SpaceX launching 60 Starlink Sats Tomorrow!

[RaymondR]

The fundamental difference between public sector versus private sector ventures.

Elon is driven to achieve the average public sector bureaucrat, to survive.

It is a very, very ambitious project. In addition to the sheer number of sats required they have to talk to earth stations at both ends and to each other and seamlessly communicate and hand over between each other whilst whizzing around the earth at a great rate.

[GordMay]

After yesterday's launch was delayed due to high winds, tonight's launch has been delayed at least until next week, due to an unspecified software issue.
➥ https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1129181397262843906

[WingRyder]

Launch delays are a short-term setback. I doubt any of us will feel any significant impact from this launch... BUT! The technology being launched right now, will have HUGE implications for the future of global connectivity. I remain cautiously optimistic... But Musk and Bezos, seem to be motivated by the future benefits for mankind, rather than strictly by profit.

Musk, Bezos, and Branson are pouring billions of their own money into the prospect of space.

SpaceX is looking to dominate the global internet market. It may take a decade, but it will benefit us all!

[BigAl.NZ]

If Iridium has *any* brains they will start to offer competitive plans now and stay in a good position with market share. Its obvious competition is on the horizon....

However I suspect they are too arrogant to make any prices changes - the writing could be on the wall like it was for Kodak when camera's went digital.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by alansmith

Don’t equate masses with price. I’m paying a hundred dollars a month for satellite tv. I’m paying 80 dollars a month for high speed Internet. That is great technology and ... to me... crazy
Prices.

I was curious when I read this, and looked at Internet service in SF. I figured you must have a multiple gbps connection to cost $80.


But -- yowza! https://broadbandnow.com/California/San-Francisco



How can it be so expensive? $50 gets you 100mbs (maximum!) and a data cap! A gigabit/s without a cap is $90!


This is at least 3x more expensive than what you get in Europe -- how can that be?


In Helsinki, I pay €9.99 for 100mbs MINIMUM with no cap. For €15 you can have that plus a SIM card for your tablet with no data cap, no throttling, no limitations on tethering, and 50mbs. If you want 400mbs, it's €25. No cap. If you're on a budget, you can have 10mbs for -- free.


When I signed up for 100mbs (I had to do it on person because I don't have a Finnish social security number), the clerk was disdainful that I was signing up for such a "slow" connection. But it's a real 100mbs, never testing out lower than that, and it's really quite fast enough for anything I do. Streaming a 4k movie while download a big file is no problem.



My father in the States has a 50mbs connection, for which he pays $50 or something, and it usually tests out at 20-25mbs and often below 10.


How can we be so far behind Europe?? Didn't our own Al Gore invent the Internet, after all?

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

How can we be so far behind Europe??

I think it's how the system was built out. A lot of people get internet connectivity through their cable company. Cable companies, in most places, acted as virtually unregulated monopolies. Their original product, sports and entertainment channels, were a "money is no object" essential service for most customers. Companies could demand, and came to expect, outrageous profit margins.

Many think they're still in that marketplace. Maybe they are. But as more and more people start to question just how many sports and entertainment channels they need, and how much it's worth to them, things are changing.

I think the only "essential" service they're now offering is internet, and they intend to milk it for every dollar they can squeeze out of their customers.

Musk has identified this as an opportunity. I hope he succeeds in disrupting that industry. I won't be shedding a tear when I can finally tell my cable company to go pound sand.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

. . . I won't be shedding a tear when I can finally tell my cable company to go pound sand.

Why do you need cable? Amazon Prime and Netflix just about covers the waterfront, doesn't it?

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I was curious when I read this, and looked at Internet service in SF. I figured you must have a multiple gbps connection to cost $80.


But -- yowza! https://broadbandnow.com/California/San-Francisco



How can it be so expensive? $50 gets you 100mbs (maximum!) and a data cap! A gigabit/s without a cap is $90!


This is at least 3x more expensive than what you get in Europe -- how can that be?


