Quote from: VVet69 on February 25, 2021, 06:07:19 PM
If you still have your old satellite, how about doing the same speed tests with it for comparison...

My Viasat runs super fast, about 60 MBPS, but latency is a full second, usually longer, upload about 2 MBPS.
I like Viasat, 100 gigs a month, but you always have to wait for a connection and if the latency is too delayed, you have to keep refreshing the page.

Before satellite, all I had was dialup, then I got Verizon, but it had a bandwidth limit of 10 gigs, which we always went over and it was costly.
Starlink has no restrictions, you can use a terabyte of data if you like.

But the real upside will be the cost savings, no Viasat bill, dumping Dish, and when latency improves, I'll dump my landline, and stick it to AT&T.

Quote from: taxed on February 25, 2021, 06:59:25 PM
Where was that link about the Dems wanting to lay more fiber?  I can't find it but I know I saw it...

Is this it?

UNIVERSAL BROADBAND —
$100 billion "universal fiber" plan proposed by Democrats in Congress
Ambitious legislation would deploy 100Mbps symmetrical broadband throughout US.
JON BRODKIN - JUN 25, 2020 6:00 PM UTC

A US map with lines representing communications networks.
Enlarge
Getty Images | metamorworks
198
WITH 127 POSTERS PARTICIPATING
SHARE ON FACEBOOK
SHARE ON TWITTER
House Democrats yesterday unveiled a $100 billion broadband plan that's gaining quick support from consumer advocates.

"The House has a universal fiber broadband plan we should get behind," Electronic Frontier Foundation Senior Legislative Counsel Ernesto Falcon wrote in a blog post. House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) announced the Accessible, Affordable Internet for All Act, saying it has more than 30 co-sponsors and "invests $100 billion to build high-speed broadband infrastructure in unserved and underserved communities and ensure that the resulting Internet service is affordable." The bill text is available here.

In addition to federal funding for broadband networks with speeds of at least 100Mbps downstream and upstream, the bill would eliminate state laws that prevent the growth of municipal broadband. There are currently 19 states with such laws. The Clyburn legislation targets those states with this provision:

No State statute, regulation, or other State legal requirement may prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting any public provider, public-private partnership provider, or cooperatively organized provider from providing, to any person or any public or private entity, advanced telecommunications capability or any service that utilizes the advanced telecommunications capability provided by such provider.

The bill also has a Dig Once requirement that says fiber or fiber conduit must be installed "as part of any covered highway construction project" in states that receive federal highway funding. Similar Dig Once mandates have been proposed repeatedly over the years and gotten close to becoming US law, but never quite made it past the finish line.

The US is behind on fiber
"America is behind on its transition to a 21st-century, fiber-connected Internet with no plan for how to fix the problem," Falcon wrote. But Clyburn's bill "would begin a national transition of everyone's Internet connection into multi-gigabit capable fiber optics... and is likely heading towards a vote on the House floor as part of the overall COVID-19 recovery effort. After that its future remains in the hands of the Senate."

The Democrats' bill is highly unlikely to become law in its current form because Republicans control the Senate and White House. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai this week endorsed a Republican bill that includes $6 billion for broadband. Another Republican plan announced last week didn't have a dollar figure attached to it but promises funding and "regulatory relief" for telecom companies.

The Democrats' bill "is the right legislation at the right time as the COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare the need for every American to have robust, high-speed broadband Internet access at home," according to Gigi Sohn, a former Obama-era FCC official and current distinguished fellow at the Georgetown Law Institute for Technology & Policy.

Sohn, who was a counselor to then-FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler from 2013 to 2016, wrote that the bill "addresses the twin problems of broadband affordability and lack of network infrastructure, recognizing that the digital divide is both an urban and a rural problem. And it would promote competition in the broadband market by preferencing open-access networks and repealing anticompetitive state laws that prohibit communities from building their own broadband networks."

