Slashdot Mirror
Satellite-Delivered Broadband Gets Louder
David Savage writes: "AOL and MSN are about to announce the release of broadband Internet connections that will allow users to access the Internet at cable and DSL speeds via satellite dishes. The MSN service will allow users to download and upload data via a satellite dish. The AOL service on the other hand will require users to upload data through a regular dial-up connection and download through the dish. Both plans will have prices that compete with current cable and DSL prices, but will have hefty setup fees (in the hundreds of dollars). Both companies are planning to begin offering their broadband services, which will be available almost anywhere within the U.S., in the next couple of months." As the article points out, satellite access has been around for a while but whether because of cost, complexity or low marketing not made the splash that cable and DSL access have. But when the 800-pound gorillas (AOL and MSN) jump in, that scene could change a lot. I'd like a little price competition in space (since it seems more likely than among local land-bound connections), but why can't the dishes and setup be free like they are with satellite TV promotions?
Why most it cost $40/month anyway? I don't see the utility or the reasoning. Personally it has to break for the modem limit (traditionally for years and years $19.95 for national providers and much lower like around $7 or less for basic access in state providers). Why the hell is broadband still so expensive any way? If they want people to use it perhaps they need to get the damn price down to reasonable levels.
Respond to s
The 2-way satellite connection is provided by Gilat-To-Home a digision of Gilat which has been used by companies for a while now. The dish has to be professionally installed to make sure you dont accidentally transmit at a military satellite or something. To alleviate the problem of rain fade common in DTHTV signals, the receiver will step down its reception speed to verify all incoming packets. The advertized speeds are minimumn upload of 128kbps, nominal 384kbps and maximum burstable download speed of 1.5Mbps.
I Don't Work Here
Wireless uploads? Cool. So far, Pacific Bell hasn't done anything but lie about when they'll have DSL installed, and we're probably never going to get cable modems installed here. Sattellite was never an option for us because upload speeds are still in the 24-36 kbps range. This MSN dish seem to be the solution since the only infrastructure is the the sattellite in space and the dish on the roof of your house. If the upload speeds can get to be around even 128k, then we would order that up ASAP.
And yet, it gets a +1 informative. Only on Slashdot...
And yes, the hw requirements are a slight jab at the trend of bloatware that comes from our favorite company, but most of the post applies to AOL's ventures into this arena as well.
Part of the problem/reason is what we've already seen with DirectPC - it's very much a Windows-only "solution" to high-speed access. IIRC, Win9x-only at that. Blech!
Paranoid rants aside, I honestly don't think that Microsoft and AOL will allow for platforms that they cannot fully control. MS's control is obvious. AOL can resort to tricks like taking over the network adaptor configuration (like the PPP debacle with AOL 5.0), and say things like "Oh, Connection Sharing? Sorry, we don't support that, so we disable it. Read your licence agreement again, it's in there.. "
But neither of them can fully control other platforms like that, nor do we want them to.
At the very least, it'll come down to what platforms can they actually support. Details are sketchy, so writing drivers may or may not be an issue, but certainly I doubt that AOL or even MS has the resources (or desire) to take calls from every quasi-major platform user that they may see.
Hell, my ISP escalates me immediatly when they hear me say the word "Linux" - 'cos the front-line folks don't have a clue how to deal with tshooting it (even though I've done all that anyway before I call).
Where the value of X-Mailer: is the true measure of a man...
Yeah, laying your own cable network is the major barrier to entry. And remember, not only do you have to run all the network that goes to the buildings, you have to get multi-family buildings to have your cable and the existing cable both going running through their building. Might be possible when a new building goes up, but who's going to agree to all the work neccessary to pull your new cable lines into an existing apartment building?
Intolerant people should be shot.
Weren't the Iridium phones transmitting to a satellite? In fact, since they weren't directed antennae (thus the signal can is strong even outside a narrow beam), wouldn't the FCC have had a greater problem with those than with these?
As to your other point, I would darned well hope that the signals were encrypted or (the dereaded security through obscurity method) were only receivable by special devices.
Mmmm.. Donuts
They still want more people to come on despite the hit to quality because that means more people giving them money. The local cable guys are getting to the point where many older customers are switching to one of the ADSL providers, just so they can have a guarenteed bandwidth and more reliable service. In all the time I've had cable, I've never seen a download above 70K/s, and usually I'm around 40. Still faster than a modem, but not as fast as they advertise it as being "capable" of. The fleeing customers have prompted a really cheesy ad campaign that's trying to convince people that just because _every_ subscriber won't be using the service at the same time, it means that only one will.
Intolerant people should be shot.
I see an awfull lot of people pointing out the problems with this service, and yes, most of them are right...however, I think we all need to keep 2 things in mind. 1)this is new technology...most new technologies are expensive and sucky...it will probably get better in both regards, given just a little time 2)I dream of one day taking off and going and living in the middle of nowhere in the rocky mountains...For much of my work, I am very dependant on my high speed net links (but also, I could survive bad latancy). Unless somebody with way too much money starts putting fiber in absolutely ridiculous places....this is the only way I will ever be able to fulfill my little dream...
A satellite in geosynchronous orbit is 22,300 mi away, minimum (at least according to the linked article). According to my math, that's about .12 light-seconds. In other words, it takes a signal 120 milliseconds to get from the satellite to the earth.
Think about telnet, or quake, or something like that. You press a key, and a packet gets sent. 120ms later, it reaches the sat. The sat sends it back down to a station, that takes another 120ms. Ignoring any latency on the ground, the ack for that packet takes 120ms to reach the sat and another 120ms to get to you. We're up to nearly half a second. Now add any ground-based latency, and you are one sorry-ass High Ping Bastard.
