Ask a question
Tue, Jan 15, 2019 1:16 AM
Samsung active 8. AT&T forced 5G upgrade. Want to turn off 5G. How?
a month ago
ACE - Professor
a year ago
@ijustwantanswer ATT just change the advance 4G LTE display to 5G e as noted in the link below.
2 months ago
ACE - Expert
Not sure what you mean but there are no 5G phones yet. Your phone shouldn’t be capable of receiving 5G. What makes you think you are?
My status bar, next to the signal strength indicator, says 5G E. Sometimes, not all the time. How does one turn this off?
Oh, thank you. Hopefully we can opt out of 5G when they start forcing it. Probably not, though. Thanks again, such a relief.
Why would you want to opt out?
ACE - Sage
That’s like saying you don’t want to use the commuter lane. You would rather sit in the slow lane with the traffic jam on the highway. Why?
Btw, until you own a 5g phone, you cannot use 5g.
🐾 (The following is included after all posts to save typing) I don’t work for AT&T. My replies are based on experience and reading content available on the website. Our answers are honest, but not always appreciated. If you posted personal information, please edit and remove.
ACE - Master
I think 5G is a lot more about marketing, than anything else, at this point.
Granted, latency is a bit less, and, in theory, high-density implementation should be better, but do we really need the speed?
I challenge someone to show (hotspot/tethering excluded) to come up with a scenario where anyone needs that kind of bandwidth, on a cell, at this point in tech.
Take a 20MB file, which would take about 2 seconds to download (pretty big file, for most cell use), on a solid LTE connection, today. Okay, so it takes 0.1-0.3 seconds, on a (good) 5G connection, is that really relevant?Maybe, in some scenarios, where you're trying to download a movie, right before a plane flight, but really you're a lot more likely to hit another bottleneck, such as your SSD speed, the server(s) with the movie, your physical RAM and its' cache speeds, and much more (not even taking bus speeds into account).
Realistically, you probably will never know if your download was over a 20mbps connection, 100, 200, gig, or similar, because there are so many other bottlenecks/factors in the mix.
I've written a lot of tests, designed to test for speed/latency thresholds, but at some point, there's really a "diminishing return", on most end-point setups (PC, cell, tablet); obviously server(s) are a different deal (and why 10G+ is important, for some implementations).
On a cell setup, you're going to use your 22GB, or whatever, in a really, really short amount of time, if you're actually pulling data at anywhere close to bandwidth (even on say a 150 LTE setup).
I'm FAR more interested in reduced latency, myself, which is why our home setup has a very carefully load-balanced dual-WAN setup. Sure the connections have plenty of "bandwidth" (about 1.25G, which exceeds most PC and other NICs now anyway), but really I designed the balancing layout to avoid latency for a given set of data-types, not to maximize "speed/throughput". I think it's easy to confuse low-latency for speed anyway, for most users, excepting those moving VERY large amounts of data.
Anyway, my $0.02 on the deal ;-]
5G will be good, because it will improve on latency and congestion as well, but how much is really going to take a while to "prove itself", in the real world, IMO.
But, like everyone has noted, there are no 5G phones yet (but will be soon), and only a few cell networks, in a few cities, that are ready for them, at this point.
Oh yeah, and the "bad guys" are going to like it too, because it's going to make "compromised" devices a lot more efficient, in terms of the stuff they want to do ;-]
*If this (or another post in this thread) fixes your problem/issue, please mark it as "accept-solution", and I'll tag it, to make it easier for others to find the answer(s). FYI: I'm an AT&T end-user, just like most of us in the forum. Thanks.
want to bet customers won’t be able to keep their current unlimited plans if the upgrade to 5g phones? They did that when basic phones went out.
Yeah, that'd be kinda' humorous, not to mention insanely ironic ;-]
"Here's this phone with a crazy-fast modem, have fun! Oh, yeah, you might have a tendency to use up your months' data in a few seconds, if you're not careful, keep an eye on that..." ;-O
I'm in no big hurry to have any sort of 5G phone (for all the reasons in my too-long diatribe ;-]), but the 955 chipset has a lot of other good reasons to make it appealing.
