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

Starlink Direct to Cell

starlink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 831 posts

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#301

Post by piyh »

papa_bear wrote: post #289
marcus_holmes wrote: post #281

This is the nomad dream. Have a single phone service and wander anywhere on the planet with it. No more having to swap SIMs out on every border, being unable to use text-based 2FA, forcing friends to contact only via messaging apps, system messages in a foreign language, etc. It's not the coverage; that's mostly good. It's not the price; mostly SIM cards and plans are cheaper when travelling than they are at home. It…

It's been possible to solve these problems by using Google Fi for many years now.

Google Voice crowd still waiting for an annoucement that they're either going to start supporting RCS or shut us down.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#302

Post by paxys »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #281

This is the nomad dream. Have a single phone service and wander anywhere on the planet with it. No more having to swap SIMs out on every border, being unable to use text-based 2FA, forcing friends to contact only via messaging apps, system messages in a foreign language, etc. It's not the coverage; that's mostly good. It's not the price; mostly SIM cards and plans are cheaper when travelling than they are at home. It…

Starlink isn't meant to be your primary cell service, and likely will never be, considering people are rarely within direct line of sight to the sky when they need to use their phone.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#303

Post by throwing_away »

modeless wrote: post #297
mmaunder wrote: post #283

Vertical integration by Starlink of the cheapest launch capability in the world (by far) is the reason there are no competitors, and there will be no competitors. The pace of innovation at SpaceX is not THE reason - it’s an additional reason that no one has a snowballs chance in hell of ever catching Starlink. I’ve seen talk of competitor satellite networks or a possible competitor emerging. Folks it’s game set and m…

I disagree. Starlink is indeed awesome and SpaceX deserves every bit of their success. But there will be competitors eventually, if for no other reason than foreign militaries sponsoring them. There's no inherent reason for this to be a winner takes all market. We can only hope the competitors are half as responsible as SpaceX has been about space debris risk and ensuring the satellites are not visible to the naked e…

I disagree too, but because it will no longer require military budget to start a SpaceX competitor.

Pretty soon AI agents could reasonably take a crack at it.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#304

Post by mmaunder »

modeless wrote: post #297
mmaunder wrote: post #283

Vertical integration by Starlink of the cheapest launch capability in the world (by far) is the reason there are no competitors, and there will be no competitors. The pace of innovation at SpaceX is not THE reason - it’s an additional reason that no one has a snowballs chance in hell of ever catching Starlink. I’ve seen talk of competitor satellite networks or a possible competitor emerging. Folks it’s game set and m…

I disagree. Starlink is indeed awesome and SpaceX deserves every bit of their success. But there will be competitors eventually, if for no other reason than foreign militaries sponsoring them. There's no inherent reason for this to be a winner takes all market. We can only hope the competitors are half as responsible as SpaceX has been about space debris risk and ensuring the satellites are not visible to the naked e…

Game that out for us. How government innovation competes with a private sector launch company whose main differentiator is lower cost.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#305

Post by modeless »

mmaunder wrote: post #304
modeless wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Starlink is indeed awesome and SpaceX deserves every bit of their success. But there will be competitors eventually, if for no other reason than foreign militaries sponsoring them. There's no inherent reason for this to be a winner takes all market. We can only hope the competitors are half as responsible as SpaceX has been about space debris risk and ensuring the satellites are not visible to the naked e…

Game that out for us. How government innovation competes with a private sector launch company whose main differentiator is lower cost.

China is going to do it for sure. It doesn't have to be as efficient as SpaceX if it is massively subsidized for defense purposes. And China is pretty good at building things cheap.

On the commercial side Blue Origin has been slow in starting but they are almost ready and will have relatively cheap launches. There are other up and coming private launch competitors too.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#306

Post by mmaunder »

throwing_away wrote: post #303
modeless wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Starlink is indeed awesome and SpaceX deserves every bit of their success. But there will be competitors eventually, if for no other reason than foreign militaries sponsoring them. There's no inherent reason for this to be a winner takes all market. We can only hope the competitors are half as responsible as SpaceX has been about space debris risk and ensuring the satellites are not visible to the naked e…

I disagree too, but because it will no longer require military budget to start a SpaceX competitor. Pretty soon AI agents could reasonably take a crack at it.

I’m sure LangGraph has Elon quaking in his boots.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#307

Post by paxys »

heywoods wrote: post #121

Does this allow the ability to circumvent LTE networks in countries like China? Do we have the capability to send messages to any/all phones in China if we (USA) wanted to?

Regardless of technical capability, do you think Elon is going to risk angering China?

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#308

Post by nikkwong »

mmaunder wrote: post #283

Vertical integration by Starlink of the cheapest launch capability in the world (by far) is the reason there are no competitors, and there will be no competitors. The pace of innovation at SpaceX is not THE reason - it’s an additional reason that no one has a snowballs chance in hell of ever catching Starlink. I’ve seen talk of competitor satellite networks or a possible competitor emerging. Folks it’s game set and m…

My family had starlink installed at a remote house we own for internet access. While we could get it up and running, the connection wasn't reliable and we encountered many issues. When we tried to contact Starlink for help, support was non-existent; sent us to multiple dead ends, and often wasted our times with repairs promised weeks into the future, over and over, which never surfaced. After 8 months of pain, we ended up getting rid of it and moving back to our 6mbps.

Starlink is like Elon's other companies. Engineering marvels—where the customer's are merely an annoyance and the means to an end. They are basically hostile to the customer every step of the way; and from what I've seen from Elon—I think this attitude comes right from the top.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#309

Post by esaym »

mmaunder wrote: post #283

Vertical integration by Starlink of the cheapest launch capability in the world (by far) is the reason there are no competitors, and there will be no competitors. The pace of innovation at SpaceX is not THE reason - it’s an additional reason that no one has a snowballs chance in hell of ever catching Starlink. I’ve seen talk of competitor satellite networks or a possible competitor emerging. Folks it’s game set and m…

>I’ve seen talk of competitor satellite networks

Swansat anyone?

https://web.archive.org/web/20080119080404/http://swansat.co...

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#310

Post by signatoremo »

threeseed wrote: post #271
chroma wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All those points are true, but it doesn't change the fact that Starlink will be quite profitable for SpaceX. Currently, each launch of 23 Starlink satellites costs SpaceX around $50 million. To get 1,000 direct to cell satellites in orbit, they'll need to launch 44 times, costing them $2.2 billion. Due to the low orbits, air resistance causes the satellites to reenter within 5-10 years, so to maintain the constellati…

> Now let's say only 1% of the population wants Starlink direct to cell Why not 5%, 10%, 100%. It's just made up numbers. Will it be a good business for Starlink, sure. Will it change the world, probably not.

If someone is rescued in the wilderness thanks to direct to cell connection; if children can attend online classes despite living in the rural; if science expedition can stay online even in the most remote places, then that’s changing the world.
Post reply on HN