And of course your actual rate of download will depend on how large the TCP window is, 'cause it takes the same half a second for you to ack that MP3 file being beamed to you from outer space...
Low earth orbit satellites make *much* more sense for Internet because of this problem. Too bad no one could redo Iridium satellites to route IP! Of course, your favorite billionaires, Bill Gates and Craig McCaw, are collaborating on an outfit called Teledesic to do LEO sat Internet, but they are targeting 2004 for service start... which probably means more like 2006+, if ever.
Yes, but they can agree that this holds potential for profit, and in corperate-land profits are usually a good thing.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but IM software isn't exactly hauling in the $$ is it? Just my thoughts...
end communication
I didn't think so. ~ : ^ )
I am not really that dim. Without some information I'll give you but not dim. As far as being a tightwad I really don't think I should care. Basically what these companies are trying to do is get away with forcing real people to pay on average *more* for their access than they were paying in the past. In fact *double* or *more* what they were paying. This is a bad thing. People have certain rights in the marketplace and they are being ruined by people who are fixing the price artifically high to prevent continued affordability. Also these companies have subtly tried to coerce/influence/brainwash people into *needing* something that damn fast. It used to be in America and the world over people actually wated for things and had to think about the costs and the consequences before they bought. The price must be decreased if this is to be the future technology or everyone will suffer.
Respond to s
- Zilch
I think we are going to need a few more satellites.
;)
Have a look over here:
Lyngsat
Looks pretty crowded up there already
NULL
just wondering
Respond to s
Short answer: Its rilly, rilly bad.
Think about it. That satellite is a long way away - geosynchronous orbit is 22,236 miles up - and your packets have to up to the satillite and back down to the ground station - thats 44,472 miles one-way. The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second, so in optimal conditions, you're looking at almost 500 milliseconds for a ping to your ISP.
Games are pretty much unplayable. Large transfers are fast, as long as you don't drop any packets. Filling that pipe is a bitch!
--
http://gammatron.weblogger.com
Actually, I just recently set up a DirecPC system myself. I went outside and got a friend to watch the signal strength meter, took about 10 minutes to get the thing aimed correctly. And that was with very little experience with that kind of thing, someone who does that kind of thing all the time should be able to do it in less time.
That's what I have and it works well. I have few people except telemarketers who ever call anymore and persoanlly I don't see the need of having the second line. I also don't squander all my money on long distance charges so it works ok too. Also as I recall cable modems are subject to network saturation via large ammounts of local users and thus if I was going to waste the big money I would go for DSL. Also ISDN crapped out with per minute charges (personally I like free unlimited per month fees).
Respond to s
I've been beta testing the AOL version of for a few weeks now, and the connection speed is always inconsistant. Sometimes I get 650 kbps sometimes I get 25 kbps, and I have 56K modem.
Months ago, I visited Gilat2Home's web site to express my interest in 2-way satellite Inet access. I live in the middle of nowhere, and dialup is just too slow. 28.8 connections are almost unheard of here. Anyway, to beta test the Gilat2Home system, they wanted $499 up front, which entered me in a contract to subscribe to their service at a cost of $69.95/month after the trial period. What if I don't want the service afterwards? Well, that's just another measly $400 to get out of the contract. Hmmm, seems like a great way to win people over, eh? Oh! Also, for those of you out there who haven't realized it yet, Gilat2Home and DirecPC are their own companies and provide Internet access completely independent of MSN or AOL. That's just a new twist :/
Will these two new online services limit the amount of time to be online? I know DirectPC does this. The download speed is nice, but the latency and upload speed are still problems, especially if I want to run a server and play online games. xDSL and cable modem services are not in my area. :(
I look forward to receiving comments on this.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
That might explain it. How hard would it be to create another company that say did a better job? What are the barriers to entry to the cable industry? Also why would it hurt to get cable access in a local area? Are there usage maps for particular zip codes and the like to determine what areas are saturated with trafic and usage and which are not? If more and more people are going to hurt the system then why do they want more and more people to subscribe. In my local area I have had at least 4-5 ads for the service from AT&T or TCI or whatever come across my door. I just ignore them myself. Personally I can wait for my content and be happy.
Respond to s
Details on how it will work here ,as well as receive DISH Network satellite television programming from two EchoStar satellites. Additional information about this combined offering will be provided in the near future on this Web page.
From the page: "The GTH system both sends requests to the Internet and receives the requested Internet content via a Ku-band satellite in geostationary orbit approximately 22,300 miles above the equator. The satellite, in turn, communicates with GTH's hub facility, which has a direct connection to the Internet. The result is two-way satellite Internet service that provides high-speed, always-on access on par with other broadband technologies, such as cable modems and DSL. Best of all, no telephone connection is needed, no terrestrial Internet account is required, and the service is available in any location that enjoys a clear view of the satellite. The GTH satellite dish is also capable of receiving EchoStar's DISH Network? 500-channel satellite television programming. By taking advantage of this capability, a single antenna can provide two-way satellite Internet service
It makes sense to offer low-cost dial-up plans for people who are legitimately *really* poor, just like the phone company does...but whining that DSL and cable are just too expensive and about how the "elites" are keeping it all to themselves? Gimme a freaking break. It's expensive to lay the infrastructure for high-bandwidth connections, and contrary to popular belief, phone and cable companies are not making money hand-over-fist off these services.
(I know, I know, cry me a river...but these companies are in business to make money, and they've got to cover their costs like anyone else.)
