this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
415 points (96.4% liked)

Technology

58131 readers
5174 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] i2ndshenanigans@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago (13 children)

I was waitlisted a while back but because of all the Elon bullshit when I got my email saying it was available I opted to just stick with Viasat.

[–] dragontamer@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Thats the thing.

Outside of the Ukrainian war, I'm not seeing much good use of this Starlink constellation.

  1. Urban areas are already built to 5G, meaning high-speed wireless internet at far cheaper prices than satellite could ever hope to deliver.

  2. Suburban areas have high 5G coverage, though it isn't perfect yet. As well as aging 4G (okay), but also a plentitude of fiber options from Verizon and Comcast. No, it isn't perfect, but the crappiest Comcast connection is still better than the best Starlink could ever offer in terms of price and reliability.

  3. Rural areas are already covered by Viasat. Which is going to be more efficient due to the simple nature of only needing like 5 to 10 satellites in the 100-year orbit height... rather than 60,000+ Starlink satellites in the 5-year orbit height.


Ukraine gets a benefit because Russians are actively trying to jam the communications, so ~5 to 10 satellites could get disrupted, but its a lot harder to jam 60,000 satellites floating around. So yes, Starlink did manage to find a niche... only to have the lord of the communications openly claim that Crimea belongs to Russia and shutdown a Ukrainian operation.

So suddenly, Ukraine can't trust Starlink anymore. So who the hell wants to use this constellation?

[–] sznio@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Rural areas are already covered by Viasat. Which is going to be more efficient due to the simple nature of only needing like 5 to 10 satellites in the 100-year orbit height... rather than 60,000+ Starlink satellites in the 5-year orbit height.

Latency sucks with Viasat. You won't play multiplayer games on it, and even web browsing will be sluggish with how many round trips displaying just a single page requires nowadays.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)