• M137@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    22 hours ago

    If it was a solved problem it would be widely used, but it isn’t. Ever looked at the reports of starlink speeds? It’s not reliable at all, everything other than a fully clear sky with cold weather (meaning less moisture and particles in the air) affects the communication. It physically can’t be a good or better alternative to fiber (or anything else that isn’t wireless).

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Yeah… Terrestrial 5G towers with a fiber backbone for some proportion of them… are… stupendously more cost effective at getting a decent level of internet to a lot of people.

      Also doesn’t cause Kessler Syndrome, which is, you know, good.

      Now, such a system will still suffer in more abberant atmospheric conditons, but to a far lesser extent.

      Literally the only actual ‘use case’ I can think of where StarLink ‘makes sense’ as a better solution is … you are a boat that is actually moving most of the time.

      If you’re a house boat… terrestrial 5G probably exists near your mooring.

      Either that or you truly, truly live far away from civilization.

      … but we already had satellite internet that did those things.

    • Giloron@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Agreed on the downlink.

      I thought this was about the node to node communications. Blue origin and probably others are also using it for in orbit communication.