  gigahurtzPremium
join:2001-10-20
Palm Coast, FL
 ·Bright House
| Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. as long as people live in areas that aren't reached by the main providers.
The option of having to dial up is almost not an option anymore for most people so Satellite broadband is the only option for those living in rural areas. Satellite providers know this and will continue to take advantage of it until another competitor pushes them to raise and/or eliminate caps. | |
|
 |  ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. From my experience, the only relevance they have is if you're wanting to ditch using a 2nd land line out in the boonies. Otherwise, the connection some time might as well be 56k.
At least then I'd have a ping time that doesn't make internet services cry. | |
|
| | Rob_Premium
join:2008-07-16
Mary Esther, FL | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. Why do we need caps in the first place?? | |
|
| | |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. said by Rob_:Why do we need caps in the first place??
to protect OVERPRICED VIDEO.
--
Oh YES! let me drop everything i'm doing regardless of who it affects to deal with your petty little problem! | |
|
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Because when you spread 10 Gbps of capacity over 400,000 users...yeah, bad things happen. | |
|
| | | | ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. said by iansltx:Because when you spread 10 Gbps of capacity over 400,000 users...yeah, bad things happen.
Network quality would go up?  | |
|
| | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. lol nope. Spaceway (the HN sat responsible for the relatively new tiers on that service) has 10G of capacity. That may seem like a lot, but when you're covering an entire continent with that amount of capacity you get spread very thinly very quickly. To provide some contrast, LUSFiber uses a 10G pipe to feed its muni fiber system, which provides much higher speeds, but to a much smaller number of subscribers. Not to mention the fact that data usage does not scale linearly with speed...ever. | |
|
| | | | | | ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. I just thought with only 400,000 users, the bandwidth would improve.
Because I swear, it feels like they've hooked up all the US into one satellite with the speeds we've seen. | |
|
| | | |  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by iansltx:Because when you spread 10 Gbps of capacity over 400,000 users...yeah, bad things happen.
If the best you can do is offer 450 MB a day then perhaps you should just go out of business. | |
|
| | | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. Then every cellular company should go out of business.
Oh wait... | |
|
| | | | | gigahurtzPremium
join:2001-10-20
Palm Coast, FL | I agree with you 100%: I don't agree with the caps that are imposed by these Satellite broadband companies. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. said by gigahurtz:I agree with you 100%: I don't agree with the caps that are imposed by these Satellite broadband companies.
based on what argument? Their associated costs with putting a bird in orbit? Their extreme costs on user equipment? or are you comparing this to the relatively low cost of dsl/cable/fiber. Satellite isn't for everyone, it's for those who don't have traditional options. I can tell you it's relatively cheap for sat service. When i crossed an ocean i think it was around $10/meg. That being said, I was in the middle of the atlantic ocean. | |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by gigahurtz:as long as people live in areas that aren't reached by the main providers.
The option of having to dial up is almost not an option anymore for most people so Satellite broadband is the only option for those living in rural areas. Satellite providers know this and will continue to take advantage of it until another competitor pushes them to raise and/or eliminate caps.
Sorry I know people that do without internet or use dial-up over paying for satellite. Besides since more people are getting smartphones and are required to get a data plan and since all you can do on satellite is check e-mail, facebook and maybe pay a bill, well you can do that with a smartphone. So actually satellite is becoming even less relevant. | |
|
| | ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. said by BF69:Besides since more people are getting smartphones and are required to get a data plan and since all you can do on satellite is check e-mail, facebook and maybe pay a bill, well you can do that with a smartphone. So actually satellite is becoming even less relevant.
...right up until you live in a broadband provider-less area, as well as no cell coverage. Then your only options are literally dial-up and satellite. And in some ways, dial-up is still better, lol. | |
|
| | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. said by Thaler:said by BF69:Besides since more people are getting smartphones and are required to get a data plan and since all you can do on satellite is check e-mail, facebook and maybe pay a bill, well you can do that with a smartphone. So actually satellite is becoming even less relevant.
