New "twisted light" fiber optics technology

[Irving]

So I keep seeing articles about this new method to twist light and boost the efficiency of fiber optic cable ability to transmit data. The most important part, I think, is that it can be retrofitted into current infrastructure.

https://www.inverse.com/article/5019...0-times-faster

While this is cool sounding, I have to wonder, if implemented, how much the end user experience would really change. I don't know much about this stuff, but it seems like current routers and modems would be a choke point. Right now, if you can watch a movie or listen to music with no buffering, would you notice anything different if it were faster?

[68Charger]

So I keep seeing articles about this new method to twist light and boost the efficiency of fiber optic cable ability to transmit data. The most important part, I think, is that it can be retrofitted into current infrastructure.

https://www.inverse.com/article/5019...0-times-faster

While this is cool sounding, I have to wonder, if implemented, how much the end user experience would really change. I don't know much about this stuff, but it seems like current routers and modems would be a choke point. Right now, if you can watch a movie or listen to music with no buffering, would you notice anything different if it were faster?

Tech like this just lets growth rates of data usage continue to climb... resolution improves (without buffering), overall content improves with no slower speed.

HD gets replaced by 4k, then 8k..

Currently the highest data rate in production widespread use is 100Gbps.

No one end user application can utilize all that bandwidth... but 1000s of users can with ease.

[GilpinGuy]

I'm hearing about 5G cell networks eventually overtaking any land based networks, with 5G being incredibly fast for any normal user for anything including streaming video. Is this pie in the sky stuff?

Of course up here we can't even get Comcast or any broadband wire service. Point to point (can't do it here in the trees) or shitty satellite is all we got, so I'm hoping for a 5G boom soon.

[Justin]

Nope. 5G is on it's way. As I understand it the spec is done, testing is done, and the beginning of the rollout is underway.

[izzy]

Like 68Charger is saying, something like this will mostly improve the over all backbone of the internet. I'm just hoping to get fiber to the home at this point, been on the pre-order for over a year now.

[68Charger]

The 5G being rolled out now is preliminary "pre-standard", and will have to be retrofitted to standardized equipment once it's available....
That being said, one of the goals of 5G is to use it for "last mile" egress into homes... For those in urban areas, it will mean competition for true broadband (300Mbps to start with, speeds in excess of 1Gbps are possible)

it's such a high frequency that it doesn't have a long range- but that's good when you want Bandwidth "density"... with bigger cell size comes bigger BW requirements per cell site. It's less expensive to deploy in existing neighborhoods than fiber, and can compete with cable, DSL, etc. but it needs density to be cost effective. not towers, but small devices with tiny antennas on light poles.

So it won't be coming to rural areas- probably never... they would have to deploy a device within 1/2 a mile of your residence to be effective- how many houses are there in a 1/2 mile radius in your neighborhood?
From a technology and economic standpoint, point-to-point wireless or mesh wireless are really your most likely options in rural areas. Trees and other foliage are a challenge to overcome, but there are ways...

The big companies really aren't interested in rural areas- we've asked... even as an employee. The easy money is in dense urban areas- and big companies are kinda lazy that way, and risk averse.
I'm using a smallish P2P wireless provider- trees are a serious issue here in East Texas, and not much topology advantage (you can't put a transceiver on a mountain top)... it really needs to be line-of-sight. Many customers here are told they need to install a tower to get above the trees before they can get service. (like a ham radio tower... many houses around here have them for TV antennas- nearest stations are 60mi away, and they were installed before satellite TV)

[Grant H.]

5G won't effect the fiber networks, it has to use them to provide their service. Cell towers don't use other cell towers to backhaul their data. They use high end microwave links or direct to fiber connections.

The furthering of fiber technology, especially when it can be utilized over existing fiber runs, will improve service for lots of folks.

68Charger hit the nail on the head with 5G. They won't be covering rural areas with it, probably ever. 5G will use lots of spectrum, including the existing 700MHz band. However, to deliver the throughput they are promising they will have to utilize the higher chunks of the spectrum that the spec calls out (15GHz and millimeter bands like 50GHz). These higher bands will be capable of delivering the high rates of speed that they promise, but this comes with extremely limited range (especially when one of the radios is hamstrung with a particularly shitty antenna - cell phones). It also doesn't account for the degradation of performance during snow and rain storms.

