U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Cell Phones and Smartphones
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-10-2013, 02:57 PM
 
2,494 posts, read 4,769,400 times
Reputation: 943

Advertisements

I thought bytes and megabytes were used in modern terminology, not bits and megabits.
However in this article and others, it uses megabits a lot. Is this a trend? Or was my first line wrong?

AT&T outshines Verizon in 4G LTE speed tests | Mobile - CNET News

If you have 4G and want to download a 100M file, how long would it take (don't need superexact figures here)?

Also, MB is megabytes but Mb is megabits. What if you just see 100M?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-10-2013, 03:12 PM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,968,627 times
Reputation: 12847
Your first line was wrong. Both MB and Mb have been in regular use. Mb is typically used when referring to network transfer speeds.

100M informally refers to 100 MB.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 06:44 PM
 
Location: 92037
4,631 posts, read 9,005,267 times
Reputation: 1946
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertpasa View Post
I thought bytes and megabytes were used in modern terminology, not bits and megabits.
However in this article and others, it uses megabits a lot. Is this a trend? Or was my first line wrong?

AT&T outshines Verizon in 4G LTE speed tests | Mobile - CNET News

If you have 4G and want to download a 100M file, how long would it take (don't need superexact figures here)?

Also, MB is megabytes but Mb is megabits. What if you just see 100M?
Just to be clear, the US has bastardized the marketing aspect of "4G".

AT&T has called "4G" their HSDPA/HSUPA network which technically is 3.5G in terms of technical speed ( in a lab).
Now we have 4G LTE. Which isnt exactly LTE either but is a true 4G.

LTE the standard is actually faster on uplink and downlink speeds than what exists right now. What we have in LTE for the US kind of is like diet LTE. Not true LTE based on the specification. I am actually surprised they got away with marketing it this way.
In the lab recently 5G speeds have been clocked notably by Samsung, but Qualcomm and other chip makers have been working on that for a while.

You wont get exact figures for a 100MB file over LTE, but generally speaking a file that size should take about 20 seconds in the real world. There are various factors involved which could decrease or increase that time, but as I have seen professionally in major metros, this is roughly an average.

Cellular networks are note really developed to deliver content that size in a steady stream. For example, you might see the first 20MB download in 5 seconds and the rest start throttling down in speed over time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 07:05 PM
 
12,577 posts, read 13,502,904 times
Reputation: 8911
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertpasa View Post
I thought bytes and megabytes were used in modern terminology, not bits and megabits.
However in this article and others, it uses megabits a lot. Is this a trend? Or was my first line wrong?

AT&T outshines Verizon in 4G LTE speed tests | Mobile - CNET News

If you have 4G and want to download a 100M file, how long would it take (don't need superexact figures here)?

Also, MB is megabytes but Mb is megabits. What if you just see 100M?
In digital world this > 1 is a bit. A megabit would be one million of those transferred at once, essentially. Eight bits = 1 byte; a byte looks like this: 01010101. A megabyte would be 1 million of those transferred at once, essentially.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shmoov_groovzsd View Post
Just to be clear, the US has bastardized the marketing aspect of "4G".

AT&T has called "4G" their HSDPA/HSUPA network which technically is 3.5G in terms of technical speed ( in a lab).
Now we have 4G LTE. Which isnt exactly LTE either but is a true 4G.

LTE the standard is actually faster on uplink and downlink speeds than what exists right now. What we have in LTE for the US kind of is like diet LTE. Not true LTE based on the specification. I am actually surprised they got away with marketing it this way.
In the lab recently 5G speeds have been clocked notably by Samsung, but Qualcomm and other chip makers have been working on that for a while.

You wont get exact figures for a 100MB file over LTE, but generally speaking a file that size should take about 20 seconds in the real world. There are various factors involved which could decrease or increase that time, but as I have seen professionally in major metros, this is roughly an average.

Cellular networks are note really developed to deliver content that size in a steady stream. For example, you might see the first 20MB download in 5 seconds and the rest start throttling down in speed over time.
Not surprised, they get away with charging you for a pound of bacon when its actually less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 07:16 PM
 
Location: 92037
4,631 posts, read 9,005,267 times
Reputation: 1946
Quote:
Originally Posted by WFW&P View Post

Not surprised, they get away with charging you for a pound of bacon when its actually less.
Yeah, I am actually surprised they were able to market it this way. The standards and definitions they have to adhere are usually pretty strict.
It was short lived with AT&T anyway. There were some devices they had labeled as 4G (but not LTE) when Verizon was first to launch their LTE network to the masses. 4G just sounded more impressive and while in some ways, technically true that it was 4G, was a bit grey area.