...right up until you live in a broadband provider-less area, as well as no cell coverage. Then your only options are literally dial-up and satellite. And in some ways, dial-up is still better, lol. Well of course with dial-up you can download 16.5 GB a month vs 13.2 GB with Hughesnet's $110 plan. | |
|
| | | | gigahurtzPremium
join:2001-10-20
Palm Coast, FL Reviews:
·Bright House
| Re: Satellite Broadband will always be relevant.. said by BF69:said by Thaler:said by BF69:Besides since more people are getting smartphones and are required to get a data plan and since all you can do on satellite is check e-mail, facebook and maybe pay a bill, well you can do that with a smartphone. So actually satellite is becoming even less relevant.
...right up until you live in a broadband provider-less area, as well as no cell coverage. Then your only options are literally dial-up and satellite. And in some ways, dial-up is still better, lol. Well of course with dial-up you can download 16.5 GB a month vs 13.2 GB with Hughesnet's $110 plan. Sure, dial up will give you 13.2 GB per month. That's assuming you don't get disconnected, you stay connected 24/7 and have a near perfect connection. When was the last time you've downloaded 13 GB of data on a 56k connection? | |
|
| | gigahurtzPremium
join:2001-10-20
Palm Coast, FL Reviews:
·Bright House
| said by BF69:said by gigahurtz:as long as people live in areas that aren't reached by the main providers.
The option of having to dial up is almost not an option anymore for most people so Satellite broadband is the only option for those living in rural areas. Satellite providers know this and will continue to take advantage of it until another competitor pushes them to raise and/or eliminate caps.
Sorry I know people that do without internet or use dial-up over paying for satellite. Besides since more people are getting smartphones and are required to get a data plan and since all you can do on satellite is check e-mail, facebook and maybe pay a bill, well you can do that with a smartphone. So actually satellite is becoming even less relevant. Sorry, perhaps you didn't see where I said "most" people. I know people who don't need internet or have it on their phone too.
Chances are, if they rely on their phone for internet then most likely don't have reception at home. | |
|
| | gigahurtzPremium
join:2001-10-20
Palm Coast, FL Reviews:
·Bright House
| said by BF69:said by gigahurtz:as long as people live in areas that aren't reached by the main providers.
The option of having to dial up is almost not an option anymore for most people so Satellite broadband is the only option for those living in rural areas. Satellite providers know this and will continue to take advantage of it until another competitor pushes them to raise and/or eliminate caps.
Sorry I know people that do without internet or use dial-up over paying for satellite. Besides since more people are getting smartphones and are required to get a data plan and since all you can do on satellite is check e-mail, facebook and maybe pay a bill, well you can do that with a smartphone. So actually satellite is becoming even less relevant. Sorry, perhaps you didn't see where I said "most" people. I know people who don't need internet or have it on their phone too.
Chances are, if they rely on their phone for internet then most likely don't have reception at home since they can't get high speed internet where they live. | |
|
| | | I would rather sick with in paying $10 a mouth for unlimited Last Century dial up internet rather than $70 Satellite Broadband anyday. | |
|
 mix
join:2002-03-19
Utica, MI | Cache Wouldn't a real effective cache that would reduce latency for satellite internet users really need to reside inside the spacecraft? This would reduce at least one of the round-trips data would take between earth and the satellite. Does such a thing exist? | |
|
| |
| | | | Re: the WORST internet provider, EVER Satellite internet is better than no internet.
I have a buddy with no phone line to his house, no cable in the area. Only thing available via cell phone is an AT&T EDGE connection. We tried a USB stick from AT&T but the connection speed was absolutely horrible. It kept timing out. He's about a half mile from the tower so it isn't a signal thing.
So he appreciates the fact that he can get something at his house.
--
SouthWest Louisiana PC Users Group »www.swlapcug.com | |
|
| rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Cache I think it would be better to try to do something like that on the client end. What might be interesting is to install client software that acted as a "proxy" but this wouldn't be any old ordinary caching proxy. It would receive a big old compressed chunk of data from the satellite and then "explode" that into all the parts and pieces the page needs from n-number of HTTP requests (however many it takes to paint the page). Of course to get the "chunk", there would have to a land-based server component to which the proxy speaks. That component would have to grab the entire page, by issuing multiple HTTP requests to various destinations as defined by the page, and then package it up and pushes it through the satellite to the client proxy. This would probably require some horsepower and might have challenges scaling. (Such a scheme might require a large quantity of rack severs acting as a farm.)
