14 ms·
Starlink Premium
- Flankk 5y agoIt looks more like an iMac with every iteration.
- thecrumb 5y agoI'm still using "Starlink S*t Ain't Here Yet" edition so this 'premium' offering is of no use to me.
- gameswithgo 5y agomight get it sooner by switching!
- dicknuckle 5y agoI appreciate your sarcasm.
- Someone1234 5y agoThe: > UNLIMITED SERVICE LOCATIONS Almost seems designed to get people's hopes up only to squash them again. What people have been asking for is an RV/camping/sailing Starlink they can use moving, and that product has yet to materialize. Announcing that: > Order as many Starlinks as needed and manage all of your service locations, no matter how remote, from a single account. Is niche, and is only going to confuse people waiting for true travel-Starlink.
- jtl999 5y agoI read the current Starlink system has a limitation where if you move outside of your assigned service "cell", you lose service. Guessing this is still the case.
- gjsman-1000 5y agoUnfortunately this is partly due to FCC regulations.
- shmerl 5y agoWhy would FCC add such limitations?
- prepend 5y agoPerhaps because there are subsidies based on providing broadband/fiber service to specific areas.
- joseloyaio 5y agoSurveillance & Monopoly Protection If people stopped using cellphone service for mobile internet they would loose their immense location and surveillance capabilities (gov).
- shmerl 5y agoDo they have authority to impose such limitations? It sounds very overreaching. What makes more sense is probably Starlink trying to prevent uneven network load.
- liketochill 5y agoI access a remote site near Vancouver with starlink and we have another satellite internet service there too. The starlink cuts out for 5-15s every 3-7 minutes. Makes talking on voip very frustrating. The old satellite with 700ms latency is better for me.
- olyjohn 5y agoYou have obstructions. I spent weeks getting mine to work right and had to top a couple of trees and build a custom pole mount to get it even higher on the roof. Being in a remote site around Vancouver, you're probably dealing with lots of tall trees too.
- liketochill 5y agoThanks for the hints, I’ll talk To the guy who recently re Aimed the dish and see what could be in the way. I’m pretty familiar with dealing line of sight issues for wireless links. We’re in a valley so might be tough to improve our path.
- JohannMac 5y agoLook in the Starlink app, under visibility after it has run for 24h and it will show you where all the obstructions are. Quite handy. Clear is blue, red is obstruction.
- DrBenCarson 5y agoWhat used to be "by mid to late 2021" is now "late 2022" for my location. I'm not shelling out another $400 for nothing. In fact, this reminded me to cancel my pre-order. Thank you! $99 back in my pocket. Deliver scalable GA and I'll subscribe.
- robalfonso 5y agoSam here, still no news on the original order.
- frittata 5y agohey Sam
- gonehome 5y agoI have one and it's really great. Went from high latency 10mbps (calnet) to low latency 150mbps (starlink). Prior to calnet we had geostationary satellite which was unusably bad and would try to tether through Verizon but signal was very weak. It's life changing if you're in an area without other options (though it does suck it's taking a long time for people to get access).
- CreepGin 5y agoJust curious. What is your avg ping for starlink? I'm looking forward to my future farmhouse and the ability to play ranked valorant on it.
- gonehome 5y agoI bought it for my in-laws in Placerville California for when I’m there so can’t easily check right now, but I recall 24-40ms typically closer to 24-30ms. Probably good enough, biggest pain is finding a view without obstructions from trees.
- mdasen 5y agoI wonder if Starlink will start prioritizing their premium customers. If someone is willing to pay 5x more, it seems like Starlink would want to get to them first.
- selectodude 5y agoAny ideas why this is $500/mo?
- animal_spirits 5y agoIt costs a lot of money to send satellites to space
- BLanen 5y agoBecause it's closer to the actual cost and not subsidised as much.
- notatoad 5y agothey allow business use on this, while the regular one is for residential/personal use only. regardless of the increased bandwidth, if a business truly needs starlink they're going to be able to pay $500/mo for it.
- fastball 5y agoSeems like they just scaled the price linearly. Starlink originally promised as ~100Mbps for $100/mo. This is up to 500Mbps for $500/mo.
- linsomniac 5y agoMy gigabit symmetric fiber at home is $70/mo. The same service from the same provider costs $400/mo at our office. The answer to your question seems to be "because business".
- Handytinge 5y agoDifferent locations have different costs of delivery, and business services also generally have different SLA and contention rules.