Someday, high-speed access will be cheap/free, when bandwidth is no longer a scarce good. But by then, we'll have changed our idea of what "high-speed" is, so people will be whining about that, I'm sure.
Advantage: If I have the time and the Patience, I can mount this sucker on my RV, and get broadband in the middle of the damn Death Valley if I wish. :-)
(Yes, there's the whole aiming, etc to worry about.. But screw that, I'm patient)
Now don't tell my bosss I can get 768K per sec when I go vacationing... But he might not care.. esp since telnet will be lagged to fuck.
Owell I see farmers, and others in the boonies buying this, and loving this. If I was in Bublefarq Ks, and this was my only option than 28.8 dial up.. I'd take it.. in a heartbeat
http://thepoliticalgeek.com/blog/ Politics for Geeks.
Its the first time I've seen send AND receive capability in satillite systems for consumer use.
-----
"My kernel can beat up your kernel"
"I use Windows 2000. Get over it."
Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
Hundreds of homes have already been equipped with Gilat2Home systems as part of the final phase of pilot testing. Testers are forbidden to share info with public sources, but many are contributing anonomously at alt.dbs.echostar and other satellite oriented newsgroups. More info can be found at this page at The Echostar Knowledge Base.
The wait for tech support doubles every 18 months... Any likelihood they can solve your problem halves. Foosters
I'm currently working with a company who is deploying broadband wireless via 802.11 in a major metropoliton area. We are, using currently avalible technology, acheive 10mb at a range up up to 25 miles with around 100-200ms ping time. The equipment is pretty cheap, and we are in the works of arranging a deal with the manufacturers to customize it with encryption to keep it from interfering with any other 802.11 network. The only problem is it's going to such for anyone who has an american 2.4GHz phone, because it knocks them right off the band. On our current configuration we can support up to 1500 concurrent connections. We are planning to wire up buildings with 100mb backbone on top to offer it to an entire building all at once.
Maybe we DID take the blue pill. You wouldn't remember anyway.
---
In IRC: "Come on! Just send me the RedHat ISO, I'm on Sattelite!!"
On web sites, 1.2meg 1280x1024 graphics scaled down to 30x30 graphics thanks to Microsoft Frontpage(tm) and all the chaotic pages it creates.
In email, problems with people trying to send 15 meg file attachments and recieving them back constantly.
Talk about a Tech. Support nightmare!
. .much less a nationwide telecomunications infrastructure.
Why not just say "Windows 2000 required"? If you have Win2k running on your computer, you probably more than meet those requirements. Leave it to Microsloth to make an internet connection that needs 300MB of disk space.
On a side note, does anyone think those reqs might be to help sales of Win2k or WinME? I'm sure there'll be some people who will upgrade just to use this.
Well the MSN one sounds good, but the AOL one has a problem. You still need to upload via dialup which means you cant get rid of that phone line. For me personally, aside from the speed increase, I could justify a $40/month cable modem because I could get rid of the extra phone line I was using for dialup. $20/month for an ISP and about $20/month for the phone line so going to a cable modem cost me nothing. So i dont really see too many people jumping over to AOL's satellite service just for this reason alone.
right... a ping has to come back to you also, so thats 2 round trips.
--
http://gammatron.weblogger.com
First off: Didn't the FCC regulate the transmission of data via satelites to recieve-only? I thought you had to have a special permit to send data.
Anyway, my question is: Wouldn't it be easier to eaves drop on a satelite internet connection (especially one that's used to both send and recieve data) or is the transmission encoded before it gets thrown out as electromagnetic radiation?
hobbz
What kind of latency could we expect from an upload / download connection?
What would be the maximum speed per satellite?
How well will these dishes be able to sync up on a very cloudy / stormy day?
I guess, still you cannot dare say these will be as reliable as a dedicated connection. But does anyone know the answers to even these SIMPLE questions?
Ever need an online dictionary?
I heard something a while back about allowing people to gain internet access through the powerlines. They said they may impliment this in the future. Does anybody know what kind of speed this will bring and if it will be able to compare to today's home broadband standards (DSL, Cable, satellite)?
The only thing that makes this news is who's doing it. DirecTV's been doing it for some time now. It works ok if you're pulling news feeds or streaming media, etc. but stinks on ice for anything else because you're placing proxy requests with the landline (@ 33.6k or less) and they fulfill them at high speed via unused channels. This whole thing could be thought of as a interactive version of DirectTV or Dish network but nothing more.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
There are some barriers with radio and physics. The reason for the dish is because of the frequencies used. Too see broadband in your car will be difficult, because:
1. You have to use an omnidirectional antenna, for mobile operation. This means you have to use more wattage and cause more interference to the band. 2. It would generally have to be below 1 Ghz, which would limit bandwidth, and also, a lot of frequencies are already allocated to Cell and Comsumer products in that band.
-----------------------------
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
I had (briefly) a connection thru a local cable company who used vsat as their connection. My ping in quake shot up to around an unplayable 900. Gamers will not like satellite-based internet. On the other hand, people and businesses who need bandwidth and won't be affected by lag will find it very nice. My download speed was phenomenal. Web pages loaded *much* slower than on my current DSl due to the lag. The one second delay in requesting the page is enough for DSL to have the page already displayed. One of you physics/math types should be able to figure out how long at C it takes for a signal to hit geosynchronus orbit and get back, times 2 for the return trip.
I wonder exactly how Time Warner comes into this considering how they are in the process of merging with AOL. Why would the AOL-Hughes' satellite broadband service try to compete with cable if that's exactly what Time Warner um, err, Time Warner AOL does: cable? A plan in case they have to get rid of part of the future Time Warner AOL? What?
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance." ~Confucius~
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
I work for Radio Shack and we had a training seminar with a MSN representative a month ago. I explicitly asked during the Q&A session if the satellite service would work with 'alternate' operating systems. He kinda floundered saying something about it wouldnt be supported. I tracked him down after the meeting and managed to find out that it uses a satellite decoder that strips off the encryption and passes standard TCP/IP through an ethernet port. So in case you're wondering if it'll work with your Linux/BeOS/*BSD/etc box the short answer is YES!
I Don't Work Here
. .Thousands of Gilat satelites conected to linux boxes, all aimed at Redmond.
[cue maniacal laughter]
[pet kitty]
[kiss pinky ring]
I just think this is another step in the whole move to wireless in just about everything. I know more people who have forsaken the land line for just a cel phone. And I know alot who have gotten rid of cable for dishes as well. The cost of wiring everyone to all the networks is quite high. Using radio is prolly alot cheaper than throwing fiber all over the place. The one thing that would be nice though is a way to do the internet satellite link with out the dish. Then it would be a real killer app for whoever made a handheld computer that uses it. I guess we just have to wait for the 150k cel service.
"My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett
I've been designing VSAT systems in the military for a few years, so hopefully I can answer most of your questions. Hughes-Olivetti (among others) offers VSAT service here in Europe, and the VSAT service we have with them uses primarily 3 types of medium access. When your transceiver sees that you have only a few small packets to transmit, it uses a protocol known as slotted ALOHA. It just transmits a packet during synchronized time slots and hopes there's no collision; if so, it just keeps trying after random wait times just like CSMA/CD. The second method, used for larger uploads, is called transaction reservation. Just like a cell phone, the transceiver lets the satellite know that it has a large chunk of data to send, and the satellite gives it a time frame in which to do it, usually all in one lump. The third method is to request a dedicated channel out of your guaranteed leased bandwidth, but I don't think that's applicable for what we're talking about here. As far as security goes, I'm not sure it's something to worry about (but I'm one of those weird trusting types!) To intercept your uplink, someone would have to be right in front of the dish; the side lobes aren't that strong. On the downlink, which is all TDM, an eavesdropper would have to know the IP address of the person they are trying to target, not to mention the specific freq of the transponder the target is on. It would be less trouble to just tap their phone line! I must admit I don't know what the service providors have in mind for security, but I'd like to think they have something in the works.
Its certainly true that for ./ readers such as myself satelite links sound crappy and slow. But lets not forget the first priority of the whole shebang. . .to get new CUSTOMERS online. My grandma is a new internet user who lives out on the outskirts of Mesa, AZ. This would be perfect for her--hook this up to a web box like Compaq's iPaq and she'll be happy for the rest of her life with her email, news and most importantly, shopping.
Just imagine: instantly, there's world wide internet available EVERYWHERE, regardless of lag. Competitively price it, and then imagine the impact that this tech gone mainstream would have on the sagging, bloated internet economy.
s
- - - - - - - -
Don't worry, being eaten by a crocodile is just like going to sleep in a giant blender.
I can really see these satelite services charging per data transfered. Or monthly fee, for 1 gig or so, and then having to pay extra.
I don't think thats how DirecPC does it, but it could be.
That was really informative :-)
As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
Obviously, it's great if you're out in the middle of nowhere and a modem (or nothing) is the only alternative. But it's not gonna be really nice until the thing you're sending to is a lot less than a quarter-light-second away.
i dunno, aren't most upstream data requests mouseclicks and simple data requests? aside from servers and gaming, high outbound data bandwidth is probably not as much of a priority.
just a clueless $0.02.
eudas
Blessed is he who expects the worst, for he shall not be disappointed.
Latency is increased.
Download speed is same.
Upload speed on AOL is slower.
Setup fee is greater.
Monthly/yearly fee is same.
Can work anywhere as long as a point in the sky is visible.
So basically, it offers the advantage of working pretty much anywhere (for areas that don't have cable) provided you are willing to put up with higher latency and a higher initial cost.
Are there any other advantages??
As for Universities not deserving the reduced price bandwidth, give me a break... Tuition is high enough already. Did you know that many Universities lease out excess bandwidth to corporations and smaller schools? Savings aren't just squandered and resources don't go unwasted. Smaller schools struggle to make use of the limited bandwidth they even have. How else do you think the MP3 craze could bring campus networks to their knees? Legitimate research and information sharing is severly hampered in today's world when the bandwidth isn't available on campus.
Don't attack educational institutions... That is where some of the best developments in technology come from in the first place!
Ever heard of INMARSAT? More commonly known as those SEAL magnaphones you see in some action flicks. I can get a solid 64kbps up and down with one, and the latest models are no bigger than a laptop computer (with a fold-out flat "dish"). Those are direct connections though. Most typical VSAT setups use a 1.8 meter dish and a ~3watt head for uplink with a GEO satellite, and I've run those up to 512kbps down and 128Kbps up. The problem with uplinking however is the MAC protocol. The VSATs I've used employ slotted ALOHA, which is like CMDSA/CD only without the carrier sense. Essentially, everyone transmit at random and hope there's no collision! Count me out!
new users is all the internet needs... ;)
eudas
Blessed is he who expects the worst, for he shall not be disappointed.
The difference between Teledesic and other satellite providers it the capabilities of the network. That and launch cost will still be less than $3 billion (plus R$D, of course;). With the investors they have (including Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, Craig McCaw, and Bill Gates among others), cost of launch shouldn't be that much of an issue.
"The Age was called Dark not because there was no Light, but rather because the People refused to see It."
Wouldn't MSN's dish be more expensive, as it has to transmit to a satellite, as well as receive from one? I know handheld GPS units talk to satellites, but in the case of beaming LOTS of data, wouldn't it require somewhat more complex (and more expensive) technology?
----------
----------
"They misunderestimated me." --George W Bush, Nov. 6, 2000
MSN is also a pretty simple dial-up PPP setup. hardly special stuff. using the sat would mostly likely involve special (read proprietary) hardware. MS is unlikely to port it to a non-windoze version, and it probably won't be easy to hack.
No. Really, all this "mobile no wire" stuff is still in the early-adopter phase. If the rich and committed like it and pay for it, eventually the economics of scale kick in and the price comes down. If you want to lower the price then I suggest either:
a) paying the high price now and contributing to entrenching this as a cheap technology for later on...
b) hyping it until you're blue in the face to people who can afford it...
My Dad's first calculator cost $500 and didn't do square roots. See the parallel? Sattelite connections don't do square roots either...
2 1337 4 u!
Ok so a company decides to offer access to people in any state and any major city in the union. That in and of itself it fine. Then they start to restrict the platform thata person can connect to for said access and all sorts of other anoying things. People think that linux is the only system that can subvert ads gimme a break. I dare to bet with a little sneaky programming on windows you can do the same thing. Also let me tell you one thing. I hate to be in one of the few states in the union that allows linux users to connect and actually do anything. Sure I would like to connect for pay. I just would like the max bandwidth that my 2400 baud modem can get and that's what I will pay for per month maybe like say 3-7 dollars to get the access and no frills like usenet and the like and I don't even need SMTP access or POP3/IMAP already got them covered. Basically I need 1. dynamic IP 2. reliable primary and secondary nameservers anything else is not needed I do think these companies can and do make fabulous access premiums for their access. Also I think that these so-called non profit organizations like universites and schools getting free T-3 or better connections is insane. I do expect to pay but at a fair price and if companies are going to offer a free deal to basically everyone then make it free to *everyone* and *anyone* and don't screw the little guy.
Respond to s
Wow! Your site is the most amazing example of net-hubris I have ever seen. It's like a 12 minute guitar solo...
2 1337 4 u!
as for weather problems, as far as i know DSS and other TV sattelite users have no issues when storms come in because the signals penetrate the clouds, etc. the latency must be an issue however because the signal will have to bounce off multiple sattelites in each direction in many cases in order to receive data. perhaps these services will be competitive with cable/dsl (i've heard predictions of sattelite connections capable of vastly greater speeds than cable/dsl on the order of 40-100mbps available to home users within a year or so) but i'm dubious. i'm also considerably biased against this technology because my high school has had a sattelite internet connection for nearly 4 years now and it is terrible. they just installed a brand new enormous sattelite and it sucks even worse than before! the problem is mostly the fact that it's a 56k uplink but i still can't trust this stuff yet. the computers hooked up to the sattelite are PCs running NT (which we've replaced with linux in many cases) but i've found myself being forced to use the dammed iMacs in the other lab because they're on a 6 megabit DSL line! ugh MSN is going to have to do a whole lot to convince me that this is good technology. and i'd never trust anything from AOL.
the receiver uses standard TCP/IP over ethernet to hook to the box
I Don't Work Here
although your calculations and reasoning make sense, experience does not support those conclusions. for a standard internet connection such as cable or dsl you still need to go through some sattelites to reach servers located in a different continent. why then is my ping to servers in italy or holland or wherever else (i live in california) only around 200?
I don't know what's going on in the powerline market over in the States, but here in Germany this has been in the media for quite some time (if you can read German, then check out this list of articles that were on the Heise news service over the last few months.
Development in the field is rather active over here. You can buy home spin-off solutions that are based on powerline communication already. One application that is already being sold is a (phone line) modem whose serial port is replaced by a powerline adapter, and by hooking up your computer to a second adapter you're able to access your modem from anywhere within your local house circuit. I am not quite sure what implications this has on security, but I am fairly sure that some measures are being taken. This is not really high-speed, though, even though it seems fairly reliable.
Powerline Internet access is a different matter, of course. In Cologne, they will be starting to sell powerline-based Internet and telephony by the beginning of 2001. A couple of field tests, also on a larger scale in a somewhat more public environment, have already been conducted.
The speed that is being claimed varies. Preussen Elektra (recently merger'ed into e.on Energie) claim that their particular system is capable of reaching 10 Mbps in-house and 2 Mbps for incoming/outgoing Internet access. Siemens claim they reach 1.3 Mbps over public lines and plan to extend this to 10 Mbps. So as far as cable or DSL are concerned, this is quite a competition. :-)
The central problem with powerline communications is that your average powerline is just a pair of wires arranged in an unpredictable network topology, and that the behaviour of the electrical properties of the system tends to be a bit difficult to handle because most electric devices emit quite a bit of noise. Take a look at the noise emissions from a 100 to 300 W dimmable ceiling lamp, for example, and then you'll immediately see why powerline network access took this long to develop. It appears that they got this quite under control, though.
The final problems introducing this over here appear to be of a legal sort, because there are quite strict regulations in Germany as to which emissions are allowed in which part of the spectrum. With powerline communications, one has the problem of the non-shielded wires acting like a very large antenna, so they have to take care as to which frequencies they're using and how they're reducing emissions. The carriers needed for 1 to 10 Mbit are well in the amateur radio spectrum, for example. Nevertheless, powerline internet has good prospects for the future over here because it is by far the least expensive way by which to hook up people to the network (and since all major electricity corporations here also sell network services, they are quite interested in extending their customer base) - practically every house is connected to the powerline network already and has quite a bit of wiring installed as well.
