3 ms·

lol no. You still have to go up, over, down, across wire, back up, over and down again you're going to be paying a 25 to 50 ms latency on everything and that

lol no. You still have to go up, over, down, across wire, back up, over and down again you're going to be paying a 25 to 50 ms latency on everything and that depends on having the dish tracking stuff working perfectly. (it is vastly better than the GEO stuff i've had to use in the past. but a replacement for fibre in general use. nope.) oh and weather is still going to poop on your signal

PopeDotNinja 7y ago
Someone smarter than I made this, which you may or may not agree with... "Why SpaceX is Making Starlink" https://youtu.be/giQ8xEWjnBs https://youtu.be/giQ8xEWjnBs TL;DR -- satellites can be faster than cables in certain cases
- tacticus 7y ago
  But not wider and not reliably so. Also marketing videos are always going to show best theoretical case. They are not going to show a cloudy day in a high contention network in a region not favoured by the orbit gods.
inflatableDodo 7y ago
Given that the speed of light is around a third less in currently installed fiber than it is in a vacuum, LEO could be in theory comparable. Also, beamforming phased arrays could presumably replace dish tracking given the distance is not that far and having the signal have to go down to earth midroute would also seem to be an unneccesary requirement. I agree that weather will more than likely poop on your signal though.
- tacticus 7y ago
  Unless they are hosting the servers in orbit your destination will be on earth somewhere. You will come back down go to it then return through a similar path to the client. the speed of light in a mostly vacuum could (provided their meshing algorithms are up to it) make latency comparable but MEO sats already have a 125ms rtt time halving that distance isn't going to get rid of that penalty.
  - inflatableDodo 7y ago
    >Unless they are hosting the servers in orbit your destination will be on earth somewhere. Sorry, was being an idiot. Latency does of course tend to mean a round trip, not just here to there.
rorykoehler 7y ago
Your comment would have been much better without the "lol, no".

PopeDotNinja 7y ago

Someone smarter than I made this, which you may or may not agree with... "Why SpaceX is Making Starlink" https://youtu.be/giQ8xEWjnBs https://youtu.be/giQ8xEWjnBs TL;DR -- satellites can be faster than cables in certain cases

tacticus 7y ago
But not wider and not reliably so. Also marketing videos are always going to show best theoretical case. They are not going to show a cloudy day in a high contention network in a region not favoured by the orbit gods.

inflatableDodo 7y ago

Given that the speed of light is around a third less in currently installed fiber than it is in a vacuum, LEO could be in theory comparable. Also, beamforming phased arrays could presumably replace dish tracking given the distance is not that far and having the signal have to go down to earth midroute would also seem to be an unneccesary requirement. I agree that weather will more than likely poop on your signal though.

tacticus 7y ago
Unless they are hosting the servers in orbit your destination will be on earth somewhere. You will come back down go to it then return through a similar path to the client. the speed of light in a mostly vacuum could (provided their meshing algorithms are up to it) make latency comparable but MEO sats already have a 125ms rtt time halving that distance isn't going to get rid of that penalty.
- inflatableDodo 7y ago
  >Unless they are hosting the servers in orbit your destination will be on earth somewhere. Sorry, was being an idiot. Latency does of course tend to mean a round trip, not just here to there.

rorykoehler 7y ago

Your comment would have been much better without the "lol, no".