- TbobbyZ 5y agoOrdered it. I work from home in a rural area that gets only 40 mbps. No brainer.
- pcl 5y agoWhat are you doing that demands more than 40 mbps?
- bpodgursky 5y agoPersonally, pushing docker images to AWS
- _joel 5y agoYou're constantly pushing to ECR so much that it saturates a 40Mbps+ upload consistently 24/7? I fear for your bills, god speed.
- ncallaway 5y ago> consistently 24/7 That part doesn’t seem to come anywhere from the previous conversation?
- bpodgursky 5y agoNo, of course not. But when it matters, it matters — there's a huge productivity difference between waiting 5 minutes and 30 minutes when making staging deploys to iterate on bugs (and sometimes I'll do this 5-10 times in a day).
- itsbenweeks 5y agoMy way around this that's less than $500/mo and indefinite wait times is to have an EC2 image running as a jump box. Then anything downloaded is already on AWS's network, making ECR uploads much faster.
- buzzard1 5y ago
- gjsman-1000 5y ago$500/mo.? That's a steep, 400% increase from the base $100/mo. tier. When are we getting Starlink Plus?
- heartbreak 5y agoHoly cow that’s half the median monthly rent in the US.
- aero-glide2 5y agoThis is aimed at enterprise though.
- adgjlsfhk1 5y ago5x the speed.
- stevespang 5y ago
- kumarvvr 5y agoThe site says it requires a clear sky to connect. So, in cloudy or rainy conditions, is there no connection or is there reduced speed?
- feupan 5y agoSo is this another product designed in California for California?
- RandallBrown 5y agoI believe Starlink is actually designed just outside Seattle.
- feupan 5y agoYou know what I mean. At $500/month it’s definitely not for most of the world.
- primax 5y agoClear from obstructions like trees or buildings, not from clouds.
- kumarvvr 5y agoOhh ok. Got it. That seems fair. Similar to a Satellite TV antenna. I get good tv reception even in cloudy conditions. I have lost reception in very heavy rainy conditions only. So I guess the same is true for Starlink too.
- LeoPanthera 5y agoRain reduces the speed and increases the latency (I'm actually not sure why the latency increases, it's not like the signal has to go further) but, it still works.
- bodhiandphysics 5y ago
- pndy 5y agoI haven't check their prices at all till now and holy guacamole - for about half of their monthly price my ISP gives me up to 1 Gb/s FTTH without transfer limits (asymmetric connection - tho, not an issue; speed varies from city to city but I can't complain now - it's not the faulty copper line that made me more offline than online), unlimited VoIP phone and tv with almost 200 channels and HBO GO (not that I would watch anything) and a mobile plan with 80GB per month w/ unlimited calls. And combined Shipping & Handling and Hardware would give me some 1 or 2 yo Samsung Galaxy smartphone. It seems I'm not the target for Starlink Since some of you decided to "punish" me: I am honestly surprised how pricey this service is in Poland and in comparison to what my ISP gives me for half of the price.
- mandernt 5y agoOf course it’s not for you. It’s not for people with dedicated gigabit fiber lines. This should be pretty obvious.
- pndy 5y agoWell, it wasn't for me - somehow I managed to avoid whole thing till now.
- Dylan16807 5y agoThen I guess you also missed that their normal plan is $100?
- tsomctl 5y agoAt my cousin's property (which I spend a lot of time at), for a little less than their monthly price, AT&T gives us an analog telephone line with local calling. That's it.
- pndy 5y agoMy city of about 70k people was in the pilot program of this FTTH infrastructure upgrade in the whole country and I'm really happy I could leave my old faulty copper line behind me (tho, phone number was carried over).
- etothepii 5y agoNot available in Bermuda!!
- gonehome 5y ago$500 deposit, $2500 total cost for the dish, $500/mo for the service. Looks like it's targeting the enterprise market. The dish cost is probably closer to the actual value of the dish. The original dish we bought for $500 I think I read actually cost closer to $3k for them to manufacture (I'm not an expert on this)? Regular service is $500 for a dish and $99 a month which is a great deal for 50-200mbps at pretty low latency. Particularly if you're in an area where your only other option is geostationary (which sucks and costs a lot).
- gkhartman 5y agoI was nodding along until I got to the $500/mo. service charge. I'd feel pretty good about $150/mo. or $200/mo., but I guess I'm not their target market since I have decent wired broadband. I was hoping that this would give Spectrum some competition in our area, but I'll have to wait a little longer.
