WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Satellite Internet Access

BrIONwoshMunky

EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY!
Staff
9,682
1,305
387
#1
Hell, you can get T.V. on satellite, why not internet. Mom found through a local municipal ISP that we can get satellite internet. Thus, freeing up a phone line. I think THIS company actually subs out the install and sales to local providers. The municipal ISP I speak of is renown around the area for it's technological advances, (relative to our area mind you), because being a municipality, it cannot show a profit, and as a result, must re-invest it's earnings back into it's systems.

As for this "Wild Blue" jobby. I dunno. Speeds seem ok to me. And I realize that's it's expensive. But it's either dial-up or satellite here. No DSL, no ISDN, no cable, no nothing. I was just wondering about upload speeds. And what is normal, broadband speaking, if I manage to get a 1.0 Mbps package...

Man, I just realized that's not even a MB... :( Crap.
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,996
1,404
487
#2
Satellite 'broadband' gets horrible latency, so while they provide a decent amount of bandwidth (for the technology), your ping will be horrible. Granted it's probably better than dial up, but I wouldn't expect to play any online games or anything.

Uploads usually cover just enough for the download; a 1Mb line would probably have a 128KB upload cap, 2Mb would have 256KB, etc, etc. Keep in mind that bandwidth != latency or speed though.
 

BrIONwoshMunky

EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY!
Staff
9,682
1,305
387
#3
The 1.0 Mb package supposedly has an upload cap of 200Kbs... which isn't 200 KBs... right? GAHH... B.... b... pffft. Whatever.

Thanks. I figured that gaming was outta the question. Sending a signal from a server... to the gateway... to a satellite, then to my dish... then to a satellite modem... then to my computer.... then back to the dish.... and back to the satellite... back to the gateway... and to the server isn't exactly streamlining the situation at all.

So bandwidth isn't going to help with viewing pages with 3000 bazillion images on them?
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,996
1,404
487
#4
BrIONwoshMunky said:
The 1.0 Mb package supposedly has an upload cap of 200Kbs... which isn't 200 KBs... right? GAHH... B.... b... pffft. Whatever.
ISPs list their speeds in Kilobits (Kb) most of the time, because it looks larger to the customer. Your computer generally measures uploads in KiloBytes (KB) though, which will be considerably smaller. 200Kb is only 20KB, so yeah, that's not much at all.
So bandwidth isn't going to help with viewing pages with 3000 bazillion images on them?
Bandwidth determines how much you can download at the same time, ie 1Mb/s. Latency determines how fast you can download files. The work together to give you the speed at which you can download.

That said, it doesn't take a whole lot of bandwidth/latency to make the web fast. Your internet browsing will probably be pretty snappy, but sending large files or doing anything that is latency bound won't be great.
 

FUCKORBEFUCKED

Pissed off since birth
315
0
0
#6
Your connection will get really bad when the weather is not at it's happiest. :thumbsdn:
 

BrIONwoshMunky

EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY!
Staff
9,682
1,305
387
#7
Yeah, I thought about that too. We don't have satellite T.V. so I can't relate how bad it actually would be.
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,996
1,404
487
#8
We had satellite for a while, and aside from being expensive and lacking real local channels, weather hardly ever effected it. That's more of an old rumor based on older technology. Rain and heavy storms made the picture fuzzy, but it was hardly noticeable except on HD channels. You do get to deal with a twice a year time period of interference though, due to the satellite's orbit and the sun? I forget.

edit:
Twice a year there is interference when the sun lies in the line of sight to the satellite, necessitating increased power for some transmissions and resynchronisation of the Electronically Despun Antenna.

That said, I'm not sure how much more susceptible data transmissions would be to interference. Although, theoretically, it should be all the same thing. I'd post over on http://www.dslreports.com/forums/all and get some opinions from people who actually have the service, or something similar.
 