Regarding cache in the satellite, with SSD it's possible to put some serious storage in the satellite but power is limited and there's probably some point where cost and complexity ruin the ROI.
This could also be "fixed" by a network of low-earth-orbit satellites or even the "blimp" ideas that float in the relatively quiet and stable far upper atmosphere.
I think the challenge with many of these ideas is that it isn't overly costly to use terrestrial-based wireless and if the customer count is small, a single POP could cover a big area provided there are no line-of-site issues. | |
|
| |  dbirdmanPremium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5 | Re: Cache said by rradina:I think it would be better to try to do something like that on the client end. What might be interesting is to install client software that acted as a "proxy" but this wouldn't be any old ordinary caching proxy. It would receive a big old compressed chunk of data from the satellite and then "explode" that into all the parts and pieces the page needs from n-number of HTTP requests (however many it takes to paint the page). Of course to get the "chunk", there would have to a land-based server component to which the proxy speaks. That component would have to grab the entire page, by issuing multiple HTTP requests to various destinations as defined by the page, and then package it up and pushes it through the satellite to the client proxy. This would probably require some horsepower and might have challenges scaling. (Such a scheme might require a large quantity of rack severs acting as a farm.)
You just described, about as perfectly as possible, the exact proxy system that Hughes has been using for the past 8 years! They call it "Web Acceleration" and all of the elements you mention including aggregation of page elements, compression for transmission, and decompression/separation at the modem are included. It actually works rather well, but of course is only effective on port 80 and does nothing for secure sites.
As you can see from my sig lines I have two satellite connections, Hughes and a much faster commercial connection; web requests on the proxied Hughes connection are clearly faster than they are on the faster unproxied connection, but the latter is better for everything else.
--
Motosat self-pointing dishes: 1.2-meter XF-3 on 127W, .74 meter G74 on 127W, SL-5 HD DirecTV|idirect 3100|Hughes HN7000S|Verizon UMW190 Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of hnFAP-Alert, PC-OPI and DSSatTool | |
|
| | | mix
join:2002-03-19
Utica, MI | Re: Cache Because most web servers aren't already using http compression in 2011? | |
|
| | | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: Cache Compression of each individual HTTP request, yes, but the aggregation of multiple requests on land before compressing the whole thing and routing it through space to a smart decompression/disaggregation client is what I was thinking.
Apparently Hughes has been doing that for years and it should work pretty well provided the land-based aggregation server mechanism has a big, low-latency Internet pipe and lots of processing power.
If we ever figure out how to harness quantum entanglement, perhaps the geo-sync latency will disappear. Of course then there are all those problems with something arriving before it was sent and whether or not that somehow violates C and introduces a time paradox.
OK -- my head hurts now. | |
|
| | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Well crap.... I guess the patent office won't approve my application on grounds of existing implementations... 
Something similar occurred in 1982 when I wrote a sort algorithm on my Timex Sinclair to order check numbers in my check-book balancing program. Young and arrogant, I thought I created something pretty special until a couple years later I realized I created a Bubble Sort, perhaps one of the most horribly inefficient sorting algorithms due to it's brute force methods. Then I was doubly humbled when I studied the Hoare's QuickSort algorithm and marveled at the brain that thought in such abstract ways. | |
|
|
| | | Re: Improvement. zeddlar, I know you're a big HUGHESNET fan-boi, but I can never forget the 6 month ordeal I went thru with them. I could never, ever recommend this service to anyone.
(I always find you correcting or commenting on my posts--WTF?) | |
|
| | | | Re: Improvement. said by compuguybna:zeddlar, I know you're a big HUGHESNET fan-boi, but I can never forget the 6 month ordeal I went thru with them. I could never, ever recommend this service to anyone.
(I always find you correcting or commenting on my posts--WTF?)
