Is this PR to distract from them losing 55 satellites in the launchpad explosion and/or to confirm that they met whatever hurdle the US required for them to keep operating?
How much market is out there for satellite Internet? I don't think anyone with access to wired ISP are going to choose satellites over wired. Plus 5G mobile Internet is becoming pretty good too. Maybe I'm missing something but to me it doesn't sound like a good long term business.
Plus I think we should be invested in installing more optic fiber. The US is laughably behind other countries on that
But I also think that focusing on residential internet as the only market might be thinking too small.
There's aviation, maritime, defense, telecom/enterprise backhaul, remote industrial (oil rigs, mines, etc.), and those guys are are not paying $135/month.
This might unlock new applications, like remote sensors and autonomous devices that are out of coverage areas today.
John Deere's farming equipment for instance is already on Starlink, and those things are basically computers on wheels.
The only issue is that satellite internet needs line of sight to the sky. Underground/undersea applicatons are basically out.
My little hamlet is 40km (~25 miles) from the nearest established town and it’s nothing but state forest between so it will never be economical to run fibre.
The typical solution is called Fixed Wireless which is essentially the same as 5G or traditional satellite internet.
I’ve used Starlink for years and aside from the exorbitant price I wouldn’t consider switching. The dish is very low voltage so I have a failover system for during power outages to keep my server and work connection going.
Space junk aside I’m glad to see Space X being challenged because some downward pressure on price would be nice
I take video calls for work regularly on Starlink. As long as you have clear visibility (eg not under a tree or the porch), it works great. I used to have occasional handover latency spikes, but I haven't noticed those recently.
I've been following the Russia/Ukraine war and satellite internet has been pretty important there. For first world countries not currently being bombed to death, you're probably right. But for everywhere else it is better than waiting for new ISPs to start up and get fiber rolled out. It is the global market outside the US that they are probably going for.
It feels like a consequence of market/regulatory failure in the US rather than a real demand for the technology. Internet access is far cheaper and more widely available in most other developed countries.
From personal experience, there's still a considerable chunk of rural America that isn't wired. I'm currently looking at an area to buy a house, and the only option around is Starlink.
Zero competition. No fiber. No cable. 5G coverage isn't sufficient for my daily needs, but okay for a failover.
Do you really think these companies are spending billions of dollars on such systems without doing any research as to whether a market for it exists?
"Starlink is SpaceX's primary revenue driver, generating $11.39 billion in 2025 and accounting for roughly 61% of the company's total sales. The satellite connectivity unit is the only highly profitable division of the company, generating an operating income of $4.42 billion"
Right, but it's the only company doing this. My question is whether there is enough market for more companies. The amount of people with wired internet access is not going to decrease.
Unless this drives a huge population migration to even more rural areas
Make a commitment to forbid lethal use of this service and I'll subscribe for backup/disaster preparedness.
It would be a huge selling point over the competition which is allegedly being used in terroristic attacks.
Algorithm: one (or a group of) terminals reaches altitude headed from one warring region to another. Disable its transit data, keep watching telemetry. A single modest modern CPU could process the data stream from millions of devices, though it probably makes sense to have a coprocessor at each downlink location, with minimum handoff data near hextile boundaries.
Non pay-wall link:
https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/amazon-leo-space-internet...
Is this PR to distract from them losing 55 satellites in the launchpad explosion and/or to confirm that they met whatever hurdle the US required for them to keep operating?
Source: https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/projec...
How much market is out there for satellite Internet? I don't think anyone with access to wired ISP are going to choose satellites over wired. Plus 5G mobile Internet is becoming pretty good too. Maybe I'm missing something but to me it doesn't sound like a good long term business.
Plus I think we should be invested in installing more optic fiber. The US is laughably behind other countries on that
I did a search and found that the satellite internet market size is $16B today and $38B in 2031 (5 years from now)
https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/satellit...