In Helsinki, I pay €9.99 for 100mbs MINIMUM with no cap. For €15 you can have that plus a SIM card for your tablet with no data cap, no throttling, no limitations on tethering, and 50mbs. If you want 400mbs, it's €25. No cap. If you're on a budget, you can have 10mbs for -- free.


When I signed up for 100mbs (I had to do it on person because I don't have a Finnish social security number), the clerk was disdainful that I was signing up for such a "slow" connection. But it's a real 100mbs, never testing out lower than that, and it's really quite fast enough for anything I do. Streaming a 4k movie while download a big file is no problem.



My father in the States has a 50mbs connection, for which he pays $50 or something, and it usually tests out at 20-25mbs and often below 10.


How can we be so far behind Europe?? Didn't our own Al Gore invent the Internet, after all?

Socialized medical system in a country where a large part of the year is spent inside. The government probably figures it is cheaper to have then distracted with bread and circuses over a subsidized internet service than drunk all winter with the excessive load that puts on the "free" health system??

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Why do you need cable? Amazon Prime and Netflix just about covers the waterfront, doesn't it?

Cable is the only realistic internet connection around here. I don't use cable TV or phone, just internet.

My cable provider, a monopoly in most towns around here, is putting the squeeze on internet-only customers. They keep throttling down the speed to encourage us to pay more for "fast" (less throttling) service. Meanwhile, they fill my mailbox with 4-5 glossy flyers and important-looking envelopes (with no return address) every week, full of ads trying to get me to buy phone and TV packages from them.

Their business model is unsustainable, and they know it. They're trying to milk every last drop from a dying industry. Our land-line provider went down the same path. They've been bought and sold so many times I don't know who owns them now. I bailed on them years ago. I'll abandon the cable company the first chance I get.

[GordMay]

According to Musk, initial service may be up and running in about a year, with global service a few months after that, and profitable service — about 1,000 satellites out of an eventual 12,000* — a few months later.
If there are no major issues with the satellites, extensive launch delays, or problems manufacturing end-user terminals, the first customers may get access within the next 12 months.
An "initial" service in the US should be possible with 400 satellites in orbit, according to Musk. Meanwhile, global and "significant" service should happen with about 800 satellites, he said.

SpaceX has until April 2024 to deploy half of its 4,400 low-Earth-orbit satellites, and the rest by April 2027. For the remaining 7,500 "very" low-Earth-orbit satellites, SpaceX has until November 2024 to launch half, and November 2027 to send up the rest.

Musk indicated that demand for Starlink would determine how many satellites SpaceX launches. That's because each satellite will have about 1 terabit of functional bandwidth, or enough to serve streaming 4K video to about 1,100 people at once.

[Checkswrecks]

SpaceX isn't the only player in this game. What they are trying to do is to be the first with the most.
https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/...ver-heard.aspx

[Briggers]

Real-time weather reports wherever you are sounds good Tom me. Not sure about the news though, the way it’s going currently, you can keep it.

[ben2go]

I live in a small town outside of two major cities in SC. We have one semi worthy cable/internet provider, Charter/Spectrum. I pay $150 per month for 100mb service which I have never received. I get 30mb usually and can sometimes get close to 60mb on a good day. Yes, they have checked and serviced my equipment and can't give me a reason why. Unfortunately, it goes down quite often as well. It's always an area wide outage.

My other options are Windstream at 12mb limited bandwidth or satellite at around 20mb and data caps. Both of these options are in the $100-150 range. If this new network can run stable, give me a true 100mb broadband internet, it would be worth the $100 to $150 to have access 24/7/365 anywhere and everywhere I may roam. I'm hoping for a true 1gb connection. Then I can implement my plan for world domination.

[svmariane]

Originally Posted by ben2go

Then I can implement my plan for world domination.

Where do I sign up to become your flunky?



{After of course discussing salary, stock options, and other benefits such as kick-backs, pillaging rights and plundering restriction zones. Etc.}

[PLANET EXPRESS]

We told specter to pound sand over a year ago and plug phone into tv to stream. Have unlimited data calls and text on 3 devices for less than I was paying for just cable internet.