Re: [Starlink] Alphabet spins off Starlink competitor Taara

[Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>]

On 18 March 2025 01:49:17 CET, David Lang via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>Marc Blanchet wrote:
>
>>> On Mar 17, 2025, at 18:50, David Lang via Starlink <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hesham ElBakoury wrote:
>>> 
>>>> https://www.theverge.com/news/631049/alphabet-spins-off-starlink-competitor-taara?mc_cid=1a1e15a2db&mc_eid=105d343de1
>>> 
>>> Interesting, a laser in a professionally installed/aligned tower is going to be able to have a higher bandwidth than the starlink dishy.
>>> 
>>> but the claim that it will be far cheaper than Starlink?? that tower and a ground station that tracks the satellites in real time is going to be FAR more expensive than a dishy. Since it's going to be in motion at all times, it's got mechanical parts to wear out, and physically re-aiming a laser between connections (on both ends) is going to be a lot slower than electronic aiming of a phased array antenna.
>> 
>> Either I don't understand the article or your comment. But my interpretation of the article is that it is "just" (ground) lasers for trunk links between (ground) towers. No satellite involved. It is a replacement of either fibre or radio between (cell) towers.
>
>Since it kept talking about being a replacement for Starlink, 

[SM] Over here this was argued more that this might be complementary to starlink in a sense, as it might allow relative quick responses to e.g. extend/replace damaged/overloaded links after say a disaster, but for more densely populated areas were starlink can run into overload easily. While in less dense rural areas LEO internet would be the better choice. However, I would guess the real reason for the comparison in the press might be that google's press release might have pitched something along those lines to nip the idea pro actively in the butt that this would have no utility given starlinks existence, but I have not looked into that material myself...

> I assumed that the towers would communicate with satellites. If there are no satellites being used, then it's not going to be a Starlink competitor as you would have to build a long chain of laser towers to try and provide service everywhere.
>
>David Lang
>
>> Marc.
>> 
>>> 
>>> As a community gateway where a lot of people share a single satellite connection, it could work, but even there I question if it would be cheaper.
>>> 
>>> There's also the question of the cost of satellites. Are they willing to take the Starlink approach of cheap satellites? or are they still thinking 'industry standard' where each satellite is far bigger, heavier, and more expensive?
>>> 
>>> David Lang
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Starlink mailing list
>>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
>> 
>> 
>_______________________________________________
>Starlink mailing list
>Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
>https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.