News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying. Parent comment

Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by nilram on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:12PM (#20789432)
I don’t see how it reduces competition since the technology requires even more bass stations then does 4G. More infrastructure equals more cost equals more investment required. Only the big players can afford this, and there’s only a few big players left.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by rayiner on Saturday August 24, 2019 @04:34PM (#20789546)
5G drastically eases the bottleneck on available spectrum. There’s tons of spectrum up in the millimeter wave bands, which means you don’t need to spend billions up front on spectrum to start deploying the technology.

At the same time wireless dramatically reduces the cost per household served. The fan-out problem for wired internet is brutal. It can cost almost as much to bring fiber from a subdivision into each house as it does to bring it to the subdivision in the first place. (It’s way easier to just string fiber along some utility poles to the edge of a subdivision than to then trench it through a couple of hundred yards.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, ... by Spooky23 on Saturday August 24, 2019 @11:52PM (#20791262)
Perhaps in a perfect world where a competent local government owns the poles.

You may be shocked to hear that Verizon or Spectrum won’t provide cheap or timely service to competitors looking to rent pole space.

[ Parent | on HN ]