- gonehome 5y agoThe regular dish is great for normal personal use already in remote areas (and the costs are very reasonable). It’s not competitive in (most) areas with options from cable providers, but that’s also not its purpose. Starlink will give us high speed low latency internet anywhere on earth, it moves the lower bound up to 150mbps with pretty low latency which is great.
- nickvanw 5y agoStarlink won't really ever be designed to compete with wired internet. There is limited bandwidth per satellite, and the density of most places that have good wired internet far exceeds what is reasonable on the current generation of satellites. It's designed for people who are currently suffering on geostationary satellite internet, or some other low-bandwidth/high-latency setup.
- smoldesu 5y agoExactly. I'm typing this out over a first-gen Starlink connection, and the value is a lot better than most people realize. My other options include: - 4g hotspot, 150ms latency, ~15gb/month, speeds of ~10-20mbps, costs $50 + $15/gb overage per month - WISP network, 400ms latency, unlimited data at 500kbps-6mbps, ~95% uptime, costs $80/month - HughesNet satellite, 600ms latency, 50gb/month, less than 10mb/s down, 90% uptime, $150/month Or I could get Starlink with ~50ms of latency, unlimited data, ~100-150mbps down, 99% uptime at the fair price of $100 per month. Once you've lived away from broadband for long enough, you can bet everyone is fed up with the other 3 options.
- partiallypro 5y agoI ordered my Dishy day 1 and have still not gotten it and they are already launching new services. Anyhow, this looks expensive, but for a business it's pretty cheap.
- lukeholder 5y agoI ordered mine and got it 6 months later. I am in Perth Australia.
- brucehoult 5y agoI ordered mine on January 3 (the same day I rented a new house), it shipped from California on January 7, and received it on January 14. I'm in northern New Zealand.
- timbit42 5y agoAre you high latitude? You may not have good enough coverage until they get more satellites up.
- partiallypro 5y agoNo, I live around the Nashville area.
- scotty79 5y agoAre we not concerned about Kessler syndrome anymore so that we think that hastily doubling the amount of satellites around there is a good idea? The news came in that SpaceX rocket stage will accidentally hit the Moon and will become first billionaire made garbage/pollution there. Are we sure we trust this company with not devastating low earth orbit due to some accidents? And for what? For expensive mediocre internet for limited number of users in places where infrastructure is lacking? Infrastructure? You know, the thing we should build more of, that serves poor people? Those people that limited expensive mediocre toys don't serve?
- thaumasiotes 5y ago> SpaceX rocket stage will accidentally hit the Moon and will become first billionaire made garbage/pollution there. There is nothing living on the moon; what would "pollution" mean in this context?
- kortex 5y agoNo, cause Elon is obsessed with Mars, and a Kessler cascade would make it that much harder to set up a Mars base, so even just from a totally self-serving angle, Elon has a high prerogative to avoid space collisions. Not to mention it would be terrible for SpaceX business on a far shorter timescale. If there's one thing you can count on, it's that billionaires will defend their bottom line.
- wmf 5y ago
- xiphias2 5y agoTesla did the same ,,strategy'' when it couldn't deliver the $35k car, as scaling was too optimistic: get a premium version with much higher margins and make people buy that. There are lots of people for whom $500 is worth a great internet, as it helps them deliiver work significantly more work value.
- Terretta 5y agoI pre-paid Starlink for delivery last Spring and it never materialized. And see similar comments here from others on never yet receiving it after long waits. So you may be onto something.
- _joel 5y agoI pre-paid at the start of last year and it materialised before Christmas, here in the UK. Friends got it 6 months before me, for pre-ordering a few of months earlier on the beta. Perhaps your cell was full, but that doesn't excuse the customer service.
- xiphias2 5y agoElon had a letter in December that to be able to make money on Starlink, they have to launch Starship first....I guess he realized that it's easier to raise prices.
- hirundo 5y agoIn 2020 they took my $99 deposit and told me I'd have service in the Summer of 2021. Then at the end of 2021 they sent an email saying that nope, it will be sometime in 2023. Now, this says I might get it this year if I pay an unaffordable price. Frustrating, since this is the only opportunity on the horizon for more than my current 10 MiB DSL, and I live online. Please Starlink, stop making new promises and shoving them in the queue in front of your old promises!
- markdown 5y agoThanks for sharing your experience. They've only just started taking pre-orders for my location with a promise of '23 delivery. Based on what you've just written, I think I'll just wait and sign up after they launch here.
- joemazerino 5y ago7 months later and I am still waiting for my non-Premium Starlink.
