- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Meanwhile, in Australia, the pricing structure and availability of Starlink is so competitive that it is demolishing the national/ state-owned infrastructure (NBN co), who are haemorrhaging users to Starlink.
In part because the previous conservative government ruined the network for pricing and in part because of the superior performance of the lower satellites. Either way, Starlink is faster and cheaper than infrastructure the citizens already own.
I just checked and it’s almost double what I’m paying currently for 100/40 fibre.
I don’t know where you got your figures but u suspect they’re faulty.
At best it might be an alternative to Skymuster.
Apples and oranges you nong.
The NBN is vdsl,.fibre, fixed wireless and satellite.
Obviously I’m comparing NBN satellite with musk satellite. 🤦
Well if you don’t actually mention what part you are comparing people are going to assume its the part the majority use, ie VDSL and fibre.
Everyone has always known normal satellite internet sucks dick, it’s slow and high ping.
But musk is too stupid to market his starlink as a replacement for that, instead trying to win over VDSL and fibre users.
You don’t get it. Slow and high ping is part of the tech, but not the problem, and not only why people are leaving: it’s the price. Australia owns the satellite and all the infrastructure. The NBN satellite should be cheaper than musklink. It isn’t, because of the Liberal party.
Musklink isn’t taking vdsl or fibre customers. 5G is.
You can get 600mbps for $85 a month with Telstra. That is what kills fibre and why metro is leaving the NBN.
Apples and oranges.
Starlink won’t beat FTTP or FTTN, but it sure as shit beats fixed wireless and sky muster.
Shit, just not having to deal indirectly with NBNCo every time there’s a problem (multiple times per month) has got to be worth $100 per month to me.
No regrets. FUCK NBNCO sideways, with an axe.
It’s a shame what happened with NBN in Australia. Fantastic idea, shit execution because they cheaped out.
The poor man pays twice
Nothing to do with cost, overlord Mudcock didn’t want foxtel to lose customers to internet streaming.
They didn’t cheap out. Liberals (the name of the conservative party, basically Republicans) spent 3 times as much money for a shitter product, and now Australia has to spend it all over again to redo it.
This. Never forget that our national infrastructure was intentionally sabotaged.
I almost got it, but gave up because of the CEO being the way he is. It’s very likely that they will raise prices or add a lot of bullshit restrictions after initial adoption, and the dish is kind of expensive to buy and cancel once the bullshit starts.
From a presentation in 2015 for fuck sake, seven years later.
Think about yourself, is everything you said 7 year ago still perfect accurate?
He’s not going to fuck you.
Not even one in a million chance?
I am not running a business, but even I try to not be off by a factor of 20.
Strong business acumen I see
/s
Not everything is accurate that I said or believed 7 years ago, no.
However, when a person builds a business on habitual over-promising, then it is an issue. Speculation is awesome! Telling people what they want to hear, because money, isn’t awesome.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
SpaceX’s Starlink division hasn’t come close to meeting customer and revenue projections that the company shared with investors before building the satellite network, according to a Wall Street Journal report published today.
SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell said in February that Starlink is expected to turn a profit this year.
"The majority of the world’s population that the business could serve and that can afford high-speed broadband lives in cities.
In those regions, Internet service is readily available, usually offers cheaper monthly costs than Starlink and doesn’t require specialized equipment."
But in public he has stated more modest ambitions for Starlink, pointing out that low-Earth orbit satellite ventures have a history of going bankrupt.
One step forward on profitability is that SpaceX says it is no longer selling Starlink user terminals at a loss.
The original article contains 654 words, the summary contains 135 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
a musk company over promising and under delivering. Surprise surprise
At least he’s consistently underwhelming across the board though.
I guess that’s the only thing consistent of his behavior… kinda sucks that companies like SpaceX are all related to him. I’d love to root for Starship to achieve it’s set goals but also I’d hate to see him get even more rich… if that makes sense
Most of them in Ukraine?
Their pricing is ridiculous.
I thought about it and I believe the pricing was 199 a month. I had other options they were much cheaper.
Yep, find a cheapo 5g modem with an ethernet port that’s capable of being given an identity crisis from the usual sources and you’ll be golden…ask me how I know. We ain’t got shit out where I am other than garbage DSL, but decent 5g coverage from the big 3 surprisingly.
