Could mobile data eventually replace home internet?

[pangaea]

So with 5G coming out in the next few years and probably going mainstream by 2025, and probably more technological developments to come, could your mobile data/hotspot eventually completely replace home internet? This could benefit consumers because there is at least a little more competition in the world of cell providers than in the world of home internet. Some people even today have unlimited data and use their phone as their primary device, probably not needing a home internet plan at all, but most of those plans don't include unlimited tethering e.g. to connect a PC or game console. As I still spend most of my time on a desktop or laptop computer, unlimited plans still aren't worth the money to me when I can just get $20/month on a prepaid plan with unlimited talk/text and 5GB high speed data. But if I could have unlimited tethering, it might be worth it to buy an unlimited plan, use my mobile data exclusively, and not buy home internet. 

[WereCat]

No.

[pangaea]

1 minute ago, WereCat said:

No.

Assuming unlimited plans including tethering could be offered in a similar price range to current unlimited plans and it could work reliably inside of buildings and such, is there any reason why not?

[Syntaxvgm]

5 minutes ago, WereCat said:

No.

There are several areas near me that current mobile internet is far better than any home internet options available, even with the data cap.

[Lurick]

Currently "unlimited" plans still throttle your data rates after a certain point. If carriers implement 5G plans in a similar manner, regardless of tethering, then it's going to be pointless. Additionally you'll not want a phone to tether, you'll want a dedicated router that can deliver some reliable speeds and keep your home network online if you leave.

[Mira Yurizaki]

8 minutes ago, pangaea said:

Assuming unlimited plans including tethering could be offered in a similar price range to current unlimited plans and it could work reliably inside of buildings and such, is there any reason why not?

When you put such idealistic parameters like "no-strings-attached unlimited data," "works fine in buildings," or something like "great speeds even in low signal strength", then sure, you paint a pretty picture why some technology is better than the other. But the reality is that unless it works loads better than the current technology or is significantly cheaper for the same performance in an actual real world scenario, it's never really going to take off.

[pangaea]

8 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

When you put such idealistic parameters like "no-strings-attached unlimited data," "works fine in buildings," or something like "great speeds even in low signal strength", then sure, you paint a pretty picture why some technology is better than the other. But the reality is that unless it works loads better than the current technology or is significantly cheaper for the same performance in an actual real world scenario, it's never really going to take off.

Is it unrealistic to think we could at least have no-strings-attached unlimited plans in the next 10 years?

[beersykins]

Eh, as per others it both depends on the terms of the deal and the requirements you have at home.

 

I only expect marginal improvements per plan unless one carrier aggressively attempts to undercut their competitor.

 

It will be better, and for 'most people' it would be usable.  If you have any specific data requirements I think it will fall short of the hype though.

 

1 minute ago, pangaea said:

Is it unrealistic to think we could at least have no-strings-attached unlimited plans in the next 10 years?

Yes, it's always a shared medium, there's always a 'string' such as unlimited data @ 20 mbit.

[SupaKomputa]

For your scenario, it can be done with current technology.

4g mobile already support speed around 30-50mbps. Remember 54g wifi?

The problem is:

1. if everyone have unlimited access, people will go online all the time. there's a finite number of cell towers, and each cell towers can only have certain number users connected at the same time. to add more support, add more cell station. $$$. Having unlimited will decrease their Quality of Service.

2. ISP makes lots of money with mobile, the usually also have wired solution, they don't want to be in conflct with the other business.

3. The best wireless ISP won't offer unlimited, because they know that you still buy their product even if its limited. Even if they do, usually at very high price.

 

Ok talking abuot 5g, i don't know how well it will be, but usually a step in new generations means lower signal range.

Using today's frequencies used sub 2400mhz, 5G will have 5ghz band, that is shorter in distance but offered high speed and low latency.

Low latency is the major difference, as it will be needed for Internet of things to operate, like autonomous cars, smart homes etc.

 

So to answer your question, will it be good in building, in theory, no, because 5ghz is a weak (short) signal.

In the future they may invent a stronger cell station, or have more signal repeaters in building.

[Daniel644]

2 minutes ago, pangaea said:

Is it unrealistic to think we could at least have no-strings-attached unlimited plans in the next 10 years?

