Give me the pros and cons of satellite internet. Will it ever beat fiber?
Fiber has higher speeds, lower latencies, last longer, cats and clouds don't block the signals.For some people, its easier to put satellites in orbit than dig trenches to everyone's house.
>>107701196>Will it ever beat fiberit already didwith a solar panel and a starlink account you can do anything anywhere. you dont have to choose your house or trailer based on some shitass provider who gives you a quota of $17,000 to pull up fiber to your shack in the woods
>>107701196easier to censor fiber
>>107701196>hehe lil cloud here>nothing personell
>>107701355If you live in a shack in the woods then it already did
>>107701355But i have gigabit fiber to my shack in the woods :) (we're like 800 yards to the road, the electric company did the conduit, was only about $500 to have it run to our house + last bit of trenching.)>>107701196Starlink is serviceable, used it for a couple of years. Average ping times were about 30ms, with no cap. Compared to viasat which was like 600ms (Best case) and a 100GB cap -- was also about 2x as expensive as Saarlink.Basically starlink and whatever kuiper faggotry bezos shits out are the best case scenario, geosynchronous sats are too far away for anything approaching decent latency.
>>107701196It's physically impossible for it to /beat/ fibre. We're talking a minimum 500km radio link through highly variable weather conditions, followed by another 500km link back down to a base station, and then the same in reverse. Whatever speed and latency you can achieve over that, you can always do better over a fibre cable.But I hear starlink is good enough in practice that many (most?) people could use it as their main residential connection. Which is obviously pretty impressive.
>>107701355>>107701748>>107702771I guess the checks stopped coming if /g/ isn't immediately dismissing starlink
>>107702929whatcha mean?
