3 ms·
As a starlink subscriber, I'm really not sure it matters. SL is leagues ahead of any of the other connectivity options available to me in rural Southern England
by pomatic 4y ago
As a starlink subscriber, I'm really not sure it matters. SL is leagues ahead of any of the other connectivity options available to me in rural Southern England (although I do have a nylon rope strung between the telegraph poles outside - suggesting FTTP may arrive one day), and I am totally in awe of the technology involved to deliver the SL service. Add in the relatively recent reductions in monthly subscription costs, and it simply represents phenomenal value for money. Isn't it incredible to think one can travel with a chair-sized device and get great internet connectivity pretty much anywhere on the globe? It opens up the possibility of medium remote work in isolated spots; I'm looking at skipping the miserable winter we have here in the UK, safe in the knowledge that I can roam with Dishy to (a qualified version of) anywhere warm at sensible cost.
- zamalek 4y agoStarlink were always pretty explicit about solving your exact scenario. That didn't stop people hoping that they could abandon Comcast or their other local incompetent telecom monopoly/duopoly. Still, I wonder just how slow Starlink has to get before the likes of Comcast start looking better in comparison, because I don't blame people for hoping, I really really don't.