carriers dont deliver "10mbits" which becomes "15mbits" with LTE.
LTE, GSM, etc. use "radio bandwidth". Thats waves in the air if you will. The faster the wave oscillate, the higher the frequency and the shorter the range at which it will keep oscillating.
Radio bandwidth is a finite element and thus frequency ranges are assigned to operators, to wifi, to your microwave (yes it emits on 2.4ghz and interfere with wifi in fact), to your TV, to handled radios, to your drone remote control, etc.
To give an example, an HSDPA channel is 5mhz. In these 5mhz you may be able to send up to X mbits depending on how the signal is encoded (how the signal is encoded is actually what provides the spectral efficiency).
Recent advances, in particular OFDM allowed us to transmit more data for the same radio bandwidth (aka frequency range). Variants of OFDM are used for xDSL, Wifi (not all standards) and LTE (and many other things, including that HD video feed from sport cars or the ISS).
So, since the milkshake's straw does not and CANNOT change size (again: radio bandwidth - spectrum - frequency range) are we are bound to the laws of physic. We're more efficient in the way we organize the data (and mainly, how we're not losing the data - thats the main advantage of OFDM - if you're interested in how it exactly works, wikipedia)
I really despise articles with sensationalistic headlines, that attempt to carry a point through misleading or even incorrect statements - even if often the result of genuine ignorance.
Also, i'm in the USA and I pay 30/mo for 5GB LTE, unlimited DC-HSDPA, unlimited text, 100m calls.
It's not great (calls should be unlimited) but thats a good enough deal. If you're paying more you should consider dropping verizon/att - not blaming milkshakes.
>So, since the milkshake's straw does not and CANNOT change size
The reason you get this impossibility is because you make the wrong assumptions. You assume that there is one channel (for a very specific definition of channel), which everyone has to share.
In reality this is just not true. By using directed antennas for instance we can create more channels. By using polarized waves we can create more channels.
But the details matter; you don't even need more finely grained directional antennas to get more bandwidth: send two different signals from two different antennas and receive them with two antennas; with the data you get and certain encoding schemes, you can work out the two underlying superpositioned waves on a DSP chip and nearly double your bandwidth while using the same spectrum, thus working around Nyquist and adding another "straw":
But it is very important! Because you could have two devices communicating using many channels on the same spectrum. This removes the theoretic Nyquist rate bound.
call me when the 2 waves are sent on the same frequency at the same moment (ie same period).
it doesnt work. mimo doesnt double the spectrum. it sends on the same spectrum.
or you just called 2 friends to downvote by 2 as its an old topic lol.
sad that most discussion forums end up with such conversations.
you cannot send then at the same exact time because theyre the same particules of matter.
you can send them at slightly different times, angles, etc. still doesnt make the straw bigger.
I pay $70/month for TMobile with unlimited LTE. My coverage isn't as good as ATT while traveling, but its fine where I live. Is this a sign of "gouging?" That it costs more for a service with good coverage in the less populated parts of the sprawling US?
Why are 4G prices higher in US? Demand is higher. Supply is more costly to build. Econ 101.
> That it costs more for a service with good coverage in the less populated parts of the sprawling US?
Did you read the part of the article where they compare to Canada which is paying less than us for more bandwidth? Compare population density there with here.
It's not as simple as supply and demand either. If your infrastructure is being utilized heavily (efficiently), therefore delivering your more customers for the same equipment compared to another region, then you come out way ahead.
This article was about how supply is actually also getting cheaper. LTE base stations get more out of fixed bandwidth allocations, and cost less as well.
Perhaps you can also tell us what Econ 101 has to say about oligopolies, high barrier to entry and natural monopolies.
Although I'm not looking to switch anytime soon, may I ask who your carrier is? I use Republic Wireless right now, who was mentioned in the article, but that's a damn good price for 5GB LTE.
I'm always trying to convince my friends to look into MVNOs over the major brands.
My Verizon contract is up and I am really thinking about moving to Republic Wireless. The Moto G offers as much if not more than I want in a phone (I have a simple flip feature phone now) and I like that it uses wifi for voice which would make it feasible for me to use my phone at home (I live on the very fringe of cell coverage, and voice calls tend to have a lot of dropouts). Are there any other services I should consider?
and compared a couple dozen of them. My previous carrier was Virgin Mobile. The service is good, but they won't let you use a smartphone without a data plan, and their phone selection sucks. Republic has limited options too, but I wanted the moto x anyways.
With multiple sending and receiving antennas and spatial encoding (specialization of MIMO) you can receive and send more data over the same spectrum and basically just make use of a second (or third) "straw".
LTE, GSM, etc. use "radio bandwidth". Thats waves in the air if you will. The faster the wave oscillate, the higher the frequency and the shorter the range at which it will keep oscillating.
Radio bandwidth is a finite element and thus frequency ranges are assigned to operators, to wifi, to your microwave (yes it emits on 2.4ghz and interfere with wifi in fact), to your TV, to handled radios, to your drone remote control, etc.
To give an example, an HSDPA channel is 5mhz. In these 5mhz you may be able to send up to X mbits depending on how the signal is encoded (how the signal is encoded is actually what provides the spectral efficiency).
Recent advances, in particular OFDM allowed us to transmit more data for the same radio bandwidth (aka frequency range). Variants of OFDM are used for xDSL, Wifi (not all standards) and LTE (and many other things, including that HD video feed from sport cars or the ISS).
So, since the milkshake's straw does not and CANNOT change size (again: radio bandwidth - spectrum - frequency range) are we are bound to the laws of physic. We're more efficient in the way we organize the data (and mainly, how we're not losing the data - thats the main advantage of OFDM - if you're interested in how it exactly works, wikipedia)
I really despise articles with sensationalistic headlines, that attempt to carry a point through misleading or even incorrect statements - even if often the result of genuine ignorance.
Also, i'm in the USA and I pay 30/mo for 5GB LTE, unlimited DC-HSDPA, unlimited text, 100m calls. It's not great (calls should be unlimited) but thats a good enough deal. If you're paying more you should consider dropping verizon/att - not blaming milkshakes.