I've only known 2 people who HAD to use this thing and I would have to say I'd go with dial up over satellite any day of the week!!
This paltry "upgrade" should be considered nothing more than a laugh in your face by the satellite companies!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
|
| |
| |
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by zeddlar:You don't call doubling the download speed an improvement? And also if you read the release it says they gave everyone over 1GB per MONTH. At 50MB per day if you add that up they in fact did increase caps across the board by 1.5 GB per month on a 30 day month. WOW 1.5 GB. That's a whole game demo on Xbox Live. | |
|
 Steve MehsGun Control Is Using A Steady HandPremium
join:2005-07-16 | I love living in the middle of no where And having cable...
I feel sorry for those stuck with satellite internet. I'd probably kill myself if I had to deal with it.
--
First Osama Bin Laden and now Steve Jobs, 2011 is turning out to be a great year afterall. | |
|
| |
|  tim_kButtons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow, KaseyPremium,VIP
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA
kudos:25 | 1 ms ping? Is that Shopped? | |
|
| | Steve MehsGun Control Is Using A Steady HandPremium
join:2005-07-16 | Re: I love living in the middle of no where Right click on the image and select properties, you'll see it's a direct link from Speedtest.net. 1 ms is pretty bad. More often then not I get 0.
Here's one from the other day:
Here's one from over a month ago:
--
First Osama Bin Laden and now Steve Jobs, 2011 is turning out to be a great year afterall. | |
|
| | | dbirdmanPremium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5 | Re: I love living in the middle of no where said by Steve Mehs:Right click on the image and select properties, you'll see it's a direct link from Speedtest.net. 1 ms is pretty bad. More often then not I get 0.
So, if they show you having a ping time that means your ping traveled faster than the speed of light with no switching delay, we're also supposed to believe they got the speed right? (200 miles round trip in 1ms is 200,000 miles per second - in 0ms it would be infinite speed)
--
Motosat self-pointing dishes: 1.2-meter XF-3 on 127W, .74 meter G74 on 127W, SL-5 HD DirecTV|idirect 3100|Hughes HN7000S|Verizon UMW190 Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of hnFAP-Alert, PC-OPI and DSSatTool | |
|
| | | | Steve MehsGun Control Is Using A Steady HandPremium
join:2005-07-16 | Re: I love living in the middle of no where Its not like I'm the first and only one to ever have it register a zero ping. From what I read on the subject, while a true zero is impossible, the ping was .4 ms or under and speedtest is rounding down. If you have issues with the validity of my speedtest result, what would you say to a result from 500 miles away with a ping of 24 ms showing nearly the same speeds.
--
First Osama Bin Laden and now Steve Jobs, 2011 is turning out to be a great year afterall. | |
|
Reviews:
·Midcontinent Com..
| They've gone down hill since I used them... Damn, Satellite is really that bad now?
I had DirecPC back in the day before my area got DSL in like 2000 or 2001, and other than ping I had amazing service. Always got the advertised 400kbps or more....
I think this is the same company? They've really gone down hill since then...too bad.
--
"He should not have use his own cc. Crime does pay, you just got to be more smart about it."-silentlooker
| |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Virgin Mobile Br..
·Charter
 ·ooma
 ·HughesNet Satell..
·Millenicom
| Top 10 Reasons HN says to use their service and my comments Here's Hughesnet TOP 10 reasons to Try/Use their Service.
1. It's available wherever you live.
Ok, they got me on this one
2. It's super-fast.
***NOT*** why do they call this broadband anyway? just cause of the inherent latency makes it even worse!
3. It works with your computer.
Ok, they got me on this one** for pc's anyway.
4. No dial-up necessary
No brainer, it uses a satellite, not a POTS line, however it can be as SLOW AS DIALUP!>
5. We install it, so you have nothing to worry about.
***BUT We want to charge truck-roll if SOMETHING DOES HAPPEN, even within the warranty period***
6. It's secure.
**Ok, they got me on this one**, but DOES NOT play well with "secured sites**https**
7. We constantly monitor the network to ensure better service.
***yes, so we can find you and throttle and FAP you if you actually "USE* the service***
8. Excellent customer service.
**WRONG** If you enjoy banging your head against your desk talking with India...***
9. Hughes is a leader in the industry,
**BUT** not necessarily the only satellite provider.
10. Hughes is a trusted name and provider....
.***Trusted name doesn't necessarily mean better service*** | |
|
BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Mobile is better and that's saying something when mobile internet is a better deal your service sucks.
