Is 6G’s fate to repeat the failings of 5G wireless?
Will the telecom industry embark on another costly wireless upgrade? Telecom consultant and author William Webb thinks so and warns that it risks repeating what happened with 5G.
William Webb published the book The 5G Myth in 2016. In it, he warned that the then-emerging 5G standard would prove costly and fail to deliver on the bold promises made for the emerging wireless technology.
Webb sees history repeating itself with 6G, the next wireless standard generation. In his latest book, The 6G Manifesto, he reflects on the emerging standard and outlines what the industry and its most significant stakeholder – the telecom operators – could do instead.
Developing a new generation wireless standard every decade has proved beneficial, says Webb. However, the underlying benefits with each generation has diminished to the degree that, with 5G, it is questionable whether the latest generation was needed.
Wireless generations
There was no first-generation (1G) cellular standard. Instead, there was a mishmash of analogue cellular standards that were regional and manufacturer-specific.
The second-generation (2G) wireless standard brought technological alignment and, with it, economies of scale. Then, the 3G and the 4G standards advanced the wireless radio’s air interface. 5G was the first time the air interface didn’t change; an essential ingredient of generational change was no longer needed.
The issue now is that the wireless industry is used to new generations. But if the benefits being delivered are diminishing, who exactly is this huge undertaking serving? asks Webb. With 5G, certainly not the operators. The operators have invested heavily in rolling out 5G and may eventually see a return but that is far from their experience to date.
The wireless industry is unique in adopting a generation approach. There are no such generations for cars, aeroplanes, computers, and the internet, says Webb: “Ok, the internet went from IPv4 to IPv6, but that was an update, as and when needed.” With 5G, there was no apparent need for a new generation, he says. It wasn’t as if networks were failing, or there was a fundamental security issue. or that 4G suffered from a lack of bandwidth.
Instead, 5G was driven by academics and equipment vendors. “They postulated what some of the new applications might be,” says Webb. “Some of them were crazy guesses, the most obvious being remote surgery.” That implied a need for faster wireless links and more bandwidth. Extra bandwidth meant higher and wider radio frequency bands which came at a cost for the operators. Higher radio spectrum – above 3GHz – means greater radio signal attenuation requiring smaller-area radio cells and a greater network investment for the operators.
The industry has been working on 6G for several years. Yet, it is still early to discuss the likely outcome. Webb outlines three possible approaches for 6G: HetNets, 5G-on-steroids, and 6G in the form of software updates only.
HetNets
Webb is a proponent for operators collaborating on heterogenous networks (HetNets).
He says the idea originated with 3G but has never been adopted. The concept requires service providers to collaborate to combine disparate networks — cellular, WiFi, and satellite — to improve connectivity and coverage and ultimately improve the end-user experience.
“Perhaps this is the time to do it,” says Webb, even if he is not optimistic: operators have never backed the idea because they favour their own networks.
In the book The 6G Manifesto, Webb explores the HetNets concept, how it could be implemented and the approach’s benefits. The implementation could also be done primarily in software, which the operators favour for 6G (see below).
“They would need to remove a few things like authentication and native provisioning of voice from their networks,” says Webb. There would also need to be some form of coordinator, essentially a database-switch that could run in the cloud.
5G on steroids
The approach adopted for 5G is an application-driven approach, whereby academics and equipment vendors identified applications and their requirements and developed the necessary technologies. Such an approach for 6G, says Webb, is yet more 5G on steroids. 6G will be faster than 5G, require higher frequency spectrum and be designed to address more sectors, each with their own requirements.
“The operators understand their economics, of course, and are closer to their customers,” says Webb. It is the operators not the manufacturers that should be driving 6G.
6G as software
The third approach is for 6G to be the first cellular generation that involves software only to avoid substantial and costly hardware upgrades.
Webb says the operators have not suggested what exactly these software upgrades would do, more that after their costly 5G network upgrades, they want to avoid another cycle of expensive network investment.
Backing a software approach allows operators to avoid being seen as dragging their feet. Rather, they could point to the existing industry organisation, the GSMA, and its releases that occur every 18 months that enhance the current generation and are largely software-based. This could become the new model in future.
5G could have been avoided and simply been an upgrade to 4.5G, says Webb. With periodic releases and software updates 6G could be avoided.
But the operators need to be more vocal. However, there is no consensus among operators globally. China will deploy 6G, whatever its form. But, warns Webb, if the operators don’t step up, 6G will be forced on them. “Hence my call to arms in the book, which says to the operators: ‘If you want an outcome that is different to 5G, you need to step up’.”
A manifesto
Webb argues that the pressure and expectation from 6G wireless are so great that the likely outcome is that it will repeat what happened with 5G.
The logic that 6G is not needed and its needs served with software upgrades will not be enough to halt the momentum driving 6G. 6G will thus not help the operators reverse their fortunes and generate new growth. This is not good news given that service providers already operate in a utility market while facing fierce competition.
