Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

testmy.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 325 posts

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#231

Post by snicker7 »

apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

France also has a high population density. Even "rural" areas are still close to major population centers. That is not true in rural Siberia or the Rocky Mountains.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#232

Post by Aeolun »

lazharichir wrote: post #190
alias_neo wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been on EE 4G in central London (Westminster) for several years now while at work. A speed test back when it was new would get me 85/85 Mb, these days, with a much more capable device, I am lucky if I get 15/30 Mb (download is being taxed more). It's not horrific, but it's a far cry from what I was advertised when I started. I guess I'll just upgrade to their 5G plan and start the cycle again sigh

Same. EE 4G in CENTRAL LONDON with a SIM-card Home Router and the speeds are horrific — mostly 5Mb, and maybe 15Mb for an hour or two each day. Used to be consistently 50Mb+ back in the days.

Is 15Mbit really such a horrible speed? For a mobile device I think that’s still great.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#233

Post by hylaride »

dx87 wrote: post #215
apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

In all your anti-american rambling, you are ignoring that SpaceX isn't the only company doing this. > Other operators include the London-based OneWeb, which has launched 74 of what it hopes will be a gigantic fleet of 48,000 satellites

Oneweb is bankrupt. It may be half-rescued by the British govt as an attempt to build its own GPS system since they got kicked out of Galileo due to Brexit, but it is unlikely to be a player anymore.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#234

Post by dx87 »

apexalpha wrote: post #221
dx87 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In all your anti-american rambling, you are ignoring that SpaceX isn't the only company doing this. > Other operators include the London-based OneWeb, which has launched 74 of what it hopes will be a gigantic fleet of 48,000 satellites

It's not anti-American rambling. As I said in my other comment I'm aware of other companies doing the same. Although an American company will be first, with clearance from the American government. I'm more drawn to the fact that the American government can greenlight this, even though it has global implications. These things will also impact astronomy in Argentina. Where can they lodge a complaint? They will impact t…

I agree that it's irresponsible, but most of your comment is "American infrastructure is horrible, European infrastructure is great. I can't believe American would force this on the rest of the world", even though it's a European company that's planning to put more of these satellites in the sky than every other company combined.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#236

Post by modzu »

dstick wrote: post #5
mbrevda1 wrote: post #2

Speed is variable, capacity can be improved. The bigger question re Starlink is latency, which this test doesn't show.

I saw these Starlink speed test results 2 weeks ago: https://tweakers.net/i/xDBb34kfMAju3YPPMsC3iOc2gXc=/656x/fil... Seems like pretty solid latency :)

is that real? how are they beating the speed of light?

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#237

Post by andruby »

gameswithgo wrote: post #168
phinnaeus wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fighting games, too. Most gamers know to avoid wifi, much less a wireless ISP.

wifi doesn't add any latency, inhernetly. nor in practice with actual equipment

The shared medium (frequency spectrum) is what can add latency. If a device wants to talk over Wifi but another device is transmitting it has to wait. This introduces (variable) latency, aka jitter.

Here's an anecdotal example for you, in practice with actual equipment:

1) Mac pro via ethernet to router:

    # ping -c 5 -S 192.168.1.88 192.168.1.1
    PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) from 192.168.1.88: 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.413 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.396 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.417 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.553 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.514 ms

    5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.396/0.459/0.553/0.063 ms
2) Same machine via wifi over Unify AP to router:

    # ping -c 5 -S 192.168.1.72 192.168.1.1
    PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) from 192.168.1.72: 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=2.992 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.136 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.873 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=2.293 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=2.552 ms

    5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.873/2.769/4.136/0.774 ms
That's an average of 2.3ms extra latency, or 6x higher.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#238

Post by reportingsjr »

cooljacob204 wrote: post #216
reportingsjr wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the flip side, why should the majority of us in denser areas in the US subsidize people who want to live in exurbs/rural areas? If you want to live in a place like that, be prepared to pay the cost for the infrastructure. We already pay enough subsidies for roads, water, power, etc in rural/exurban areas.

Because we need rural areas to supply us with food and other materials.

A massive number of the people that live in rural areas are not providing food and key materials. In fact, the amount of farmland and farmers has been declining for years due to increases in agricultural efficiency (green revolution).

I've got no problem (to a point) subsidizing infrastructure for farmers and other key jobs, but acting like all of these people who insist on living in an incredibly unsustainable way deserve to be subsidized is ridiculous.

Re: SpaceX Starlink average speedtest is 42.3Mbps down / 9.7 Mbps up

#240

Post by syshum »

apexalpha wrote: post #199

So I guess companies will now fill the entire global sky with thousands of sats just to make up for the fact that the US government ignores rural houses when it comes to digital infrastructure? I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload? My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. I…

I am sorry but how it is the role of government to provide everyone with internet?

The American government "refuses" because there is no Constitutional Authority for which it could use to provide such a service, and that is a good thing

People seem to think government should just provide everything to everyone, the government should be very limited in size and scope, and providing internet is WELL outside what a limited government should be doing.

under the federalist system that is the United States you could make an augment that STATE governments could provide such a service but it should not be a Federal program at all

Post reply on HN