Darklight

Oppressing your posts...
5,438
87
142
#9
I really only recommend satalite internet for those who have no other choice... such as an old boss I had owned a house out in nowhere north carolina.. he's so remote from civilization a road had to be built from his house to the mainroad.. just for his house... either way the cable company told em it would be about 4 grand to run cable to his house... so Satalite it was... he gets tv and internet that way... like fucked said, weather has a big impact and if the equipment is low end, if your neighbors dog farts you'll loose your connection for 10 minutes...
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,996
1,404
487
#10
Darklight said:
I really only recommend satalite internet for those who have no other choice.
That is the whole point...
 
223
0
0
#11
I used to work tech support for Earthlink and the satellite internet was absolute CRAP. Not only was it expensive as hell to setup, the speeds were horrendous. Rather than looking at the best effort speed (1Mbps) you need to look at the minimum acceptable. They can tell you it CAN go 1Mb but they may have a minimum accpetable of 256kbps or less. Then you'll be stuck in a contract and not get much better than dial-up If that's your only option other than dial-up and you have the cash to burn I'd say go for it otherwise don't. It's been a while since I worked there so I can't remember the min acceptable for satellite but I remember for DSL best effort was 1.5-3Mbps and minimum acceptable was 384kbps, to give you an idea of how much it can vary.
My advice would be to find out if there's any money back guarantee. With ELNK after you got it installed you were stuck no matter how much it sucked.
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,996
1,404
487
#12
sideshow_bob said:
They can tell you it CAN go 1Mb but they may have a minimum accpetable of 256kbps or less.
That has nothing to do with speed, as I explained earlier. That's bandwidth, which most people confuse as being download speed. Latency is what determines your download speed, not the bandwidth allotment for your line. You can have a 10Mb line that has horrible latency and all that bandwidth won't make a bit of difference. Satellite is slow because of it's latency, not the amount of maximum of minimum bandwidth.


What is latency?
1) In a network, latency, a synonym for delay, is an expression of how much time it takes for a packet of data to get from one designated point to another. In some usages (for example, AT&T), latency is measured by sending a packet that is returned to the sender and the round-trip time is considered the latency.

The latency assumption seems to be that data should be transmitted instantly between one point and another (that is, with no delay at all). The contributors to network latency include:

* Propagation: This is simply the time it takes for a packet to travel between one place and another at the speed of light.
* Transmission: The medium itself (whether optical fiber, wireless, or some other) introduces some delay. The size of the packet introduces delay in a round trip since a larger packet will take longer to receive and return than a short one.
* Router and other processing: Each gateway node takes time to examine and possibly change the header in a packet (for example, changing the hop count in the time-to-live field).
* Other computer and storage delays: Within networks at each end of the journey, a packet may be subject to storage and hard disk access delays at intermediate devices such as switches and bridges. (In backbone statistics, however, this kind of latency is probably not considered.)
 

gurlgonewild

Was machen Sie?
1,086
0
0
#13
monkey, you should setup a wifi hot spot company and transmit broadband in your town for others. or ugh you could look into it, see if anyone else offers it already?
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,996
1,404
487
#14
GGW, that would be a good idea if he could rouse the capitol it would require to secure the bandwidth, equipment and personnel required to do that. Even a T1 costs about a grand a month and it's download capability is only 1/3 the average broadband cable of DSL line.
 

gurlgonewild

Was machen Sie?
1,086
0
0
#15
junglizm said:
it's download capability is only 1/3 the average broadband cable of DSL line.
it's got to be better than satellite innernetwebconnecting though ;)
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,996
1,404
487
#16
You're correct, but I was addressing the 'offer it to others' bit; a T1 can barely service a small office these days. There's no way it would be able to cover enough clients to be profitable in that situation. And if you did cover more, they would get similar speeds to dial up. In effect he'd be starting his own ISP, which is surrounded by TONs of red tape, regulations and up front investment costs. Unless BW has a rich uncle.. :p
 

jamesp

In Memory...
1,714
1
0
#17
Keep in mind that due to the dopplar effect and the large distance between sattelites and the dish, you are going to have at least on second of latency right off the bat.