AT&T Attempts A Head Fake With 'Fake 5G'
from the tomato,-tomahto dept
We've already gone over how fifth-generation "5G" wireless, while a notable improvement in network speed and performance, has been obnoxiously over-hyped by hardware vendors and cellular carriers. We've also noted that in reality, broad availability of 5G-capable handsets and networks are still quite a few years away, and when products do arrive, they won't, contrary to some claims, magically fix the myriad of problems deeply woven into the U.S. broadband industry, most of which have to do with lobbyist political power and the monopoly domination of cellular tower backhaul.
AT&T's been among the biggest hype generators for 5G, even though its early offerings on this front, while fast, tend to suffer from high prices and low usage caps (did you expect something else?). In addition to over-hyping 5G's impact, AT&T has been busy both distorting what 5G actually is... and dramatically over-stating actual availability. For example, last year AT&T introduced what it called "5G Evolution" wireless connectivity, which wasn't actually 5G, but a collection of tech (specifically 4x4 MIMO (multiple input, multiple output) antenna and 256 QAM technologies) that simply made existing LTE networks somewhat faster.
AT&T's since taken this head fake to an entirely new level. Last week, for example, AT&T began replacing the "LTE" (4G) notifier on many users phones with a "5G E" symbol, despite its phones and networks not actually being upgraded to 5G yet:
In short, AT&T is taking some modest network improvements to existing 4G LTE networks, and confidently calling them 5G, knowing full well the Pai FCC isn't likely to do much of anything about it. Confusing customers into thinking AT&T's ahead in the 5G "race" (which isn't a race) appears to be the whole point:
"AT&T last year introduced the “5G Evolution” marketing label to cover markets where it offers advanced LTE network technologies like carrier aggregation, 4x4 MIMO, LAA and 256 QAM. Such technologies can dramatically improve the speeds available through LTE, and AT&T has argued that such technologies pave the way for eventual 5G services, though critics have argued that AT&T’s “5G Evolution” marketing moves only serve to sow confusion among consumers."
If you've been around the wireless sector for a while, you might recall that earlier generation standards also played fast and loose with actual definitions. Carrier marketing departments, for example, eventually convinced the UN's International Telecommunication Union that it was fine to pretty much call whatever they wanted "4G", since confusing and misleading customers, or over-stating product availability (as any cellular carrier coverage map will tell you), has never really been considered a bad thing in telecom.
The one-two punch of over-promising what 5G actually delivers (like this story which proclaims it will bring 4 day workweeks to us all) while distorting the very definition of 5G, is likely to leave a sour taste in consumers' mouths once they realize the canyon-esque gap between marketing hype and reality (especially on pricing, which is rarely discussed). And this is, of course, before you tack on the inevitable arbitrary restrictions and limitations AT&T hopes to erect in the wake of the death of real FCC oversight and net neutrality protections.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: 4g, 5g, 5g e, false advertising, fcc, lte, wireless
Companies: at&t
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
AT&T is always innovating
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: AT&T is always innovating
And even if someone complains, AT&T can simply say the 5G, 6G, and 10G labels are "puffery" and people should know they're only getting the speeds they paid for in their contract.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: AT&T is always innovating
It will require a Whole new antenna system have a Much shorter range, Cost about 3 times the amount of energy to power, and Cost about 10 times the price..
Its called signal flags.. then Semaphore...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It is no different than current wifi or 5G cell phone plans, but it will use fancy sounding words to make it sound expensive.
You have that fancy new 4K TV you just got for the holidays, don't you want the best wifi to stream 4K content to it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Maybe we'd all be happier with "5G Insurrection"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
5Ge?
There are a lot of folks who have older unlimited plans. I get free roaming in North America, free hotspot, no stream saver (so full HD video), and so on.
I see this as another push to get folks like me to move. No 5Ge for me unless I "upgrade" to an inferior plan to what I have now in extras, and costs more per month.
I expect them to continue down that path, slowing LTE speeds, until it gets so frustrating that I just move to the new plan. Or working with folks like Apple and Google so new phones only accept 5G plans.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
He will launch a "test satellite" that consists of a wifi router strapped to a tin can, call it "a revolutionary test of the capability of the launch system" and get fawning coverage from the techbro press. Then when nothing happens after that, he will complain how all of the international governing bodies won't let him just broadcast into unused spectrums without their authority.
Then he will see another shiny object he can spend a ton of other people's money on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"5G", sure. Something that truly deserves the tase as a next gen system and not a marketing term use to justify overcharging for a barely incremental increase in service? Not so much.
"Then he will see another shiny object he can spend a ton of other people's money on."
You do realise that almost all businesses spend "other peoples' money", right, especially in the early R&D phases of products? Even corporations with cash positive cashflow tend to borrow money from banks or investors rather than use their own cash.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Payroll is a great example. Most direct deposit systems rely on the processor (quickbooks, ADP, ect) paying the employees, and the company paying the processor, but the payment to employees happens before those funds clear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not the only one
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They are all so full of shit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm good
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm good
why not lie?
You're welcome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Four-day work week
1794: When the cotton gin... 1804: When the steam locomotive... 1812: When gas-lighting street lamps... 1824: When Portland concrete... 1838: When the telegraph... 1876: When the telephone... 1879: When electric lights... 1886: When the automobile... 1903: When heavier-than-air aircraft... 1913: When the assembly line... 1952: When the mainframe computer... 1974: When the personal computer... 1983: When the cellular telephone... 1985: When the laptop computer... 1996: When the personal digital assistant... 2007: When the smartphone...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Four-day work week
Those promises have come true: over the years, I've known plenty of people who've managed to score four-day work week jobs. Sure, they usually needed to work at least two at a time, but, you know, details... ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
They could claim it has Smellivision or cures cancer without an actual Standard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Will answering machines in the future be able to block this feature?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jan 2nd, 2019 @ 8:56am
I used to have an AT&T cell plan, but now I get my AT&T service from Straight Talk for half the price, thus using one evil empire to shaft another.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Jan 2nd, 2019 @ 8:56am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
from the [not] to-may-to, [nor] to-mah-to dept
?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ideals
[ link to this | view in chronology ]