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

221–230 of 607 posts

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

#221

Post by manmal »

gbear605 wrote: post #116
Barrin92 wrote: post #59

just to do some napkin maths, the entire constellation is supposed to be 12k satellites. Some googling gives 20Gbps throughput per satellite, so that'd be about 240k Gbps per second. Now of course the satellites keep exchanging information themselves and not all satellites are everywhere all the time but ignoring that, and let's say you can assume ten times as much bandwidth because not everyone is online at the same…

Gigabit speeds are great, but 80% of the value of Starlink is just getting the 11 Mbps to the people who can't get even that speed in any better way. There are many (millions?) of Americans who don't have that. So let's calculate from that number (or 10 Mbps, to make it easy). 240K Gbps * 1000Gb/Mb / 10Mbps/customer = 24M customers. I've heard that in most residential cases, people on average use about a tenth of the…

Also, rural endpoints can be shared among multiple households, AFAIK small African villages often share one WiFi hotspot, and sometimes one phone/tablet/computer.

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

#222

Post by eddieh »

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.

Viasat is already available and provides 12-100 Mbps service. Viasat only uses 4 satellites. HughesNet provides up to 25 Mbps service and I think has 5 satellites.

Caveat: Of course I've never used either service myself, so I can not speak to the actual download speeds vs advertised speeds.

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

#223

Post by vinw »

blocked_again wrote: post #192
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.

> Even a reliable 10mbps What are some applications that requires more than 10mbps speed in rural places?

Probably same applications that require more than 10mbps in non-rural places.

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

#224

Post by Ekaros »

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.

If that big compression rates where achievable why wouldn't we be already using them? They would be standard in any network.

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

#226

Post by zdragnar »

blocked_again wrote: post #192
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.

> Even a reliable 10mbps What are some applications that requires more than 10mbps speed in rural places?

Same applications as anywhere urban. We folk living out in the sticks may appreciate the outdoors more, but there's still those of us who do use computers.

Example: Downloading modern software over anything at 10mbps is a royal pain- VMs, docker containers, bloated IDEs, gigabytes worth of OS updates, tens of gigabytes for games, you name it.

Streaming services cap quality, or stutter out horribly. Don't even bother trying to stream over satellite (even at 25mbs with hughsnet, for example), you'll blow your cap out of the water in a hurry and it'll make you resent leaving the 90's.

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

#227

Post by Ekaros »

Alupis wrote: post #36
xenadu02 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having this kind of network is a good thing but the idea that any kind of satellite or wireless can replace wires is just fantasy. Delivering just 10Mbps to 100 million customers is over 900 Tbps. There is absolutely no way a satellite network can clear that kind of downlink bandwidth. And that's just a tiny fraction of the market. Physical cables/fiber represent several orders of magnitude more capacity and always w…

And even in remote areas, building out VDSL2 networks with relatively decent speeds (200Mbps down and 100Mbps up[1]) would be better, honestly. Most homes already have a phone line and can support a DSL network... and in some countries a phone line is mandated by law, so the infrastructure already exists. But, DSL is not nearly as "sexy" as thousands of satellites... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VDSL#:~:text=VDS…

The range just isn't there even for suburbs. The high speeds are only achieved with line length of less than 500m, and at 1600m it's similar to ADSL2... So not really a effective solution.

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

#228

Post by gamblor956 »

bronco21016 wrote: post #174
Alupis wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand your comment. Why would the US Government (aka. Taxpayers) pay for internet use in other nations? We already have expensive problems domestically that people would rather spend that coin on.

Winning 'hearts and minds'. You drop access to the internet as whole in places where the internet is suppressed or non-existent and the populace learns just how bad they have things then they might revolt on their own. I wouldn't say I 100% advocate for the idea but thats the thought process behind it.

That would generally be considered a violation of another country's airspace, and some countries would even treat that as an act of war.

You would also have to deal with the real possibility that those countries would simply shoot down any planes observed dropping Starlink base stations.

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

#229

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

SEJeff wrote: post #46
xenadu02 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having this kind of network is a good thing but the idea that any kind of satellite or wireless can replace wires is just fantasy. Delivering just 10Mbps to 100 million customers is over 900 Tbps. There is absolutely no way a satellite network can clear that kind of downlink bandwidth. And that's just a tiny fraction of the market. Physical cables/fiber represent several orders of magnitude more capacity and always w…

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.

There are underlying physical limitations to spectral efficiency. The best modulation schemes in use today can hit about 60 bits per second per hz of bandwidth. Meanwhile, single fibers top out above 40 terabit. To duplicate the bandwidth of just a single fiber link with a radio downlink, you'd need over 600 ghz of available spectrum. That'd require advances pushing deep into the thz gap, but beyond that, the physics of propagation are so different between 6 ghz, 60 ghz, and 600 ghz that it's hard to conceive of a single system covering so much spectrum. And that's not even getting into issues with geometric limitations of radio beam widths.

While change is constant, this isn't an argument that any change you can imagine is physically realizable.

Fiber is here to stay for a very long time precisely because it starts out with such massive fundamental physical advantages. It's also a mistake to assume innovation only benefits one alternative. We're still learning how to make and run fiber cheaper too.

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

#230

Post by AmbientNomad »

eddieh wrote: post #222
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.

Viasat is already available and provides 12-100 Mbps service. Viasat only uses 4 satellites. HughesNet provides up to 25 Mbps service and I think has 5 satellites. Caveat: Of course I've never used either service myself, so I can not speak to the actual download speeds vs advertised speeds.

I live in a rural area where both of these services are available. They both come with seriously outdated data caps. Hugesnet, if I recall, charges $150/month for their fastest tier, but after 50gb, your speed is reduced to 300kbps.

I haven't experienced either service, but I regularly read that they are riddled with disconnects and spotty service.

Currently we're paying a ridiculous amount, $200/month, to Unlimitedville for what is literally just a 4G hotspot in our house, but with an actual, usable data limit (1tb/month).

I have some serious concerns about Starlink, but until we decide that internet is a utility and rural people need access too, I guess I'm happy to see at least somebody is trying to make rural internets better.

Post reply on HN