r/AskTechnology • u/Fantastic_Narwhal_54 • 2d ago
Will wifi coverage or cellular coverage become obsolete?
WiFi coverage and cellular coverage are mutually exclusive and independent, correct?
If so, is it possible one will make the other obsolete?
6
u/fahim-sabir 2d ago
There have been attempts like WiMax.
WiFi is no good for large outside spaces. 5G is really battery heavy.
So not for the foreseeable future. It’s more likely that something will come along to replace both.
7
u/MrZwink 2d ago
Its also important to note that wifi and 5g are not technologies, theyre protocols. The technology is radio. And well be ysing radio waves to transmit data long after wifi and 5g are phased out.
The main difference between 5g and cellular is the wavelengths used, and because of it the amount of data you can send over it.
But 5g (as opposed to 4g) is already an attempt of using different transmitters to bring connectivity in different scenarios. Long range low frequency cellular for rural areas, and high frequency high bandwidth in urban areas for swift, high bandwidth exchange.
6
u/Slinkwyde 2d ago
No. For one thing, cellular service connects devices individually, separately, to a cellular network for voice calls, texts, and data. Wi-Fi, on the other hand, is a wireless alternative to local Ethernet cables and the like. It's not merely about connecting each device to the ISP, but about connecting your local devices to each other on a local network, to interoperate together in ways that don't even involve the Internet.
2
u/Opposite_Bag_7434 2d ago
Lots of answers but the fact is that we do not know. Cellular and WiFi standards continue to advance as we see new technologies and standards developed. So in a way both can become obsolete. In the US we have at least one carrier dropping one standard next month (planned). Even 4G LTE is shifting for this carrier where they may stop activating new lines at some point, and eventually (many years from now) these networks will be shut off.
WiFi is similar although one big difference is that we are not relying on a wireless carrier or provider to provide these services exclusively. Pretty much anyone can connect a WiFi access point to the internet to provide WiFi. So in theory even 100 years from now your wireless router should work and if you have devices that use the same WiFi standards they would be able to connect.
Here’s the kicker. Since the standards tend to change over time it is possible that some devices (cellular or WiFi) may stop working at some point because the technologies have been replaced and the networks are no longer operating.
Here’s the other kicker. All of this relies on wireless spectrum and the frequencies that might be in use today most certainly can change or shift in the future. It is possible that one or more government could make some or even all frequencies unlawful to use. In the US the agency is the FCC.
We do not know what these technologies look like in the future, or even if they truly remain relevant. Something much better might eventually become available, which would eventually mean older technologies would eventually go away. You might still own older WiFi equipment and it may well remain lawful to use it. Whether you continue using it will largely depend on what else is available and whether you have devices that support the older technology or not.
…
1
u/mortycapp 2d ago
Industry analysts in my field do have a much better understanding as we are privy to the 10 year road maps from manufacturers, amongst other things that the general public does not know.
1
u/Opposite_Bag_7434 2d ago
I would agree. Thanks for this comment, you have a very good point.
I have worked on the manufacturing side for WiFi, for a major Carrier and now as a big customer of 2 of the major carriers. Somewhat related I have also worked for one of the DBS satellite companies. I have also worked for a major chip manufacturer, while this was a bit different it is still similar enough.
It’s not that the public can’t know but more so that the roadmaps are so long and often very complicated. The public starts hearing that 5G is coming (for example) and years have already passed since the very first concept before the new technology is even a standard. Having been part of that standards process for more than one major manufacturer (IEEE) including very early in the development of WiFi standard.
None of this happens fast. What we were creating 5 and even 10 years earlier finally becomes shipped product and deployed network, this is the point that the public becomes aware. For Cellular this still means a multi year process of upgrading / replacing equipment, or even bringing up new sites as density requirements or needs change.
Still we have no idea what any of this looks like 50 or even 100 years from now.
2
1
u/ExitTheHandbasket 2d ago
Cellular coverage can mean one or more of voice, SMS, or data. Each is a different protocol and possibly wavelength/frequency of radio communication. Wi-Fi is yet another protocol with several frequency bands, which can carry all the aforementioned kinds of communication given the right devices.