- markdown 5y agoStill no scheduled launch date for my part of the world and it's been 5 years :)
- tzs 5y agoMy understanding is that the Starlink antenna uses a phased array allowing some electronic steering and that it has motors for physically steering it. The physical steering is just done at setup time to point the antenna in the right general direction for your location and the the phased array is used for actually tracking satellites. A back of the envelope calculation tells me that when they have all their satellites deployed any given service location will have several hundred satellites visible at any one time. Question: does a given customer's connection just use one satellite at a time, tracking it with the phased array until it moves too far and then switching to another? Or does it use more than one at a time in parallel?
- wmf 5y agoStarlink is limited by the FCC to only use one satellite at a time (technically called Nco=1).
- shaklee3 5y agono, the antenna is cheap and cannot receive from more than one at a time. nothing to do with fcc.
- wmf 5y agoYeah, no. Legally, each cell can only be covered by one satellite beam because otherwise it might cause interference [with non-Starlink systems]. Given that the terminal only has one beam hitting it, there's no point in designing the terminal to support multiple beams.
- shaklee3 5y agothat's not how modern satellites work. there are overlapping frequency bands and polarizations in the same location that do not interfere. there's also tdma to prevent interference.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- boplicity 5y agoWhat are the upload speeds? Can't seem to find them.
- geerlingguy 5y agoIn the image on their site, it shows 25 Mbps up, so I wouldn't expect much more.
- viczsaszbo 5y agoPremium is 20-40Mbps and regular is 10-20Mpbs. https://www.starlink.com/account/legal/documents/DOC-1002-69942-69?regionCode=CA https://www.starlink.com/account/legal/documents/DOC-1002-69...
- staunch 5y ago> Are there data caps? > At this time there are no data caps. Too bad they don't commit to no data caps. Data caps suck ass.
- ComputerGuru 5y agoWhy would this have lower latency?
- mdasen 5y agoI'm not sure the site is claiming that. They claim 20-40ms latency for the premium plan and "as low as 20ms" for the regular plan. Real world latency on the system seems to be around 45-50ms. The section says "highER speed, low latency" [emphasis mine]. So the speed will be higher than regular Starlink, but the latency will be low just like regular Starlink.
- nikolay 5y ago$500/month for 350Mbps! What exactly is Elon been smoking?! Okay, it's mobile... given you have electricity, of course, but if you have electricity, won't you have other options as well?
- wolrah 5y ago> but if you have electricity, won't you have other options as well? No. There's a huge chunk of North America by area that does not have 100+mbit/sec broadband. Most of those areas don't have huge population, but those who are there sometimes are there for good reasons. Starlink is wonderful for those people. There are a lot of people who have delusions that Starlink is going to have a significant impact on mainstream wireline broadband providers, which is absurd, but there's a lot of the world that still has nothing even close to what this service offers. If (and this is a massive IF) they get the laser linking working it'll be huge for the aviation and marine worlds but even as is it's the best thing to happen to rural broadband service in years. --- Personally I hope they get mobile service for RVs working soon, all I need to work is reliable low-latency internet access so if I can theoretically get it from anywhere in the country I am free.
- danielsju6 5y agoI pay $700/mn for 200/200mbs fiber, in an rural area where 10/1mbs DSL is the only other option. Seems like it’s competitive to me.
- veb 5y agoNZ has done the high speed fibre roll out really nicely - this includes small rural towns (1,600 people, 433 people from two rural areas near me) this is gigabit fibre. It costs about $95 NZD a month for 1000Mbps/500Mbps unlimited. For those who are in the cities (like me), we have access to "hyperfibre" which is like 2Gbps which costs about $150-$200 NZD a month (unlimited). They've even been trialling 10Gbps! https://company.chorus.co.nz/chorus-supercharges-new-zealands-broadband-10gbps-trial https://company.chorus.co.nz/chorus-supercharges-new-zealand...
- unionpivo 5y ago
- JaimeThompson 5y agoThis, most likely means that regular Starlink will be bandwidth limited to be less than 100-100 mbits/sec so as to drive premium sales.
- reledi 5y agoReally hoped they supported subscription pausing by now. Doesn't make sense paying a year's sub for a secondary home when you're only there for a couple months, unless it's the only option you have.
- grishka 5y agoA tangent: it's honestly really disappointing to me that Starlink requires proprietary equipment to use. High-speed, low-latency satellite internet would've been a real game-changer in countries where the government seeks to control information flow by blocking websites and online services. But because you need the proprietary dish made specifically for Starlink, they'll of course just restrict import of these.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- DennisP 5y agoAre generic phased array antennas available in those markets?
