[Starlink] speedtest.net takes a look at sat internet around the globe

[David Lang]

On Fri, 13 Aug 2021, Ulrich Speidel wrote:

> - If we reasonably assume that the capacity of a Starlink satellite needs to 
> be shared between its users, then few users / satellite equates to a large 
> share of the capacity. From Starlink's front page: "Starlink is available to 
> a limited number of users per coverage area at this time." Guess what? What 
> we see here may not last, but it's sure great for marketing.

although as they launch more satellites and implement routing between satellites 
this will also expand

> - Ever wondered why Starlink's bulk of beta users sits between 40-something 
> and 50-something degrees of latitude? That's right, because that's where you 
> get the largest concentration of satellites right now, which helps keep the 
> number of users per satellite down. Elsewhere? Tough luck.

the problem is having satellties overhead for continuous coverage. This happened 
first a higher latitudes. I'm in the Los Angles area and according to a check I 
did a couple weeks ago, there are still 15-75min/day that I would not have any 
satellites available to use. They have launched enough satellites for global 
coverage, but the last several batches are still climbing to their final orbit 
(it takes a couple months post-launch to do this)

> - At the other end of your terrestrial broadband connection might be a few 
> CDN servers, meaning you and your fellow customers will only need to use the 
> ISP's feed once for that viral cat video everyone wants to watch. Starlink 
> goes direct to site, not to a local ISP. So if your ISP is in space and the 
> CDNs are on the ground, a thousand Starlink users on a satellite wanting to 
> watch the cat video will need to bring it across the satellite a thousand 
> times. Your terrestrial ISP (or even sat-based ISP with a terrestrial network 
> connecting end users) only needs to do this once.

bzz, your local ISP needs to transport the data to each customer individually, 
multicast is not a functional thing on the Internet

And with SpaceX putting ground stations on the roofs of major datacenters 
(google and others), they will have as good or better connections than your 
local ISP.

> But big numbers always look great, don't they?

you seem to be wnting to compare starlink to gig fiber to the home or something 
like that.

My sister is the perfect example of their real target. Before I got her 
Starlink, she had the choice between dialup (with toll charges), a wireless ISP 
at symmetrical 2Mb/s, or cellular based service (with a tall mast to hold the 
cell antenna)

starlink isn't targeted at urban areas, but if you look at population density 
maps, the vast majority of the country isn't urban, and while the percentage of 
population isn't as lopsided, that's still a LOT of people

I'm in the Los Angeles suburbs and up until the time that spectrum cable 
upgraded their system a couple years ago, the best I could get (short of 
$thousands to run new wires to my house) was 10M/2M dsl. I'm going to get 
starlink as a backup, and as a portable setup that I can take when traveling 
(camping, search and rescue bases, etc)

David Lang

> On 13/08/2021 9:22 am, Darrell Budic wrote:
>> https://www.speedtest.net/insights/blog/starlink-hughesnet-viasat-performance-q2-2021/ 
>> <https://www.speedtest.net/insights/blog/starlink-hughesnet-viasat-performance-q2-2021/> 
>> 
>> Nothing we didn’t know, but interesting comparisons between the 3 sat 
>> companies and fixed breadboard around the world.
>> 
>> Made me wonder if there’s anyone else contributing to the speed tests in 
>> Iowa county, WI, looks a lot like my averages there...
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlink mailing list
>> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink