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

Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

starlink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 395 posts

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#281

Post by Dylan16807 »

consumer451 wrote: post #90
Someone1234 wrote: post #16

I'm actually a huge fan of "unlimited slow speeds" as a falloff, instead of a cliff. Aside from the fact it allows you to work with Starlink to buy more fast speed, it also allows core stuff to continue to function (e.g. basic notifications, non-streaming web traffic, etc).

> I'm actually a huge fan of "unlimited slow speeds" as a falloff, instead of a cliff. When on cellular, I like to call that "HN-only mode." It is one of the few web properties that is entirely usable at 2G speeds.

2G speeds are awful, and cell companies clearly want it that way since 3G plans throttled to "2G speeds" and 5G plans still usually throttle to "2G speeds".

Starlink is offering 1Mbps here, which is enough for a normal internet experience. It's enough to stream video at 480p or 720p depending on the exact content and encoding settings.

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#282

Post by coryrc »

Analemma_ wrote: post #274
drnick1 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Counterpoint, HN is notoriously hard to use on mobile No it's not, it's perfect on Vanadium with the zoom set to 125%. Much better than some bloated Javascript monstrosity.

It's very frustrating whenever this topic comes up that people see no middle ground between "the website as it is right now" and "some bloated JavaScript monstrosity". There is lots of room for improvement that would not turn it into "a bloated JavaScript monstrosity". How about bigger touch targets? Half the time when I go to vote on a comment on mobile I vote in the wrong direction and have to undo it. Same goes fo…

> How about bigger touch targets?

And lose even more precious space for reading? No thanks. Zoom in before you vote if it's a problem for you. You might say "how about drag up/down?" but then you can't scroll reliably on the page.

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#283

Post by coryrc »

QuantumNomad_ wrote: post #35
Someone1234 wrote: post #16

I'm actually a huge fan of "unlimited slow speeds" as a falloff, instead of a cliff. Aside from the fact it allows you to work with Starlink to buy more fast speed, it also allows core stuff to continue to function (e.g. basic notifications, non-streaming web traffic, etc).

My mobile data plan is like this. It’s funny because when I’m “out of data” my provider sends an SMS suggesting I upgrade to more gigabytes, but then it still continues to work. And yes I checked my bills to make sure that they are not charging me for any usage excess of what’s included in the plan. It’s not even particularly slow. I can still browse the web, send and receive WhatsApp messages, images and videos, wat…

They'd rather you keep paying monthly than start price comparing options.

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#284

Post by danpalmer »

bahmboo wrote: post #2

Nice that instead of completely cutting you off at the cap they put it in super slow 500 kbits. That is actually usable and used to be the fastest speed you could get at home.

I'd disagree that that is usable today. A few days ago I had some network trouble that restricted me to about 350kbps, although stable without much packet loss, and a lot of stuff just didn't practically work. At that speed, loading images and resources on webpages within timeout limits is hard. Many web apps don't work, or degrade enough that you wouldn't want to use them.

Also what do we actually use the web for? A lot of streaming video and audio that won't work. A lot of reading webpages with a lot of images and ads, that won't work. I'm sure that Wikipedia would load and work slowly, but that's not really representative of web usage today.

There's a separate argument about whether the web should be like that, but regardless of your thoughts on that, it is like that.

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#285

Post by coryrc »

londons_explore wrote: post #249
Someone1234 wrote: post #16

I'm actually a huge fan of "unlimited slow speeds" as a falloff, instead of a cliff. Aside from the fact it allows you to work with Starlink to buy more fast speed, it also allows core stuff to continue to function (e.g. basic notifications, non-streaming web traffic, etc).

Thing is, the heaviest users are often the ones with some malware on their machine using up 100% of the bandwidth. When you limit that to 512kbps, thats still 129 gigabytes a month, on top of the 100 gigabytes a month you let the user use at high speed. When a typical user might use just 10 gigabytes a month, it seems dumb to let one user use 23x what everyone else is paying for/using, especially when that user is mo…

> it seems dumb to let one user use 23x what everyone else is paying for/using

Bandwidth is use-it-or-lose-it. If nobody else was using it, then it doesn't hurt anything. And during high demand traffic shaping hopefully gives their traffic even lower priority.

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#286

Post by shibapuppie »

mikestew wrote: post #269
shibapuppie wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're mad you're paying the same for double the data, of which it wasn't completely used beforehand anyway. You do you, I guess.

My comment says nothing about being mad, nor that data go unused every month. But you do you and read it however you want, I guess.

Lies, then uses my own line. Get real, but more importantly, be original.

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#287

Post by Dylan16807 »

coryrc wrote: post #282
Analemma_ wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very frustrating whenever this topic comes up that people see no middle ground between "the website as it is right now" and "some bloated JavaScript monstrosity". There is lots of room for improvement that would not turn it into "a bloated JavaScript monstrosity". How about bigger touch targets? Half the time when I go to vote on a comment on mobile I vote in the wrong direction and have to undo it. Same goes fo…

> How about bigger touch targets? And lose even more precious space for reading? No thanks. Zoom in before you vote if it's a problem for you. You might say "how about drag up/down?" but then you can't scroll reliably on the page.

There's all this blank space to the left of the comment. Some of that could be used for bigger arrows.

Or some of the buttons on a comment could be hidden until you tap the comment. (And you can do it in CSS if div toggle is an offensive amount of javascript.)

There are some low-hanging fruit that would make the experience better. It's fine but it's not great.

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#288

Post by Analemma_ »

coryrc wrote: post #282
Analemma_ wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very frustrating whenever this topic comes up that people see no middle ground between "the website as it is right now" and "some bloated JavaScript monstrosity". There is lots of room for improvement that would not turn it into "a bloated JavaScript monstrosity". How about bigger touch targets? Half the time when I go to vote on a comment on mobile I vote in the wrong direction and have to undo it. Same goes fo…

> How about bigger touch targets? And lose even more precious space for reading? No thanks. Zoom in before you vote if it's a problem for you. You might say "how about drag up/down?" but then you can't scroll reliably on the page.

The Octal app has better touch targets on mobile and manages to show more text at the same time. Here’s a pair of screenshots from my iPhone of the top of the “Is Rust Faster than C” comments. [0] is mobile Safari, [1] is Octal. The app shows more text.

This is exactly what makes me nuts about this whole debate: the complete lack of empiricism or nuance. People would rather just have their knee-jerk outrage about JavaScript or web design fads, instead of actually checking whether the things they’re saying are true.

[0]: https://imgur.com/a/aOvLFcM

[1]: https://imgur.com/a/7R14m4d

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#289

Post by Marsymars »

amelius wrote: post #250
Salgat wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would kill for a web renaissance to return to this format of webpages, as least as an option. Not only loading improves, but also navigation and accessibility.

Maybe someone can build a service that translates webpages into "reader mode" format, which you can then consume on mobile devices with low bitrates.

That's effectively what Opera Mini did. (And apparently still does, I had no idea it was still functional.)

Re: Roam 50GB is now Roam 100GB

#290

Post by tacon »

drnick1 wrote: post #239
jcattle wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you and how much do you pay?

USA, paying $15/month for the cheapest T-Mobile plan. I only use a few hundred MB per month typically.

I got Connect by T-Mobile a few years ago when it was $10/mo prepaid ($11.03 with tax), and I am grandfathered in. It has a hard cap of 1GB/mo, then nothing. Then I got Hello Helium with a physical SIM on my exercise phone (out in the rain, at the gym) and it is completely free with ... wait for it ... 3GB/mo of data. Go figure. The Hello Helium app used to require location permission on at all times, but they eliminated that.
Post reply on HN