SpaceX will have to demonstrate Starlink internet's low latency within the next month to qualify for

Discussion in 'General Satellite Discussion' started by krel, Jun 17, 2020.

  1. krel

    krel New Member

    527
    68
    Mar 20, 2013
  2. krel

    krel New Member

    527
    68
    Mar 20, 2013
    doing some research on starlink. it looks to be no better than viasat or huesnet with a latency of 30 ms with 100 mbps down and only 40 mbps up. and it also looks like it's not good for urban areas since the bird won't be able to handle all of the bandwith.. all speculation now still..
     
  3. Jul 1, 2020 #3 of 42
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,090
    1,583
    Nov 13, 2006
    It’s designed for less urban areas in the first place imho.
     
  4. Jul 1, 2020 #4 of 42
    NYDutch

    NYDutch DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    750
    124
    Dec 28, 2013
    Last October Starlink was tested by the US Air Force at 610 Mbps to a flying aircraft.
     
    krel likes this.
  5. Jul 2, 2020 #5 of 42
    krel

    krel New Member

    527
    68
    Mar 20, 2013
    any idea on upload speeds and latency
     
  6. Jul 2, 2020 #6 of 42
    krel

    krel New Member

    527
    68
    Mar 20, 2013
    your not in my head imho... i was thinking that everyone's looking to dump there current ISP you know everyone and there mother is going to sign up for it.. but i do agree with you
     
  7. Jul 2, 2020 #7 of 42
    krel

    krel New Member

    527
    68
    Mar 20, 2013
    104388294_3037614772998800_2056038178995866005_o.jpg
     
  8. Jul 2, 2020 #8 of 42
    NYDutch

    NYDutch DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    750
    124
    Dec 28, 2013
    I've seen ~20 ms pings mentioned, but I don't know how official it was. I haven't seen an upload figure mentioned from that test. Given the limited number of Starlink sats in orbit and available ground stations at that time, latency may not have been a significant test result.
     
  9. Jul 4, 2020 #9 of 42
    krel

    krel New Member

    527
    68
    Mar 20, 2013
    i have to say it's gonna be interesting how the providers are gonna play the rate game once things like starlink and amazon's kuiper project and 5G becomes full blown:rolleyes:,, i was told to switch over to 5G because the price and speeds i would get with it would bankrupt spectrum...
     
  10. krel

    krel New Member

    527
    68
    Mar 20, 2013
  11. NYDutch

    NYDutch DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    750
    124
    Dec 28, 2013
    The Starlink system is only partly in place with about 2% of the total satellite count currently in orbit so far. Many of the needed ground stations are still under construction and the next generation of interlinked satellites are still in the design and testing stage. The current Beta testing should probably be more correctly labeled as "Alpha Plus" testing.
     
  12. slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,959
    1,632
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    If you're thinking it was ever going to compete with speed with DOCSIS or fiber you were sadly misinformed. Those speeds would look very good to someone who is stuck with GSO satellite internet, or is on the extreme edge of DSL or cellular deployment and gets single digit Mbps currently. That's what it has to beat to be successful. It was never going to compete in urban/suburban areas for multiple reasons.
     
    harsh and krel like this.
  13. SledgeHammer

    SledgeHammer Icon

    3,401
    528
    Dec 28, 2007
    I was just going to say, but Krel beat me to it. 60Mbps on the best case absolutely sucks. Maybe not for rural folks who get internet via telegraph :D. Starlink on more then one occasion said they would be competitive with Docsis/Fiber. 1Gbps speeds and low latency :).

    "According to SpaceX, Starlink will offer speeds of up to a gigabit per second at latencies from 25 milliseconds to 35 milliseconds."
     
  14. mjwagner

    mjwagner Icon

    1,465
    403
    Oct 8, 2005
  15. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    22,063
    331
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    While the speeds may improve, it seems likely that latency will increase with the number of users. I reason that systems such as this that need to switch between satellites as they enter and exit line of sight likely have a pretty significant overhead.

    As we know, there's always the hopeful person that has a relatively tiny hole where they can see the sky. If you can't get a GPS fix, Starlink probably won't work for you.
     
  16. Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    36,267
    2,062
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    It would be a lot better than DSL. It would solve the problem rural folks have. Gotta wonder if that will be another nail in the coffin for sat services. And cable.

    Rich
     
    mjwagner likes this.
  17. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    51,358
    2,379
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    "Starlink beta users found speeds as high as 60 Mbps downstream and 17.7 Mbps upstream. Latency was as low as 31 milliseconds.
    Speeds ranged from 36 Mbps to 60 Mbps on the download and 5 Mbps to 17.7 Mbps on the upload.
    "

    "Better than DSL" does not take much in rural areas. One stream of OTT TV (if the speeds hold up when the service is saturated with users)? It might be tempting for some to dump satellite TV for low quality OTT (especially as prices rise) but the OTT companies seem to be reaching for higher prices as well. When StarLink charges more that the $1 billing fee price will factor in to the value of StarLink plus OTT providers as a satellite/cable replacement.

    I can see the use in the RV/camping market for people who want to see some TV but not watch multiple overlaping hours of content every day. A lot easier to find an open patch of sky in any direction than lining up a satellite dish and hoping there is not an obstruction.
     
    Rich likes this.
  18. mjwagner

    mjwagner Icon

    1,465
    403
    Oct 8, 2005
    Except in many cases that is not how it plays out. Folks would get StarLink for faster internet. At that point the economics is StarLink + sat or StarLink + an OTT service. So the cost of StarLink comes out of the equation when comparing sat to OTT service in that scenario.
     
  19. NYDutch

    NYDutch DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    750
    124
    Dec 28, 2013
    I think the key point there is just as it is now. Do we count the cost of our Internet service as part of our OTT service cost if like most, we would have the same Internet service even without the OTT service?
     
    mjwagner likes this.
  20. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    51,358
    2,379
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    If one cannot use the Internet while streaming or cannot stream while otherwise using the Internet I'd count the cost of Internet against the streaming.

    There have been times where my PC has been pulling Windows Updates while I have attempted to stream (on a streaming device). My streaming dropped to less than SD quality due to the peak use of bandwidth. If you're going to tell me to increase my service plan then you have identified a cost that should go toward streaming.

    My service plan also has a data cap. If streaming forces me over the cap that is a cost that should go toward streaming (either the lost data for browsing, any overage charge or the cost of an unlimited plan.

    Not counting the cost of Internet when streaming is fine if streaming only uses excess speed and bandwidth. But when streaming interferes or raises the cost it has to be part of the equation.
     
    Rich likes this.

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements