4 ms·

I have fiber to the home that is super reliable... I am still anticipating this and will be signing up to supplement my fiber so it is not just for people wit

by syshum 6y ago

I have fiber to the home that is super reliable... I am still anticipating this and will be signing up to supplement my fiber so it is not just for people with poor internet

paxys 6y ago
I'm curious why though?
skissane 6y ago
> I have fiber to the home that is super reliable... I am still anticipating this and will be signing up to supplement my fiber We have fibre-to-the-home, but we'd like a bigger house and a bigger backyard. There are some really nice big houses with nice big backyards about 10-20 minutes north of us, but fibre-to-home is not available in that area. If Starlink works well, it would increase the odds we could move. So, I'd be inclined to sign up for Starlink alongside our fibre-to-the-home, just to compare the two.
Johnny555 6y ago
Well... wait until you see pricing. Even if it comes in at the speculated $80/month price point, many people will find it cheaper and faster to stick with their terrestrial internet. There aren't many people willing to pay $80/month for a backup connection they'll only use once every month or two. (I'm one of them, I usually have at least one Comcast outage a month, from a few hours to a few days). I'm in a bit of a celluar dead zone, I get one bar of signal from AT&T or Verizon, and only if I walk up to the second floor)
- asdfk-12 6y ago
  In Alaska, specifically, gigabit internet costs ~$200/mo through Liberty Media's subsidiary GCI in the three major cities. In rural areas, GCI offers plans through local co-ops averaging $150/mo for 6mbit down, 100gb data cap over terrestrial microwave relay. Starlink will normalize this market.
  - Johnny555 6y ago
    Yeah, those rural customers are in the category "people with poor internet access" that I mentioned above - but I think that few people with fiber to the home are anxiously awaiting Starlink. That $200 gigabit plan is faster than I can get from Comcast (my only provider) not far from Seattle - the fastest they can provide to me is 600mbit, but with only about 15mbit upstream. Starlink hasn't really revealed speeds, bandwidth caps, etc. Some tests claim they can provide gigabit speeds, but will have to wait and see what they can provide in real world usage.
  - shaklee3 6y ago
    Starlink will not cost $80 for the gigabit plan. I'd wager there won't be a gigabit plan. They need thousands of customers per 20Gbps satellite for this to even start to make sense. You cannot fit even a couple hundred 1Gbps customers on a single satellite.
    - zaarn 6y ago
      You can certainly fit a couple hundred 1Gbps customers on a 20GBps satellite provided you make sure that those people don't completely saturate the entire line at the same time.
      - shaklee3 6y ago
        Yes, I know how the modeling works. For a 100Gbps subscriber they will need to guarantee that they can achieve 100G peak speeds when nobody is using it. That means the beam the user is in always has to be illuminated with as much power as they need for 100G. Remember, this power is shared between all the other beams on that satellite.
    - dan1234 6y ago
      At 60:1 contention ratio (which used to be BT’s standard for home ADSL), you’d be able to squeeze 1,200 Gb plans per satellite.
      - 6y ago

by syshum 6y ago

I have fiber to the home that is super reliable... I am still anticipating this and will be signing up to supplement my fiber so it is not just for people with poor internet

paxys 6y ago

I'm curious why though?

skissane 6y ago

> I have fiber to the home that is super reliable... I am still anticipating this and will be signing up to supplement my fiber We have fibre-to-the-home, but we'd like a bigger house and a bigger backyard. There are some really nice big houses with nice big backyards about 10-20 minutes north of us, but fibre-to-home is not available in that area. If Starlink works well, it would increase the odds we could move. So, I'd be inclined to sign up for Starlink alongside our fibre-to-the-home, just to compare the two.

Johnny555 6y ago

Well... wait until you see pricing. Even if it comes in at the speculated $80/month price point, many people will find it cheaper and faster to stick with their terrestrial internet. There aren't many people willing to pay $80/month for a backup connection they'll only use once every month or two. (I'm one of them, I usually have at least one Comcast outage a month, from a few hours to a few days). I'm in a bit of a celluar dead zone, I get one bar of signal from AT&T or Verizon, and only if I walk up to the second floor)

asdfk-12 6y ago
In Alaska, specifically, gigabit internet costs ~$200/mo through Liberty Media's subsidiary GCI in the three major cities. In rural areas, GCI offers plans through local co-ops averaging $150/mo for 6mbit down, 100gb data cap over terrestrial microwave relay. Starlink will normalize this market.
- Johnny555 6y ago
  Yeah, those rural customers are in the category "people with poor internet access" that I mentioned above - but I think that few people with fiber to the home are anxiously awaiting Starlink. That $200 gigabit plan is faster than I can get from Comcast (my only provider) not far from Seattle - the fastest they can provide to me is 600mbit, but with only about 15mbit upstream. Starlink hasn't really revealed speeds, bandwidth caps, etc. Some tests claim they can provide gigabit speeds, but will have to wait and see what they can provide in real world usage.
- shaklee3 6y ago
  Starlink will not cost $80 for the gigabit plan. I'd wager there won't be a gigabit plan. They need thousands of customers per 20Gbps satellite for this to even start to make sense. You cannot fit even a couple hundred 1Gbps customers on a single satellite.
  - zaarn 6y ago
    You can certainly fit a couple hundred 1Gbps customers on a 20GBps satellite provided you make sure that those people don't completely saturate the entire line at the same time.
    - shaklee3 6y ago
      Yes, I know how the modeling works. For a 100Gbps subscriber they will need to guarantee that they can achieve 100G peak speeds when nobody is using it. That means the beam the user is in always has to be illuminated with as much power as they need for 100G. Remember, this power is shared between all the other beams on that satellite.
  - dan1234 6y ago
    At 60:1 contention ratio (which used to be BT’s standard for home ADSL), you’d be able to squeeze 1,200 Gb plans per satellite.
    - 6y ago