Any ideas why this is $500/mo?
Seems like they just scaled the price linearly.
Starlink originally promised as ~100Mbps for $100/mo.
This is up to 500Mbps for $500/mo.
Starlink Premium
51–60 of 223 posts
Re: Starlink Premium
#52The site says it requires a clear sky to connect. So, in cloudy or rainy conditions, is there no connection or is there reduced speed?
Clear from obstructions like trees or buildings, not from clouds.
Ohh ok. Got it. That seems fair. Similar to a Satellite TV antenna. I get good tv reception even in cloudy conditions. I have lost reception in very heavy rainy conditions only. So I guess the same is true for Starlink too.
Re: Starlink Premium
#53Ordered it. I work from home in a rural area that gets only 40 mbps. No brainer.
But why not just normal Starlink?
Re: Starlink Premium
#54Re: Starlink Premium
#55I ordered my Dishy day 1 and have still not gotten it and they are already launching new services. Anyhow, this looks expensive, but for a business it's pretty cheap.
Re: Starlink Premium
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Almost seems designed to get people's hopes up only to squash them again. What people have been asking for is an RV/camping/sailing Starlink they can use moving, and that product has yet to materialize. What an odd comment. Seems like a narrow way to blame the marketing. And, a narrow way to cherry pick what doesn't fit your description of what Starlink should be and shouldn't be. In truth, Starlink is an absolute…
The actual competition: https://www.hughesnet.com/get-started
> No Hard Data Limits††
>
> If you exceed your plan data, we won't cut you off or charge you more. Stay connected at reduced speeds, typically 1-3 Mbps.
Are they, though? (Seriously, I once looked at them, and promptly concluded that unless I wanted to give up streaming video and pulling docker images, there was no point since I'd blow through the data cap in a week or two.)
Re: Starlink Premium
#57Re: Starlink Premium
#58The site says it requires a clear sky to connect. So, in cloudy or rainy conditions, is there no connection or is there reduced speed?
Rain reduces the speed and increases the latency (I'm actually not sure why the latency increases, it's not like the signal has to go further) but, it still works.
Does your latency measurement account for dropped packets? Rain-caused attenuation could cause more packets to be dropped, increasing latency if you measure it as an average over total packets sent, instead of just across packets that get delivered?
Re: Starlink Premium
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rain reduces the speed and increases the latency (I'm actually not sure why the latency increases, it's not like the signal has to go further) but, it still works.
Because it needs to repeat messages more till you get a clear message through
Not sure about that? In a UDP based ping it's fire and forget so wouldn't repeat, so would show as packet loss not increased latency.
Unless the physical layer is using more FEC and using longer "timeslots" to get to transmit the payload. But even that seems unlikely to cause major latency increases?
Re: Starlink Premium
#60Are we not concerned about Kessler syndrome anymore so that we think that hastily doubling the amount of satellites around there is a good idea?
The news came in that SpaceX rocket stage will accidentally hit the Moon and will become first billionaire made garbage/pollution there.
Are we sure we trust this company with not devastating low earth orbit due to some accidents?
And for what? For expensive mediocre internet for limited number of users in places where infrastructure is lacking? Infrastructure? You know, the thing we should build more of, that serves poor people? Those people that limited expensive mediocre toys don't serve?