dslreports logo
 story category
ViaSat Hopes ViaSat-1 Changes Satellite Broadband Economics
Though Western U.S. Residents Won't See Much Improvement

Assuming everything goes according to plan, ViaSat this week should launch ViaSat-1 from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, finally providing U.S. residential satellite broadband providers with added capacity. ViaSat tells Fortune they hope the new satellite will change the economics of providing satellite service, which up until now have resulted in satellite broadband being seen as a last resort connectivity option. ViaSat tries very hard to convince Fortune that ViaSat-1 will change satellite broadband's bad reputation:

quote:
...while consumers may have come to assume that satellite Internet service is inherently slow and overpriced, that's not so, says Mark Dankberg, the chief executive of Viasat (VSAT), which built the new satellite. Satellites have long been able to provide fast downloads, but total capacity was so limited and expensive that standard consumer offerings had to be much slower than cable and DSL. "What has made Internet service by satellite bad is economics, it's not physics," says Dankberg.
Well, sort of. Physics will continue to dictate that satellite broadband will suffer significant latency, and ViaSat-1's not going to change that. ViaSat-1 also isn't going to change the fact that most satellite broadband customers pay an arm and a leg in part because they're captive consumers in an un-competitive niche market. As we've noted previously, while this launch should allow companies like WildBlue to add capacity (they've had to turn away customers in recent years) -- that capacity is going to be used to add more customers, not ease daily usage limits (aka the "fair access policies" or FAP).

Some users may see faster speeds, but as the Fortune article notes many users in the West will continue to reside on older satellites. ViaSat-1's launch may be good news for satellite companies who can improve ROI with added users, but the end result for most customers may not even be noticeable. In other words, satellite broadband will continue to be the Rodney Dangerfield of broadband: expensive, relatively slow, and choked by low daily usage caps.
view:
topics flat nest 

Metatron2008
You're it
Premium Member
join:2008-09-02
united state

Metatron2008

Premium Member

Eh..

It'll add capacity because no one is rushing to get satellite Internet...
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

Re: Eh..

Before thinking about getting new customers perhaps they should be trying to keep CURRENT customers. I think everyone that only has satellite as a choice for internet knows that satellite sucks. There aren't these long lines of people who can't get satellite internet because of capacity issues. They don't want the sucky service in the first place.

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt

Premium Member

Re: Eh..

said by 88615298:

............trying to keep CURRENT customers. I think everyone that only has satellite as a choice for internet knows that satellite sucks. .

That model doesn't work for Satellite internet because customers only stay if there NO other "faster than dial up" service available.
Happiness is not required, but if you've lived where dial up is still 9600/14k then dish SOUNDS good.
the profit is in selling the dish and install to people beyond the reach of wired.
As soon as they aren't captive anymore they'll leave when their current contract.
mogamer
join:2011-04-20
Royal Oak, MI

mogamer

Member

Need more satellites

They would have to launch 2 or 3 more satellites like ViaSat-1 in the next five years if they want satellite internet to be practical and competitive. And I sure don't see that happening. So, sat internet will continue to be a "last resort" service.

andyb
Premium Member
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario

andyb

Premium Member

Re: Need more satellites

Another (called Jupiter) is being launched next year
mogamer
join:2011-04-20
Royal Oak, MI

mogamer

Member

Re: Need more satellites

said by andyb:

Another (called Jupiter) is being launched next year

That is a Hughes satellite though. I should have said ViaSat needs 2 - 3 more in five years to be competitive. There will be two high capacity satellites spread out over two customer bases. That will help out a bit, but each service needs the amount of satellites I mentioned. And the previous poster was right, the satellite providers know they have their customers "by the balls". It's so bad that people rejoice when they can get crappy 1.5/512 dsl or get 4G with it's ultra low caps.

The fact that satellite internet can get new users through government subsidies, shows how bad government policies involving broadband is.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Wrong Approach :)

quote:
Physics will continue to dictate that satellite broadband will suffer significantly latency ...
Now see, these guys are taking the wrong approach to solving this problem:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· bPhnfFEI


Happy Monday!
zeddlar
join:2007-04-09
Jay, OK

zeddlar

Member

Hughesnet vs. Wildblue

I sure am glad Wildblue got into the Satellite market, ever since they did, Hughesnet has been making small improvements to their service which have now turned into several Large improvements coming one or two every couple of weeks. Thanks Wildblue for helping make my provider better, hehe.
chances14
join:2010-03-03
Michigan

chances14

Member

Re: Hughesnet vs. Wildblue

said by zeddlar:

I sure am glad Wildblue got into the Satellite market, ever since they did, Hughesnet has been making small improvements to their service which have now turned into several Large improvements coming one or two every couple of weeks. Thanks Wildblue for helping make my provider better, hehe.

