Cutting the cord

[madbad2000]

My wife's family has a large homestead up north. I can make calls & send/receive basic texts for the most part, but it's a 15 minute drive to get enough service for data.

 

We have plans to spend at least half of our time up there, and I'm really curious to know if there will ever be decent data coverage in a place like that ("everywhere"). With how much technology advances, I almost don't accept that there are still dead spots, or will be 5-10 yrs from now.

 

Anyone know if overall coverage areas will keep improving, or is the focus on strengthening signals (5g) in more areas only?

 

I would guess that the cell companies are less likely to expand coverage for the few it would help. Cost/benefit not really there for them honestly. Upgrading speed capacity in congested areas is big. The better option is probably going to fome from satellite internet and then connecting via wifi to that connection.

[Menotti80]

My wife's family has a large homestead up north. I can make calls & send/receive basic texts for the most part, but it's a 15 minute drive to get enough service for data.

 

We have plans to spend at least half of our time up there, and I'm really curious to know if there will ever be decent data coverage in a place like that ("everywhere"). With how much technology advances, I almost don't accept that there are still dead spots, or will be 5-10 yrs from now.

 

Anyone know if overall coverage areas will keep improving, or is the focus on strengthening signals (5g) in more areas only?

 

I would guess that the cell companies are less likely to expand coverage for the few it would help. Cost/benefit not really there for them honestly. Upgrading speed capacity in congested areas is big. The better option is probably going to fome from satellite internet and then connecting via wifi to that connection.

 

Yeah that's what I figured. And in a way it makes sense. I always knew getting paid internet and wifi would be fine in and next to the actual residences, but a lot of being up there is being outside. And of course it's nice being nice to be "unplugged", but on the other hand it would be nice to check a brewer score for instance!

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

My wife's family has a large homestead up north. I can make calls & send/receive basic texts for the most part, but it's a 15 minute drive to get enough service for data.

 

We have plans to spend at least half of our time up there, and I'm really curious to know if there will ever be decent data coverage in a place like that ("everywhere"). With how much technology advances, I almost don't accept that there are still dead spots, or will be 5-10 yrs from now.

 

Anyone know if overall coverage areas will keep improving, or is the focus on strengthening signals (5g) in more areas only?

 

I would guess that the cell companies are less likely to expand coverage for the few it would help. Cost/benefit not really there for them honestly. Upgrading speed capacity in congested areas is big. The better option is probably going to fome from satellite internet and then connecting via wifi to that connection.

 

Yeah that's what I figured. And in a way it makes sense. I always knew getting paid internet and wifi would be fine in and next to the actual residences, but a lot of being up there is being outside. And of course it's nice being nice to be "unplugged", but on the other hand it would be nice to check a brewer score for instance!

 

I live right between Three Lakes and Eagle River, so I can attest to the poor internet options up here. They are, in fact, terrible. The absolute best internet I can get at my home is DSL with a 6 mbps max. There are better options though fiber optic cable if you live in town, but if you are more rural, good luck. I've been told that the rural areas here don't have the population density (enough homes per square mile) for any high speed internet service to add the infrastructure needed. It's simply a poor investment for them.

 

There's a lot of hope up here that Starlink will be operational within the next year or so.

 

This affects cellular coverage, as cell signal is used and abused up here in the summer by people coming on vacation from down south. We don't have the cellular infrastructure to handle the influx up here, but since it's only for 3 months, the companies never improve it, and the locals are left to suffer through it.

Edited July 28, 2020 by Ron Robinson's Beard

[MrTPlush]

Verizon is by far the best mobile carrier for coverage in Wisconsin. I have heard some people will get good coverage with ATT depending on where it is...overall the coverage isn’t as good, but sometimes it will be better in that one specific spot you really need it. It does really well for me “Up North” and other unpopulated areas. Did me pretty well on my spring vacation driving through parts of AZ/NV/CA.

[Menotti80]

Yeah Beard, it's pretty bad where I'm at (about an hour East of eagle river. I am as rural as it gets up here. Nearest (very) small town is 15 minutes away (Dunbar)

[CheezWizHed]

In late developing countries where the landline infrastructure was poor, they skipped adding hardwired phone lines and everything was built around cellular. So for some countries in eastern Europe and Africa, their cellular was much better and cheaper than the US for many years.

 

My guess is that for most of the rural parts of the US, the government will work with cellular providers to make sure there is "ok" coverage in the rural areas to provide the minimum internet access levels. I remember when the first cell tower was put up in my tiny unincorporated town in NW Wisconsin when they just started getting phone coverage in the boonies. Or when cities had high speed internet, but outside was dial-up only.

