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

311–320 of 831 posts

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#311

Post by ssl-3 »

nehal3m wrote: post #284
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…

Are you Elon? Also monopolies are never awesome.

Must a monopoly always be bad?

For example: Mitutoyo seems to have a monopoly on producing accurate digital calipers that have battery life measured in years (using one dainty little LR44 alkaline cell). They use approximately fuck-all for power whether switched on or off.

Certainly, the market is open for others to produce an actually-competitive product with similar performance. All it takes is for the competition figure out how to do it and put them into production, since any necessary patents expired long ago.

But they simply have not done so.

So here we are today, wherein: The free market has decided that Mitutoyo has a defacto monopoly on tools of this capability.

Is that... is that implicitly a problem, somehow?

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#312

Post by ianburrell »

charliebwrites wrote: post #6

I wish I could pay Starlink directly and have global satellite based LTE instead of having to go through a specific carrier and be limited by other carriers’ reciprocity to specific countries and bands One space based cell plan for the whole world

Direct to Cell has pretty low bandwidth. The total bandwidth is 4Mbps per cell, with each person getting kpbs. If they do offer internet, it will be like 2G or dialup.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#313

Post by taeric »

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…

Most nomads don't really care for cell phones? This is the facsimile of the idea for people that want the benefits of travel without the negatives of no fixed relationships.

Which isn't really a negative to this. Indeed, if you have the means, I'd say go for it.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#314

Post by ianburrell »

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…

Direct to Cell is not usable LTE service. It doesn't have the bandwidth. It is effectively 2G or satellite phone, with messages, voice calls, and slow data.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#315

Post by dyauspitr »

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…

It’s awesome but also worrying. Elon is a political timebomb. I wouldn’t put it past him to selectively deny people usage based on political alignment, sex etc. At least for now there are much worse geosynchronous competitors, but some future state where one doesn’t exist is worrying.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#316

Post by jampa »

threeseed wrote: post #178
unsnap_biceps wrote: post #41

I really wonder if anyone is going to be able to catch up to SpaceX anytime soon. Kuiper seems dead in the water, the legacy operators seem unwilling to expand into LEO constellations.

Honestly not sure why they would want to. The world is continually moving towards being centred around cities where it makes sense to simply rollout fibre. Especially with gigabit speeds being the new standard. And even in Australia they are starting to move remote areas onto fibre.

You are right for on-grid systems. If you can get power from the grid, it is easy to get fiber. I have friends working remotely from very rural zones in Brazil, and they got fiber for a lower price than it was for buying up the transformers/posts to route power to their farms.

But, there are still niche use cases, like ships and planes, that would pay a premium for fast LEO satellite connections. For people I know who live on islands, going from barely being able to use WhatsApp to entirely using the internet (YouTube / Netflix) is game-changing.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#317

Post by dyauspitr »

user3939382 wrote: post #282
cprayingmantis wrote: post #192

If anyone from Starlink or SpaceX is reading these comments here’s what you want to do: Sell your own branded trail cam with solar charging and LTE from orbit. You can charge $25-$40 a month for unlimited pictures sent from the cam. This would open up hunters, nature enthusiasts, and researchers to be able to place their hardware anywhere in the field without worrying about connectivity. Here in SWVA we have deep hol…

Isn’t tree cover a problem for propagation of wavelengths used in satellite comms?

Having had starlink before, yes. I needed a direct line of sight to the sky to receive service.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#318

Post by djsnoopy »

teruakohatu wrote: post #210
cprayingmantis wrote: post #192

If anyone from Starlink or SpaceX is reading these comments here’s what you want to do: Sell your own branded trail cam with solar charging and LTE from orbit. You can charge $25-$40 a month for unlimited pictures sent from the cam. This would open up hunters, nature enthusiasts, and researchers to be able to place their hardware anywhere in the field without worrying about connectivity. Here in SWVA we have deep hol…

I work with researchers that deploy all sorts of solar powered sensor equipment in remote parts of New Zealand. Realistically Starlink would need to support NB-IoT and LTE-M which is what these kinds of devices are moving towards (if they need cellular connectivity). These are low power variants of 4G and 5G. Even if you have solar and a fixed platform, you usually want to deploy as little solar as possible. Especial…

Ridiculously niche comments from experts like this is why HN is so special. Thank you.

Re: Starlink Direct to Cell

#319

Post by JumpCrisscross »

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…

> It’s over. And IMO it’s awesome

It’s not over precisely because it’s vertically integrated. Buyers want to maintain leverage. SpaceX wants to avoid forced divestiture. Hence the airlines inking deals with AST Mobile, and SpaceX lofting their birds.

Post reply on HN