Then T-Mo hopped on the bandwagon. Basically all they did was update their existing 3G network, which is why TMo broadcasts as 4G. 3G isnt even an option with TMo, even though that is what users are technically sitting on. lol

Oh well, so goes marketing in the US
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2013, 09:47 PM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,968,627 times
Reputation: 12847
Quote:
Originally Posted by shmoov_groovzsd View Post
Just to be clear, the US has bastardized the marketing aspect of "4G".

AT&T has called "4G" their HSDPA/HSUPA network which technically is 3.5G in terms of technical speed ( in a lab).
Now we have 4G LTE. Which isnt exactly LTE either but is a true 4G.

LTE the standard is actually faster on uplink and downlink speeds than what exists right now. What we have in LTE for the US kind of is like diet LTE. Not true LTE based on the specification. I am actually surprised they got away with marketing it this way.
In the lab recently 5G speeds have been clocked notably by Samsung, but Qualcomm and other chip makers have been working on that for a while.

You wont get exact figures for a 100MB file over LTE, but generally speaking a file that size should take about 20 seconds in the real world. There are various factors involved which could decrease or increase that time, but as I have seen professionally in major metros, this is roughly an average.

Cellular networks are note really developed to deliver content that size in a steady stream. For example, you might see the first 20MB download in 5 seconds and the rest start throttling down in speed over time.
They can get away with it because the ITU (the folks who control 4g standards) said they can call LTE-FDD/TDD, WIMAX, HSDPA, etc 4G.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2013, 09:18 AM
 
Location: 92037
4,631 posts, read 9,005,267 times
Reputation: 1946
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
They can get away with it because the ITU (the folks who control 4g standards) said they can call LTE-FDD/TDD, WIMAX, HSDPA, etc 4G.
Thanks NJBest! You clarified my point. even the ITU way back when admitted its not true 4g by their own standards.
We were discussing this stuff years ago and even then we were all confused by their conventions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2013, 08:41 PM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,968,627 times
Reputation: 12847
Quote:
Originally Posted by shmoov_groovzsd View Post
Thanks NJBest! You clarified my point. even the ITU way back when admitted its not true 4g by their own standards.
We were discussing this stuff years ago and even then we were all confused by their conventions.
ITU revised their statement about what can be called 4G. The issue is that 4G is fairly ambiguous. LTE, Wimax, etc. is 4th generation. As such, it should be referred to as 4th generation.

The 3rd generation Prius never hit it's originally spec'd mileage. It doesn't make the 3rd generation Prius a 2.5 generation prius. It just means that the 3rd generation Prius missed the mark.

Similarly, the 4th generation cell radios didn't meet the spec. But they are still 4th generation cell radios. That is ITU's perspective on the situation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2013, 12:40 PM
 
Location: 92037
4,631 posts, read 9,005,267 times
Reputation: 1946
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
ITU revised their statement about what can be called 4G. The issue is that 4G is fairly ambiguous. LTE, Wimax, etc. is 4th generation. As such, it should be referred to as 4th generation.

The 3rd generation Prius never hit it's originally spec'd mileage. It doesn't make the 3rd generation Prius a 2.5 generation prius. It just means that the 3rd generation Prius missed the mark.

Similarly, the 4th generation cell radios didn't meet the spec. But they are still 4th generation cell radios. That is ITU's perspective on the situation.
Not so sure about that first paragraph.

LTE, Wimax are certainly 4G, I dont think that was the issue.

HSDPA/HUSPA via WCDMA/UMTS is most definitely not, which is simply existing 3G infrastructure on steroids...hence the fake 4G I was referring to and why the ITU retracted. Native CDMA networks never had this issue to begin with. EVDO data went straight to an LTE overlay.

In other words, EDGE was 2.5G, but was always considered 2G...never 3G. They did develop an EDGE+ but that never truly materialized.

Not sure what you mean by 4th Gen cell radios not meeting spec.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Cell Phones and Smartphones
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:25 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top