4 ms·

$500 beta terminal cost, connections cut out every ten minutes, connection varies by weather. Latency variable, a bit worse than most DSL.

mlindner 6y ago
The cutouts vary. It's not "every 10 minutes". DSL latency is not standard, it can vary a lot. Latency for the beta is worse than it will be for production. For the people this is marketed to, it's life changing. If you think it's overpriced, you were never the target demographic.
- neolog 6y ago
  > If you think it's overpriced, you were never the target demographic. Isn't that true of every product?
  - zaroth 6y ago
    I would say it becomes increasingly relevant given that SpaceX has a multi-billion dollar SAM at the currently expected price/performance.
  - swsieber 6y ago
    Almost. It's possible for a company to overprice the product for their target demographic. But then it's likely that they fail to acquire customers and go out if business. So it's generally true. It's still very easy to forget.
- PinkMilkshake 6y ago
  I think parent was taking a stab at DSL, not StarLink. They could be from Australia, haha.
toomuchtodo 6y ago
The article specifically has a quote from someone in Montana on CenturyLink DSL paying $120/month for 1Mbps, and getting 100x faster connectivity through their $99/month StarLink service (with some intermittency because the constellation and ground station network isn’t complete). Latency is acceptable enough to play a first person shooter, and target latency is 16ms-19ms (and meets the requirement for the FCCs rural broadband contract [1], which is latency below 100ms). For those with marginal service, this is a material improvement. It’s also firming up the case that StarLink will generate billions of dollars per year in revenue (eclipsing SpaceX’s launch revenues), from both government contracts (rural broadband and DoD) and unsubsidized subscribers. This doesn’t include revenue from StarLink’s contract building missile tracking satellites for the Defense dept (based on StarLink sats) [2]. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/10/spacex-gets-fcc-approval-to-bid-in-16-billion-rural-broadband-auction/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/10/spacex-gets-fcc-... [2] https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/6/21503165/spacex-space-development-agency-contract-missile-warning-satellites-starlink https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/6/21503165/spacex-space-dev...
zizee 6y ago
“No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.”
- lmm 6y ago
  This is the exact opposite of that. HN is hyped for Starlink because it's cool tech, not because it's a great user experience.
  - modeless 6y ago
    That's wrong. In this case, as with the iPod, the tech enables a dramatically better user experience. Compared to existing satellite ISPs you get dramatically better latency and dramatically faster/easier setup (no professional installation required, plug and play in 5 minutes). It's also likely to be far cheaper if you actually transfer a decent amount of data, and early tests seem to show better reliability in poor weather as well. It's even better than DSL and some wireless ISPs or 4G hotspots with marginal connections, which are probably the main competition for Starlink.
    - lmm 6y ago
      > In this case, as with the iPod, the tech enables a dramatically better user experience. The whole reason CowboyNeal was attacking the iPod was that technically it was a step backwards. It couldn't do anything that a Nomad couldn't. The part that it did well (and that he missed the importance of) was the usability and polish. > Compared to existing satellite ISPs you get dramatically better latency and dramatically faster/easier setup (no professional installation required, plug and play in 5 minutes). It's also likely to be far cheaper if you actually transfer a decent amount of data, and early tests seem to show better reliability in poor weather as well. All true, but can you see HN caring about any of that if SpaceX wasn't involved? The HN userbase is overwhelmingly city folk; I suspect only a tiny proportion of us have ever used satellite internet before.
      - modeless 6y ago
        Yes, I can see HN getting excited about a dramatically better satellite internet option regardless of who it came from. OneWeb, Amazon, etc could have had this attention if they had gotten here first.
kalleboo 6y ago
This beta test period is literally called the "Better Than Nothing Beta"
- StavrosK 6y ago
  Aw, not "beta than nothing"?
- rektide 6y ago
  the beta test period will probably have a higher ratio of uplink to user bandwidth than any time in the future. these satellites are radically undersubscribed right now, serving a handful of users tops. that's not going to model what happens if this works & grows.