One key aspect of the bill is that it requires federally funded ISPs to provide low latency and speeds of at least 100Mbps for both downloads and uploads. The bill also defines "unserved" areas as those lacking options with download and upload speeds of 25Mbps. By contrast, the FCC's current, five-year-old broadband standard is 25Mbps downstream but only 3Mbps upstream. "These higher metrics [for both downloads and uploads] are what make this a fiber infrastructure bill as older legacy networks such as DSL cannot effectively deliver these speeds," Falcon wrote.

Funded projects must also provide broadband at prices that are "comparable" to or lower than what's available in areas that already have broadband access, the bill says.

What else is in the bill
As Clyburn's announcement explained, the Democrats' bill includes these provisions:

$80 billion to deploy high-speed broadband infrastructure nationwide
$5 billion for low-interest financing of broadband deployment through a new secured loan program
Ensur[ing] Internet affordability by requiring an affordable option for Internet service plans offered on the newly-built infrastructure; providing a $50 monthly discount on plans for low-income consumers; and directing the FCC to collect and publicize data on prices charged for broadband service throughout the country
$1 billion to establish grant programs for states to close gaps in broadband adoption, as well as digital inclusion projects for organizations and local communities to implement
$5 billion to enable students without Internet at home to participate in remote learning
Funding for Wi-Fi on school buses so students can stay connected, especially in rural areas where longer bus rides are common.
The $80 billion would be appropriated to the FCC "for fiscal year 2021, to remain available until expended," the bill says. The FCC would be required to distribute the money through a competitive bidding process, similar to how its current programs work. But the commission would have to award 75 percent of the funding within 18 months "to expand access to broadband service in unserved areas and areas with low-tier service." Low-tier is defined as less than 100Mbps downloads or uploads. The FCC's biggest broadband-funding plan right now is for $20.4 billion over 10 years, or about $2 billion a year.

Falcon argues that a plan like Clyburn's is needed for the US to deploy fiber throughout the country within a few years instead of decades. "Such an ambitious program would have the United States match China's efforts to build universal fiber with the US completing its transition just a few short years after China," Falcon wrote. "Without this law, the transition would take decades."

Falcon also praised the legislation for "emphasiz[ing] open-access fiber networks that would replicate the success in Utah, where people are getting a dozen options for low priced gigabit and ten-gigabit services, including in rural markets."

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/100-billion-universal-fiber-plan-proposed-by-democrats-in-congress/

Quote from: Skull on February 23, 2021, 12:27:14 PM
To clarify - "I am not on cable..."  - still hate putting more garbage into our sky!

I agree however, better us than the democrats though...err I mean Chinese...

Quote from: Solar on February 25, 2021, 05:26:27 PM
OK, got it last night, all ready to go, all you have to do is set in in your yard, plug it in, it's already wired up.
It's cool, because it seeks out the satellite on its own, and my download speeds are around 180 MBPS, upload around 28 MBPS, latency is in the 20s.
All in all, it takes about 20 minutes to log on for the first time, and you're ready to go.

In other words, this little monster screams!!

The downside? Needs more satellites, I'm up for 20 minutes, and off for 2 as it waits for the next satellite, sometimes it holds the connection for the next one but it really doesn't matter because when it's up, you can load a bunch of movies, download games, open all kinds of sites, all at the same time and it doesn't blink, until the satellite is out of reach.


Just did a speed check as the satellite is almost out of range...
You can check your own here.
https://www.speedtest.net

Result ID 10995577841
PING ms
27
DOWNLOAD Mbps
180.1
UPLOAD Mbps
21.3

OK, 2 minutes later as the satellite went out of range, it didn't finish the upload speed.


Result ID 10995582795
PING ms
27
DOWNLOAD Mbps
105.38
UPLOAD Mbps

At the rate they are putting new satellites in the air, this won';t be a problem for long, but any estimate?

Quote from: Possum on February 26, 2021, 03:01:36 AM
At the rate they are putting new satellites in the air, this won';t be a problem for long, but any estimate?

I'm hearing by summer. Latency will improve and connections are supposed to be solid, though still fast and slower, like that of a roller coaster, but will stay connected.

