4 ms·

The geostationary satellite example, while interesting, is kinda obsolete in the age of Starlink

by maxlin 1y ago

theandrewbailey 1y ago
Starlink is only 1 option in the satellite internet market. There are too many embedded systems and legacy infrastructure that its not reasonable to assume that 'satellite internet' means Starlink. Maybe in 20 years, but not today.
- maxlin 1y ago
  That's like saying vacuum tubes are only one option in the radio market. The quality of connection is so much better, and as you can get a starlink mini with a 50GB plan for very little money, its already in the zone that just one worker could grab his own and bring it on the rig to use on his free time and to share. Starlink terminals aren't "infrastructure". Campers often toss one on their roof without even leaving the vehicle. Easier than moving a chair. So, as I said, the geostationary legacy system immediately becomes entirely obsolete other than for redundancy, and is kinda irrelevant for uses like browsing the web.
3cats-in-a-coat 1y ago
"Obsolete" suggests Starlink is clearly better and sustainable, and that's a very bold statement to make at this point. I suspect in few decades the stationary satellites will still be around, while Starlink would've either evolved drastically or gone away.
- maxlin 1y ago
  I can easily say they are obsolete. The same way old tech is obsolete. Sure, given a catastrophe, eventually maybe we'll be driving around in easier-to-fix old cars and such, and making communications with whatever simpler analog methods. For the use highlighted, geostationary satellites are absolutely obsolete, unless a catastrophe happens. Questioning my premise is like saying its perfectly logical to plan your kitchen around eating MRE's because "they aren't obsolete". Today's satellite internet isn't yesterday's satellite internet.

4 ms·

The geostationary satellite example, while interesting, is kinda obsolete in the age of Starlink

by maxlin 1y ago

The geostationary satellite example, while interesting, is kinda obsolete in the age of Starlink

theandrewbailey 1y ago
Starlink is only 1 option in the satellite internet market. There are too many embedded systems and legacy infrastructure that its not reasonable to assume that 'satellite internet' means Starlink. Maybe in 20 years, but not today.
- maxlin 1y ago
  That's like saying vacuum tubes are only one option in the radio market. The quality of connection is so much better, and as you can get a starlink mini with a 50GB plan for very little money, its already in the zone that just one worker could grab his own and bring it on the rig to use on his free time and to share. Starlink terminals aren't "infrastructure". Campers often toss one on their roof without even leaving the vehicle. Easier than moving a chair. So, as I said, the geostationary legacy system immediately becomes entirely obsolete other than for redundancy, and is kinda irrelevant for uses like browsing the web.
3cats-in-a-coat 1y ago
"Obsolete" suggests Starlink is clearly better and sustainable, and that's a very bold statement to make at this point. I suspect in few decades the stationary satellites will still be around, while Starlink would've either evolved drastically or gone away.
- maxlin 1y ago
  I can easily say they are obsolete. The same way old tech is obsolete. Sure, given a catastrophe, eventually maybe we'll be driving around in easier-to-fix old cars and such, and making communications with whatever simpler analog methods. For the use highlighted, geostationary satellites are absolutely obsolete, unless a catastrophe happens. Questioning my premise is like saying its perfectly logical to plan your kitchen around eating MRE's because "they aren't obsolete". Today's satellite internet isn't yesterday's satellite internet.