ED E wrote: » Its a great solution for ships, oil rigs, aviation, research bases in the arctic. Its a non runner for mass market.
celtic_oz wrote: » Sounds like a bit more than that, not urban but yes rural surely
It's called the Better Than Nothing Beta. Estimated speeds 50Mbps to 150Mbps Estimated latency 20ms to 40ms Some interruptions in connectivity to be expected
The Cush wrote: » Luckily rural Ireland will have access to 10 Gbps fibre via the NBP.
But it could potentially be a good interim solution To those waiting for decent broadband in the "intervention areas" which do you think will rescue you first ?
celtic_oz wrote: » I'll repeat the OP To those waiting for decent broadband in the "intervention areas" which do you think will rescue you first ?
To those waiting for decent broadband in the "intervention areas" which do you think will rescue you first ?
celtic_oz wrote: » Understood products are not comparable probably in speed or cost.
clohamon wrote: » Are there any ground stations in Ireland yet, apart from wishful thinking by the usual suspect? Have the user terminals been approved for Europe yet?
KildareP wrote: » There's only so much you can modulate over the air and that dips significantly in rain or heavy cloud cover when it has to back down the modulation big time. As for connectivity on the move, this isn't going to get around the inherent limitations of multipath and rapidly changing signal levels as objects rapidly move between you and the other end of the link which is what makes connectivity on the move so difficult with 3G,4G,SiriusXM, etc.
KildareP wrote: » A ground station is not required but will cause the problem that frequently hits traditional satellite broadband insofar as geolocation is fecked and you'll get served your Google and Netflix content from wherever the earth station breaks out onto the WWW (and you'll get RTE Player International not the Irish version). Of course, satellite has never been a viable use case for streaming media due to extremely low usage caps so wasn't an issue until now.
ED E wrote: » These are results with basically nobody on the network. Like 4G when nobody had a 4G phone or 5G today. Add a few thousand ground stations to an area and it all grinds to a halt.
Orebro wrote: » I'll believe Starlink is a viable alternative when the people advocating it cancel their Fibre to the Home connections and sign up with it - but not a moment before. What's good enough for the Goose etc.
Worse than 4g I tellz ya.. and what happens when it RAINS.
celtic_oz wrote: » Starlink is estimated to cost in excess of 10 billion dollars...
celtic_oz wrote: » Starlink is estimated to cost in excess of 10 billion dollars What fools they are .. Musk et al should have just asked the boardsies. :rolleyes:
KildareP wrote: » Grand. Seems like you have your mind made up and are not for changing, even when you have people who actually work in telecoms and network engineering - both fibre and microwave - offering advice based on actual, real world experience. No point in trying to discuss so I'll leave ye to it
NewClareman wrote: » With free space optics there's almost no limit to what 'you can modulate over the air'.
NewClareman wrote: With free space optics there's almost no limit to what 'you can modulate over the air'.
plodder wrote: » Though that's a different technology to Starlink and doesn't work over long distances.
NewClareman wrote: » I was just replying to the comment that there was a limit to what 'you can modulate over the air'.
listermint wrote: » Nah, lets be clear you were trying to belittle someones experience and saying you'd have to work in actual starlink to understand it. Because they are the only show in town. Bit of elon fanboyism here i suspect. Let the brand drive the outcome...
NewClareman wrote: » I have never suggested that Starlink are the only show in town - that would be silly. It is equally silly to suggest that working in telecoms makes someone an expert in satellite communications. Even for experts in that area, Starlink brings a whole new level of complexity. So, to be clear, I'm not belittling anyone's experience. However, I am suggesting that they are overstating the relevance of that experience, in this area. It is clear from their comments that that is the case.
listermint wrote: » Also no one has said it doesnt have an application, of course it does. It would be silly to suggest it doesnt.
listermint wrote: » But the absolute lunacy in saying its a serious competitor to fibre to the home in a country like Ireland needs to be tackled head on for what it is.
celtic_oz wrote: » Actually some mentioned "congo basin" or the "artic" Please stop going off topic and READ the op.
listermint wrote: » Starlink simply cannot match fibre to the home.
listermint wrote: » Now i know that might really irk you (for whatever reason) but its just how it is.