As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
Fuck M$. They will requrire you have some
PNP based bullshit that will in turn require
their sorryass OS.
I've got two questions that were left unanswered so far, so if anyone could help me out with these, I'd really appreciate it.
If there's anyone out there who knows a bit about how these technical details are tackled, I'd appreciate to hear about it... ;-)
As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
MSN and AOL ought to keep their butts out of this. Although I agree that there should be some more competition besides @Home, I just don't think AOL and MSN are the people to do this. Look at how many DSL competitors are out there. I haven't done enough research to see if any of those actually support Linux, but if AOL or MSN or anyone else that comes up with the idea to offer broadband cable access, then AOL and MSN should be thanked. I know that sounds wrong.
Why?
Wow, that is a rip off. Thank you for sharing it with us. I can get IDSL (144kb/sec MAX), but it costs over 100 bucks a month and you have to sign a contract (usually a year or more). I am not that rich! If I was, I would get a T1. :(
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
check this out... I know it's not available in all of the US... but since it has been in AZ it has taken off like crazy... excellent package too: http://www.sprintbroadband.com adios -cipher
-ballpark
I can't believe how many posts here have been putting down this service. Yes, the latency will be relatively high, yes there are significant startup costs, but no, this is NOT only relevant to the "rural community". We should all stand up and cheer every time there's a new way to get Internet access that doesn't involve the existing cable plant, I don't care if it involves smoke signals and ham radio!
Sure, DSL and cable are just fine ways of getting Internet access, in theory. I personally don't consider myself to live in a "rural" area. I live in a large and dense community, about 1.5 miles from AOL headquarters. I can SEE MCI/Worldcom headquarters from my neighborhood. But guess what: there is NO real broadband access available where I live! None! Zippy! Nada! The only thing that comes close is the cable service, which is (you guessed it) one way. Further, their service is lousy, and for some reason their plans for upgrading the infrastructure are a state secret that they're subscribers are not worthy of knowing.
DSL? Hahaha! There are at least a dozen independent DSL providers in the area, all of whom would happily provide service (including Covad, of course), but they can't. Why? Because Bell Atlantic (I'm sorry, Verizon!) hasn't gotten around to upgrading the CO. They're supposed to get to it this fall; I'm sure we all believe this latest prediction. And I'm sure that service rollout will be immediate, once the CO is updated. You've only got a few thousand homes in the CO's area waiting for something, anything to become available. Oddly enough, with a few huge internet companies in the neighborhood, a few people are actually interested in accessing the Internet! Of course, the bad news is that all the neighborhoods are new, and many of them have fiber running through them. Sounds great, doesn't it? Except DSL isn't built for fiber, it wants copper! So you can't REALLY do DSL in these neighborhoods. Instead, you get iDSL, which is really nothing more than an ISDN line, and your bandwidth (up and down) is limited to 144Kb. Wow! And all of this for only $80 or so a month! A bargain at twice the price! I guess we should just go ahead and get the readily available ISDN service, instead. After all, it's 128Kb, almost as good. Oooh, but that's right, Verizon charges for that one by the minute, right? Oh, I think they offer flat rate for $150-300 a month. Let me jump right on that!
Enough ranting. The point is this. As long as the cable plant monopolies (your local phone and cable companies) are your only choices for Internet access, it's bad for you, the consumer. We're just lucky that the cable companies got into the act; otherwise, we'd still be wistfully looking forward to the day when T1 prices fall below $1000 a month, or ISDN cost less than $250 a month. Unfortunately, neither the cable companies or the phone companies are making a significant portion of their revenue from home broadband access, so they just don't care. Don't let them fool you. Even where the service is readily available and cheap, we hear endless horror stories about the providers filtering traffic, throttling connections, forbidding telecommuting, etc. Wireless is the ONLY arena where its still possible for a hungry, focused company to come in, provide real value, and finally start realizing the dream of universal affordable broadband access (or at least the universal availability of it).
I'm not saying that these satellite services are some sort of godsend; for all I know, they're going to be horrible. I'm already wary of Gilat (the company behind the MSN/Echostar service) given several goofy statements that have leaked out about the service. (One story claimed that the service would only be bundled with new computers purchased at Radio Shack for the first few months of the rollout??) But maybe, just maybe, it'll help keep the others on their toes. Worldcom is experimenting with line of sight, ground based wireless. Ricochet is claiming (for the last few years) that they're upping their wireless service to 128K in all 1.5 cities it's available. There's nothing the phone company or the cable company can do about these services, and that's the best thing about them.
Finally, personally, I don't WANT to get DSL, because I'm not so keen on giving more money to the local phone company, even indirectly. Those guys have been dragging their feet on high speed access for decades to maximize their profits; how long ago was ISDN introduced? Why is it STILL not affordable everywhere? Whatever. Maybe they'll finally, finally wake up if enough people start walking away.
You don't have to be much of a wiz to do the math. *** pulls out kcalc ***
.12 secs/trip, and the round trip is .24 secs. Whether the satellite is on the horizon or straight above doesn't make much difference in this case because the geometry of the situation roughly cancels the effect.
Google turns up 35785 km as height to geosync orbit (on the first hit as usual - loves Google). Dividing by C=300000 km/sec gives about
So your 900 ms ping is not explained by the distance.
