[minhazm]

How many people have access to this 100 Mbps fiber though? From what I'm seeing on Wikipedia, the internet penetration rate is around 50% of the population. Starlink isn't intended to replace existing reliable broadband solutions. It's meant to provide internet access to remote areas where running fiber to those areas is way more expensive. Fiber and cellular (usually needs fiber backhaul) would be prohibitively expensive to bring to many areas of the world and telecoms won't do it unless the government pays for it. But for $500 up front and $99 a month you can bring 150-300 Mbps to remote villages and schools. They don't need a dedicated connection per household, 300 Mbps is enough to split across potentially dozens of households or even a smalls school.

[mohanmcgeek]

Serious question: can you show me in a map where in India these remote villages and schools are that lacks cellular or fiber coverage?

[minhazm]

There are many cellular coverage maps out there that you can overlay with population graphs, but I can't link you to anything specific besides just a coverage map. But this isn't a problem unique to India. Many countries have holes in their coverage, including the US. There are many parts of the US where you'd be lucky to get 1 Mbps down on 3G. Or where your only broadband option is DSL at a few Mbps.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/native-american-tribe-gets-early-...

[mohanmcgeek]

> There are many parts of the US where you'd be lucky to get 1 Mbps down on 3G.

India has nation-wide 4g coverage with decent speed except inside reserve forests where nobody lives.

These "remote" villages seem to exist only in "developed" United States.