Hughesnet $110 2 Mbps spped 450 MB daily cap( 13.2 GB )
Verizon 4G $100 12 GB monthly. $120 14 GB monthly.
4G is faster and has less latency. Even 3G would be better. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Virgin Mobile Br..
·Charter
·ooma
·HughesNet Satell..
·Millenicom
| Re: Mobile is better and that's saying something If you can get it, mobile broadband is blazingly fast compared to satellite. (A&T recently went from EDGE to 3G to 4G here within about 3 months)...Verizon has LTE here now. Sprint...well, they're still trying....
FOLKS, if you have cell phone service and you're wanting internet, check Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint, you may have upgraded coverage you dont know about. Check them before you sign up for satellite internet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
After I dumped Hughesnet, I had both Verizon and Sprint Mobile Broadband for almost a year and a half. $60 got me 20GB on Verizon, and the speeds were much better and consistent than Hughes.
and the internet gods answered our requests, Charter stepped up to the plate.
said by BF69:when mobile internet is a better deal your service sucks.
Hughesnet $110 2 Mbps spped 450 MB daily cap( 13.2 GB )
Verizon 4G $100 12 GB monthly. $120 14 GB monthly.
4G is faster and has less latency. Even 3G would be better.
| |
|
| | | | Re: Mobile is better and that's saying something Hughesnet allows you to download FAP-free between 2 and 7 AM EST. My 1 megabit package speed has more than doubled recently due to their improvements so I can conceivably download around 5 gigabytes a night at ~300 KB/s if I wanted to (in addition to the 250 megs throughout the rest of the day). So to say that cellular service or dial-up allows you to download more is absurd. If you do the math you'll see that it's not even remotely comparable.
I will also say that - though it looks pitiful - the extra 50 megabytes is a welcome improvement. Before, I was nearing the limit every day, but now I generally stay within it comfortably.
I won't sit here and tell you that the 250 meg limit is a good thing, because it certainly hampers what you can do. But it's something I can learn to live with given that I can download just about anything I want if I schedule it properly (Free Download Manager and uTorrent are wonderful programs for doing this, by the way).
Furthermore, I don't really understand how people can say Hughesnet is such a horrible company when you look at the ridiculous prices cellular services are charging, even though it's VASTLY easier for them to improve their infrastructure. I mean come on, I see 4G quoted at $100 a month for TWELVE GIGABYTES? 12 gigs is absolutely nothing in the year 2011. I can download that amount in three days easily on Hughesnet. Does Verizon have a free download period? I honestly don't know. If not, I wouldn't ever consider switching to that kind of service. You can say, well the latency is a lot lower so you can game online, but if you're a gamer you'll realize that you need a ton of bandwidth to keep up with patches and demos and such, and 12 GB a month is simply not going to cut it.
Comparing it to DSL or cable is missing the mark. People don't buy satellite because they prefer it over a land line; they buy it because they don't have access to a land line. And this is exactly the situation for me and hundreds of thousands of others in this country. | |
|
| bn1221
join:2009-04-29
Cortland, NY | I was at my friends house in the boondocks. The "supposed" 768K Hughesplan was SPANKED by my Verizon 3G card. I could Netlfix (laptop screen quality not big tv quality).
Even facebook was abysmal onHnet | |
|
| | hah I live in a rural area where Hughesnet is my only option for internet (besides WildBlue, which is even worse), and my cell service here is AT&T Edge network. Even the Edge network is faster than hughes net. I have unlimited data on my plan, and so I usually use my phone for web browsing because Hughesnet is so bad. | |
|
| | | Re: hah Pretty bad when AT&T EDGE (what?? 256kbps max) is faster than Hughesnet . . . | |
|
|
|
