Yes they do? Just like WiFi needs way more channels than it has available to work well inside a Stadium, which is why it doesn't work well inside a stadium or airport at all. Heck, I would never even bother trying WiFi in such a setting - between 5G and WiFi, 5G is much better designed for handling such dense cells.

It's important to note that "they" are not trying to fix calls, they are trying to improve cellular connectivity. Getting calls to work is easy, and traditional calls have become a niche use of smartphones. Many already have excellent internet connectivity on their devices and would like that to just remain seamlessly available in all situations rather than having to switch technologies and maintain multiple subscriptions.

While I'm quite happy with my fiber at home, I only really use WiFi on my phone at home is to access local devices. In other situations, especially in corporate or public settings, WiFi is not only inconvenient but often a way worse and slower experience than just staying on 5G - after all, my phone gets gigabit on 5G with a public IPv6 address, and the latency is pretty good too, which can't be said for overcrowded WiFi and crap enterprise network solutions. If it wasn't for casting, 5G + tailscale would alleviate most needs to WiFi.

Heck, for the smartphone-native generation it might even seem weird that they need another internet subscription for their home when they pay for on for their phone, "just because" 5G or whatever wasn't allowed to step on a spectrum - a quite literal tax.

(Don't get me wrong, I like my WiFi, but cellular is not the enemy. We just need to hand out more spectrum to both.)

Let’s start with the things we agree and then I’m going to voice my concerns.

We do need a lot more frequencies to be opened up both for personal and professional use. New technologies, dynamic long and short range connections etc.

We also need to enforce frequency usage as well so that a neighbor of ours doesn’t block the entire 2.4GHz for the entire block with his access points blasting at full power.

Here’s the problem, 6GHz already became a WiFi standard and these cellular companies are lobbying to retroactively change the frequency allocation for themself because they think they can use it better and more importantly all the research and development is already done and they don’t want to waste money developing new technologies there.

But why? Why would we do all the research and development with public fund and then allocate the frequency bands to cellular companies and let them charge people $100+ per month and have 40%+ profit margins while increasing their prices over 60% since 2020.

Hypothetically speaking just a small fraction of that money can be used to put fiber internet all over the place with tons of 6GHz access points and let everyone have free internet.

The cellular companies are late to the game here so they can have a small section of the 6GHz or some of the 7GHz can be opened up but there’s no reason for 6GHz to be retroactively given to them because they lobbied for their own benefits.

I have no idea where your 100 USD+ per month comes from, my 5G plan is 10 USD per month - considerably cheaper than my 50 USD per month fiber connection, even though they're both gigabit. And the fiber rollout cost more.

> Hypothetically speaking just a small fraction of that money can be used to put fiber internet all over the place with tons of 6GHz access points and let everyone have free internet.

That's what 5G is: fiber running to a bunch of APs running a suitable technology for covering an entire area with a lot of devices in high-speed internet.

WiFi is not that technology (it doesn't target that kind of device density or coexistence, and only really works well with very low device counts in RF quiet buildings), nor would anything about that be cheaper - sounds like the issue you voice is mainly greedy ISPs, while using WiFi deployments would not give them any reason to be any less greedy. A free internet service is a choice that can be done with both WiFi and 5G.

(Yes it would be nice if they didn't both trample on upper 6GHz, but improving cellular, but I'm not sure if WiFi is the greater value prop for those channels.)