[dnu]

But why should the satellites be on geosynchronous orbit? What if we bring them closer to Earth? For example, when we use mobile internet, we travel from antenna to antenna. With satellites on lower orbits, the antennas will travel around us.

[leoedin]

This is possible, but the problem is that the closer your satellites get to earth, the larger number of satellites you need in your constellation to maintain coverage. Iridium[1] spent $6 billion putting a very large constellation of satellites into orbit and promptly went bust. Convincing an investor that you won't end up having the same problems that iridium had would be tricky.

It's certainly not impossible, but I would be surprised if the economics of satellite based internet can compete with fibre based networks. The areas where fibre isn't feasible are also probably the areas with few people, and so the potential to make money is limited.

Iridium has shown that (once you disregard capital costs), there is a niche for satellite based telecom services, but it's a fairly niche area.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_Communications_Inc.

[dnu]

Well, if it's DARPA, then probably the main purpose of the network will be military. And I'm pretty sure that they have much more money than Iridium.

[leoedin]

Obviously military use is quite different from civilian use. I was really trying to address the part of the original article which suggested that this technology might make its way into civil life.

[crististm]

I think it's hard to pinpoint a satelite that is moving around all the time.