191–200 of 325 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw these Starlink speed test results 2 weeks ago: https://tweakers.net/i/xDBb34kfMAju3YPPMsC3iOc2gXc=/656x/fil... Seems like pretty solid latency :)
30-100ms is better than I feared, and should be generally reasonable for most uses.
I'm eagerly awaiting reports from beta users about the length of downtime during antenna repositioning and handover to another satellite. Hopefully it's sub-second. I can't think of anything apart from a competitive gamer playing a shooter that might be intolerant of this.
What would change would be the latency which would have a bit of a jump on a handover.
This is easy to have a lot of bandwidth when you only have 10s of users, but when the bandwidth will be shared between 10000 users will it plummet? I remember when 4G was new and only few user where using it, it was very fast, but when more users arrived on the spectrum, the bandwidth per user decreased and the latency incised.
Is there a way to use this on the go, battery powered? I wonder if it would be a good alternative to using 4g or 5g networks. How does it work indoors? Does the antenna/receiver need line of sight?
It also can't be an alternative to cell networks since the antenna is huge and heavy compared to phones, requires LOS and needs to follow the satellites [1].
[1] https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0173/8204/7844/articles/GM...
If this provides unfiltered internet to regimes which dislike it, will we see them blowing satellites out of orbit?
Can't use a service that you have no method of paying for...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
30-100ms is better than I feared, and should be generally reasonable for most uses.
What sort of areas is low latency important in outside of video games?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure that's revolutionary outside of very rural areas or in a desert. Smart phones and set-top boxes etc can already access the internet without satellites, and often with much better latency. What would satellites add for urban or sub-urban applications? I do appreciate the extra competition that satellite internet brings. Especially in parts of the world with suppressed competition (like the US..) this coul…
Smart phones use 4G networks. And now there is another alternative. Cellular networks have limited coverage. Imagine tracking a truck traveling across the US, or a ferry, across the English channel. Currently, that's not possible with 4G. But with a satellite driven internet system, it very well could be. As for urban and sub-urban applications, not much.
You will need a ground station to communicate that isn't going to fit in a pocket.
I'm sorry but how is 42Mbps worth spamming the entire nightsky with to the point that it prevent astronomers from obtaining useful data? Not even 10Mbps upload?
My inlaws live in a village in France that has 70 people total. It's 25min drive to a bakery, 45min drive to anything resembling a supermarket. I'd say it's rural.
They now have 16Mbps *DSL and are scheduled to get Fiber in 2021. Next village already has it.
But because the American government refuses to invest in infrastructure the rest of the planet just has to accept some American company is going to put 14,000 sats in low orbit?
Besides the progress this resembles I still think it's pretty strange the US government can greenlight this plan even though it has global implications.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A 100ms ping is perfectly playable in everything except twitch-based shooters. In voice calls you will notice it, but it won't get in the way like say a 1-2s delay would (like you get if you phone from one end of the world to the other). It's really a very good result bearing in mind that this can work absolutely anywhere.
I'm struggling to imagine a network path that could induce a 1-2 second delay from one side of the world to the other. Even at just 50% of c-in-vacuum that's only a tenth of a second.
