So, not 4x, but 2x.
BTW, did you know HughesNet is cheaper, and works just as well. Or, it will work just as well once Starlink reaches the saturation HughesNet faces.
Comment on SpaceX says states should dump fiber plans, give all grant money to Starlink
HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 2 days agoTIL 120 is 4 x 70…
ubergeek@lemmy.today 2 days ago
HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Physics says otherwise.
Geostationary orbit, which is where hughesnet satellites are, is approximately 22 THOUSAND miles away.
That’s a round trip of 44 thousand miles.
That’s a long time of 236ms just for the satellite connection, before any other connections are added in.
That’s worse than my dialup latency was.
Meanwhile, my Starlink ping averages less than 30ms, because these satellites are MUCH MUCH closer.
ubergeek@lemmy.today 2 days ago
Wonder how your starlink will work once it reaches it’s peak market saturation?
HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It’s cute that you’re worried about me. But it’s still better than whatever else is currently available at my house.
JordanZ@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I’m on the mid tier fiber plan(3gbps) with my ISP which is $100 a month. Here’s the results from the daily speed test my router does.
Image
StarLink is very expensive for the service provided. Its only advantage is the location availability which is essentially anywhere. If they installed fiber to rural areas then its usefulness falls dramatically. I’d rather they invest in more fiber rather than more StarLink satellites that only last about 5 years.
Jason2357@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
lol. I thought those commas were decimals for a second. Wow.
HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I’d rather have fiber, too. But until it’s available here, this is the next best thing.
Jason2357@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
You lack individual choice by design. You should choose whatever is best for you, obviously, but you can be pissed there’s no fiber running alongside your electricity service.