[cycomanic]

I don't get your post. On the one hand you say that you need to go to FR2, due to higher throughput requirements. On the other hand you point out beam forming, MIMO etc. as the real difference between 4G and 4G. But that's exactly the technology used to get higher throughput. You don't need more bandwidth necessarily to get higher throughput, there is a D term in the Shannon formula, thus you can go to several spatial paths to increase throughput.

I doubt we will see _real_ THz comms in 6G, maybe we go up to a few 100s of GHz, but not THz (I know many in the industry use THz to mean anything from ~50GHz, but that's just marketing rubbish).

[Ballu]

Beamforming, MIMO, etc are not like you need for FR2, but without that you cant deploy. At this high frequency, the range is in 10s of m with antenna size of coin. To get the gain, you need MIMO and to get the distance, you need beam forming. Both MIMO and beam forming has more advantages, but without these technologies, almost impossible to deploy more than 50GHz. We will mmWave, but will take time. Thats how mobile world works. The high end of the targeted band is usually used at the end of particular generation of mobile or the next one. BTW, mmWave is having issue in adopting in mobile world not the FWA. My understanding is, both Lumen and Verizon are going ahead with mmWave band for FWA.

Regarding THz, FCC already opened the band till 3THz for 6G testing. I dont track, but next WRC might be planned for 2024 or 2025 (because of COVID, all the schedules are screwed up). The next WRC will kick start the standardization fo 6G and there is more possibility of THz to be part of 6G. Although as I mentioned earlier, my guess is, it more than a decade before THz band will be in use for mobility.