Verizon Expands 5G Network to 28 Cities
But Sprint, T-Mobile, and AT&T have launched sub-6 GHz 5G, which does not have that range issue. It has the same coverage as 4G (in the regions where they've launched it). But it's not as fast as mmWave 5G.
Verizon's 5G (which is mmWave and therefore limited to downtown areas) is available to consumers. It's AT&T that has limited their mmWave 5G to business customers. But AT&T offers sub-6 GHz 5G to consumers.
With that said, sometimes you get poor service and it's not technically a coverage issue, such as when you're in a busy downtown area and the network is overloaded. In that scenario, yes, 5G will absolutely help.
As always when discussing 5G in the US, it's important to understand the two types: sub-6 GHz and mmWave.
AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint have deployed sub-6 GHz, which uses the same frequency bands as 4G. It provides the same coverage, but simply a bit faster data where they've launched 5G. ...
I meant to say here: Overall, aren't the carriers looking to deploy a mix of both sub-6 and mmWave? I'm also wondering why each carrier chose to start with sub-6 and mmWave versus the other?
mmWave was, in part, a way for companies like Verizon and AT&T to deploy 5G slightly sooner than the rest of the world and claim some "firsts". mmWave was faster to deploy for two reasons:
1. mmWave is all-new frequency bands, so you can just deploy right away. Sub-6 generally uses the same ...
In many of the more densely populated metropolitan areas 5G will be of great assistance for congestion issues.
You can have 5G but if you are not in range of the tower, it is useless.
Faster data is great. Hopefully 5G will be worked on carefully and not pushed. Hopefully coverage will be worked on as well with this. Getting it rolled out in more rural areas would be great so subscribers do not have to depend on Wi-Fi for spotty network coverage.
This forum is closed.