i've been consistently getting downloads speeds of 300 kb/s on the 1mb plan even during the fap free time. can't complain about that
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT
·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68

BiggA

Premium Member

3G

Where is there left that can't get AT&T or Verizon 3G? Those two companies should really market to the ultra-rural with 50GB or higher plans for areas that have low bandwidth utilization, and just lock them down to the nearest five towers or something... As it is though, you can at least get good internet access, even if the caps are too low to download much of anything.

mickier
join:2006-08-22
Hilham, TN

mickier

Member

Re: 3G

my house. No 3G.
Tennessee.
Zoom in on the verizon map (Verizon ois the *only* service available here) and look at North Middle Tennessee.
Those maps are lies anyway....

I have a 50ft antenna with a Wilson Wide band antenna and all I can get is voice and 1X internet.

(any suggestions?)
chances14
join:2010-03-03
Michigan

chances14

Member

Re: 3G

said by mickier:

my house. No 3G.
Tennessee.
Zoom in on the verizon map (Verizon ois the *only* service available here) and look at North Middle Tennessee.
Those maps are lies anyway....

I have a 50ft antenna with a Wilson Wide band antenna and all I can get is voice and 1X internet.

(any suggestions?)

verizon's coverage maps are a joke. they may in theory have the largest coverage map, but when that coverage barely gets you 1 bar of service, it's essentially useless.
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT

BiggA to mickier

Premium Member

to mickier
Do you have a repeater with the PCS band for EVDO?

mickier
join:2006-08-22
Hilham, TN

mickier

Member

Re: 3G

said by BiggA:

Do you have a repeater with the PCS band for EVDO?

I have the Standard repeater that came in the kit. I upgraded the antenna to try to get a better signal than the panel antenna. I called their tech support and dude told me if I cannot see 3G on my phone I won't get it with an antenna. He said you can't boost nothing....
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT

BiggA

Premium Member

Re: 3G

Correct, but 100% of Verizon sites have EVDO, unless you are roaming. It may be in the PCS band, where you'd need more gain than on the CLR band.

SimbaSeven
I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
·StarLink

SimbaSeven

Member

Interesting..

Although the latency still stinks, it'd be worth a test drive. If they'd increase the speeds and give their customers a decent size cap (250GB or larger), I'd be interested.

Satellite still stinks.. But this might make a tastier alternative instead of getting FAP'd to death by HughesNet.
zeddlar
join:2007-04-09
Jay, OK

zeddlar

Member

Re: Interesting..

If the FAP is your problem with Hughesnet then any cell service is not going to solve your problems, even Sprint's unlimited plan caps at 50GB a month and I can get that pretty easily on Hughesnet without fapping out. Granted you have to rely on the free hours ALOT to get that much but it is easily possible with the new speeds if you have the upper tier plans. The only two places cell service can actually beat Hughesnet on is price and latency. Oh and in some cases, customer service but I think that is fixing to change alot for the better with Hughesnet.

HunterZ
join:2003-07-16
Kent, WA

HunterZ

Member

spot on

Karl Bode's assessment is spot-on with my experience. Latency and cost are satellite's boat anchors.

When co-renting a house my senior year in college, we couldn't get anything but satellite for broadband. The prices were so high that we laughed and lived with dialup.

My mother-in-law lives way outside of Santa Barbara and has satellite because it's her only option. She barely gets Verizon cell coverage, but nothing else is in range. Her satellite Internet connection is barely usable half of the time, and at best gets sub-DSL speeds with horrendous latency.

cork1958
Cork
Premium Member
join:2000-02-26

cork1958

Premium Member

Re: spot on

"When co-renting a house my senior year in college, we couldn't get anything but satellite for broadband. The prices were so high that we laughed and lived with dialup."

I think I would have to do the same thing. There's no way in heck I'd be suckered into paying that much for that little speed and bandwidth!!

Gary H
@twtelecom.net

Gary H

Anon

Ka is a new technology. ViaSat 1 is opening a new BW door

The author may want to consider the differences between Ku and Ka band throughput speeds. This new generation service is focused for poorly served areas not Manhattan. The author writes as if we are in 1990 considering analogue to digital.
There is a vast difference and "fiber-like" is closer to reality... the article quoted 15 year old Ku and C-band technology....way off. Study of the new EutelSat European speeds and that of YaSat would be a better compaison. Dangerfield "got no respect" but he was not everywhere and anywhere.

mtgirl
@mdsg-pacwest.com

mtgirl

Anon

Re: Ka is a new technology. ViaSat 1 is opening a new BW door

So with no DSL, or Cell phone coverage I've been waiting for the new satellite to launch. Should I wait even longer for Jupiter or go Via sat?