Wireless is inherently easier to accidentally get disrupted. When wired internet fails, it is rarely the wire. More importantly, if it is the wire that is easy to check and fix.
With wireless internet, disruption can be caused by many things. That makes diagnosing a problem so much harder. Incidentally it also tends to be less reliable.
Besides that, the massive complexity of the technology stack makes wireless harder to manage, configure, figure out compatibility for, and more prone to software bugs.
Wireless does has an advantage in terms of redundancy. If the nearest tower fails, you can probably also use another one nearby. Not so with wired connections, where the whole signal chain needs to be intact. Even if the whole network fails, you can probably switch SIM and use a different network.
But they both have trade-offs. Wireless allows many connections at once rather easily at the cost of interference and (potentially) speed and reliability, cable is more expensive up front if infrastructure isn't already there.
Wireless consumes more energy. So it is more enironmentally friendly to go with wires, especially fiber.
Personally I like to have both, wired main connection and wireless as backup.
While not as much, installing and maintaining the 5G endpoints also requires all that, and they generally have to be wired to achieve low latency, meshing only does so much and the speed of light is going to win out for backhauls.
I don't trust that the wireless solution would be equivalent, though this may be because I've been burned too many times living in concrete houses that block cellphone signal rather effectively.
I would hate to have all the devices in my house connect directly to a wireless signal from the ISP, for example. I manage the DNS and firewall to control what goes on. Giving up that control means more ads and more tracking and nothing good for me. Having fiber come into the house has no drawbacks that I can see, so why trade that away for something worse?