--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Persoanlly I like to have access to technology and means of presentation that most people need to spend millions to get. As far as the hubris I don't think I have it. I hate to have to use ftp and the like to upload changed html documents and I found the absolutely perfect solution (ok comments need to be there but all in all it works well for the money: free). The internet is removing the barriers to access and providing for it's loyal. Also I like actually getting code without thousands of dollars in charges to myself. Any other comments can be made via story submission or via e-mail. That's the way I like it kind of a Q/A type thing.
Respond to s
In regards to the bidirectional satellite Internet access...
I would assume that the satellite is not "aiming" signals at each receiver, so does that mean it's like cable modems where everyone is sharing the bandwidth (at least for a particular channel)? Will everyone's dish receive the packets of everyone else on that channel? And (therefore), will it slow down the more users that are using it?
If the answer to all that is "yes", I would be curious to know how much bandwidth each satellite channel has, how many channels, and how many satellites they actually have in orbit.
As for uploads, if multiple people are sharing the same channel, can the satellite handle many signals coming in at once, or does it need some Ethernet-style collision detection? Is the signal actually digitally processed by the satellite, or is it just "bounced" through some sort of analog retransmitter?
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
System Requirements
- PC equipped with Pentium II or better running at 300 MhZ or better
- 128MB of RAM or more
- 300MB of free HD space
- Windows2000 or WindowsME
- Mouse
No Linux, no BSD, no Solaris, no MacOS, no BeOS. Maybe they'll let you plug your XBox into it, but otherwise it's gonna be pretty restrictive.
Not to mention what the user access agreement looks like. "In exchange for this service you agree that we may, at any time, make available, with or without notice, information which may or may not be personally identifiable as coming from you. Failure to agree to these terms will result in termination of service. Termination of service does not release liabilty to fufill your usage contract, which will, in the event of termination be due in full at time of termination..." And so on.
Of course, this is just speculation, based on past behavior, and is as likely to be completely wrong as not. Just don't say I didn't tell you so. Me, I'm sticking with DSL, thanks.
Where the value of X-Mailer: is the true measure of a man...
Here is a good use for Iridiums sattalites,seems better than just de-activating them and waiting for them to come crashing down
This is a friggin' amazing deal for the bandwidth we get, plus there is infinite expandability, since all they have to do is add another antenna if the demand gets too high. The upload rate is slightly lower (256K/s), but it is comparable to the Frame Relay we are using at work.
One of my coworkers is getting in on this deal for many of the reasons shown here. He is sick of using his DirecPC connection with a dialup for upload. I would love to see this type of technology catch on, since it is infinitely cheaper than running coaxial cable through downtown streets. The only problem is that not every city has a mountain at the outskirts of the city.
Because you can't, you won't, and you don't stop...
Do these things really use Geosyn satellites? I could have swore they used some sort of LEO system, which would make your latentcy somewhat better. Then again, I may be confusing this with one of the Iridium competitors MS had invested some money with.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
Someone out in Podunk, Kansas will be thrilled to have a satellite connection after suffering thru sub-28.8 speeds for years. As for latency, yes its a factor. However, for your average home user playing games isn't a high priority. It'll be used mostly to surf the web and download files. Thus, it seems like latency isn't going to be that big of an issue to most people.
Last night I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I'll never know.
Any limitations in the AUP? Like how many MB, no servers, etc.?
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
With all the posts about LEO (Low Earth Orbit) and GEO (Geosyncronous Earth Orbit) I took the liberty of diging up an old link you might find enlightning. Point your java enable web browser here and you'll see just how high up a GEO is, and thus how much latency such a system will have.
www.delphiauto.com is on it I think.
check out their Communiport® Smart Receivers
You have paid for a total of 0 pages and so far 0 have been used up (0 today).
WildBlue (formerly iSky) will be offering two-way satellite internet in late 2001 (for those of us who prefer not to deal with either AOL or MSN).
Simpletoneity, n. -- The phenomenon of many people all doing the same stupid thing at the same time.
Hope I'm not too late. Mod me up, if you want. Anyhey, my family is one of few testing the G-2-H connection. I must say that it has been a great experience... I've got it shared about my network here at home (yeehaw!). I have found that at times it has been faster (yes, I say faster) than the DSL that they compare it too [A nearby business that I spend time at has a DSL] under my own incredibly weird benchmarks. At MediaBytes.com (I think that is right...), where George Lucas in Love is hosted, I can (and do) run it at the 700k (T1++) speed on the main (server) computer and it runs great. On a DSL, the best I could get was 150k.
WorldMaker
Sure the wavelengths may penetrate clouds, but...
I've noticed on my dish that my signal|noise Ratio drops depends on...
1) Heavy Winds (Even though the dish is Bolted right on the side of my house)
2) Foliage... (During the winter I get a better signal than summer)
3) Snow!!!! yes A good snowstorm can drop your signal quicker than anything.. now It's pretty easy to keep on cleaning off your dish if you mounted it right outside a window like I did, but there are a lot of people in my who have to mount way up on top of a pole/house/whatever to clear the mountains to even get a clear signal to the sat... If it is at all possible..
Now since I work for an ISP I'm just wondering.. Will the customers call the help desk and complain during the winter about their connectivity, only to find out that they can't get to the roof of their house in a blizzard to clean it off???
Now the idea comes to mind of running a thermostatically controlled heating wire on the rim of the dish that would keep it above 45 F
-- Life: Hate the Game... Love the cereal
I own a direct tv unit, how can these dishes be any different. Well, i've notice that my unit doesn't work when we have thick clouds over head (that happens a lot), how would that effect the sattelite connection. "OH there must be a storm coming, Counter strike just lagged out".... I think anyone who puts in one of these dishes should be shot, or have great weather =)...