10 years, probably, as i understand it 5G has horribly short range so each and every 5G modem will be functioning as a repeater for the signal creating a sort of "mesh network", unless there is MASS ADOPTION (which will require MUCH BETTER pricing then current plans offer) it will take several decades for cell based home internet to become the standard, my town's local ISP is in the process of rolling out Fiber and has a truly UNLIMITED data plan with no throttling and will be smashing there existing pricing structure once it comes in, for what they currently charge for 60 down 6 up you'll get 200 down 200 up when Fiber comes, Gonna be hard to pass that up for unreliable cell data, heck as it sits now on 4G WELL BELOW the data throttle limits I can see speed ranges from 12 to 80 on my cell phone sitting in the exact same location depending on the time of day, cell speeds are just to inconsistent.

[pangaea]

4 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

For your scenario, it can be done with current technology.

4g mobile already support speed around 30-50mbps. Remember 54g wifi?

The problem is:

1. if everyone have unlimited access, people will go online all the time. there's a finite number of cell towers, and each cell towers can only have certain number users connected at the same time. to add more support, add more cell station. $$$. Having unlimited will decrease their Quality of Service.

2. ISP makes lots of money with mobile, the usually also have wired solution, they don't want to be in conflct with the other business.

3. The best wireless ISP won't offer unlimited, because they know that you still buy their product even if its limited. Even if they do, usually at very high price.

 

Ok talking abuot 5g, i don't know how well it will be, but usually a step in new generations means lower signal range.

Using today's frequencies used sub 2400mhz, 5G will have 5ghz band, that is shorter in distance but offered high speed and low latency.

Low latency is the major difference, as it will be needed for Internet of things to operate, like autonomous cars, smart homes etc.

 

So to answer your question, will it be good in building, in theory, no, because 5ghz is a weak (short) signal.

In the future they may invent a stronger cell station, or have more signal repeaters in building.

Mainly regarding 2, I think the only major cell provider that currently has any stake in the home internet business is Verizon. I don't think T-Mobile would be hurt in any way by people paying for more expensive T-Mobile data plans and canceling their Comcast plans. Plus this sort of thing has already happened by online services putting a dent in the number of people willing to pay for cable TV. Given that cell networks are only going to grow larger, I think cell tower availability will gradually become less and less of a problem over the years.

[Daniel644]

1 minute ago, pangaea said:

Mainly regarding 2, I think the only major cell provider that currently has any stake in the home internet business is Verizon. I don't think T-Mobile would be hurt in any way by people paying for more expensive T-Mobile data plans and canceling their Comcast plans. Plus this sort of thing has already happened by online services putting a dent in the number of people willing to pay for cable TV. Given that cell networks are only going to grow larger, I think cell tower availability will gradually become less and less of a problem over the years.

it took like 5ish years for Verizon to roll out 4G to all it's existing towers, 5G will require many repeaters, likely installed along power poles, this will greatly increase the amount of time for effective deployment of the service, I doubt we will even see a complete nationwide 5G network in the next 10 years.

[Donut417]

31 minutes ago, pangaea said:

Is it unrealistic to think we could at least have no-strings-attached unlimited plans in the next 10 years?

In the US, yes is very unrealistic that will will have "Unlimited Plans". Because theres no way in fucking hell ISP's or Wireless Providers are going to put that much money in to investing in their network. Remember its all about fucking their customers in the ass and making record breaking profit.  

[WereCat]

1 hour ago, Syntaxvgm said:

There are several areas near me that current mobile internet is far better than any home internet options available, even with the data cap.

There will always be a terrain issue. Some places with flatlands have no problem to get a really awesome coverage.

Then there is my area with a lots and lots of hills where you struggle to maintain Edge connection.

 

Then the ISP pricing and caps based on your location.

 

Then you have to take in account that the cable tech wont stagnate while the wireless will only improve. Its easier to spread the cable infrastructure compared to the wireless one (well, also based on the terrain) but generaly if you come with a new wireless tech, you have to build new towers as well depending on how big range and how strong the signal on the new tech is. Etc... its definitely not a simple No or Yes question as I answered but I am definitely not optimistic for Yes... at least not in the near future of 10 years.