“If you look at most utilities – gas, electricity, water – you end up with a monopoly network supplier and then perhaps some competition around the edges,” says Webb. “Telecoms is now a utility in that each mobile operator is delivering something that towards every consumer looks indistinguishable.”
It is not good news too for the equipment vendors. Vendors may drive 6G and get one more generation of equipment sales but it is just delaying the inevitable.
Webb believes the telcos’ revenues will remain the same, resulting in a somewhat profitable businesses: “They’re making more profit than utilities but less than technology companies.”
Webb’s book ends with a manifesto for 6G.
Mobile technology underpins modern life, and having an always-present connectivity is increasingly important yet must also be affordable to all. He calls for operators to drive 6G standards and for governments to regulate in a way that benefits citizens’ connectivity services.
Users have not benefitted from 5G. If that is to change with 6G, there needs to be a clear voice that makes a wireless world better for everyone.
Further Information:
The significance of 6G, click here
Silicon Photonics Merging Ahead
"Silicon photonics has made considerable progress in a relatively short time to emerge as an important systems technology whose time has come"
LightReading Market Spotlight: ROADMs
Click here for the market spotlight ROADM article written for LightReading. See also the comment discussions.
ASICs and digital signal processing heat up the optical marketplace
Guest blog on Lightwave magazine, click here
Why optical transceiver vendors are like discus-throwers
Guest blog on Lightwave magazine, click here.
The art of market analysis
Bob Larribeau, a telecom industry analyst and technology consultant since 1992 has just retired. gazettabyte asked him to reflect on what it takes to be a good market research analyst.
"Most companies provide good numbers but some, quite frankly, are hard to believe."
Bob Larribeau
There are several skills a good industry analyst must develop. The ability to communicate well - in writing, in presentations and in informal exchanges - is critical, as is a broad knowledge of the telecom industry and its technologies. These days the ability to have a global view - an understand of developed, developing, and emerging markets - is also important.
In addition, there are two more skills an analyst must possess.
The first is the ability to develop a detailed knowledge of the industries covered. For telecom this includes knowledge of the service providers and vendors and the products and services they offer. Regularly publishing reports that compare results and market positions of the service providers and vendors is an important part of this process.
This skill includes evaluating data provided by service providers and vendors. It is important that definitions are aligned to be able to compare results from companies. It also requires detecting when data is misleading or false. Most companies provide good numbers but some, quite frankly, are hard to believe.
An analyst may also have to develop their own market metrics since the statistics provided by the vendors are inadequate.
When I started following the IPTV market I found it necessary to develop ways to use service provider subscriber counts as a metric. This worked well for most segments, but I had to work with video encoder vendors to use the number of encoders sold. The video encoder firms were willing to provide such information to have an independent view of market position. Such metrics developed by the analyst can provide a good assessment of the market and are likely to be the only choice.
Reporting market positions is the most sensitive part of an analyst’s job. No company is happy when an analyst’s assessment of market position does not match the company's own. A few companies believe that they can improve their market position by being aggressive with an analyst. The analyst must be able to listen to the company but cannot be browbeaten into changing his or her assessment. The challenge is doing this without disrupting an important relationship.
The second analyst skill is the ability to provide a short and long term view based on the data an analyst develops. This includes identifying key trends and understanding how these trends will affect the markets they study as well as how they will affect the participants. Providing a strong strategic perspective is what characterises the best analysts.
I developed business models for several markets I studied. I found that a simple business model can provide a good perspective on the problems that service providers face. Ten years ago one of my models showed that the financial structure of unbundled access in the U.S. market would make it difficult for the competitive broadband providers to be profitable, which was indeed true.
Business case analysis also showed that WiMAX could be a strong competitor to wireline broadband and that it will be difficult for mobile TV operators to make a profit on the service.
I also developed ways of assessing future market opportunity. I showed that there were few opportunities left for vendors in the IPTV market even though there was major growth in subscribers ahead. This conclusion was based on the assumption that it will be difficult to disrupt existing service provider/ vendor relationships in most market segments. This has proved to be the case even though many aspiring vendors felt that the market would be more open.
I found being an analyst a good job. It provided plenty of opportunity for creativity and allowed me to work with a lot of great people.
Bob Larribeau has worked on his own and for RHK (now part of Ovum) where he was responsible for its access and switching and routing services. He was also affiliated with MRG where he made contributions in broadband and developed its IPTV service. In 2004 he co-founded TelecomView with Ian Cox, another RHK alumnus. TelecomView analysed the market for WiMAX as well as broadband and IPTV.
Bob’s first project was a private analysis of the commercial Internet in 1992. In that year, commercial Internet revenues were $15M. In 1999 he wrote an analysis for RHK that forecast that IP traffic was about to eclipse both ATM and circuit-switched voice traffic and predicted the coming importance of MPLS in IP networks. In 2001 he began covering the IPTV market. Bob can be contacted at bob@larribeau.com
