|
|
|
|
|
by doogerdog
1456 days ago
|
|
I'm not a fan of Musk overall, but Starlink is pure gold for us in rural America. Before this, my best option was 25Mbps for $125/mo. I installed mine about 5 months ago. You really need to put it in a location that has no obstructions for the antenna's oval of coverage. The speed varies a lot but overnight and mornings I get downloads of 90 to 180Mbps. Afternoon and evening the range is 60 to 110Mbps. I measure these speeds myself from actual transfers of large files over the course of about one hour. Now and then I check to see what Ookla - SpeedTest - or Cloudflare report. They never agree with each other, even when running concurrently. The FCC is not going to use Ookla data. The antennas are self installed. Many will be slowed down by obstructions, bad cabling etc. As mentioned above, many people only test when they have trouble. Once the trouble is fixed the new speeds are not added to the Ookla database. Viasat is in a sad position. I don't see how they have a future at all. I think they only have two satellites that were launched by cheap Proton rockets. With Russia gone, they would have to pay much more for any future launches. The one thing they can do is spread fear to keep their business afloat a little longer. |
|
It's pure gold for people in rural Australia as well. Our country is extremely vast with most of us concentrated on the cost in major cities. Our fixed internet speeds are not that great at all in major cities, let alone in the country.
Starlink provides fantastic speeds that no other solution can currently provide in the country. It's also not bureaucratically tied with another company that needs to provide the infrastructure. Which means you don't need to go through the hassle of an ISP, then the ISP liasing with the company that actually owns the infrastructure.