Could never have worked from up there.
I'm glad it worked for you! But the rural places where my friends live have lots of trees, tall ones, and they made Starlink totally unusable.
Either way, I'd say Starlink is an enormous improvement over every other satellite solution I've tried. The lack of data cap alone puts it head-and-heels above the competition, and the speeds are good enough to coax people off 4G. I have some small complaints about CGNAT and the provided router, but the service itself is more reliable than some cable connections I've tried.
Having seen (and tried) a lot of the alternatives, there really aren't any pushbutton services that compare.
It’s much like a cell tower where a geographical area has finite capacity. You use your “priority” data that has speed guarantees, then it slows down, but is still unlimited. Apparently some users were reselling the link & maxing out the upload/download 24/7. (yeah, I get it, but in this case some kind of QoS probably needs to happen to turn a profit)
I’ve been a beta user since the first couple months of launch. They’ve had growing pains, but it has overall been light years ahead of our local WISP or Hughesnet/Viasat in terms of speed and reliability. Several of my neighbors have no other option than traditional geostationary satellite providers, and I don’t think any of us every want to go back to 600ms+ latencies!
edit: I just wanted to add that for many people, priority speeds for 1TB & having sub-100ms latency is far, far better than the alternatives.
Comcast has similar traffic caps for many of their plans. It's perfectly adequate for most typical users.
Don't worry though, once you hit your gratuitous 50gb/month limit, they only make your network 8x slower until you pay $10/extra gig... I wouldn't praise Starlink if it wasn't such a steal by comparison.
Don't you mean the other way around? Not that it's any better.
Alternatively, perhaps the starlink antenna could be mounted on a large pole or modest radio tower. That would be ugly but probably a lot less ugly than chopping down your trees.
If close to the home doesn't work, depending on siting requirements, you can erect a tower in a clearing or where there is clear line of sight to the sky and then run power and network to the tower from the nearest structure. Don't neglect lightning surge suppression to protect equipment.
Similar to this: https://old.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/mk4jfx/starlink_d...
I'm not sure what the answer is in general. It's probably not realistic to expect universal wired broadband in very rural areas. Conventional satellite is by all accounts pretty bad. And cellular isn't really an option absent a good 5G signal.
But, other than a vacation cottage, lack of usable Internet isn't really an option either if you're going to be working from somewhere.
Is the infrastructure for low-broadband in low density areas inherently more expensive than POTS infrastructure was 75-100 years ago?
POTS bills also at least used to have a universal service charge line item, in part to subsidize rural service.
No? The process to transition the USF to covering broadband didn’t even start until the tail end of the Obama administration.
An example, in Carroll County, GA I live outside of Carrollton, GA and have 2 fiber options 1) Charter/Spectrum which I use 2) CarrollEMC/Crossbeam which looks like they just dropped fiber on our power pole within the last month. If you look at the FCC map of Highway 5 it correctly shows ATT DSL availability, incorrectly shows Comcast coax availability, and does not show either Charter/Spectrum or CarrollEMC/Crossbeam. There is only a process to challenge availability on the FCC map, like Comcast...that incorrectly shows availability, and no option to add new providers to the map. It is left up to the provider to claim availability.
There are now plenty of rural areas with symmetrical gigabit broadband available, while most cities are stuck with whatever pitiful options Cox or ATT decides to bestow.
I don't know why. It seems incredibly realistic to expect wired broadband in most rural areas. (We were able to provide them with power lines and telephone lines over 60+ years ago, there's no reason fiber would have to be any different)
Dangerous also because the media industry insists that ISPs permanently cancel the service of customers after multiple unproven allegations of copyright infringement and without a single conviction. So far, the courts have been completely agreeing with them and ISPs who refuse to bow to the wishes of the media industry and terminate these users are being sued.
Anyone can lose the ability to have an account at the only ISP they have just because some third party P2P snoop, hired by a movie studio, forwarded a DMCA notice to their ISP with their IP address on it too many times (with "too many" being entirely unspecified in law and up to whatever the ISP thinks won't get them sued). Those third parties haven't exactly always been so careful about avoiding false accusations either. Actually doing anything to deserve a DMCA notice isn't required.
Customer volume for Starlink is arguably more valuable to SpaceX than profit per customer.
Incidentally the latency has really improved my web development practices.
Even this method can be flawed - there might be a hefty installation fee, or you might run into a situation where even though service is technically offered at your new place but it's not physically possible to install. My mom and I ran into the latter situation years ago when she moved into a new house during a FiOS installer strike. They scheduled installations weekly for a month or two, optimistically thinking they'd reach an agreement I suppose, but nobody ever showed up. We eventually had to sign up with Comcast, which sort of got us through a few months until it was possible to get FiOS installed.
Comcast gave me a quote for $330,000 to run a fiber line to my house.
Starlink is beter than nothing but still disappointing compared to the speeds they promise. And I worry it's going to get worse as more people start using Starlink.
I had a funny similar thing happen a long time ago, back when copper ADSL was “broadband”, and it was all the incumbent local telcos or resellers: Before a move, I contacted my local telco, who I was getting ADSL directly from and setup everything for the move, including confirming that service was available and, because of available service appointment windows, having it shutoff at my new place before the move and turned on at the new location.
When we got to the new place, telephone was up and ADSL wasn’t. Initially was told they would need to schedule a new service call, which they missed, and then when I called again was told service wasn’t available. In the meantime, given the service problems, I had already contacted one of the ADSL resellers, who said my address did have ADSL available, and was quoted a lower price than directly from the telco. Confronted the telco with this information, and they insisted that despite confirming multiple times in the past that the new address was in the service area, it was, in fact, too far from the central exchange for ADSL service. Switched to the reseller, and stayed with them for several years (and faster service tiers) before switching to another provider that had fiber available.
There was a comcast truck driving down the street a while back (before we had starlink) and I literally chased him down and asked if they were installing broadband. He was a little confused, and then said "no, I'm just checking the line levels...but you're the fourth person to ask me that on this street"
I would take a 100/100 fiber to the home connection than a “1Gbps” Comcast connection.
Somewhat related.
I'm in the middle of signing a lease on a new place...
One of the biggest draws for me is what me and my friends jokingly call "the socialist service" I'm going to have.
Water, Sewer, Electricity, Phone, Cable and Internet (up to 2gig!) all in one bill and managed by the same company. Oh and the bill is on average cheaper than even a single electricity bill from the nearby city my old place was in.
Only downside is the internet is cable so not asymmetric.
The very first thing we did (mostly my wife) was to call Comcast, give them the specific address, and have them verify the place had high speed Internet.
For those that passed that test (a relatively low percentage did since we were looking to live in a relatively rural area) the next thing we did was contact the relevant real-estate agent. This part was tricky and often annoying. We cut through everything they had to say and said that, if they wanted to potentially move forward, they had to do something for us. They had to get permission from the current owner and run an Internet speed test.
This was a PITA, but most of the time they did it. And most of the time, Comcast's data was accurate about whether service was available.
The place we ended up buying is about 10 miles outside of Olympia Washington. Our street is one of the very few in the area that has high speed comcast.
Having said that, we also got a starlink dishy right away and we use that as backup, because while most of the time our Internet is really excellent, speed is great, etc, it has a lot of small outages, so it's worth having a highly reliable but much less fast backup.
Having at least two good internet providers is a requirement for any home I purchase going forward.