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

Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 607 posts

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#151

Post by francis_t_catte »

mc32 wrote: post #74
hesdeadjim wrote: post #53

Anyone complaining about this has never experienced the frustration of rural living when it comes to internet. This is absolutely amazing, and it will just get better. Even a reliable 10mbps would be a godsend in many places.

It’s better than the DSL AT&T provides in some parts of SF where “you’re too far from the CO, you’re maxed out at 12”.

LOL, try Verizon-level of rural infrastructure neglect. I paid for a guaranteed 3,300Kb/s down, 768Kb/s up. I usually got 900Kb/s down, and 150Kb/s up. to quote the linesman who had the shit job of patching together the literal 1930's(!) phone lines," I was told by corporate to absolutely not replace any lines unless they're taken out by a drunk or a tree. the cable on that spool I pull behind my truck is going to go white from sunfade long before I ever get to use it."

I non-jokingly asked him which tree I should cut to 'accidentally' nail the worst sections of wire. his response was essentially 'they're all so bad you'd need to cut down a lot of trees'. Verizon DSL was my only choice beside Hughesnet or dial-up. I ended up moving instead.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#152

Post by wlesieutre »

gamblor956 wrote: post #120
wlesieutre wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US does have a lot of people in rural areas where 5G coverage won't be good. And even if you have good 4G coverage, take take a look at the 4G home internet plans from Verizon: https://www.verizonwireless.com/home-services/lte-internet-i... For $60/month you get 10 GB of data. For $150 you can go up to 40 GB. Overage is billed at $10 for each additional 1GB. If I did my math right, at 12 Mbps you can chew through…

I get that people are placing their internet hopes and dreams on Starlink being cheap, but the financials they've provided just don't work out to them being any cheaper than any existing ISP unless (a) Starlink receives massive government subsidies (b) signs up a fuckton of commercial partners/sponsors, or (c) runs the network at a huge loss.

They've provided financials?

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#153

Post by Maximus9000 »

CarelessExpert wrote: post #70
hesdeadjim wrote: post #53

Anyone complaining about this has never experienced the frustration of rural living when it comes to internet. This is absolutely amazing, and it will just get better. Even a reliable 10mbps would be a godsend in many places.

Honestly, one of the barriers to my moving to a more rural area and working remotely was broadband access, but Starlink could very well solve that problem...

You're not alone there. I wonder if starlink will increase property values in rural areas.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#154

Post by Alupis »

bearjaws wrote: post #143
Alupis wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even just as a reliable alternative Starlink would be a big boon to rural users Starlink is susceptible to cloud cover, rainstorms, lightning and other things that would interfere with signal quality (or render it unusable for periods of time). Seems buried lines (either POTS for DSL, Coax for Cable, or Fiber) is the best solution. We just need to figure out how to incentivize it being built.

As someone who lived 50 minutes inland in Florida, no way. Our DSL and cable options were limited, Comcast said they offered cable, but when they got to the line near the house, the signal was so poor they were unable to make it work without 50k in labor. Then ATT came with DSL, the connection has routine outages for hours at a time. There is a technician servicing the DSLAM pretty much every week, there is literally…

Sounds like you have experience with above-ground lines. I specifically said buried lines - which are mostly immune to environmental issues.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#155

Post by bryanlarsen »

SEJeff wrote: post #148
rubber_duck wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Encoding and compression software What does that have to do with bandwidth ?

Sending less data over starlink (which is not tcp/ip btw). I’d you can make 10Mb suddenly only require 900k of actual raw bandwidth by say adding a fpga or something then you can increase throughout to the users.

Hopefully in 2020 most internet traffic is encrypted. If encrypted traffic is compressible you're doing it wrong.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#156

Post by adventured »

gamblor956 wrote: post #113
bserge wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, I'm on 4G right now, getting 45/25 Mbps, in what is considered a rural area (20km from the city). I lived in Birmingham, UK, a way more populated area, and got ~40/30 on 4G, as well. I noticed many people say they're lucky to get ~15 Mbps on 4G and I'm confused, why? Is it just congestion or is there some difference in the towers/implementation?

4G is slower in the US, largely due to congestion.

4G in the US often matches the parent's reference speeds, it depends on where you're at. People often make poor comparisons with the US, they context drop, comparing eg the speed across the entire US or a state versus their experience in one large city in a smaller more densely populated country (and then cherry picking based on a good outcome).

Cleveland, Minneapolis, Detroit, NYC, Boston, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Baltimore are the best in the US, averaging at or above 30mbps across the cities in question. SF, Philly, Atlanta, Kansas City were also competitive with what the parent referenced (eg the SF avg was 27mbps, meaning people are routinely seeing the parent's ~40mbps in Birmingham).

https://9to5mac.com/2019/05/31/state-mobile-network-speeds/

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#157

Post by trothamel »

Maximus9000 wrote: post #153
CarelessExpert wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, one of the barriers to my moving to a more rural area and working remotely was broadband access, but Starlink could very well solve that problem...

You're not alone there. I wonder if starlink will increase property values in rural areas.

Especially with COVID showing the downsides to living in urban areas.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#158

Post by DingoMeansDildo »

otterley wrote: post #109
SEJeff wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is absolutely no way a satellite network can clear that kind of downlink bandwidth. Evergreen comment. Encoding and compression software and hardware continue to improve. The only constant in technology is change. Will we be able to do this sort of bandwith to LEO eventually? Yes. Can we do it this very moment? No one has tried.

Context is important, though. Network performance advances are always relative. If satellite fully-congested download speed improves 10x while hardwire link performance improves 10x, satellite will still be perceived as "too slow" by some segment. Our experience thus far has been that advances in applications tend to consume the bandwidth available. Whether that trend continues remains to be seen. (To be fair, I have…

Give this man a dildo, or a new beer, whatever he needs dudes. Bingo. Good answer.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#159

Post by hpkuarg »

rconti wrote: post #66
bargl wrote: post #45

Starlink internet is not meant to replace hard line internet. There is no getting around the physics of cable being so much cheaper/easier. Even terrestrial cell towers are more efficient and cheaper than satellites. This is 100% meant to supplement existing infrastructure not to replace it. You will almost always get cheaper and faster internet (for both you and the company providing internet) over a cable to your h…

are the physics of cables cheaper and easier? Took me, what, over a decade to get fiber internet in the middle of Silicon Valley.

> over a decade to get fiber internet in the middle of Silicon Valley

This is not a physics problem. This is a local government problem.

Re: Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

#160

Post by bargl »

cma wrote: post #91
bargl wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is 1000% my point. There is now a baseline amount of signal per KM. That signal is now the same everywhere. It will be (about) the same speed everywhere. This is really great for more rural areas and over the ocean.

We already had a baseline amount from geosynchronous and Iridium. This is increasing bandwidth and reducing latency, but is not establishing the first baseline.

Gah - I got so caught up in this thread. Finally something I know a fair bit about.

Yes, there is a baseline. But that's like saying dail-up is a baseline. Everyone might have it but it doesn't give people access to the modern web.

Geo, can be great in some services but it's again not a blanket. They have broad beams but they're moving to spot beams instead and those beams don't move.

This constellation is really going to be the same bandwidth capacity across the globe within a given altitude band. Which is awesome.

Post reply on HN