
AT&T’s “5G E” is slower than Verizon and T-Mobile 4G, study finds - sinak
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/03/atts-5g-e-is-actually-slower-than-verizon-and-t-mobile-4g-study-finds/
======
system2
Carriers don't even fully provide what 4G is capable of, yet still advertising
so-called 5G. I would be okay with 50gbit 4G LTE with an unlimited plan for
the next 5 years at least until they figure out their new gimmicks.

~~~
ghettoimp
That would be awesome. I could blow through my monthly data cap in 0.68
seconds...

~~~
KenanSulayman
50Gbit/s = 6,25GB/s; if your cap was 25GB it would take 4 seconds.

~~~
seandhi
Don’t most mobile carriers cap at 5GB?

~~~
JoshGlazebrook
No. Most unlimited plans start deprioritization after 22GB.

~~~
joecool1029
It's 50GB now. I've been digging into how they do it as I'm a casual user of a
few hundred GB/mo on both T-Mobile and Sprint.

From what I can see and from the Sprint CTO's comments, the deprioritization
happens on radio layer working on slices of around 30ms. If you are near cell
edge, the scheduler will assign you less physical resource blocks. This
deprioritization will affect you much less if you are near the tower as higher
orders of modulation and less error correction plays into it. (Think out of a
possible 100 or so blocks you could be assigned in a given timeframe, the
blocks can either be slow due to poor radio conditions or fast)

From my year or so of having a dedicated testing phone on T-Mobile, I can feel
confident in saying what they say is true about speeds only being affected on
congested sectors (not the full tower or region). Sprint I haven't had as much
time with so I can only go with what they say is the case.

~~~
JoshGlazebrook
Ah, Verizon is still 22GB for the "new verizon unlimited plan" and "Beyond
unlimited". "Above unlimited" is 75GB, and "Go unlimited" deprioritization is
possible from the start.

I'm still on the "new verizon unlimited plan" which is the same that "beyond
unlimited" provides, just at a cheaper price.

------
zentiggr
Sounds like a (theoretical, I know) solution would be to limit carriers to
advertising no more than their current rolling average of download speed
across all users.

No one needs mention the obvious incentivizing to cut off all of the slowest
areas/device/customers.

I just think being required to report something based an 'actual' performance
as opposed to 'vague technical term' could be more informative and shift all
this handwaving over to a 'look, we've improved out actual throughput!' basis.

~~~
Godel_unicode
Given all the perverse incentives involved, this seems like something the FCC
should do on their own and make public.

------
waynecochran
Are there rules for enforcing (and by whom?) the term “5G”? Or is it like the
word “natural” for health food?

~~~
TheOperator
4G was supposed to achieve 100mbit peaks and I have yet to see speeds even
approaching this with 4G LTE. So if somebody is enforcing advertising rules
they're doing a shit job...

~~~
joecool1029
LTE's initial iterations were actually not considered 4G by definition. Part
of the longterm evolution part was that as the components were upgraded they
would comply with 4G. I can break 100mbps down in a few places on an iphone SE
with only a cat3 modem, but that's pushing the spec's real-world limit for
that.

Today these speeds are easily achievable on most networks, it's just unlikely
for AT&T due to congestion and their poor network and spectrum planning. It
helps to spend money on capex instead of buying up shitty Mexican carriers and
DirecTV to stem the flow of fleeing customers.

~~~
IshKebab
They were 4G by definition because the definition of 4G is the 4th generation,
and LTE is *clearly" that, despite what some idiots in the ITU may try and
claim.

The 3G/4G/etc labels are descriptive, not prescriptive.

~~~
Godel_unicode
Please don't let a phone company hear you say that, they'll roll the "g"
number every year because there's a new generation of firmware. Words should,
and do, mean things.

~~~
IshKebab
I didn't say they don't mean things. And phone companies are welcome to try
and call whatever they like 5G but it doesn't make it true, any more than the
ITU trying to claim some technology is or is not 5G. What makes something 5G
is that it is a widely adopted technology that is a clear generation ahead of
4G. That's it. It's not complicated.

------
pryelluw
Reminds me of that Parks and Rec episode where Tom (character) puts a spin on
municipal water with fluoride.

~~~
selljamhere
H2-Flow!

------
aphextron
Bandwidth doesnt matter so much as latency. The only thing keeping me from
using 4G tether as a main connection is the 150ms ping. 5G is supposed to get
this under 5ms. I see no mention of latency in this study, which makes me
question the source.

~~~
callesgg
4G should be able to give pings much lower than 150ms. The internet says 50ms
I have seen even faster.

Maybe you can try another provider.

~~~
aphextron
I’m showing a consistent ~150ms to all nearby servers right now on T-mobile.

Either way, it’s more than 10x difference. 50ms vs 5ms is the difference
between being able to game and not.

