The technology aspects of "2G", "3G", and "4G" are so loosely defined that it is a meaningless terminology. Using the idea that "new technology means a new generation" ignores the fact that many technologies are developed in parallel, and many "die on the vine".
It reminds me of the "3G" and "4G' and "5G" programming language debates of the 1980's and 90's. There was certainly a lot of discussion about 4G languages, with some claiming to be building 5th generation programming languages. But today's most common and generally useful programming languages (perhaps Java and C#) aren't put in this "5th generation" category. Nope, they're still firmly entrenched in "3G". Just like BASIC and Pascal and PL/1 were. And no one cares.
In the end, customers care about price, performance and reliability. And since now people know how to talk about such things (such as "14 Mbit/sec, works in all major markets in the US, for $20 per month"), the idea of using a non-descriptive "generational" description is nothing short of marketdroid pointlessness.
Selling a WiMAX router? Tell me if it will work in my house and my car, how much bandwidth I can expect out of it, and how much it'll cost me per month. The label "4G" tells me none of those numbers, even though those who are posting the article certainly know the answers to those questions.
The technology aspects of
The technology aspects of "2G", "3G", and "4G" are so loosely defined that it is a meaningless terminology. Using the idea that "new technology means a new generation" ignores the fact that many technologies are developed in parallel, and many "die on the vine".
It reminds me of the "3G" and "4G' and "5G" programming language debates of the 1980's and 90's. There was certainly a lot of discussion about 4G languages, with some claiming to be building 5th generation programming languages. But today's most common and generally useful programming languages (perhaps Java and C#) aren't put in this "5th generation" category. Nope, they're still firmly entrenched in "3G". Just like BASIC and Pascal and PL/1 were. And no one cares.
In the end, customers care about price, performance and reliability. And since now people know how to talk about such things (such as "14 Mbit/sec, works in all major markets in the US, for $20 per month"), the idea of using a non-descriptive "generational" description is nothing short of marketdroid pointlessness.
Selling a WiMAX router? Tell me if it will work in my house and my car, how much bandwidth I can expect out of it, and how much it'll cost me per month. The label "4G" tells me none of those numbers, even though those who are posting the article certainly know the answers to those questions.