What the dims want, and what will actually happen.

The left wants to line their crony supporters bank accounts with our money, giving them a death grip on Free Speech, while Elon is simply making the lefts mode of restricting the First Amendment look like a Govt sanctioned snail race that no one will care to attend.

Democrats Send Insane Letter to Cable Carriers and Big Tech, Demanding a Ban on Conservative Media

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2021/02/23/democrats-send-insane-letter-to-cable-carriers-demanding-a-ban-on-conservative-tv-networks-n2585181

Question for a friend....

How does the satellite connect to the tv?  Do you have to power it?  Coax?  Elon Magic?

We have a Smart TV - wireless connection to Starlink.  (Just like our computers.)  Toy

Quote from: Owebo on February 27, 2021, 07:14:56 AM
Question for a friend....

How does the satellite connect to the tv?  Do you have to power it?  Coax?  Elon Magic?

The router does have an secondary output connection for newer TV's, like a smart TV, which are cheaper that a computer monitor. That's what I use for my monitor, a 48" Smart TV, cost around $200.0+.
Thing is, the TV remote will work, but the cursor is a bitch to use, so we're buying another computer just to search out videos and save them on the hard drive, since we don't want to stream, this way we have a mouse and keyboard to work with instead of a stupid single remote.

Quote from: Solar on February 25, 2021, 07:38:49 PM
Is this it?

UNIVERSAL BROADBAND —
$100 billion "universal fiber" plan proposed by Democrats in Congress
Ambitious legislation would deploy 100Mbps symmetrical broadband throughout US.
JON BRODKIN - JUN 25, 2020 6:00 PM UTC

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/100-billion-universal-fiber-plan-proposed-by-democrats-in-congress/

This is a huge wet kiss to VSZ, AT&T & Lumen (formerly CTL, formerly Level3).
They're imbedded so deep into the Federal government, and have positioned themselves as "too important to fail", for the sake of national security - when they have financial troubles, expect the taxpayer to bail them out.

For the life of me, I don't understand why people still think "the internet is owned by the government" or "the internet is FREE & nobody owns it".   Fact is, the entire backbone is owned by one of these three and smaller companies, like Comcast, some ISPs, etc.  Just because there can be several "networks" built over the same bundle of fibers, doesn't imply ownership of that fiber.  Someone paid big money to plow or hang that fiber, and trust me, they've not given away an inch of it.  The gear hanging off the end of that fiber is VERY expensive, the test sets cost as much as a new car!

The dumbest thing a city, municipality can do, maybe the most corrupt, is to build it's own fiber optic network to "compete" or "lower costs" - they go broke, and wind up giving away all that fiber infrastructure to someone who knows how to run a business.  Virginia has several examples.

$100 Billion is a drop in the bucket.  Just a wet kiss, or a bailout.  IMO, Starlink isn't going to be broadbanded enough to seriously compete with Fiber, not when we can deliver 400Gbit waves, and 64 waves of that in parallel.  This stuff is so fast, it's optically split/combined with prisms, before it hits anything electronic.  But, for the rural people, like ME, who deliver service to everyone but myself... I'm gonna sign up.

a.  It's faster, up and down
b.  I already KNOW the company I work for, LOVES collecting data
c.  I expect to be able to use it in a mobile situation - and potentially ditch the cell phone too!
d.  20ms latency is as fast as SIP trunking, VOIP and other voice-over-internet service, there won't be a difference.
e.  2 land lines + internet = $130 per month, company cell phone loaded with spy-ware...  I think I can come up with a better, cheaper plan.

Quote from: Hoofer on February 28, 2021, 07:41:01 AM
This is a huge wet kiss to VSZ, AT&T & Lumen (formerly CTL, formerly Level3).
They're imbedded so deep into the Federal government, and have positioned themselves as "too important to fail", for the sake of national security - when they have financial troubles, expect the taxpayer to bail them out.

