Satellite - Starband Broadband

[Freebie Hawk]

I am wondering if anyone has used or heard anyting about the new satellite service through StarBand and Dish Network? It guarantees 500K download minimus with people getting up to 1200K!

At any rate, ny networking question is if so, has anyone heard or gotten it to work with Windows 98 SE's Internet Connection Sharing (ICS)? I have two machines, a host and a client and need them both to be able to surf, etc.

Let me know!

Thanks,

T

 

[THELAIR]

there is a company in canada called Maxlink that is using sattelite technology. However there is no real "satellite" its just a 18" dish pointing to a networking tower. I forget their rates but it was REALLY good. Plus its not like DSL where you may get 0.6mbits up and 1-4 mbits down. You can have it setup ANY way you want. 4mbits up and down, or 2mbits up and 5 mbits down etc... whatever you want. Only prob is that they have to have towers in the areas you want to connect to, say for VPN as an example...

:\

looks promissing though

 

[Clocker]

The internet sharing app wizard that comes with 98 se is pretty bad. I have had other people in this froum complain about it userbility. Personally, I have had problems and i prefer using wingate to split my net connection-I believe it is the most easiest and their help section is fairly comprehensive for a newbie. Others have reccomended Sys something.

Have a good one
Clcoker

 

[adsouthpaw]

There is some specific information on connection sharing on Starband's site. Looked pretty helpful to me. Check it out. On another note, does anyone have this service? I'm thinking about getting it, but I got ripped off with DirecPC a few years ago and am a bit apprehensive.

 

[celeritas]

IMHO, the Starband+Microsoft+Radio Shack setup isn't worth considering. First of all, AFAIK it still requires the purchase of an MSN Internet contract and a $900-$1200 POS Compaq PC.

Secondly, I went to a couple local RS stores that had the system setup in order to test the bandwidth. I ran the MS speedtest and the one on 2Wire 3x in a row. The MS site seemed to give high numbers (big surprise): ~600kbits/sec download; 2wire said it was more like ~450kbits/sec. Real-world download tests yielded even lower figures: ~340kbits/sec. I didn't get a chance to do upload tests, but the specs say 150kbits/sec max, so I can't imagine that you'll see anything much faster than that...

Thirdly, the latency on a bidirectional satellite connection really sucks. Due to the distances involved, expect 500ms+ ping times. That would rule out online gaming. I'd get it only if you really need a broadband link and there is nothing else available.

Check out this thread

 

[Emory7]

Still, it's a step up from the 18 to 20 kps I average on my dialup.

You do not have to buy it though RS. The 180 modem unit is avail form Starband direct. Cost's are $600. including install and $70 a month.

High, yes but I will network with my brother and split the cost.

 

[pm]

I know that I mention this everytime anyone mentions satellite, but I'll mention it again. The latency will be very high (>500ms). Probably twice as bad as a 56k modem. This set up will probably be very fast in downloading, but it won't be good for gaming or video/audio conferencing.

 

[xile]

I read somewhere that satellite connections have an average ping time of around 300 ms which is very close to the ping time of a standard dial-up modem - around 250 ms.... Gaming over modem is possible, so it also should be possible through satellite.

Besides, have you heard of Teledesic? They plan to offer satellite Internet through 288 low-orbit satellites and claim to provide access as fast as fiber. However, they will start providing the service in around 2003 (I think...).

 

[pm]

The speed of light in a vacuum is ~125,000 miles per second - the atmosphere is not a vacuum and so the speed of light is slower, but we'll ignore that. Satellites in geosynchronous orbit are ~22,000 miles from earth - of course, this is measured from a perpendicular angle at the equator, so once you head north (or south) of the equator, the distance increases even more, but we'll ignore that.

A message from the computer to a webserver somewhere would take 4 trips (two on the outbound, two more inbound). So we are looking at a 88,000 mile trip or 700ms. This is unavoidable. Most guesses are that two-way satellite will have a ping in the 800 to 950ms range.

Teledesic is likely to be expensive. A ring of satellites in low-earth orbit require several hundred satellites each of which need to constantly use fuel to stay in orbit and, when the run out of fuel, they will burn up in the atmosphere. Launching the satellites costs a fortune. Low-earth orbit satellites require a continuous investment into the infrastructure. Iridium wanted to do satellite wireless telephone and it ended up costing $3k for a phone and $10/min. to use the network.

 

[celeritas]

The speed in light is more like 186,282 miles per second, but no matter. The 61K odd mps doesn't make a big difference. The lowest theoretical number would be around 500ms -- but with overhead, slow hops, etc. you'll probably see the numbers pm mentioned.

 

[pm]

Oops. I'm used to seeing the speed of light in glass (SiO2) which is ~125kmps and I forgot the vacuum number. That's what I get for quoting numbers from memory.

 

[xile]

To pm's reply about Teledesic:
Well,
that may be true, although there are a few differences (in my view).
First, far more people would use and are in need of broadband satellite Internet than the people that need satellite phones... Millions of people use the Internet, but just a few need to make a phone call in the middle of the Pacific Ocean for example.
Second, the quality of Teledesic should be higher, than the quality of Iridium. I've read that the satellite connections were noisy and that it's difficult to use a satphone...
When talking about prices I think that Teledesic will definately be cheaper than fiber in my country. Let me tell you something about it - it's Bulgaria (situated in Eastern Europe, on the Black Sea coast). The telecommunications infrastructure here is very weak and this has a terrible effect on Internet access pricing... For example, a 64 kbit/s guaranteed-speed connection to the net costs $650/month (yeah, 650 US dollars). ISDN, which does not have a guaranteed speed is also very expensive - $1 - $4 per hour! Western Europe has better communications than most part of Eastern Europe, but even there the Internet is more expensive than in the US. In Germany, people pay an average of $0.8 per hour for dial-up Internet access.
I think that Teledesic will be cheaper than that and it will have large consumer demand, at least in Europe...

 

[pm]

Xile, we shall see.

Iridium's cost structure was predicted to be substantially lower than it ended up being as well. Iridium was not intended to just be cell phone useable in the middle of the ocean. Iridium was supposed to be an alternative to cell phones allowing people to make phone calls from anywhere, no matter how remote, moutainious, etc. Most of the world doesn't have access to cells (heck, I can drive 20 miles west of where I currently am and lose all cell phone access) - Iridium was supposed to give cell phone access anywhere. It was supposed to allow a business travelling to take the same phone with the same number and make calls from anywhere in the world without having to worry about various national plans. Originally the phones were projected to be <$500 and rates were going to be <$3/min once the system hit full swing.

I'll grant you that Teledesic has a better business model than satellite telephones, but the point remains that low earth orbit satellites are very expensive to launch and operate and you need a lot of them. I believe that it will end up being more expensive than you, or they, think it will once all is said and done. The equipment will be expensive and it will be subject to weather and solar storm issues.

My wife is Polish and so I travel to Eastern Europe frequently. I have first-hand knowledge of the difficulties of accessing the Internet over there. Based on the situation with cell phones vs. landline phones it seems to me that wireless broadband is a more likely solution to internet connectivity than LEO satellites.

 

[xile]

Ok, this sounds reasonable.
Besides, do you know when Starband are comming to Europe?

 

[Shack70]

I've heard of ppl getting ok speeds, but you can't do online gamine with it beacsue of the lag time. You have to keep in mind that you are bouncing signals off a satalite