[mrweasel]

Really, everyone I've talked to has loved it. Granted they've all either live or work in remote areas where it has completely changed their lives. Those who live in remote areas can now actually work from home reliably and those who work on ships or in remote parts of world can now call home daily.

It's probably down to your expectations. Starlink won't replace a fiber connection, but if you only have a satellite connection or dial up, I can't see it being anything other than an improvement.

One concern I do have is if Starlink is down, there aren't really any backup. On the other hand I also only have one fiber connection at home. It's just that I could get a COAX hookup by tomorrow.

[madaxe_again]

I use starlink and find it fast and reliable - far more reliable than any cabled connection I ever had elsewhere, and faster than the fibre that’s available around me, which is contended to hell and back. Yes, it’s gigabit in theory, but in practice you get 20Mb/s, and any time there’s a power outage, which is often, it’s down.

[cubix]

And if you live a rural, mostly wooded area like I do, fallen trees are constantly taking out the fiber services for days at a time.

[SirHumphrey]

They aren’t buried? Or do the roots tear the fibre?

[mrweasel]

A lot of countries still uses poles for cables, and fiber. It's always super weird to see when you're from an area that buries everything except high voltage powerlines.

For areas with frequent earthquakes I think poles are preferred because it's easier to fix broken cables.

[SirHumphrey]

From the part of the Europe where I am from power lines are rarely buried, however fiber is universally buried so I haven’t even considered it could not be.

[cubix]

They’re not buried around here for the most part. I think the population density is just too low to justify the cost.