 

The coverage will come, but it will always lag the populated areas in speed and/or features.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Yeah Beard, it's pretty bad where I'm at (about an hour East of eagle river. I am as rural as it gets up here. Nearest (very) small town is 15 minutes away (Dunbar)

 

That's even more rural than my "rural" LOL. The only way things are going to improve in this neck of the woods is if a politician up here champions broadband and cellular infrastructure improvements, which means companies would need to get federal money to improve the infrastructure. It's always going to be a sunken cost due to the lack of population density.

 

As for the best cellular carrier up here, I've had the best luck with Verizon ... or at least carriers that use Verizon towers. AT&T has dead spots all over.

[madbad2000]

I just don't see the federal government intervention for something like that. While the cell providers may like having the initial fed dollars to establish the coverage, they are likely to be stuck with the maintenance once done. And for the chance at a very small amount of additional revenue. They will also face stiff counter lobby from the satellite industry who have really taken aim at global internet on their LEO constellations. You're looking at 2-3 competitors right now who will be up and running in space probably before you could get a cellular lobby approval on that upgrade. And even then you're talking probably years before you could start to populate these northern dead spots with multiple years to get that coverage finished in just Wisconsin. All for how much more revenue? The cell companies are likely happy with their current infrastructure covering the major roadways and decent sized towns. They need their money for 5G upgrades which is going to put them in competition with current Internet providers and potentially a lot more revenue. The satellite providers are playing a numbers game globally, so I would bet their costs are going to beat cell plans currently without having a huge investment in hardware for the consumer.

[LouisEly]

Amazonl just got FCC approval to launch a boatload of satellites to bring high-ish speed internet everywhere.

[nate82]

Amazonl just got FCC approval to launch a boatload of satellites to bring high-ish speed internet everywhere.

 

Satellite internet is still very hit and miss (mostly miss) on the speed and connection. It is great if all you are using it for is surfing the web and getting emails. If you are doing anything like working from home good luck with that as your connection will be dropped a lot it will also feel like you are on dial up when doing conference calls and forget video because that is not going to work all that well.

 

If you want to stream movies or shows satellite internet is also going to be a huge let down as you are going to be luck to get 480p from it. Also if you like to play video games online this will also not work as you will have a high ping and latency is going to be an issue.

 

Elon Musk's starlink I believe it is called also has the same issues though once the technology gets worked more this should improve though plugging into a line will still be the fastest and most reliable way to get onto the internet.

[DHonks]

Starlink is supposed to go live in WA, ID, and MT within the next few months. Really hoping that works well

[madbad2000]

Amazonl just got FCC approval to launch a boatload of satellites to bring high-ish speed internet everywhere.

 

Satellite internet is still very hit and miss (mostly miss) on the speed and connection. It is great if all you are using it for is surfing the web and getting emails. If you are doing anything like working from home good luck with that as your connection will be dropped a lot it will also feel like you are on dial up when doing conference calls and forget video because that is not going to work all that well.

 

If you want to stream movies or shows satellite internet is also going to be a huge let down as you are going to be luck to get 480p from it. Also if you like to play video games online this will also not work as you will have a high ping and latency is going to be an issue.

 

Elon Musk's starlink I believe it is called also has the same issues though once the technology gets worked more this should improve though plugging into a line will still be the fastest and most reliable way to get onto the internet.

 

It really depends on what you are using. The upcoming constellations should be pretty solid once the constellations are mostly/fully populated. The current offerings at high speed are still a premium in terms of cost and not "high speed" if you're used to current home internet rates. I've tested some of the stuff out there right now/upcoming and it hits all of the marks. This is especially true if you're already in a disadvantaged location where it will be a complete game changer. With the capability, design and backhaul already being built you should have no issues doing video calls, streaming or gaming. But that is all once fully populated and gateways are in place to handle that traffic.

 

It's also important to realize too that there is a large corporate social responsibility for these global constellations to bring internet access to the globe in areas that have nothing at all. So anything that they can pull will be amazing to them. Will be very interesting to see how it all plays out.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Amazonl just got FCC approval to launch a boatload of satellites to bring high-ish speed internet everywhere.

 

Satellite internet is still very hit and miss (mostly miss) on the speed and connection. It is great if all you are using it for is surfing the web and getting emails. If you are doing anything like working from home good luck with that as your connection will be dropped a lot it will also feel like you are on dial up when doing conference calls and forget video because that is not going to work all that well.

 

If you want to stream movies or shows satellite internet is also going to be a huge let down as you are going to be luck to get 480p from it. Also if you like to play video games online this will also not work as you will have a high ping and latency is going to be an issue.

 

Elon Musk's starlink I believe it is called also has the same issues though once the technology gets worked more this should improve though plugging into a line will still be the fastest and most reliable way to get onto the internet.

