Look, wireless service is almost guaranteed to be worse, but that has more to do with dodgy operators. The technology is fantastic, and when engineered correctly largely undetectable.
That said, in my time, I can count on one hand the number of installations where I was allowed to engineer the service correctly. And I can count on all the hands in a small city the number of times I have been called to rescue something extremely stupid, like shooting a link across a construction site.
>You can create a great wireless link. It still won't beat a great fiber link. I'm sure the best wireless links beat the worst fiber links, but...
When engineered correctly people tend to have absolutely no idea wireless is involved in their connection. Largely its a self inflicted branding issue. You see wireless being sold as "Fibre Extension" way too often for this reason.
Theres also factors that fibre people never consider, like mean time to restore a service. Even if you have a team of 24/7 engineers ready to mobilise, a fibre break will often take a significantly longer time to restore than a wireless outage.
Look at it this way as well: The slowest practical fiber connection is 10Gbps, individually per fiber. The fastest practical wireless connection is about 2.5Gbps, shared between all users.
Look, wireless service is almost guaranteed to be worse, but that has more to do with dodgy operators. The technology is fantastic, and when engineered correctly largely undetectable.
That said, in my time, I can count on one hand the number of installations where I was allowed to engineer the service correctly. And I can count on all the hands in a small city the number of times I have been called to rescue something extremely stupid, like shooting a link across a construction site.