I still don't understand though, how they're going to handle voice, when they re-purpose more and more of their retired 2G and 3G spectrum, for 5G or upgraded LTE. Something's going to have to give, or they'll have to do away with BYOD or something...
They expect us to talk with our thumbs rather than call.
Im thinking we are due some unrest when vast areas of the US are suddenly without coverage.
Forget fast. I’d settle for 4G speed if the service was merely reliable. 😉
@lizdance40 Yeah, except that the last time I looked, the ATT "RCS-like" implementation had nothing to do with the "real" version, for either voice OR text. I'm pretty sure this means you can't text over LTE, either, so if you can't get that 3G signal, well...
@gr8sho Exactly, this is a great summation. I'd much rather have 10-20mbps (or even a bit slower/lower-bandwidth), everywhere, vs a screaming-fast LTE or 5G connection, in a SMALL set of urban locations. I get crazy-fast speeds at our house, in the greater Seattle area nowadays, big change from a few months ago, went from say 70's and 80's (down), to 160-180, even 190 (down) and 30+ up.
It's spiffy-and-all, but as soon as I drive maybe 10mi east, it's a struggle to get decent data at all, in a whole lot of places. I get the problems with geography (mostly), but they're mostly solve-able, but have a lot less "marketing splash", than saying we have "blazing fast 5G speeds" (in those few locations). "Splash sells", plans and phones, I bet, in almost all cases.
What the heck am I going to do with another 100mbps at my house anyway? I already have commercial-grade WiFi, tied to my custom dual-WAN, load-balanced SMB router (I built out a nice set of low-latency rules, can typically get down in the <4ms, consistently, for most closer servers), so why in the world do I need that kind of bandwidth, here?
I'm not really "complaining" about the increased bandwidth, mostly just "head scratching" ;-]
@pgrey You know you’re like the kid who blows the curve on every test right? 🤨. We hate that kid cause our b- became a solid C.
The best I’ve ever seen around here is 60 Mbps. But that was on my Verizon phone 2 town over.
I get around 30 Mbps in some places.
Unfortunately I have no such perks at home. I cannot carry on a decent conversation using cellular. Since this has been going on for 20 years, I accept the inevitability things will not improve any time soon. Either live with the situation or find an alternative if one exists. I don’t expect 5G to be a solution any more than 4G LTE was when that rolled out. VoLTE helps somewhat, but in a fringe area, can actually suffer just as many dropped calls. I just wrote a post about this “revelation “.
@lizdance40 Hmm, never really thought of it that way ;-]
I was thinking more along the line of the "whistle blower kid" (is this even a thing), really, or the "don't shoot the messenger kid", perhaps ;-O
30mbps is good for pretty much ANY type of stuff I do, on my cell device. Even if that means a "solid 8-10mbps", that's still plenty, for almost everything, IMHO.
I can think of a few scenarios, such as needing to transfer my whole music collection of MP3s to something, all 17.6GB of low-loss-quality files, to a device, in a power-outage perhaps? Seems like I have a better chance of being hit by lightning, in said outage, than having that sudden need...
Tech will keep moving forward, speeds/bandwidth/latency will keep getting "better" (particularly latency, that's my one big driver, the only real driver I see, behind 5G), I have no doubt, but there's also cost associated with that. Have people seen the cost projections, on really getting 5G "up and running" on most of the US? It's a bit mind-boggling, the numbers. I'm much happier with my fast-enough LTE service, at a decent rate.
@gr8sho Yeah, that bites, the connectivity at/near your home, I think you and @lizdance40 have a similar perspective there. In theory, if more and more low-frequency towers keep replacing the older (high-frequency) ones, this should get better for all, over time; small comfort, I bet.We have a household of non-branded/non-iOS devices, so VoLTE and VoWiFi(and text over WiFi) don't seem to be coming to us, anytime soon, per the comments above about re-purposing the 2G/3G bandwidth.
I don't think there are any official announcements about 3G, at this point, but it's sort of the "elephant in the room", if you ask me, the next one...