 

Starlink's low-earth satellites "should" provide a much stronger signal than current satellite options. From what I've been told, it has the capability of offering speeds comparable to lined cable internet, and one of Musk's key talking points with the project is that it will also be affordable. Current satellite internet is a terrible value.

[madbad2000]

 

Starlink's low-earth satellites "should" provide a much stronger signal than current satellite options. From what I've been told, it has the capability of offering speeds comparable to lined cable internet, and one of Musk's key talking points with the project is that it will also be affordable. Current satellite internet is a terrible value.

 

It will provide a better signal and have lower latency. The problem we have with current higher orbit constellations such as GEO is the distance it takes for your signal to travel from end-to-end. You're seeing a lot of loss and most small devices can't produce enough power to transmit and have a large enough receiver to catch the signal on the download. LEO is significantly closer and the small form factor devices out there even today is impressive. You don't really have a Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite constellation that is built and marketed for home use. Iridium has the best one, but does not have the capacity for wide-spread use. It's pretty much for Business and Government who can pay the rates required. O3B has a MEO orbit and has already proven to meet current speeds, but again that is expensive due to the terminal requirements to access the constellation. Starlink is the front runner right now for a global, LEO constellation that is accessible for normal commercial use. Once they get a satellite receiver at a price point that is palatable for the general public and get their infrastructure in place, I think people will be impressed. I like what I've seen on it so far and having Amazon enter the game only makes it more likely that prices stay down due to competition.

[nate82]

I am just hoping we don't make the same mistake of leasing orbit to only so and so company like we do with land lines for the cable companies. The reason dial-up internet was extremely affordable is because there were a lot of companies offering dial-up internet.

 

If there can be a wide range of competition the prices should become more affordable but I have very little faith this will happen.

[CheezWizHed]

I'm curious if 5G wireless data will once again make satellite obsolete. I worked for Motorola when they launched iridium for the world sat-phone network. But that died so quickly as terrestrial towers were cheaper and easier to maintain (NOTE: I believe Iridium is still active, but only for the US Government use).

 

Yes, there are still holes in coverage, but competition like this seems like a case where terrestrial towers might (once again) overtake satellites.

[LouisEly]

The shorter wavelength allows for faster transmission of data, but it also means a shorter range. From what I understand, 4G has a range of about 10 miles; 5G has a range of about 1000 feet. Unless they can make towers cheaply, or turn people's phones into mini-towers, 5G is really only going to be practical in bigger cities.

[pacopete4]

I would gladly put something on my roof for cheaper service and better coverage.

[madbad2000]

I'm curious if 5G wireless data will once again make satellite obsolete. I worked for Motorola when they launched iridium for the world sat-phone network. But that died so quickly as terrestrial towers were cheaper and easier to maintain (NOTE: I believe Iridium is still active, but only for the US Government use).

 

Yes, there are still holes in coverage, but competition like this seems like a case where terrestrial towers might (once again) overtake satellites.

 

Iridium is still active. The Government basically bailed them out for some exclusive access. They have since rebounded and completed an entire refresh of their constellation last year. Iridium didn't take off initially for quite a few reason with cost of equipment, cost of service and lack of data capability all contributing along with the rise of cell phone competitors who offered cheaper, better and more flexible options. They will be a player going forward in their current niche with aviation/maritime and government customer base. I dont see them as a player in a broad option to general population.

 

We are reaching an interesting point where a user in the city will be able to choose between wired internet, cell phone (4g/5g) or satellite options that should all be at broadband speeds. Since cities are a major draw for user base, there will be a lot of competition and you should see corresponding prices reflect that. I would assume that cell phone probably wins out for most, especially as you start seeing more 5g hotspots for other devices in your home. Wired internet dominates home setups for good reason with the ability to connect all your wifi devices, but once cell phones start meeting people's needs for throughout, its on. I wonder if cable and internet providers will see a drop from those that are fed up with the customer service and experiences. I went out of my way to switch from Verizon Fios in Maryland because I hated the way they operated and their customer service. To the point that I had a competitor run a new line just to get rid of them. And after all of the hassle, I still enjoyed a 50% reduction in bill with faster speeds and much better TV packages.

 

It will also be interesting because users in more remote areas will have either some alternate options or even a 1st time option for broadband without really increasing costs. If I'm a user in the middle of Alaska, my cell coverage is already spotty and "high speed" internet could still involve a kbps in the package. Not a great option for tradional GEO satellite service due to the extreme angles/latency and a LEO provider like Starlink could change my life in extreme ways. The cost to add me as a new satellite user is essentially $0. Whereas if I wanted 5G or wired internet at that speed, no telecom is looking to invest the cost of setup and maintenance in rural Alaska to capture my small monthly fee.

