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

I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 258 posts

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#21

Post by sschueller »

krisoft wrote: post #13

So he says that he wanted to give the dish to his cousin. Then he describes all the bureaucratic barriers he faced in that plan. But what happens if he just places the dish there? Does it immediately give an error on first connection, or doest it get banned later? I understand that the limit is because Starlink is oversubscribed in the cousin's area, I'm just wondering where the limitation is enforced.

From what I gathered from the video is that it doesn't work there because there is no converge. Those 70 miles might be just outside the coverage area. I guess if you are right outside one of these circles https://starlink.sx/ it won't work

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#22

Post by shortformblog »

A year or two ago I stayed in an Airbnb with the literal worst DSL connection I’ve ever run into, just dog slow, took literal minutes to load a modern website. I have to imagine the benefit of Starlink is when your alternatives are so bad that it’s like having no internet access at all, it looks pretty good.

But many people aren’t dealing with that, meaning that when you have better options, something like Starlink no longer looks all that necessary.

But users who are in a position where real internet is a real luxury due to location, Starlink still has value, even if it’s obviously not perfect. Especially when compared to satellite internet options that are comically slow even compared to cable modem connections that were common more than a decade ago.

Good critique, Jeff.

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#23

Post by mikestew »

perydell wrote: post #8

Article looks and sounds like clickbait. One of the fundamental aspects of starlink is the internet access and speed you will get. That doesn't seem to be covered here. You took down your starlink because you couldn't transfer it to someone else, are afraid of the damage starlink is doing to astronomy, and you don't like the design decisions about the new dish that you don't even have? Sorry, this doesn't make any se…

TFA doesn’t talk about what you think it should talk about, so it’s “clickbait”? Granted, “YouTube Face” never helps bolster one’s legitimacy, but what part of the headline did not meet expectations? By your own description, the article delivered.

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#24

Post by clvx »

ghaff wrote: post #7
fastaguy88 wrote: post #3

I get it. If you already have internet, then Starlink is not for you. There are lots of questionable design choices (particularly in version 2), it's picky about placement, etc. etc. But if your other choice is HughesNet or its competitors, that throttles you after 15 GB (2 days of non-streaming usage for me), or 50 GB, the Starlink "shortcomings" are irrelevant. With Starlink, if you can get it, and if you can site…

Starlink is a game changer if you don't have decent wired broadband. We had about 1 Mbps download and were the last house on the road who could get it. Then we didn't even have that. Verizon hotspot was "ok" but data was expensive so you had to watch your usage. Starlink isn't perfect--had a couple of days downtime over Christmas--but basically it works fine with 20+ Mbps bandwidth. With the prior DSL, I couldn't hav…

Similar situation but I switched to T-Mobile. I have a Starlink order but it got delayed 6 months. At this point, I'll just cancel it because T-Mobile Home Internet is a game changer.

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#25

Post by LegitShady »

NDizzle wrote: post #11

I've had Starlink in Rural AR for 10 months now. I have it currently set to "failover only" on my Ubiquiti device, as it's snowing sideways and there is a tremendous (read: 30%) amount of packet loss at the moment. I don't yet know how to do automatic failover due to packet loss on a UBNT device, but that's what I'm looking up this afternoon. Anyways - I have 3 ISPs, with two of them being LTE. One is the unlimited A…

starlink radomes to keep snow and cats off the dish next?

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#26

Post by sschueller »

woudsma wrote: post #10

$240 per month for internet, wow. I didn't realise things were that expensive for people living in remote areas. I'm currently paying ~$40 (converted from EUR) per month for a 100Mb/s fiber connection.

CHF 64.75 (~71 USD) per month for 25 gbit synchronous [1] here in Zürich, Switzerland. The cost now is hardware. The Fiber infrastructure in the city is mostly operated by the state electrical company. Anyone can provide service over it.

[1] https://www.init7.net/en/

[2] https://www.speedtest.net/result/c/df4123cf-5f0e-40f2-bf71-f...

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#27

Post by mprev »

If you can get high speed, low latency, affordable internet access another way then Starlink probably isn't for you.

We've just moved to a place where our only other option was a £400 a month leased line delivering synchronous 100Mbps. For less than a quarter of that, Starlink gives us roughly 120-150Mbps down, around 7Mbps up, and pings around the 30 ms mark. Upload is slow but workable for now.

It's easy to complain for clout when you don't actually need the service. But if you don't have another affordable option, Starlink is remarkable. I keep having to remind myself that I'm running a business from my rural home via space.

And, sure, there are elements that aren't perfect (the cable on our dish isn't replaceable unless you want to manually splice wires, but reports on the Starlink subreddit say that Starlink will send you a new dish if the cable gets damaged). The power draw is around the same as a fairly typical lightbulb from 20 years ago, so I can totally live with that.

I know it's frustrating for people who can't get Starlink, especially if they know someone who wants transfer their dish to them, but that's the price of avoiding oversubscription.

If you can take the Starlink dish off your roof and still post your videos complaining about Starlink then you were never the target customer anyway.

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#28

Post by tylerscott »

woudsma wrote: post #10

$240 per month for internet, wow. I didn't realise things were that expensive for people living in remote areas. I'm currently paying ~$40 (converted from EUR) per month for a 100Mb/s fiber connection.

We pay 180 USD a month for a phone line and DSL from Century Link. This connection is 1.5 mbps down and 500 kbps up in practice (advertised speeds are higher). Starlink has been a game changer for us.

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#29

Post by geerlingguy »

sschueller wrote: post #16

I don't understand why cable connections are so bad when there is DOCSIS 3.1. Is it that the cable provider just has such a limited link on their end that people are getting speeds sub 100mbit? Are they vastly over provisioning their networks?

In my case, Spectrum has decided that they want a flashy "gigabit tier", so they provision everything as download bandwidth (940 Mbps), and then only assign 35 Mbps upload.

I'd pay extra for business class service, but it doesn't even help, it's the same speed just with some more guarantees and a stable IP.

Re: I took down my Starlink dish (but haven't cancelled)

#30

Post by spaniard89277 »

sschueller wrote: post #16

I don't understand why cable connections are so bad when there is DOCSIS 3.1. Is it that the cable provider just has such a limited link on their end that people are getting speeds sub 100mbit? Are they vastly over provisioning their networks?

HFC is a mess. It's not worth it to keep improving it. Here in Spain HFC providers are rushing to lay fiber because it's not only more competitive for real speeds, but because maintinance is much easier and cheaper.

The savings come in the form of real state, the "last mile" widens a lot, many of the elements of the network are passive so you save up energy too, and you can cram up much more people/€ spent.

Post reply on HN