You must not be familiar with US broadband outcomes. If starlink actually services 500k user for only 1bn it will probably be the best ROI the US has recently gotten in terms of rural broadband access relief funds.
Also your link:
> Starlink currently has 650 satellites in orbit, with 12,000 planned by 2026. But even at full capacity the researchers estimate the service won’t be able to service any more than 485,000 simultaneous data streams at speeds of 100 Mbps.
These are not even Starlink's official numbers but some estimate by some researchers without any first hand knowledge of Starlink's tech plan. Moreover, it assumes 485,000 simultaneous 100 Mbps, a ridiculous standard, no reasonable engineer would define the max user limit of a system to be how many user can use maximum bandwidth simultaneously because that is not how network usage happens in real-world use.
My mother has had at&t dsl in the a rural town, the only broadband provider in the area, it delivers 2 Mbps *at best* aka when it works at all, even if Starlink delivers 20 Mbps with be a massive quality of life improvement.
Also your link:
> Starlink currently has 650 satellites in orbit, with 12,000 planned by 2026. But even at full capacity the researchers estimate the service won’t be able to service any more than 485,000 simultaneous data streams at speeds of 100 Mbps.
These are not even Starlink's official numbers but some estimate by some researchers without any first hand knowledge of Starlink's tech plan. Moreover, it assumes 485,000 simultaneous 100 Mbps, a ridiculous standard, no reasonable engineer would define the max user limit of a system to be how many user can use maximum bandwidth simultaneously because that is not how network usage happens in real-world use.
My mother has had at&t dsl in the a rural town, the only broadband provider in the area, it delivers 2 Mbps *at best* aka when it works at all, even if Starlink delivers 20 Mbps with be a massive quality of life improvement.