The best anyone in a rural area can hope for is the existing 4G performance that they have.

[68Charger]

The best anyone in a rural area can hope for is the existing 4G performance that they have.

To be clear, I was referring to fixed wireless (WISP), not 4G cellular as the best option - 4G cellular usually has higher price tag and/or low data caps... unless you buy/lease a grandfathered unlimited plan. And then there's the latency.

My ISP uses Wireless equipment by Ubiquiti, a company with hardware for unlicensed solutions that will reach over 100km at up to 2Gbps, and FCC licensed backhaul solutions exceeding 300km and 1.2Gbps.
They also have mesh solutions that can provide seamless Wifi over large areas (like a stadium or a park)

I just measured my wifi latency to a server in Dallas at 15ms (10ms jitter), and to the same server using Sprint 4G LTE at 53ms (39ms jitter). For those not technically inclined, lower is better on those measurements.

I'd startup a WISP on the side if my employer didn't already emphasize non-compete (and I know how many lawyers they have on payroll to back it up)... even though I can't get their @#%^& service at my house anyway.

[Grant H.]

To be clear, I was referring to fixed wireless (WISP), not 4G cellular as the best option - 4G cellular usually has higher price tag and/or low data caps... unless you buy/lease a grandfathered unlimited plan. And then there's the latency.

My ISP uses Wireless equipment by Ubiquiti, a company with hardware for unlicensed solutions that will reach over 100km at up to 2Gbps, and FCC licensed backhaul solutions exceeding 300km and 1.2Gbps.
They also have mesh solutions that can provide seamless Wifi over large areas (like a stadium or a park)

I just measured my wifi latency to a server in Dallas at 15ms (10ms jitter), and to the same server using Sprint 4G LTE at 53ms (39ms jitter). For those not technically inclined, lower is better on those measurements.

I'd startup a WISP on the side if my employer didn't already emphasize non-compete (and I know how many lawyers they have on payroll to back it up)... even though I can't get their @#%^& service at my house anyway.

I understood your point for internet service. I was more speaking to 5G capability in general.

I'm very familiar with UBNT, and WISP's. I was involved in starting one in CO, that has since been sold off in lieu of other adventures.

You likely know this, but for clarity, you cannot get 2Gbps at 100KM with a UBNT radio. The 2Gbps will be at 0-10 miles tops, and once you get to 100km, you're talking about low Mbps.

Carrier grade backhaul links, in the realm of $20k-100k per link (2 radios, 2 dishes), only produce 50-100mbps at 100km...

UBNT is good at "specsmanship"...

They have a lot of good products, but their wireless claims can be a little misleading/excessive.

[68Charger]

I understood your point for internet service. I was more speaking to 5G capability in general.

I'm very familiar with UBNT, and WISP's. I was involved in starting one in CO, that has since been sold off in lieu of other adventures.

You likely know this, but for clarity, you cannot get 2Gbps at 100KM with a UBNT radio. The 2Gbps will be at 0-10 miles tops, and once you get to 100km, you're talking about low Mbps.

Carrier grade backhaul links, in the realm of $20k-100k per link (2 radios, 2 dishes), only produce 50-100mbps at 100km...

UBNT is good at "specsmanship"...

They have a lot of good products, but their wireless claims can be a little misleading/excessive.

I'm aware...speed is based on signal strength and signal/noise ratio. I figured I was already getting wordy and nerdy. Should have used or instead of and, but confusing when trying to stay brief.

Their value (price vs performance) is decent, I have some of their gear to keep 3 houses connected with wifi... want to run fiber between houses, but that's a project for another day.

5G is not just for phones and tablets... they are definately marketing it as home broadband and competing with cable & LECs. Also execs get all frothy at the mouth over IOT (Internet of Things), where everything will connect to the internet... appliances, toys, etc... billions of potential streams of revenue!