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

Setting up Starlink

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 340 posts

Re: Setting up Starlink

#221

Post by malux85 »

I’m in rural NZ and I can’t wait for Starlink to be available here (it says late 2021 for my area)

I have been trying to get the local ISP to install their system for 6 weeks now, their service is just terrible. Installers don’t answer the phone, they make promises they don’t keep, I have the keep hounding them, and the ISP itself has a monopoly position so they are abusive in pricing and customer service because you have no alternative :(

There is nothing more frustrating than having money to pay for a service, the desire to have it, and the company who’s selling just being abusive and totally useless. (Example: before I got involved they were selling my elderly parents 8,000$ in unneeded networking equipment they told them was required)

Save me Starlink!

Re: Setting up Starlink

#222

Post by yosito »

paranoidrobot wrote: post #40
andrepd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just coordinates? Talk about overcomplicating.

Probably because a plus code is harder for someone to screw up. Find the place on Google Maps, copy the plus code. Rather than entering lat/lon coords... except did you get the sign right, or maybe you flipped lat/lon, or got a significant digit out.

> Probably because a plus code is harder for someone to screw up

Probably because a plus code is harder for someone to use with non-Google services and open source map tools

Re: Setting up Starlink

#224

Post by s5300 »

Baeocystin wrote: post #215
ianlevesque wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sure the generalization earned the downvotes but candid opinions good and bad help paint a more well rounded picture, thanks.

Eh. They aren't wrong per se, but there are a lot of folks that might look like the fit the picture, but are just from a different cultural background. A little tolerance goes a long way in any direction.

A little tolerance goes a long way until you find yourself in a place with people without a little tolerance unfortunately

Re: Setting up Starlink

#225

Post by mlindner »

argvargc wrote: post #98
person_of_color wrote: post #5

The prices aren’t competitive for metros.. what am I missing?

I wonder how much ignorance in the world will be required, before HN stops downvoting people for asking questions?

I mean the question itself is pure ignorance and also shows a kind of lack of care of others. As one other commenter responded "New York City has subways, why do cars exist?" is the kind of question it was.

Re: Setting up Starlink

#226

Post by m463 »

eigenschwarz wrote: post #193

I have Starlink and am in a wooded part of New England. I mostly agree with freedomben's points. All I will add is I still use my cell phone hotspot (Verizon -- only carrier that gets a modicum of service where I am) for Zoom calls or similar. Starlink is definitely fast but too many hiccups for video calls. Edit: More musings. There is a push to get broadband in our area within the year. If that happens and Starlink…

I suspect the hiccups will gradually disappear as more satellites get deployed.

60 satellites batches, just about every week, pretty amazing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#Launches

Re: Setting up Starlink

#227

Post by m463 »

Jemm wrote: post #223

So I can't use Starlink for mobile Internet. Bummer would be great to take around on an RV.

I think that would be the killer app.

My take is that they're manually scheduling satellite customers/aiming/timeslices and as they get more sophisticated they will allow this.

The ultimate would be a self-contained electric rv with fold out panels - solar for the motors, climate and appliances, and satellite for internet connectivity.

I think an acceptable middle-ground would be the ability to call-it-in change your address. But then there would be people that would get an address in boise, then set it up in NYC.

Re: Setting up Starlink

#228

Post by m463 »

poisonborz wrote: post #31

> It's powered through PoE++ (using around 100W of power continuously) Not familiar with Sat gear, but this number seems extremely high to me for just powering an antenna (and some motors occasionally)

Seems to me that most "normal" satellite gear like satellite tv is receiver-only.

Re: Setting up Starlink

#229

Post by esaym »

bserge wrote: post #2

Wow, I'm impressed! I thought it would take more than a decade to implement when it was announced, but it's here and it works. Just amazing. 100/16 Mbps is pretty decent I guess, hopefully it doesn't go down as the number of users goes up. The latency is great imo, 40ms using satellites? I don't think anyone has achieved that before. Would a bigger dish work better or not?

> I thought it would take more than a decade to implement when it was announced,

The idea of low orbit satellites for internet has been around at least since the late 1990's [0]

[0]:https://tinyurl.com/9frjxbhz

Re: Setting up Starlink

#230

Post by ecshafer »

walrus01 wrote: post #143
stochastician wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is OT but can you share a little bit more about what it's like living in East Idaho? I grew up in Boise and now live in Chicago but with the way things have been going lately I've been considering moving back, and there's a real appeal to living in a smaller town in the eastern part of the state (my dad was from Twin Falls). Internet access is always a bit of a concern though, which maybe Starlink ameliorates? S…

I know a few people from the Seattle area who do part time work there - unless you enjoy and agree with religious fundamentalists, die-hard MAGA anti maskers or people whose personality revolves around owning 35 guns, you might want to spend some time there first... Boise by comparison is much more secular and liberal than some of those areas.

As you specify people from Seattle, and these people went out of their way to point out that the people are religious, republicans who like guns, I have a feeling they aren't particularly open minded or tolerant people. Religious or secular, blue team or red team, basic politics shouldn't color your ability to get along with people. Fundamentally people are pretty similar, and American culture is quite homogeneous.
Post reply on HN