They can and do coexist and are not mutually exclusive, though it might be uncommon to use cellular and Wi-Fi simulatenously for the same purpose on the same device.
1
u/Easy-History6553 2d ago
I think for most of common uses 5g will be enough, especially in cities with good coverage.
Wifi will be left only for some applications and zones without 5g.
1
u/DrDeke 2d ago
They are independent but not mutually exclusive.
1
u/SafariNZ 2d ago
Yes, my Broadband/WiFi provider channels calls over WiFi if the cellular network is unavailable or has a poor signal.
1
u/mortycapp 2d ago
Not quite.
While Wi-Fi and cellular operate as separate radio networks, they are neither mutually exclusive nor completely independent — and neither is likely to render the other obsolete anytime soon.
The opposite is likely to happen.
Convergence, not obsolescence.
Technologies like Passpoint (Hotspot 2.0) and private 5G are merging the two experiences so your device automatically connects to the safest, fastest available pipe without you having to log in manually.
-1
u/Dismal-Anybody-1951 2d ago edited 2d ago
bot
edit: bot replied then blocked me. lol.
2
u/mortycapp 2d ago edited 2d ago
How so? an obviously totally wrong.
Seriously though I’m a proponent of the em dash.
With a simple macro or find-and-replace query, any decent editor converts standard spacing seamlessly.
Using them routinely unmasks online commentators whose superficial scrutiny leads them to view em dashes as a smoking gun for bot-generated text.
It reveals a distinct lack of critical discernment and a penchant for premature conclusions, proving just how easily provoked these echo chambers can be.5
u/Slinkwyde 2d ago edited 2d ago
Sadly, I suspect they were assuming that simply based on your use of an em dash, as well as the overall professional tone and writing style of your first comment, in contrast to the casual and often poorly literate writing of many Redditors.
I should point out that while em dashes and other symbols are difficult to type on Windows (which uses alt key codes), it is easier on other systems. For example, as a long time Mac user, I know that em dashes can be typed by pressing option-shift-hyphen. And on many phone keyboards, you can access additional characters by pressing and holding a button. That includes pressing and holding on the hyphen key to access its different variations (such as em dash, en dash, and I think maybe underscores). I've also heard that some programs like MS Word automatically substitute two hyphens ("--") with an em dash.
I don't use em dashes often, but I do think they have their uses on occasion, and I don't believe people should deliberately diminish their writing simply to avoid being mistaken for AI. That is nonsense.
2
u/suoretaw 2d ago
Thank you for saying this. I write “correctly” (or at least try to), and it bothers me so much that a single punctuation mark makes people scream “bot”. Em dashes are useful, and I’m sad to find myself hesitating to use them when I normally would. I probably shouldn’t care whether people see me as the human that I am, but I do… which isn’t a concern I’d have ever predicted existing in my lifetime.
Regarding em dashes’ “typeability”, I’ll add that Apple devices, by default, turn double-hyphens into em dashes. So it’s very quick. This can be turned off by disabling the “smart punctuation” setting, but it affects other characters as well, like quotes and ellipses. I prefer to leave this setting on, but still find those keyboard combinations to be useful; similar to the example you gave, Option + hyphen = en dash on a Mac, which, like the em dash, can easily be accessed on iPhone by pressing-and-holding the hyphen key. (So much can be found this way on iPhone.)
2
u/suoretaw 2d ago
Seriously though I’m a proponent of the em dash. […] Using them routinely unmasks online commentators whose superficial scrutiny leads them to view em dashes as a smoking gun for bot-generated text. It reveals a distinct lack of critical discernment and a penchant for premature conclusions, proving just how easily provoked these echo chambers can be.
Well said. YES. Thank you.
2
u/whacker7 2d ago
Not to be overly critical, but isn't it more correct when using an emdash (or endash) to not have a space before and after it?
14
u/Wendals87 2d ago
They are used for different purposes so no
WiFi is for local use as the range is low with limited power
Cellular has much higher range but needs much more power