Verizon's New 'Nationwide' 5G Isn't Nationwide, Barely Faster Than 4G

from the that-word,-it-does-not-mean-what-you-think-it-means dept

While unveiling its shiny new 5G-enabled iPhones this week, Apple brought Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg to the stage to declare that Verizon had launched an updated, "nationwide" 5G network that shores up the company's 5G coverage. Until now, Verizon has largely embraced "high band" or millimeter wave 5G, which provides amazing speeds if you're near an antenna, but suffers from terrible range and building wall penetration issues. As a result, the company has been routinely criticized for comically overstating not only what 5G is capable of, but where 5G is available.

To attack this credibility problem, and drive some hype for the new iPhones, Verizon announced that it was dramatically expanding its 5G network to 200 million more people.* To do so, Verizon's using "dynamic spectrum sharing" (DSS) that helps utilize some existing 4G channels to offer 5G. The problem: Vestberg wouldn't state what speeds this new "5G" service operates at, because it's not likely to be much faster than existing 4G. It will however make the "5G" icon on your phone light up, which is helpful for marketing purposes:

"As there's going to be no additional airwaves in use, you shouldn't expect much better speeds than on 4G. 5G shines when it has big, broad lanes to itself. On the other hand, this lets Verizon manage a transition from 4G to 5G smoothly, and lets it light up a 5G icon on many people's phones for marketing reasons."

In time, 5G will provide faster, more reliable, lower-latency networks. But Verizon has repeatedly tried to advertise 5G as less evolutionary and more revolutionary, claiming (falsely) that it's akin to the "fourth industrial revolution," will revolutionize cancer treatment (something doctors I've talked to have laughed at), and will result in amazing next-generation smart cities of tomorrow. In reality it's an incremental upgrade that's good but not game changing, especially given a recent study showed Verizon 5G was available just 0.4% of the time in the real world.

Several problems: one, a self-regulatory oversight system constructed by the telecom sector to pre-empt real regulatory action declares it fine to abuse the word "nationwide," (something T-Mobile is doing as well). *And the FCC, for decades, has done a piss poor job verifying the chasm between marketing hype, ISP claims, and actual availability. Regulatory capture also means industry sees little meaningful penalty for lying about coverage, so they, you know, keep doing it.

In wireless carrier and handset vendor PR land, 5G is an incredible, revolutionary upgrade that changes everything. With smartphone innovation flailing and overall sales lagging, they're eager to drive mass upgrades by portraying 5G as something more substantive than it is.

Here in reality, U.S. 5G continues to be far slower than a long list of overseas networks because we've done a poor job making mid-band spectrum available for public use and driving fiber to lower ROI areas (despite billions upon billions in subsidization). And numerous studies have found that current 5G is in some instances slower than 4G. In a few years as more mid-band spectrum is pushed to market this will steadily improve. But right now, consumers (correctly) don't really see 5G as worth it, which is a major reason why Verizon had to back off plans to charge a $10 monthly premium just to access it.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: 5g, exaggeration, hype, truth in advertising
Companies: verizon


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Michael Long (profile), 15 Oct 2020 @ 8:54am

    I don't think that word means what you think it means

    Just like information coming out of the White House. "I know I said 'nation-wide', but... I mean, it's in some places in NY and in some places in LA, so... like... that's nation-wide, right?"

    "It's even... I read somewhere... it's even in half a baseball field in Chicago, so it's even in the middle of the country, right?"

    "All these people trying to say it's not nation-wide... sad really. Just more FAKE NEWS!"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2020 @ 10:53am

    hold up

    Wait a minute. Wait 1 minute.
    You mean to tell me that Verizon, Apple, companies in general, actually lie to people?!?
    GET...(wait for it)...OUT!!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2020 @ 12:51pm

    What a shock news at 11 a telecom mobile phone company is not completely honest about its network coverage

    I.m Surprised apple emphasised 5g so much in its latest iphone reveal when less than 1 per cent of users can get a good 5g signal and even then 4g is usually faster
    5g now is basically hype maybe in 2 years there might be good 5g coverage in city's
    IF telecom company's can actually get the spectrum they need
    I suppose each new iPhone needs a new gimmick
    to get people to spend 1000 dollars on a phone

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2020 @ 3:12pm

    I would still like to know where this future "new spectrum" is going to be coming from.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2020 @ 5:01pm

    At this point, really don't care. I don't have a lot of need for faster on a phone.

    So why should I boot out more money for a new phone capable of 5G and endure faster battery depletion in the process not to mention higher phone bills for the use of it?

    Exactly how does extra speed help with voice calls? For that matter how does it help with text messages? You can only punch keys so fast, the text is not going to leave your phone before you're done typing it out.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Cyber Killer, 16 Oct 2020 @ 3:50am

    Bandwidth problem

    The biggest problem with mobile networks that I experienced is the actual bandwidth which is provided. 3G allowed for 7 Mbps, but all that was available in my country was 1 Mbps at most. 4G allows over 100 Mbps, which would be awesome for most purposes, but I saw 15 Mbps at most. I don't care for 5G, just give proper bandwidth behind the BTS to use what the current tech can achieve.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    TasMot (profile), 16 Oct 2020 @ 5:50am

    Verizon 5G

    Here: https://www.verizon.com/coverage-map/, is a Verizon 5G coverage map. However; the most important thing to look at is that all those red 5G splotches. Wow, so much 5G coverage. Until you look at the "Legend". In there, the red 5G splotches are 5G AND 4GLTE coverage combined. There is no just 5G coverage displayed in the map, at all.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 17 Oct 2020 @ 4:37pm

      Re: Verizon 5G

      The legend and the map have different colors for "4GLTE" and "5G, includes 4GLTE coverage". Since the distinction would be pretty silly otherwise, I take that to mean that in the 5G regions, 4GLTE coverage is automatically implied (in case you don't have a 5G capable phone).

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.