6 ms·
You're conflating bandwidth and latency. Not much needs both high bandwidth and low latency. The latency has the potential to be better than the current inter
by CarVac 8y ago
You're conflating bandwidth and latency.
Not much needs both high bandwidth and low latency.
The latency has the potential to be better than the current internet backbone when going intercontinental due to straighter paths, but it'll be higher when going to your local AWS, probably.
Bandwidth is anyone's guess.
- zw123456 8y agoThe amount of BW is based on how much spectrum you have (see Shannon's Law). I am not sure how much they have. Also, I am not sure they will have enough power to provide in building service.
- Tuna-Fish 8y ago> Also, I am not sure they will have enough power to provide in building service. The issue for that is the wavelengths they are using. Their properties basically completely rule out any kind of in-building service, there needs to be a clear uninterrupted path between the receiver and the transmitter. (But they penetrate water well, so should not have a problem with clouds.)
- zw123456 8y agoFCC-18-38A1.pdf say 10.7Ghz - 12.7Ghz, that's a lot of spectrum. Depending on the SINR they get, which depends on the power, antenna sizes etc. you could get some pretty good speeds, probably above 100Mbps. But at those frequencies not likely to have any in car or in building. You can penetrate a building with higher frequencies if you have high enough power levels, but not from a satellite. So to use it you will have to install an antenna on the roof of your house.
- zjaffee 8y agoI was actually just curious about bandwidth, I've only ever used satellite internet through the context of being on an airplane, and was curious if satellite internet was good at supporting things like netflix.
- shaklee3 8y agoYes, there is plenty of bandwidth to watch Netflix on satellite.
- _ph_ 8y agoOver long distances, their latency is going to be significant better, as light speed in fiber is over 30% less than through vacuum.