Every year, the telecom world packs its bags and heads to Barcelona for Mobile World Congress—our industry’s biggest stage for bold predictions, big deals, and the next wave of network disruption. ECG was there again this year, with our eyes on one clear trend: the growing push for next-generation broadband networks. And make no mistake—5G vendors are coming for your WiFi. Not in the distant future, but now. Many already are.
Back in the early 2000s, when SuperCOMM in Chicago was the go-to event for U.S. telecom providers, MWC was still growing into its global role. But as the big American trade shows faded into memory, MWC took the spotlight—and never gave it back. With over 100,000 attendees, a mix of global tech giants, and a platform for every major trend in connectivity, it’s become the pulse of the industry.
This year, two themes cut through the noise. First, the serious push to replace—or at least compete with—enterprise WiFi using private 5G. Second, a maturing conversation around open, standards-based radio access networks (RAN) that finally seems to be gaining real traction with mobile operators.
Numerous vendors spoke broadly about Private 5G. In this network design, you use the technology developed for high performance communication by cell phone operators (Mobile network operators) and deploy it for private us. In the USA we have major advantages in available radio spectrum. To connect, a device needs a cellular radio with the proper spectrum compatibility, and a SIM card or eSIM designed for the private network.
The big three—Ericsson, Samsung, and Nokia—all offer gear and software built for Private 5G deployments. But only our Finnish friends at Nokia are making serious moves to open their 5G core software to play nicely with other vendors’ radios. That’s a big deal. It means you can run Nokia’s 5G core and baseband alongside more affordable, lower-power radios from emerging players like Moso Networks, CableFree, and Accelleran —without locking yourself into a single-vendor ecosystem.
In the commercial space, this is often most interesting in ports - such as shipping ports and airports. And it's seen as valuable in advanced manufacturing.It also means that a network core, such as the 5G core from Druid Software can be used with the high-power, high-performance radios from Nokia to cover massive areas.
You see a Faceless Finnish robot, I see WiFi replacement for my whole neighborhood.
Why would anyone choose 5G over WiFi? Proponents argue that 5G’s radio technology brings serious advantages—especially in real-world, high-mobility environments. Unlike WiFi, which was designed for stationary devices with minimal movement, 5G was built from the ground up to maintain connections at highway speeds, whether you’re in a car or aboard a train.
Another key difference is how each technology handles signal reflections. WiFi often treats bounced signals—like those reflecting off walls or buildings—as interference. 5G, on the other hand, was engineered to use those reflections to its advantage, improving coverage and reliability in complex environments.
Signal reliability is another battleground. WiFi operates in unlicensed spectrum, where you’re competing with everything from your neighbor’s router to your microwave oven. 5G can operate in reserved spectrum blocks, where interference is tightly controlled. In the U.S., for example, many Native American tribes hold protected access to dedicated spectrum, enabling more stable and controlled deployments. But anyone can reserve use of CBRS spectrum, which gives them a dedicated right to use a particular spectrum in a particular area without fear of competition. (Don't try this near a Submarine base, though...all CBRS is on loan from the US Navy.)
So is 5G really coming for WiFi? Some say not exactly. Jim Hodge of Moso Networks puts it this way: “Use WiFi anywhere it will work, and then use 5G everywhere else.” But here's what we’re seeing on the ground—especially in the U.S., where unlimited data plans are common: 5G often outperforms the cluttered, under-managed WiFi networks run by small businesses and home users. For many, it’s becoming the more reliable way to connect.
The second major theme at MWC this year was Open RAN—an initiative aimed at bringing standardized, interoperable protocols to the Radio Access Network (RAN) and opening the door to true multi-vendor deployments. The promise? Greater flexibility, vendor diversity, and the ability to innovate without being locked into a single supplier’s roadmap.
Of course, Open RAN isn’t without its critics. The skepticism we’re hearing now sounds strikingly familiar to what we heard during the rise of multi-vendor VoIP systems two decades ago. Back then, it was considered risky to mix and match hardware and software from different vendors. Now, that’s just how we build networks.
Companies like Parallel Wireless are leaning hard into Open RAN, focusing on making their software integrate smoothly with a wide variety of third-party radios. I could swear they're reusing the talking points from the companies in the early 2000s who were migrating from hardware-based DSPs to software-based systems. And while some of this sounds revolutionary, it’s important to remember: 5G already includes a degree of standardization. Components like the radio units (gNodeBs) and baseband units often interoperate across vendors—even among traditional players like Nokia, Samsung, and Ericsson.
One of the most closely watched Open RAN deployments is happening at Telus, the Canadian mobile operator. They’ve pieced together a live, production-grade Open RAN architecture using radios from Samsung, HPE servers, and Wind River’s cloud platform. The industry is watching carefully—not just to see if it works, but to see if it can compete economically.
Because here’s the big question: Is the Open RAN model, with its mix of vendors and layers of integration, actually cheaper? Or will the cost of stitching it all together end up higher than just buying a turnkey solution from a traditional vendor like Ericsson? You hear a lot about "Total Cost of Ownership."
That tension—between openness and simplicity, flexibility and cost—is where the Open RAN story will be won or lost.
The telecommunications industry has effectively fractured into three major battlefronts:
Moving data over the horizon (long-haul and international transport),
Delivering data the final few miles to end users, and
Doing useful things with data (applications - Voice, shopping, banking, messaging, entertainment).
The long-haul fiber transport industry—anchored by providers laying undersea cables and building intercontinental backbones—continues to lead the first front with deep expertise and unmatched capacity. But when it comes to that crucial “last mile” of delivery, especially in the individual-user space, the momentum has clearly shifted toward mobile network operators. They're winning the race to deliver high-quality, consistent access where people live, work, and travel.
Then there’s the third front: making the data useful, engaging, or even addictive. This is where application-layer giants like Meta (formerly Facebook), Google, Apple, and even Vonage (in the voice world) dominate. They don’t build the roads—they build what people want to drive.
Sure, the King of Spain can park anywhere. But does he have unlimited data?
A major shift happened in 2007 with the arrival of the iPhone, and Android’s rapid follow-up. These pocket-sized devices reshaped global computing habits. The dominant platform for work, communication, and entertainment shifted from the lap to the hand. In many parts of the world, smartphones are the computer.
And that shift has implications for fixed broadband and WiFi. We've already seen a generation of users—especially younger ones—abandon laptops entirely for mobile-first experiences. As cellular networks grow more reliable and bandwidth-rich, especially with the rise of 5G, it’s not hard to imagine a world where in-home and in-business WiFi becomes a fallback, not a priority.
If your phone does everything you need, and your 5G connection is fast and stable, what’s the real value of WiFi in your house? For some, the answer may increasingly be: none. And that’s a future traditional broadband providers need to think carefully about.