But I also think that focusing on residential internet as the only market might be thinking too small.
There's aviation, maritime, defense, telecom/enterprise backhaul, remote industrial (oil rigs, mines, etc.), and those guys are are not paying $135/month.
This might unlock new applications, like remote sensors and autonomous devices that are out of coverage areas today.
John Deere's farming equipment for instance is already on Starlink, and those things are basically computers on wheels.
The only issue is that satellite internet needs line of sight to the sky. Underground/undersea applicatons are basically out.
My little hamlet is 40km (~25 miles) from the nearest established town and it’s nothing but state forest between so it will never be economical to run fibre.
The typical solution is called Fixed Wireless which is essentially the same as 5G or traditional satellite internet.
I’ve used Starlink for years and aside from the exorbitant price I wouldn’t consider switching. The dish is very low voltage so I have a failover system for during power outages to keep my server and work connection going.
Space junk aside I’m glad to see Space X being challenged because some downward pressure on price would be nice
Is latency comparable to wired? Can you trust the connection enough for remote work ?
Absolutely. Starlink outperforms ADSL anytime, and is better than most 4G fixed-wireless-access options. I use it for remote work regularly.
If there's fiber (like GPON) or reliable 5G available, then of course they win. Otherwise, Starlink is better.
I take video calls for work regularly on Starlink. As long as you have clear visibility (eg not under a tree or the porch), it works great. I used to have occasional handover latency spikes, but I haven't noticed those recently.
There are plenty of roaming applications: camping, boating, flying and war zones, which have both private and enterprise customer possibilities.
Then there are remote places that either have no other option or would like a backup solution.
I've been following the Russia/Ukraine war and satellite internet has been pretty important there. For first world countries not currently being bombed to death, you're probably right. But for everywhere else it is better than waiting for new ISPs to start up and get fiber rolled out. It is the global market outside the US that they are probably going for.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.stardebug came out of Ukraine and is useful for debugging the antenna, if you feel like looking at more data about it.
It feels like a consequence of market/regulatory failure in the US rather than a real demand for the technology. Internet access is far cheaper and more widely available in most other developed countries.
The military demand is real enough, though.
The military radar demand? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbp3kdJZ1_A
> Plus I think we should be invested in installing more optic fiber
right now at&t is actively trying to get people onto their wisp products.
From personal experience, there's still a considerable chunk of rural America that isn't wired. I'm currently looking at an area to buy a house, and the only option around is Starlink.
Zero competition. No fiber. No cable. 5G coverage isn't sufficient for my daily needs, but okay for a failover.
Right, but how many potential customers are we talking about?
Wired cable is such a monopoly that even Google fiber couldnt compete.
Its the only innovation in the space (literally and metaphorically.)
Do you really think these companies are spending billions of dollars on such systems without doing any research as to whether a market for it exists?
"Starlink is SpaceX's primary revenue driver, generating $11.39 billion in 2025 and accounting for roughly 61% of the company's total sales. The satellite connectivity unit is the only highly profitable division of the company, generating an operating income of $4.42 billion"
Right, but it's the only company doing this. My question is whether there is enough market for more companies. The amount of people with wired internet access is not going to decrease.
Unless this drives a huge population migration to even more rural areas
Make a commitment to forbid lethal use of this service and I'll subscribe for backup/disaster preparedness.
It would be a huge selling point over the competition which is allegedly being used in terroristic attacks.
Algorithm: one (or a group of) terminals reaches altitude headed from one warring region to another. Disable its transit data, keep watching telemetry. A single modest modern CPU could process the data stream from millions of devices, though it probably makes sense to have a coprocessor at each downlink location, with minimum handoff data near hextile boundaries.
> It would be a huge selling point over the competition which is allegedly being used in terroristic attacks.
Russia isn’t allowed to use Starlink anymore.
>It would be a huge selling point over the competition which is allegedly being used in terroristic attacks.
Is this a Ukraine war reference?