~~~
js2
34ms on Verizon with an iPhone XS in the burbs.

~~~
jfaat
Just got 27ms in the city on Verizon on iphone X

------
milankragujevic
Here's a speedtest over 4G LTE... Serbia with Telenor.
[https://www.speedtest.net/result/8133950542](https://www.speedtest.net/result/8133950542)

~~~
tyfon
Crazy, I didn't know Telenor was in Serbia.

I have a mobile provider that uses their network here in Norway, I got 171/40
and 22 ms ping. I'm in the countryside approximately 50 km from Oslo.

~~~
milankragujevic
They're not anymore. Telenor in the Balkans was sold to PPF Group. They new
owners raised prices a lot, and they have a license to call the company
Telenor for 5 years.

------
byteCoder
This is Marketing 101 on how to make your customers and potential customers
feel that you're ahead of the curve when you're really behind and you need to
buy some time.

Also, haven't we all learned yet that the publicity and discussion this is
generating reenforces the connection between AT&T and 5G in people's minds,
even if it's technically incorrect? The facts don't really matter.

------
burtonator
Clearly the solution is for Verizon to call their network "6G E"

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
Fuck everything, we're doing 7G.

~~~
blihp
For those who don't get the reference: [https://www.theonion.com/fuck-
everything-were-doing-five-bla...](https://www.theonion.com/fuck-everything-
were-doing-five-blades-1819584036)

~~~
Spectral
Lol this onion article was posted in '04 and what do you know, Gillette is
actually up to 5 blades and 2 strips - "Fusion5"

------
Tsubasachan
Speed isn't everything though. I only get 40Mbps but the network is reliable
and I can tether (just retrieved 4 gigabyte from my seedbox).

Do not let carriers blind you with fancy numbers.

------
jrockway
Still waiting for the Java-style version increment, where 5.1G comes out and
someone starts marketing it as 51G. "It's 47Gs better than T-Mobile!!111!"

------
bentearwalking
Yeah and I get 220 mbps down on 4g prepaid tourist SIM in Singapore so what
the?

~~~
OrgNet
I get 25 mbps on my _cable_ connection... for $30/month...

------
holbrad
Just got 800 Kbps on a speed test. That's on "4G" in the UK.

------
thecleaner
Do all countries have telecom companies that are jerks ? I thought it was
limited to Germany and US.

------
Spectral
Dirtbag AT&T always doing shady stuff like this. Wouldn't be surprised if
someone proposed this and execs signed it off as a great idea because the
revenue from the additional signups was determined to be greater than the
expected fines.

------
willart4food
Just like the meme: Well Yes, But Actually No

------
jtms
You would think the FCC would have something to say about this.

~~~
rayiner
I can’t find anything in the Communications Act of 1934 that gives the FCC
jurisdiction over marketing practices.

~~~
wnevets
What makes you think the FCC doesn't have jurisdiction over deceptive
marketing?

~~~
metaphor
What makes you think they do?

IANAL, but Truth in Advertising[1] enforcement is a FTC affair, not FCC.

On the other hand, rayiner is, so there a benefit-of-the-doubt element that
I'm inclined to respect.

EDIT: ...and I humbly stand corrected.

[1] [https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-
consume...](https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-
protection/our-divisions/division-advertising-practices)

~~~
rayiner
47 USC 201 gives the FCC certain authority over “charges, practices,
classifications, and regulations,” which the FCC has used as authority to
regulate deceptive and misleading billing practices. The FCC doesn’t have
plenary authority over communications advertising.

------
thereare5lights
"All four major carriers have rolled out LTE-Advanced. But while Verizon,
Sprint, and T-Mobile accurately call it 4G, AT&T calls it 5G E."

"AT&T's network name change may well trick consumers into thinking they're
getting better service than a 4G operator, but they aren't. We already knew
that 5G E has no technological advantage over LTE-Advanced, because they are
the same thing with different names."

Doesn't that mean this, for all intents and purposes, isn't really the 5G
we're all thinking of and that this is just massive click bait?

~~~
stochastic_monk
It’s not clickbait. AT&T is pretending to have 5G when it doesn’t. This is
worth reporting.

~~~
iscrewyou
They’ve done this all the way back to 4G. I know because I used to sell
cellphones when I was I college. It was 3G but they called it 4G. They’ve done
that with every new iteration. It’s ATT being ATT. Why they haven’t gotten in
trouble for this shady practice is beyond me.

~~~
sovnade
Massive amounts of money and a complicit FCC?

~~~
metaphor
> ...a complicit FCC?

What role do you think the FCC has here?

If anything, this is a Truth in Advertising[1] issue--enforced by the FTC, not
FCC.

[1] [https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-
consume...](https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-
protection/our-divisions/division-advertising-practices)