mlindner 6y ago

The cutouts vary. It's not "every 10 minutes". DSL latency is not standard, it can vary a lot. Latency for the beta is worse than it will be for production. For the people this is marketed to, it's life changing. If you think it's overpriced, you were never the target demographic.

neolog 6y ago
> If you think it's overpriced, you were never the target demographic. Isn't that true of every product?
- zaroth 6y ago
  I would say it becomes increasingly relevant given that SpaceX has a multi-billion dollar SAM at the currently expected price/performance.
- swsieber 6y ago
  Almost. It's possible for a company to overprice the product for their target demographic. But then it's likely that they fail to acquire customers and go out if business. So it's generally true. It's still very easy to forget.
PinkMilkshake 6y ago
I think parent was taking a stab at DSL, not StarLink. They could be from Australia, haha.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

The article specifically has a quote from someone in Montana on CenturyLink DSL paying $120/month for 1Mbps, and getting 100x faster connectivity through their $99/month StarLink service (with some intermittency because the constellation and ground station network isn’t complete). Latency is acceptable enough to play a first person shooter, and target latency is 16ms-19ms (and meets the requirement for the FCCs rural broadband contract [1], which is latency below 100ms). For those with marginal service, this is a material improvement. It’s also firming up the case that StarLink will generate billions of dollars per year in revenue (eclipsing SpaceX’s launch revenues), from both government contracts (rural broadband and DoD) and unsubsidized subscribers. This doesn’t include revenue from StarLink’s contract building missile tracking satellites for the Defense dept (based on StarLink sats) [2]. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/10/spacex-gets-fcc-approval-to-bid-in-16-billion-rural-broadband-auction/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/10/spacex-gets-fcc-... [2] https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/6/21503165/spacex-space-development-agency-contract-missile-warning-satellites-starlink https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/6/21503165/spacex-space-dev...

zizee 6y ago

“No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.”

lmm 6y ago
This is the exact opposite of that. HN is hyped for Starlink because it's cool tech, not because it's a great user experience.
- modeless 6y ago
  That's wrong. In this case, as with the iPod, the tech enables a dramatically better user experience. Compared to existing satellite ISPs you get dramatically better latency and dramatically faster/easier setup (no professional installation required, plug and play in 5 minutes). It's also likely to be far cheaper if you actually transfer a decent amount of data, and early tests seem to show better reliability in poor weather as well. It's even better than DSL and some wireless ISPs or 4G hotspots with marginal connections, which are probably the main competition for Starlink.
  - lmm 6y ago
    > In this case, as with the iPod, the tech enables a dramatically better user experience. The whole reason CowboyNeal was attacking the iPod was that technically it was a step backwards. It couldn't do anything that a Nomad couldn't. The part that it did well (and that he missed the importance of) was the usability and polish. > Compared to existing satellite ISPs you get dramatically better latency and dramatically faster/easier setup (no professional installation required, plug and play in 5 minutes). It's also likely to be far cheaper if you actually transfer a decent amount of data, and early tests seem to show better reliability in poor weather as well. All true, but can you see HN caring about any of that if SpaceX wasn't involved? The HN userbase is overwhelmingly city folk; I suspect only a tiny proportion of us have ever used satellite internet before.
    - modeless 6y ago
      Yes, I can see HN getting excited about a dramatically better satellite internet option regardless of who it came from. OneWeb, Amazon, etc could have had this attention if they had gotten here first.

kalleboo 6y ago

This beta test period is literally called the "Better Than Nothing Beta"

StavrosK 6y ago
Aw, not "beta than nothing"?
rektide 6y ago
the beta test period will probably have a higher ratio of uplink to user bandwidth than any time in the future. these satellites are radically undersubscribed right now, serving a handful of users tops. that's not going to model what happens if this works & grows.