[Donut417]

1 hour ago, Syntaxvgm said:

There are several areas near me that current mobile internet is far better than any home internet options available, even with the data cap.

If you live in a rural area that his why. If you dont meet a certain population density then Cable providers or Fiber providers will not provide service. Thats when wireless is the only way. The issue however is, rural areas might not see 5G, again because of population density issues. Those cell towers have to be connected via something, hopeful a nice Fiber Optic cable. Cities have very good access to Fiber for their cell towers, making it easier for wireless providers to upgrade their service. 

 

Another issue is Wireless has limits. Firstly there is only so much spectrum that can be used for Cellular services. Some of that is used for other things like broadcast TV. Wired providers like Comcast has very few limits. I mean the Docsis 3.1 standard will allow them to provide Gigabit speeds without doing much upgrading of their infrastructure already on the poles. Plus they keep finding new ways to make Fiber faster. 

[Syntaxvgm]

9 hours ago, Donut417 said:

If you live in a rural area that his why. If you dont meet a certain population density then Cable providers or Fiber providers will not provide service. Thats when wireless is the only way. The issue however is, rural areas might not see 5G, again because of population density issues. Those cell towers have to be connected via something, hopeful a nice Fiber Optic cable. Cities have very good access to Fiber for their cell towers, making it easier for wireless providers to upgrade their service. 

 

Another issue is Wireless has limits. Firstly there is only so much spectrum that can be used for Cellular services. Some of that is used for other things like broadcast TV. Wired providers like Comcast has very few limits. I mean the Docsis 3.1 standard will allow them to provide Gigabit speeds without doing much upgrading of their infrastructure already on the poles. Plus they keep finding new ways to make Fiber faster. 

Pretty much.

Currently, even though I can get 2 gigabit, just a few minutes south of me you can't even get working DSL. Seriously, ping times often cross into the 1000-1600 range making most things declare you dead. The speeds, when it works, are closer to dial up then dsl. The pots infrastructure never even caught  up with DSL, hell I remember how bad the dialup was there- back in the says when I considered 56K still usable in general, it wasn't south of me. 
 

Satellite internet is an option, but it has bandwidth caps just like cellular and the ping time is...satellite internet. But hey unlike verizion's dsl it works. 

In the past 2 years or so the 4G coverage has massively improved in this area, and I've mostly been able to get a signal, even in bumfuck nowhere, where I used to have to stand at certian places at certain times to even send a text message if there was data involved. These days, I just use my cell phone for reliable basic internet. I'm trading in (theoretical) high reliability for lower ping times and decent speed. I've heard some people have been able to get fixed point 4G service as home internet, and have been pretty happy with it. I really don't think you need 5G here to make it good home internet. Like the 6Mb/s dsl comes in at a max of 200Kb/s when it works and ping times slower than satellite. 4G is a massive improvement and what they need to actually use the internet. 

 

[FlappyBoobs]

I live in Denmark and get 4g+ speeds (160Mbs down and 50Mbs up) it's around twice as fast as my home internet (I live in one of the only streets in the Kommune without fibre or cable so have to use ADSL). However, on mobile, ping times are horrendous and really affect my game play experience in things like CS:GO. I also have two carriers that use different networks (one personal, one business) when I switch to my work carrier the speeds drop to 80 down and 10 up, still quite good, but the ping gets destroyed, were talking 600ms (work) vs 250ms (personal) vs <10ms (home internet). 

 

So I could totally see cellular replacing the home ISP for a lot of people (downloads and streaming are fine), but for those of us that are even casual gamers a fixed internet connection will always be better, and for the competitive sorts among us it will always be a requirement, especially when fibre gives you  <1ms ping times.

[schizznick]

Fiber will always be king, considering 10G optics are getting really cheap, offering 10Gb fiber to customers is more likely in the next 10 years. The ISP I work for has completely fiberized our rural areas and are starting to upgrade our urban areas. Much of our urban areas already have fiber as most new construction in the last 10 years has been fiber. Once you have fiber in the ground upgrading and offering faster speeds is simply a swap of optics on both ends.