If for you 4G is only slightly faster than 3G, then blame your service provider, because it's not supposed to. Where I live (Portugal) I get 2-7 Mbit/s speeds with 3G and 10-40 Mbit/s speeds with 4G. But most importantly, I was getting 100 ms pings with 3G while 4G pings are more like 20 ms. Or perhaps your service provider is limiting LTE usage to phones and forbidding tethering, which is silly too.
LTE is, right now, the only way to even get proper Internet connections on rural areas, where the alternative is DSL with speeds below 1 Mbit/s, and sometimes not even that. I believe it's also much cheaper for the network operators to cover those areas with wireless Internet than by laying copper, let alone fiber.
The main issue, that can't be stressed enough, is indeed the data caps. As things are now, higher speeds only lead to hitting the limits in less time. Worse, some sites now seem to detect faster connections and deliver more/heavier content over these (cough YouTube in auto quality mode cough), completely ignoring that a faster connection may still have caps. But I have no doubt there are uses for having fiber-like experiences over wireless broadband, especially if the latency is reduced (IMO more important than increasing the speed).
That said, my current situation is not representative - I'm in a known poor spot (it's tricky to get a decent signal due to lack of line-of-sight to a base station, and the nearest is 5 klicks away as the crow flies) and if I go uphill and bask in the sun with my iPad things improve markedly :)
Also, LTE at lower frequencies will fix most of these issues - we already have some of the best mobile broadband connectivity on the planet here in Portugal, and it's only going to get better.
I use my mobe for tethering on holiday and it's great but the only problems I have in that case are bad 3G coverage.
Yes of course the bump from 10mbit (which I get with HSDPA, top speeds on HSDPA here in Barcelona are over 15mbit) to something like 40 is useful if you're using it for your desktop/laptop but that's not really what this article is about.
The general assumption that higher and higher data rates will enable new uses just doesn't hold true to me. In the last few years my home connection has gone from 30mbit VDSL to 300mbit fiber and honestly it's only really noticeable in a few edge cases like downloading games on Steam. I see no radical new use cases taking any sort of advantages of these sorts of speeds, just as I haven't for 4g mobile networks.
But I agree with you that if you have a 10 GB monthly limit, higher bandwidth wont change much.
This is critical for wearables like AR glasses and the like to become commonplace.
For example we build 3D point clouds in real-time on devices and then process them on the cloud to stitch them together to then reload on the device. With super fast internet we could move our mapping to the cloud and could reduce our hardware requirements to basically a camera, battery and an LTE chip.
This is that the printing press "only" made it quicker and cheaper to make books, and the internet "only" made it quicker and easier to move information around... So improvements that can be characterised as only incremental can still be important.
(I'm not trying to weigh in on the case of this 5G stuff however)
Why do you want to go from 802.11g to n? But then you upgrade your incoming connection, add more devices, then you see the difference
Compare playing Second Life to playing World of Warcraft. Second Life loads all data from the server, WoW has most of the world preinstalled on the client.