelength penetration and power draw may not be worth the cost if the performance increase for 5G is this marginal.

C 2018 » Impressum     Sprachen: Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Türkçe | Svenska