- capkutay 5y agoMaybe when the open source community successfully executes manned space missions, we can free ourselves from the tyranny of proprietary satellite technology…
- grishka 5y agoThey could've published their documentation so it would be possible to build a client terminal yourself out of readily available parts. You'll still have to pay for the service itself, obviously. And I'm not talking about satellites themselves, only about the user equipment.
- wmf 5y agoI don't think you understand the complexity of what you're suggesting. I doubt there are any off-the-shelf chips suitable to build a Starlink terminal and even if there were it would still cost over $10M and maybe more like $100M to design the terminal.
- BenjiWiebe 5y agoThis isn't WiFi. A starlink terminal is complex. It isn't something you can cobble together with readily available parts. For that matter, it's amazing to me what WiFi can do, and yet you can buy a WiFi device for a couple of dollars!
- BugWatch 5y agoThis is going to cost all of us, money and a whole lot more, once his space junk triggers the Kessler effect (or accelerates, because many think it is already slowly under way, but the growth is exponential). Ground astronomy is already "ruined", thanks to Starlink: IIRC from something I read recently, what used to be fraction of the percent of plates ruined by satellites right before Starlink, now has risen to astounding 20%.
- lamontcg 5y agoCan we get a $50/mo Starlink Budget?
- bryanlarsen 5y agoThere will definitely eventually be cheaper options. But not for a while and likely not in America. The satellites are unused over Africa etc, and they can't pay $100 per month. But until the manufacturing cost of the dishes comes down, a cheaper option is unlikely.
- shaklee3 5y agoI don't agree with that. the likelihood of them reducing the cost of the antenna to what it needs to be in Africa is close to 0. even legacy satellite providers, with terminals that are 1/5 the cost cannot do it. and those aren't phased array
- bryanlarsen 5y agoThe legacy providers can't provide slower internet for less money because their slowest package is already unusable.
- adgjlsfhk1 5y agoand so is their fastest package
- shaklee3 5y agoThat's exactly my point. they are the exact same speeds, which is not what OP said.
- shaklee3 5y agotheir fastest package is 100Mbps, which is the same as starlink for most people. I'm not sure where you're getting your information.
- dboreham 5y agoIt'd be good if they would spec the upstream throughout. I have Starlink as a backup to my own terrestrial microwave network and the 20Mbit max upload is the only thing stopping me using only Starlink and retiring from the networking business.
- robga 5y ago“Unlimited Service Locations. Order as many Starlinks as needed” Does this mean I could have 3 on a property to triple bandwidth? If 1 per property, could I have my neighbours hang together? (High density, 10M between 3 dishes).
- iptrans 5y agoI can see this being used for backhaul in remote areas. There’s a bit of a risk for adverse selection, as anybody willing to spend $500 per month on this is going to want to get their money's worth.
- kisstheblade 5y agoDoes this make starlink any more feasible? I thought that the math just doesn't work out. Not to mention the massive amount of space garbage (40k satellites replaced every 5 years?) See for example a "busted" video https://youtu.be/zaUCDZ9d09Y?t=912 https://youtu.be/zaUCDZ9d09Y?t=912
- yoz-y 5y agoI doubt it. At this price basically the only customers are in rural US and CA. And, by definition, this is not very many people.
- gnabgib 5y agoIt only just showed up for CA (in 2021) and mostly only along the border (eg Victoria). Granted a lot of population is lower.. but current ETAs (from the starlink "Order" page) for the 5 biggest cities are all tbd: - Montreal late 2022 (4.2M people) - Vancouver late 2022 (2.6M people) - Toronto 2022-2023 (6.2M people) - Calgary 2022-2023 (1.6M people) - Edmonton late 2023 (1.4M people)
- yoz-y 5y agoThere is no way that getting a satellite connection inside a city is cheaper or more practical than a physical line though. It will be necessarily slower, have worse latency and be more expensive.
- gnabgib 5y agoI didn't say it was? I just used cities (major population centers) to determine what coverage was like (bad) and how much of the country had access (almost none).
- yoz-y 5y agoMy reaction was with regards to the parent’s question, sorry if it came out as flippant. If those are indeed the planned locations for expansion then it’s even worse for Starlink because nobody over there needs it.
- curtson 5y agoThere's not much available information on this one
- sylware 5y ago"javascript must be enabled"... well...