5G value is an issue for some users who have bought it, especially in some markets where low-band spectrum has been the way 5G is mostly experienced. But there arguably are reasons why user experience could be challenged even in markets where mid-band spectrum underpins 5G experience.
One reason is the difference between what users do--and what the networks must support--on fixed and mobile networks. Fixed networks are multi-use networks. So the obvious value in a fixed network setting is "speed" or "bandwidth" to support multiple simultaneous users.
That is not the case on mobile networks, where accounts are set up on a one device, one user basis. Even when there are multiple users on a single account, those users do not "share" a local access connection. So the advantage of "speed" is different on a mobile network.
There is no "sharing" of a single connection. Also, fixed networks support screens of many sizes. Mobile networks mostly support very-small screen devices. That shapes bandwidth demand.
Apps typically used on large screen or medium-screen devices further shape bandwidth demand. Entertainment devices such as 4K TVs will consume more bandwidth than standard-definition or high-definition viewing on very-small screens.
Mobile-connected devices supporting artificial reality are the exception, at the moment, but also are relatively rare. And even many of those use cases rely on a local Wi-Fi connection, not the mobile network.
Up to a point, bandwidth affects user experience. Just as surely, additional bandwidth does not improve experience, once a threshold is reached. Latency and jitter also matter, but users might not be able to discern such changes, or wrongly attribute the lack of perceived improvement to "bandwidth" issues.
But if 4G provides any evidence, 5G value is going to change over the lifespan of the network.
The initial value will be “speed,” even if user experience is less changed than some will expect, even if the perceived value is the marketing value of 5G delivering data faster, irrespective of user experience value.
The value after a decade will be “new use cases” and apps, for consumers and business use cases. But that will take time. And consumers might well find there is "not much difference" between 4G use cases and new 5G apps. They have not been created yet.
The betting early on is that many--perhaps most--of the new use cases will come from enterprise, not consumer uses.
After a decade or so, we are likely to have discovered new consumer apps as well. It just is hard to say what those mass deployed use cases will be. Perhaps nobody predicted the emergence of ride sharing as an important 4G use case.
Few predicted turn-by-turn navigation would be important. And though streaming video and audio were foreseen, even those apps do not rely so much on “speed” as the creation of easy-to-use and popular streaming apps.
In fact, the rise of “mobile-first” apps does not depend, strictly speaking, on bandwidth improvements brought by 4G, though faster speeds are an enabler.
That would not be unusual for a next-generation mobile network, up to a point. If nothing else, coverage is an issue, early on. Even a better network does not help if it is not “generally available.”
Complicating matters is the rollout of 5G during the Covid pandemic and many restrictions on “out of home” and “on the go” usage. Working or learning remotely, many users likely spend most of their time connected to home Wi-Fi. So even if 5G is faster, the amount of time any single user might use it is far more limited than under normal circumstances.
Still, faster speeds should help, up to a point, with existing applications, as page loading on a 600-Mbps fixed network connection should provide some noticeable advantages compared to a 300-Mbps connection (especially in multi-user and simultaneous multi-device usage cases.
Since 3G, the key user experience gain has been “faster mobile data access.” Sometimes that is tangible; but sometimes not so much.
An argument can be made that latency has even greater user experience impact on a mobile network. Beyond some relatively low point, additional speed might not improve user experience. We can debate what that threshold is, as it changes over time.
If a consumer’s primary reason for buying 4G was a tethering experience closer to fixed network experience, the 4G advantage was immediately tangible. If the primary advantage sought was mobile web browsing experience similar to fixed network experience, then the advantage might well have been tangible.
5G poses a bit of a tougher problem. When downstream 4G speeds are routinely in the 20 Mbps to 30 Mbps to 35 Mbps range, how much does experience change when 5G offers 165 Mbps? It should help, but how much?
It depends on what a user does on a phone. Web page loading will be faster, but how much faster? Ignore for the moment the authoring of a web page (optimized for mobile access or not; how well optimized).
For fixed network access, faster access speeds have not necessarily meant that web pages are loading faster, for example.
On mobile networks, connection speeds have improved, but mobile page load times tracked by have increased, according to the Nielsen Norman Group.
Of course, page and landing page loading times are not a direct function of access speed but perhaps largely an artifact of remote server performance. So access speed is not the only, or perhaps not even primary determinant of user experience.
The build-out phase of a national next-generation network takes years, so coverage outside of urban cores will typically be an issue. In some markets, where low-band and millimeter wave frequencies have been the mainstay, users might not often find there is much mobile data performance difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment