Verizon wants to develop standards for 5G, signs deal with KT to speed up commercialization

Verizon wants to develop standards for 5G, signs deal with KT to speed up commercialization
It probably wouldn't be much of a surprise to hear that Verizon wants to play a leading role in developing the global standards for 5G wireless service. The largest carrier in the U.S. has just signed a partnership deal with Korea Telecom for both to determine what technologies would be needed for the pair to come up with standards for 5G wireless service. AT&T, Verizon and Sprint have already started conducting very preliminary tests of 5G. Earlier this month Sprint tested 5G during a soccer tournament in Santa Clara and was able to achieve download speeds of 2Gbps.

On Friday, Verizon's Lowell McAdam signed the partnership agreement with KT's chairman, Hwang Chang-gyu. The agreement was announced today. Mr. Hwang says that developing the standards for 5G is not something that can be accomplished by a single company or single country, leading KT to sign the agreement.

While most carriers hope to start rolling out 5G service in earnest by 2020, Korea Telecom has said that it will demonstrate 5G capabilities by 2018 during the PyeongChang Winter Olympics. Under the terms of the deal, both Verizon and KT will work on speeding up commercialization of the next generation of wireless service, trying to help KT meet its goal.

After both sides signed a memorandum of understanding, Verizon whisked the KT executive to its 5G testing ground in New Jersey. Big Red is said to be interested in KT's 5G millimeter wave technology. The Korean carrier will demonstrate this at the 2018 Olympics. Verizon was the first U.S. carrier to offer 4G LTE service in the U.S. and hopes for an encore with 5G. Data speeds are as much as 100 times faster than 4G LTE speeds.

source: KoreaHerald via AndroidAuthority



1. bambamboogy02

Posts: 838; Member since: Jun 23, 2012

Go Big Red!

5. deviceguy2016

Posts: 826; Member since: Jun 16, 2016

Ya just till they bill you on 5G!!! You won't be saying go big red than??

2. trojan_horse

Posts: 5868; Member since: May 06, 2016

2Gbps? That gonna be a crazy fast connexion. woah!

6. zunaidahmed

Posts: 1183; Member since: Dec 24, 2011

Yeah right, I remember they said we could reach 500Mbpe on 4G LTE, look where we are, I should thank god if I can just get constant 50Mbps, 4G has a max speed of 1Gbps, why not mature something we already have and lower they cost, than bring something new and charging insane amount for it? Verizon just wants to milk all the customers.

3. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

I'd pefer they finish making their LTE coverage match the footprint of their 3G coverage first. Right now I'm shown as being in full LTE coverage, yet I am barely getting a signal. I'm not in a low area, in fact where I live is higher than most of the surrounding areas. Which makes that Verizon commercial with Ricky Gervais saying how Sprint's map says that the map isn't a depiction of coverage a load of BS. On Verizon's coverage map is says essentially the same thing, and i was told by a Verizon engineer that the map isn't meant to show actual coverage, only where they CAN offer service. So why do they call it a coverage map if it doesn't show coverage? But they have the disclaimer there in fine print so as far as they're concerned their a$$e$ are covered. But it's comical that they call out Sprint for doing something they themselves are doing. Here's what it says in the fine print on Verizon's coverage map. "These maps are not a guarantee of coverage and contain areas of no service, and are a general prediction of where rates apply based on our internal data. " According to the commercial, Sprint's coverage map disclaimer is “map is not a depiction of coverage.” Yeah, those are worlds apart Verizon. Since I'm not in a valley, and I have line of sight to the towers (I live in a rural area with nothing to block the signal), I should have no issues getting coverage.

4. Sprissy

Posts: 193; Member since: Feb 11, 2012

I also would like Verson to work on their LTE network, I live in an area that Verizon is considered the best, but still get dropped calls and coverage going from 4G to 3G and even in 1X....Is so bad I have to use wifi calling to ensure it doesn't drop the call.

7. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

That's fine if you're using a Verizon branded phone, but for those using unlocked devices like the Moto X Pure 2015 or either of last year's Nexus phones, WiFi calling won't be an option since Verizon's WiFi calling is tied to their Advance Calling app, which is only available to phones sold through Verizon. Unlocked devices can still do VoLTE calling, but it won't have the HD component that Advance Calling has. And from what I've heard the only other options for calling is a Network Extender, but once they move to LTE only and drop CDMA altogether, it gets worse because they won't have access to wifi calling and from what I've heard they don't plan on doing an LTE Network Extender. At that point my only hope is that AT&T will have increased their coverage by then, since Verizon seems to think that their coverage is good enough not to deploy more towers. I've been a customer for almost 20 years, and from their actions, any loyalty I had to them was misplaced. If there were another option I'd jump on it, but there is no T-Mobile or even Sprint , and like I said, currently AT&T is actually worse than Verizon for coverage. I live on a 1200 acre farm (my family's since 1912) so moving isn't even an option. It's a shame the FCC doesn't take these carriers to task over their coverage maps, since it's a selling point for them and they're engaging in misleading advertising. According to the Verizon engineer I talked with, the disclaimer is there so they're covered legally in the event that the new customer isn't actually covered when the map shows they are. So for them it's non issue.

8. Sprissy

Posts: 193; Member since: Feb 11, 2012

We have a network extender, the problem is that you may have a good signal 4g phones still dont work right because the extender is only 3g, Verizon finally admitted that most phones aren't really compatible with it, voices keep cutting in and out making conversations useless.....I moved my phone to prepaid so advanced calling doesn't work so I have to use google voice for wifi calling. At&t, and Sprnt don't work here either but we just found out recently that T-mobile does, making that an option worth considering.

9. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

All the phones I've tried with our Network Extender have worked OK. The biggest issue we have here is keeping the Network Extender going. Half the time it loses GPS, which is odd since it's pointing to the south which is where it's supposed to for optimum signal reception. It's not blocked by anything (the nearest tree to the south is 2 miles away). And if we even get a power blip, most times you need to unplug it for a few hours to let it settle out and then turn it back on. Verizon's always told me it takes around 10 minutes to come back up, but I've never had one get a GPS lock faster than 45 minutes. Like I said, my worry is when they drop CDMA (3G) altogether, because if they don't have an LTE Network Extender out by then, and WiFi calling will only work on their Verizon branded phones, we'll be SOL here. This is my first Nexus phone and I don't think I'll go back to a skinned device. The only one I would've gone back to is Motorola, and since they're not really Motorola anymore, and they alternate between unlocked devices and locked up exclusive devices depending on the year, they're off my list.

10. deviceguy2016

Posts: 826; Member since: Jun 16, 2016

@sprissy and VZWuser76 JUST TO T MOBILE ALREADY!!!!! VZW SUCKS!!!!! I used to have them!!!

11. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Hey, since we're talking in all caps now, I CAN'T GO TO T-MOBILE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ANYWHERE NEAR MY AREA, AS I SAID IN MY LAST POST. I LIVE IN SOUTH DAKOTA, AND T-MOBILE IS ONLY IN SIOUX FALLS THE LARGEST CITY. FOR THE REST OF THE STATE, THEY ROAM OFF OF AT&T. So, before you suggest T-Mobile, realize that you can't get service with them unless you live in an area with their towers. You can't get service if you're in an area that is roaming for them. When you look at their home areas, it's limited to major metros, everywhere else they roam off of AT&T. Believe me, I wish that was an option, but both T-Mobile and Sprint and not options no matter how much I want them to be.

12. deviceguy2016

Posts: 826; Member since: Jun 16, 2016

Ahhh South Dakota is a dead spot i drove to Iowa to see family once and ya that's a dead zone!! My apologies VZWuser76 in Iowa in desmones Iowa isn't all strong there

13. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Like I said though, if you don't live in an area covered by their towers, you cannot get service through them. If you look at a their party map that shows just their network and not roaming coverage, you'll see that T-Mobile, like Sprint, isn't an option for a good chunk of the population. The way they get around that and the way they can say they cover a large percentage of the population is that most people live in a major metro area, and since those people can benefit from their roaming agreements, it appears their networks are more robust than they actually are. Take away their roaming agreements, and their coverage would suck. That's the reason that many people are on Verizon and AT&T, because if you live anywhere that isn't a major city, they're the only option.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.