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

341–350 of 607 posts

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

#341

Post by btian »

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…

What sort of physics?

You can multiplex wavelengths for wireless just like cable right? Granted you'd need to buy the licenses for those frequencies, which should be fairly cheap in rural areas.

I don't think Elon would approve this project if cable is always cheaper and easier.

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

#342

Post by itsoktocry »

vardump wrote: post #286
AmbientNomad wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 They both come with seriously outdated data caps.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 Unlimitedv…

"I have some serious concerns about Starlink..." Curious, what kind?

>Curious, what kind?

Maybe that you might be forced into an NDA for a service that never ends up delivering on promises?

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

#343

Post by ExtremisAndy »

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.

You’ve got that right! I taught remotely all summer long on 6mpbs down/ 0.3 up. Dreadful. Just enough upload speed for PowerPoint + my voice. I’d love for something like Starlink to work.

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

#344

Post by itsoktocry »

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?

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

Why do rural areas need any lower internet speeds than you do in the city? What are you doing in the city that they aren't?

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

#345

Post by manquer »

pier25 wrote: post #308
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.

> Encoding and compression software and hardware continue to improve. But these would apply to both wired and wireless, no?

If encoding tech is specific to wireless then not really , just like improving cable medium , number of cable pairs etc will not improve wireless , better transmitter or receiver will not impact wired

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

#346

Post by jasonpeacock »

xenadu02 wrote: post #25
jasonpeacock wrote: post #12

Honestly, this is just awesome. It's a working demonstration of high-speed satellite internet, showing this approach is a viable solution for "anywhere on Earth" internet. For all those people who don't have broadband available, this will be life-changing. It'll only get better from here, welcome to the future :) (and remember that perfect is the enemy of good)

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 yet such a satellite network is being built and deployed.

The people building this have obviously done the math and have a solution which they're implementing while you're busy saying that it can't be done :)

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

#347

Post by Alupis »

yencabulator wrote: post #309
Alupis wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough... except everyone here is in awe of 11Mbps satellite service, as-if satellite internet is some brand new thing.

If Hughes had been serving 11-60 Mbps at 31-94 ms ping without caps, Starlink wouldn't need to exist. Starlink is absolutely not the same as the previous generation of satellite internet. This is a brand new thing.

OK, but they've touted each satellite in the cluster being capable of driving 20Gbps all by itself.

So why are people only getting 11Mbps? Beta or not, that's a very far cry from the promised specs.

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

#348

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

kickopotomus wrote: post #292
curiousllama wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree. Also - my frustrations over the last few days compel me to point out that the latest AAA shooter is in fact 227 GB, plus >100GB of updates.

Has anyone come out with a reason for the size? I mean they seem to reuse a lot of the same textures throughout the game so I have a hard time understanding how it managed to swell to that.

I assume it must be a massive refusal to deduplicate. For example in the Verdansk map, many of the houses and buildings are cut and pasted. In theory, these could be aliases of the same model, but I suspect they are all baked in.

Other than that I just don't know. Maybe they used bad settings for whatever is their compression algo and they don't have any experts who could actually identify the problem? It's a preposterous idea but I can't explain it otherwise.

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

#349

Post by [deleted] »

bargl wrote: post #167
t-writescode wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the satellites are moving, so there's no "Wyoming satellite customers" in the same way as existing satellite internet. The Wyoming customers will be sharing satellites with several other places as they move in and out of their regions

The constellation is moving but they are moving in a formation. Meaning you have a rotation of 2-4 satellites above your head at any give time. Each satellite can service a radius the size of Wyoming. So you have a limit on the number of satellites and the number of customers per satellite. The article says 5 million in the USA. That makes sense given what I'm thinking. That's about 100,000 per state, but it's not go…

[deleted]

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

#350

Post by jobu »

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.

My Xfinity "Up to 1Gbps" plan never tests above 60Gbps on any speed test other than their own. If nothing else Starlink should light a fire under Comcast, CenturyLink and others to start providing actual fast internet.
Post reply on HN