[DHonks]

I’m really excited for our property in Montana. We’ve been paying full price and been lucky to get 3mb speeds, our neighbors down the street are stuck with DSL. Starlink is promising roughly 80mb speeds.

 

Or my in laws in Texas who get 1mb DSL. They’ve been yearning for higher speeds for years. I don’t think anyone in cities will downgrade to Starlink...it’s not for them

[madbad2000]

I’m really excited for our property in Montana. We’ve been paying full price and been lucky to get 3mb speeds, our neighbors down the street are stuck with DSL. Starlink is promising roughly 80mb speeds.

 

Or my in laws in Texas who get 1mb DSL. They’ve been yearning for higher speeds for years. I don’t think anyone in cities will downgrade to Starlink...it’s not for them

 

Something else to consider is that with satellite internet, you can in theory take that anywhere like a cell phone. The antennas are much smaller and I can see people switching from wired and taking it with them in their RVs or for other travel. Not the vast majority, but an interesting use case.. As long as you have power considerations, in theory you should be able to take it anywhere in the world.

[CheezWizHed]

No, I wasn't suggesting Iridium do anything with data plans. My point was that it became too expensive with cheaper terrestrial options. The only reason it still exists is the USG funds it for the convenience and privacy. But the parallels are there between that tipping point in the early 2000s and high speed internet options today. It looked like satellite was the best and easiest option (plus available everywhere), but terrestrial solutions came that were cheaper and people didn't want to pay for the convenience.

 

If I'm a user in the middle of Alaska...

 

The problem is the uber-remote are always going to be at the mercy of what is available. No company is going to fund a solution for the 0.1% as that won't fund the business. Maybe if the 5% (pick your preferred number, I didn't do a business analysis for this post. ) will select the satellite, then Grizzly Adams in remotest Alaska can use it too.

 

The shorter wavelength allows for faster transmission of data, but it also means a shorter range. From what I understand, 4G has a range of about 10 miles; 5G has a range of about 1000 feet. Unless they can make towers cheaply, or turn people's phones into mini-towers, 5G is really only going to be practical in bigger cities.

 

Good point. But that is today's tech and/or solutions also. No one thought satellites would reach starlink speed either. What if people put up 5G towers at various places where the high speed fiber resides rather than running that fiber to each house. For example, a friend of mine has fiber running down the road past his house. Rather than the $20k bill of running it up to his house, what if they put in a tower and picked up him and his neighbors? Perhaps the business case isn't there today, but you need to look forward where costs continue to drop due to volume and improvements.

[madbad2000]

No, I wasn't suggesting Iridium do anything with data plans. My point was that it became too expensive with cheaper terrestrial options. The only reason it still exists is the USG funds it for the convenience and privacy. But the parallels are there between that tipping point in the early 2000s and high speed internet options today. It looked like satellite was the best and easiest option (plus available everywhere), but terrestrial solutions came that were cheaper and people didn't want to pay for the convenience.

 

If I'm a user in the middle of Alaska...

 

The problem is the uber-remote are always going to be at the mercy of what is available. No company is going to fund a solution for the 0.1% as that won't fund the business. Maybe if the 5% (pick your preferred number, I didn't do a business analysis for this post. ) will select the satellite, then Grizzly Adams in remotest Alaska can use it too.

 

I agreed with your point on Iridium and added to it. The USG is not even 25% of Iridium business today as they have really taken off with their commercial business. Look into the sensor market and Iridium is pretty much going to be the leader for good reason. They are also doing a lot in the Aviation industry for onboard data integrated with safety and voice. They have the luxury of a strong, long-term fixed contract with the Government that helps them leverage financing better than a lot of other companies. Going forward though, they are basically niche and not looking to be a global telecommunications provider to the general public.

 

I used Alaska as an example from personal experience. I'm not talking about a single recluse riding moose in the woods. State and federal agencies, mining, oil, fishing, etc are all woefully in need of good broadband outside of major cities and actually present a really solid business case for satellite providers since you don't have to do much at all in terms of investment outside of what you're already doing in populating a constellation. And when you look at the usage of each space vehicle, users in these extreme latitudes are not having to contend with any saturation issues that may eventually pop up in more populated areas. One thing that stood out to me from being in this industry is the amount of places in the United States that are still lacking good coverage and throughput let alone expanding that out to a global scale. Will be interesting to see how it transforms in the next few years.

[homer]

I'm not convinced this whole "internet" is here to stay. Seems like a fad to me.

[CheezWizHed]

I'm not convinced this whole "internet" is here to stay. Seems like a fad to me.

 

Al Gore invented it, so he gets to say if it stays or not!

 

The USG is not even 25% of Iridium business today

 

Interesting, I hadn't realized it has started to grow again. I left Motorola in 2004, so I've been out of that industry for a while...