Live data from Hacker News

Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps

arstechnica.com

491–500 of 607 posts

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

#491

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…

No, there are not millions of Americans who don't have that. Both viasat and Hughes provide 25Mbps everywhere in the USA, and up to 100Mbps in some cases. Your math is completely ignoring the fact that 80% of the satellites are over NOBODY at any given time.

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

#492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The article says the beta testers are seeing 30-90ms. That's actually pretty impressive.

Why is that impressive if the original press announcement said it would be < 20ms?

Satellite usually gets several hundred to nearly 1000 ms of latency, so being under 100 is a big deal.

Satellite latency is so bad most people with smart TVs can't stream to them because most streaming buffers empty faster than the network responds with more packets. They are usually stuck with their computers to pre-download content or increase buffer size/decrease video resolution.

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

#493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are arguing against exactly what Elon had said at launch. I'm not being unfair with a beta. I've lived this industry for a while; latency will go up with congestion. Let's revisit this comment in a year.

Which statements of his am I arguing against? Also if buffers are configured to be very small then congestion does not have to add more than a fraction of a millisecond of latency. Bufferbloat is endemic but it is not unavoidable.

https://www.shacknews.com/article/118663/spacex-starlink-20m...

He said 20ms, and you are saying it'll be higher, and that's okay. You can't just shrink buffers to get rid of queuing latency. You introduce new problems with scheduling when doing so.

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

#494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that impressive if the original press announcement said it would be < 20ms?

Satellite usually gets several hundred to nearly 1000 ms of latency, so being under 100 is a big deal. Satellite latency is so bad most people with smart TVs can't stream to them because most streaming buffers empty faster than the network responds with more packets. They are usually stuck with their computers to pre-download content or increase buffer size/decrease video resolution.

I didn't say the latency was as high as GEO. If a car commercial said a car was $20k, and you got to the dealership and it was $60k, would you just throw your hands up and say it's still pretty good? The point is that the publicity was based on completely fake promises.

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

#495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

IDK if they do this for PC versions... But a lot of these games not only Reuse textures but also duplicate them. They do this to improve load times for levels/etc (less seeking). Playstation DOOM is an early example of this pattern. The WAD files were actually 'per-level' and contained all sprites/textures/etc used in said level.

[deleted]

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

#496

I recall when Iridium was going up, there was discussion about the complexity of the software that managed the pattern of transmitting packets among the satellites. The description indicated it was a complex software problem and they were struggling to get it right. (I went looking for articles from the time period, but couldn't track one down, however, came across MIT/Motorola FCC application for what would become I…

IIRC, Starlink satellites operate at a much lower orbit, are much more numerous and are a lot closer together which reduces the tracking complexity a fair bit. Also the inter-satellite links on the Iridium network are radio whereas the Starlinks have 4 motorized optical links (laser). They're highly reflective objects against the background of space.

That doesn't reduce tracking complexity. It makes handoffs more frequent and complex as the OP was pointing out.

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

#497
post #394

My understanding is that the FCC is very partial towards existing ISP. If I'm correct, how likely are they to negatively impact starlink accessibility to end user? Do they even have such power? I would very much appreciate if someone more knowledgeable could give her opinion.

The FCC prefers 5G. Starlink will likely never be able to use that spectrum in certain areas.

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

#499

Can anyone tell me why this was not previously possible? Both latency and speed? What did Starlink do differently

It is possible and has been done before in the past. The companies that tried it went bankrupt because the business plan doesn't work out. The ground stations are too expensive for end consumers. Starlink will likely see the same fate unless they get government money.

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

#500

Can anyone tell me why this was not previously possible? Both latency and speed? What did Starlink do differently

I believe the innovation is that the satellites sit in low earth orbit. Traditional internet satellites operate in geostationary orbit, which is around 35,000km above the surface of the earth. This was preferable because with only a handful of satellites you could give the entire globe internet connection. However you have much higher latency due to the distance. Not exactly sure why the bandwidth is so slow, distanc…

That's not an innovation. Iridium was doing that 25 years ago.
Post reply on HN