Starlink only serves a purpose in truly rural or remote areas where, unsurprisingly, they’ll make no money. The number of people I see using it as a backup connection or aggregate it with terrestrial cable or fiber connections is obscene… and a waste of money imo.
I’m not “rural” but oddly in a new subdivision that doesn’t have a lot of access yet.
I went with the mobile 5g. 50 bucks a month. I’d say it’s great 95% of the time. I video conference just fine.
Only thing that doesn’t work great is my Plex.
What kind of upstream throughput are you getting?
For 5g? About 20. My other end is 1 gig fiber. I get about 250 down on 5g
Yeah, that’s expensive for something that is really only useful for people that live entirely off grid. And those people are usually broke too.
I was willing to pay you to a hundred not to have a contract.
I’ll also give you no contract if you want to pay me too.
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.
Thats the thing.
Outside of the Ukrainian war, I’m not seeing much good use of this Starlink constellation.
-
Urban areas are already built to 5G, meaning high-speed wireless internet at far cheaper prices than satellite could ever hope to deliver.
-
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.
-
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?
I support a few business that have locations in Texas that can’t get fiber or cable internet. We use Viasat for them. I wanted starlink since we were seeing people with the service that had way better speeds and latency compared to Viasat.
I find your comment to be a bit North America focused. Surely there are many places in the world where that stuff is handy.
You realize that the Ukrainians are spending $2500 / month per terminal, right?
This isn’t a cheap system. Yeah, focusing on America where we have subsidies for rural internet (Government to pay part of those costs) is for a damn good reason. I’m not sure who can afford this in practice.
It is said that the terminal costs $1,300. And I’d expect that the communications will be hundreds+ / month. There’s not actually a lot of people around the world who can afford that, but shoot. You can tell me which countries you think this is a good business idea for.
As I said earlier: Ukraine has crazy requirements where the Russians are conducting electronic warfare (and other… warfare…) where the costs are worth it. Anyone else? Because Viasat is right there at like $100/month. Unless you NEED a way to escape the Russian jamming of traditional satellites, why would you pay Starlink’s crazy high costs?
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/05/10/1051973/russia-hack-viasat-satellite-ukraine-invasion/
“Rural” includes oceans. So airplanes who are flying across oceans use Viasat right now, and its likely cheaper and more available than Starlink in practice thanks to the far fewer satellites that Viasat needs to launch and maintain. Yeah, 10 satellites are way, way cheaper than 40,000+ satellites. Who’d a thunk it?
I work on a ship and am in the Galapagos right now. Thr island is covered in Starlink terminals and they’ve changed the internet existence here. Posting this via public starlink WiFi. I have a friend in the Philippines, and same there, huge impact.
His point about your US centric point is valid.
Starlink has many issues network wise, but the price point is per country so it is still being well used around the world in rural existence.
You don’t understand today’s economy.
Companies today run below costs to trick you into thinking they are legitimate businesses.
You need to calculate the actual costs of launching 60,000 satellites every 5 years because this dumbass idea literally falls out of the sky because the orbit paths are so low.
Much like how Uber or MoviePass have fake business models with fake prices for years, Starlink has a fake price on the consumer facing side.
So how do we get closer to the real price? We look at the thousands of terminals or other large scale deployments of Starlink. Like Ukraine’s $2500 price point.
I understand that $100/month internet is gamechanging. However, it is also fake if it’s coming from Starlink, because we Americans can find companies for years to make a loss in 3rd world countries and fake our growth.
Adjust the stats closer to reality, and you see the immediate problems.
Hey you make some really good points and I appreciate your contribution to the discussion, but maybe dial it back 20% on the sass. You don’t need to make it personal by saying
You don’t understand today’s economy
Anyways, assuming that your assertions are accurate (they seem so), what’s the angle for Musk? You’re implying Starlink will corner the market in certain areas with unrealistic price points, and then raise prices eventually? Or is there a more insidious corporate strategy I’m not recognizing?
You’re implying Starlink will corner the market in certain areas with unrealistic price points, and then raise prices eventually?
Basically, yeah. I’m not saying they “will” do that, but this is what they’re hoping to accomplish.
Think jet.com, Uber (and UberEats), WeWork, Bird scooters, etc. etc. This isn’t anything particular to Musk, this is just how US companies have operated over the past 10 years.
