To some extent, comparisons between mobile generations are based, to some extent, on formal specifications, theoretical versus “real world” performance, degree of commercial deployment and other assumptions. Still, there are clear differences.
Among the most basic, since the 2G era, is the tendency for each successive generation to feature an order of magnitude improvement in capacity (end user peak data rates), an order of magnitude improvement in latency and an improvement in spectral efficiency more on the order of a doubling between generations.
Since each successive generation has to run on new spectrum, to support legacy network operation while users are shifted to the latest generations, and since available spectrum not already assigned is to be found at higher frequencies, each new network platform uses new spectrum allotments at higher frequencies.
Eventually or by design, new use cases and lead applications will develop. Most 3G use cases actually developed during 4G. It is a reasonable assumption that some touted 5G apps will not flourish until 6G.
But there are some differences in intention, if less clearly in outcome. Both 3G and 4G were envisioned as general-purpose networks that could support all media types and many use cases. 5G is the first to specify support for machine-to-machine communication. No doubt 6G will be touted as supporting more-immersive features.
Most likely, some combination of prosaic and innovative outcomes will happen. Mobile operators simply must supply more bandwidth at “equivalent prices.” So the basic need for the new platform is lower cost per bit. That is not incompatible with the emergence of new lead use cases, however.
The emergence of those new use cases is less predictable than the need for networks that operate at lower costs per delivered bit.
No comments:
Post a Comment