For the life of me, I don't understand why people still think "the internet is owned by the government" or "the internet is FREE & nobody owns it".   Fact is, the entire backbone is owned by one of these three and smaller companies, like Comcast, some ISPs, etc.  Just because there can be several "networks" built over the same bundle of fibers, doesn't imply ownership of that fiber.  Someone paid big money to plow or hang that fiber, and trust me, they've not given away an inch of it.  The gear hanging off the end of that fiber is VERY expensive, the test sets cost as much as a new car!

The dumbest thing a city, municipality can do, maybe the most corrupt, is to build it's own fiber optic network to "compete" or "lower costs" - they go broke, and wind up giving away all that fiber infrastructure to someone who knows how to run a business.  Virginia has several examples.

$100 Billion is a drop in the bucket.  Just a wet kiss, or a bailout.  IMO, Starlink isn't going to be broadbanded enough to seriously compete with Fiber, not when we can deliver 400Gbit waves, and 64 waves of that in parallel.  This stuff is so fast, it's optically split/combined with prisms, before it hits anything electronic.  But, for the rural people, like ME, who deliver service to everyone but myself... I'm gonna sign up.

a.  It's faster, up and down
b.  I already KNOW the company I work for, LOVES collecting data
c.  I expect to be able to use it in a mobile situation - and potentially ditch the cell phone too!
d.  20ms latency is as fast as SIP trunking, VOIP and other voice-over-internet service, there won't be a difference.
e.  2 land lines + internet = $130 per month, company cell phone loaded with spy-ware...  I think I can come up with a better, cheaper plan.

That's the thing, Starlink bypasses all of that.

Here in SC we can get Fiber to the home in association with the Rural Electric Cooperatives. Our REC rolled this out a couple of years ago. I get 1Gbs up and down for $90 per month (prior to that it was AT&T DSL , 3-6Mb down, and 500kb -1 Mb up on a good day). You can get 500Mb and 100Mb fiber plans for a bit less.  The company that manages the network, Carolina Connect, has no known association with *any* of the big ISP or Content Providers. However, at some point in time they have to connect to an Internet backbone owned one of the major ISP but I don't know which one... Starlink also has to connect to an Internet Backbone provider as well.

Quote from: VVet69 on February 28, 2021, 10:44:12 AM
Here in SC we can get Fiber to the home in association with the Rural Electric Cooperatives. Our REC rolled this out a couple of years ago. I get 1Gbs up and down for $90 per month (prior to that it was AT&T DSL , 3-6Mb down, and 500kb -1 Mb up on a good day). You can get 500Mb and 100Mb fiber plans for a bit less.  The company that manages the network, Carolina Connect, has no known association with *any* of the big ISP or Content Providers. However, at some point in time they have to connect to an Internet backbone owned one of the major ISP but I don't know which one... Starlink also has to connect to an Internet Backbone provider as well.

Nope. Anyway, not any of the big providers, Hell, I haven't seen anything whatsoever in this case, it may be his own.

I think this article explains it better than I did (or tried to  )
https://www.networkworld.com/article/3532318/what-is-the-internet-backbone-and-how-it-works.html
However it is STILL 'see ya later' to any of the big ISP/Content providers 

Quote from: VVet69 on February 28, 2021, 10:44:12 AM
Here in SC we can get Fiber to the home in association with the Rural Electric Cooperatives. Our REC rolled this out a couple of years ago. I get 1Gbs up and down for $90 per month (prior to that it was AT&T DSL , 3-6Mb down, and 500kb -1 Mb up on a good day). You can get 500Mb and 100Mb fiber plans for a bit less.  The company that manages the network, Carolina Connect, has no known association with *any* of the big ISP or Content Providers. However, at some point in time they have to connect to an Internet backbone owned one of the major ISP but I don't know which one... Starlink also has to connect to an Internet Backbone provider as well.

True, but that's OK because nobody is going to shut down the backbone if some of us are going to conservative sites...  also, I'd think Starlink will have its own internet.  Instead of now where you go to http://, maybe we'll go to sites like starlink://....

Lots of possibilities...