Wireless will always be worse than proper fiber.
In a perfect world, we would all have active optical fiber from the backbone to our home routers. But 5G and satellite internet is cheaper...
In a perfect world, we would all have active optical fiber from the backbone to our home routers. But 5G and satellite internet is cheaper...
But yes. For rural less dense deployments. Long range signal through the air is much cheaper.
Wireless is always cheaper than wired for an equivalent coverage area. It just requires less physical infrastructure. But in almost every other way it has inferior performance.
fiber=c lasers=c fiber=nonlinear lasers=linear
So in physics terms, starlink will eventually surpass buried fiber in latency for all situations where fiber routing divergence from linear exceeds the ~1000km orbital round trip.
We've been getting a thunderstorm every evening here, and my Starlink slows down a lot -- not sure if it's ionization, the water content of clouds, or what, but it's definitely noticeable.
And my previous point-to-point wifi would also essentially stop transferring data when it rained, just in case some Starlink hater thinks it's somehow worse than alternatives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light_neutrino_ano...