Beta users of Starlink get downloads of 11 to 60 Mbps • Hacker News Board

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

#61

Post by ianai » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 6:54 PM UTC

grecy wrote: post #47

derekp7 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to see a kit from SpaceX which provides a solar powered Starlink to LTE bridge. Such kits could be installed anywhere, and provide service to places such as farm communities (install them on top of grain silos, for example). That way Starlink could be available to more customers without them having to have their own premise equipment (beyond an LTE hotspot).

I worked for the Telco that services all of Northern Canada (world's largest operating area for a telco). We installed one of the world's first 3G towers that uses only satellite as backbone. Think fly-in only communities that are thousands of kilometers away from anything in the Arctic. Many of our sites are served by radio backhaul for that reason. The sat backhaul tower is extremely expensive and temperamental. It…

This is what turns me away from the astronomers complaining about the constellations. They’re not interested at all in the community whose problems satnet helps resolve. Society has had plenty of time to run data lines out to the hardest to reach areas and clearly cannot and will not do it any other way.

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

#62

Post by hangonhn » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 6:55 PM UTC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giQ8xEWjnBs

According to this Engineering Explained video, it may be possible to achieve a lower latency using Star Link than over fiber if the points are far enough. People like high frequency traders might be willing to pay a ton for such a thing.

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

#63

Post by aaomidi » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 6:57 PM UTC

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…

Bandwidth is over provisioned at 50-100x the amount. Sometimes even more.

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

#64

Post by alwaysdoit » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 6:57 PM UTC

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…

It also raises the baseline across the board by injecting a new competitor to every ISP and wireless service in the world

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

#65

Post by bob33212 » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 6:58 PM UTC

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…

This will not be competitive with existing broadband offerings. Especially in competitive markets. Some people pay 70/month or less for 1GB currently in good markets. This will be competitive where the cost is currently 100/month for much slower connections.

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

#66

Post by rconti » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 7:01 PM UTC

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…

are the physics of cables cheaper and easier? Took me, what, over a decade to get fiber internet in the middle of Silicon Valley.

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

#67

Post by shajznnckfke » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 7:01 PM UTC

ianai wrote: post #61

grecy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked for the Telco that services all of Northern Canada (world's largest operating area for a telco). We installed one of the world's first 3G towers that uses only satellite as backbone. Think fly-in only communities that are thousands of kilometers away from anything in the Arctic. Many of our sites are served by radio backhaul for that reason. The sat backhaul tower is extremely expensive and temperamental. It…

This is what turns me away from the astronomers complaining about the constellations. They’re not interested at all in the community whose problems satnet helps resolve. Society has had plenty of time to run data lines out to the hardest to reach areas and clearly cannot and will not do it any other way.

I wouldn’t blame the astronomers for that. People who lead different lives get affected by technology in different ways. It’s good for everyone to tell the world how they are being affected. Ultimately people in positions of power are going to make decisions and it’s good for them (and activists, lobbyists, and advisors who they talk to) to have all the relevant information. It’s not necessary or possible for everyone to know how everyone else is affected before they speak about their own concerns.

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

#68

Post by grahamburger » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 7:01 PM UTC

Alupis wrote: post #54

grahamburger wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't personally deployed VDSL2, but I have deployed DSL and other data-over-twisted pair systems including recent G.fast, G.hn and MOCA. I strongly doubt that VDSL can achieve those kinds of speeds reliably at the distances and densities needed to provide this service to the areas that need it most. In rural areas the copper lines are too long and too old to achieve these speeds (but they're fine for voice/POTS,…

What about VDSL2 Vectoring (G.vector)? Seems like it mitigates most of the crosstalk problems - but I admit I'm not an expert on DSL deployments. It seems VDSL2 can achieve maximum throughput at run lengths under 1000ft from the DSLAM, with maximum performance beginning to degrade after. That sounds sufficient for most of the people currently stuck with slow access right now in the US (more rural areas outside major…

> It seems VDSL2 can achieve maximum throughput at run lengths under 1000ft from the DSLAM, and maximum performance degrades after that over distance. That sounds sufficient for most of the people complaining of slow access right now in the US

I would guess that this isn't right, but honestly I don't have the data either. My rough guess would be that only around 5-15% of people have very quickly after the max length, and only even work up to the max length in absolutely ideal scenarios. What I've seen of current copper infrastructure in the U.S. is pretty bad - lots of hand twisted copper lines with the ends exposed and rusting out, for example - that kind of thing would add the equivalent of at least several hundred feet of additional cable, and is very difficult to fix en-masse.

Honestly my gut feeling is that you pretty much have to run new cables to something like 80% of the U.S. to get good Internet service everywhere, and obviously if you're running new cables you should just run fiber. Looking at the cost of that compared to launching satellites - and accounting for the additional benefits of the satellites, like connectivity in extremely remote places and on the ocean - I'm not sure the satellites don't come out ahead.

EDIT TO ADD: A comparison point on the 1000 feet number is that this is in the same ballpark as how close a 5G tower needs to be to get real 5G service to your home or your cell phone. Current 4G towers are nowhere near that dense, and it's going to take huge amounts of money to get them that dense, even in the most densely populated areas.

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

#69

Post by bargl » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 7:02 PM UTC

xutopia wrote: post #56

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…

If the price is 5 times cheaper though... what then?

There is a set capacity for these satellites, they can accomodate X number of users per satellite which would be a region (I'm making an educated guess) about the size of New Jersey. I think the size is larger than that which means fewer users but I'm trying to ballpark during my lunch break.

So if they expect to have 10,000 users (again ballpark) in New Jersey, but they instead get 40,000 they'll increase their costs. If they get 1000 users in say Wyoming, then maybe the costs in Wyoming will be lower.

The issue is they have a world wide capacity of 10,000 users at 11 MBs over the size of New Jersey. Again, I haven't run these numbers but these are the kinds of calculations GEO sats make to set prices for say, airplanes traveling from US -> Europe. The difference is that GEO targets specific areas more rather than blanketing the entire earth due to them being stationary.

The benefit of Starlink is that it'll have approximately equal signal all over the earth. So if you're in a city it can cover the same number of people per mile as it can in the middle of the ocean.

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

#70

Post by CarelessExpert » Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 7:03 PM UTC

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.

Honestly, one of the barriers to my moving to a more rural area and working remotely was broadband access, but Starlink could very well solve that problem...