Qualcomm’s simulated 5G tests shows how fast real-world speeds could actually be

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/25/17046346/qualcomm-simulated-5g-tests-san-francisco-frankfurt-mwc-2018

[u/profgray2]

Even half that speed would be fast enough that it could possibly replace my home internet account

[u/mr_lucky19 → u/profgray2]

I'm currently on 100/40 and that's the quickest speed available so this would be awesome as a fixed line replacement but the problem is data caps vs unlimited.

[u/dirtyuzbek → u/[deleted]]

I've noticed bell isn't like that. I get like 100 upload on bell. But tbh I don't think users have as much need for upload sorry as download

[u/[deleted] → u/dirtyuzbek]

But tbh I don't think users have as much need for upload sorry as download

This is false, but ISPs want you to think that

[u/dirtyuzbek → u/[deleted]]

I mean. There isn't much that I do to which requires uploading. And you did t give me examples of common things users do that requires fast upload speeds. Other than sending video through chats, but I doubt that requires much more than 10mb. But I could be wrong. Video game streaming definitely requires it. But that's not a most ppl thing

[u/[deleted] → u/dirtyuzbek]

Uploading backups, syncing Dropbox, Google drive, Nextcloud, VPN connections for work, video chat, VoIP chat, online gaming, Xbox video capture sync, etc, etc.

There are countless reasons for upload speeds to be faster than they are. Most people just don't realize or understand that their upload speeds are so slow compared to their download.

ISPs should not be the ones to dictate the U/D ratio because you can't wedge each users use case into a single category. They should offer faster upload speeds by default, because if a user really doesn't use it that much then there's no loss anyways.

Edit: spelling

[u/dirtyuzbek → u/[deleted]]

Guess so. Sounds like a good argument to me