Musk is good at this strategy mind you. But he’s hardly unique in regards to doing it. MoviePass was really bad at this strategy, but plenty of others “succeeded”. (Not true success in my books, but a financial success in that they got big enough that a big bank bought them out and they’re hundred-millionaires now. Even if the company is worthless with terrible business plan like jet.com was, if the company leaders/owners were bought out, they see that as a personal success). Key to this strategy is raising more-and-more money from venture capitalists and IPO / SPOs by hyping (over-hyping) and misleading your statistics a bit. Speaking in half truths, pretend you’re solving world-changing problems (We’re going to Mars!!!), etc. etc. Its all a package deal.
What?! The Ukrainians pay for starlink service? I though Musk said he donated them and eat the service cost?
Iirc he did at first until the US military worked out a deal with Starlink.
No wireless communication will beat physical connection ever. Period. There’s not argument in it to be had.
All of wireless bandwidth can be crammed in a single fiber optic cable. All of it, with room to spare. And then you realize you can run as many as you like in parallel while in wireless communication only one device can talk at the time.
Cables are here to stay.
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.
-
I see tons of ads when I drive around rural Indiana for Hughesnet. I’ve never seen an ad for Starlink. Why aren’t they even marketing it to rural midwesterners?
Elon companies have never really done traditional marketing. Maybe they’re just allergic to it?
I can sort of see that with Tesla. The word of mouth thing working for a pricey car brand. But the only way you’re going to get farmers to know about Starlink is to advertise it to them.
They honestly don’t even seem interested in anyone in the midwest getting it. They’re only really interested in the coasts.
To get Starlink near me you need to be put onto a waiting list for them to roll it out to your area. But closer to the coasts (you don’t even have to be all that close, Idaho gets it) and you can sign up and get started right away.
That’s not the way to get to 20 million users. Not that I’m shocked.
Given how stable Elon is with his other companies, why would anyone be skeptical of letting him supply them with a utility service?
No way in hell I’d entrust my internet service to someone who unblocks Nazis and blocks the people who complain about Nazis.
As long as you post a Nazi tweet a day, your connection should be fine, though. It’s called Tweet Heil.
XHeil.
I just checked the price and its $599 for the hardware + $99 deposit + $50 shipping. After that the service costs $120/month. I pay $65/month for fiber at the moment.
I paid the deposit over 3 years ago and they still haven’t done shit.
If you have fiber, it’s unlikely you will benefit from something like Starling. Transfer data wirelessly through a constellation of satellites will have running costs much higher than just having a fibre. That is unless you have to dog a trench or run a fibre on mast for km for just one customer, which is where Starling starts making more sense.
Starling is for rural customers, mobile customers, and possibly an option to counter monopoly abuse by some Telco companies. But if you are in a city with fibre, then do use the fibre, that’s your better option.
Is starling like an interstellar zergling or something?
I actually would not be surprised if SpaceX starts using Starling for one of their thrusters in the future. I’ll keep the typo.
It’s a type of bird.
removed by mod
Rude tone apart, this is absolutely true. Nobody thinks satellite Internet is meant to compete with fiber to the door.
Potentially rude. They are indeed dumb.
Of course it’s rude. Are you dumb?
Exactly, not rude. Rude things are fact
So you’re dumb then.
Not rude, just a fact.
Kool
If it is a fact, feel free to release an intelligent assessment based on more than a single data point. I’m guessing you’ve said things other people thought were stupid on occasion.
You know, you can make your perfectly valid argument without the insult. No need to add more toxicity to Lemmy and fediverse at large.
It is dumb though. Like c’mon. There’s being a toxic dick and there’s calling out a dumb statement.
I think the two can coexist. But fuck it.
deleted by creator
I was in a similar spot. No fiber but I could get dsl.
The reason I wanted it is I have two houses in Oregon and I could take it with me.
It’s too expensive for that.
Yeah that’s a shame. Would be great if you could move it around
Move Starlink around? You can. The roam plan costs more and has the lowest priority in traffic, but it does work. We’ve been using it for internet access in our RV all over the US this summer as we work from the road.
They almost had me on the hook right up to when they decided tiered and throttled plans were the way to go. its essentially a hyped up cellphone plan. so glad I bailed. Also, fuck muskrat.
It works as long you ain’t got to carry out a special military operation in Crimea!
oh, Crimea river
Elmo Musk fanboy heads exploded.
And 500k are from ukraine