And quite frankly who would waste that much money on something outside of the government?
Respond to s
I recently played the the beta GTH system, and even with only a few beta testers on it, it doesn't work.
I know about the whole speed of light thing(which is where most of the latency comes from), but sharing an uplink makes it worse. The problem is that although data is always streaming on the downlink side, people have to take turns transmitting. For example, when I was the only user with data to transmit, my ping times to the first router were ~700ms (pure speed-o-light), but when one person was ahead of me to transmit a packet, it quickly went to ~1500ms, then ~2400ms, etc. When someone is ahead of you to transmit you have to wait for them to stop transmitting data, for their transmitter to shut down, your transiever's rx-tx turnaround, your transmitter to come on, and then you can finally get your packet out. Imagine this whole sequence with ten people ahead of you(if the service became widespread, this could become very common)!
The other problem is that people with defective transmitters(or malicous people who modified them), could easily jam the transponder being used for the uplink. If someone is transmitting continuously(knowingly or unknowing), A SINGLE USER COULD TAKE DOWN THE WHOLE SYSTEM! How's that for bad security!
Some questions about this idea:
1. Can you connect to the internet using this method?
2. How much and where can you obtain a cheap dish?
3. Wouldn't you have to find a geostationary satellite or move the dish?
Respond to s
1. Gamers don't want it. It has more lag than a telephone modem! With my new high speed satellite connection, I'm going to whip yo... damn, dead already.
2. No one who can get cable or DSL wants it. It's more expensive, and it's no more portable. Even if one of these dishes is small enough to mount on your BMW, you still have to power, and much worse, aim the lousy thing.
3. So the people left are ones in the country who are willing to pay lots of money for high speed Internet service. Computer illiterates, swamp dwellers and underpaid rednecks need not apply. Well, if I lived in the middle of nowhere, you could count me in. My guess though, is that the seven people above who have proclaimed their support are the only ones. Take advantage of it now guys, it's not going to last long!
If you are modding me down because you disagree with me, use the "Flamebait" category, not the "Troll" one.
hmmm.. okay, never mind then.
When and If price-competition begins to heat up, I'm certain free setup as well as a number of other "perks" will be offered.
"I'm making perfect sense, you're just not keeping up."
Each transponder can send about 32Mbps. Now I don't know how many are up there but I do recall that there was some concern about how much bandwidth HDTV was going to eat up. And now you have to add broadband internet access.
I think we are going to need a few more satellites.
do you know that for sure? have you done extensive scientific tests? until then, assume nothing. If you think about it, half of the system is completely differnet from the other.. and of course it should make a huge difference.
Buying a Dell computer is equivalent to dropping the soap in a prison shower.
I really hope someone besides AOL and MICROS~1 get into this market. Because I don't want to pay for AOL service, and it most likely won't work with Linux anyway. I know Microsoft service isn't gonna work with my Linux box...
" I work for DirecTV, and we get training to the point to where we're absolutely blue in the face with it."
I never mentioned DirecTV training. Read the sentence from the original post again.
"On top of that, tech support calls for the PC stuff are more common, and expensive to deal with. The call centers have specially *cough*POORLY*cough* trained staff"
All I said about the DirecTV staff was that their job was easier. I will say that at the time I worked there, the TV was very well trained.
It is of course, possible that their training methods have changed drastically in the last month. I stopped working there 9 months ago, but it was still the same when I left, because I have a friend who worked there until SITEL (The DirecPC/TV support contractor.) moved the site from Virginia to Georgia, and we set up several other people with jobs there, and their training was as bad as it was when I was there. Let me sum up the training they gave me.
- One week of in class training. That was it. The only resource was a bad website to use as a text.
- The content of the website was incorrect in regards to the products in some areas.
- The teacher was a CNE who was so bad at what he did that he couldn't get any other job in the area. The area is northern Virginia, where anyone with a CNE can get a job in a heartbeat. This guy couldn't even tell us what UDP stood for.
I could go on, but I have work to get to.
Isn't that similiar to what some people were trying with UHF signals? You'd send requests through regular dial-up, and would download from a UHF antenna? I remember them getting some rather impressive bandwidth with it, but I guess it never caught on. Anyone have any real info on this?
--
Good point. I'll be changing the sig today.
"why can't the dishes and setup be free like they are with satellite TV promotions?"
Because the hardware is more expensive, and targeting them is a pain in the ass. I used to work for DirecPC (The company that does this with AOL.) and their signal bandwidth is very tight, so a satellite must be pointed within several tenths of an inch, versus within half a foot or so for a TV dish. The TV signal is also much stronger, so the parts to pick it up cost less.
On top of that, tech support calls for the PC stuff are more common, and expensive to deal with. The call centers have specially *cough*POORLY*cough* trained staff who are all in front of high end windows machines (To simulate the kind of machine that someone hard-core enough to want satellite net access would have.) running these satellite systems as well as good, I mean, land-based internet connections, and the costs for all of that get high pretty fast, as opposed to TV where most of the calls are just "Ok now push the select button on the remote. It's the one that says "select" on it.
Anyway, these systems are pretty much guaranteed to suck, as they are all being run by companies that have done little more than muck up the net as it is.
Nice suggestion.
I was hanging around talking with the Radio Shack guys as a friend and I so-often do... and the guy pointed to a Compaq spitting out some full-motion video on a nice LCD... I saw an MSN logo... I thought, "Ok, what's the big deal?" Then he explains how MSN is offering satellite 'net access and the Fond du Lac store was the first one to have it working in the state of Wisconsin... (this was a few weeks back) The guys were pretty proud of it... then they told me it did upload as well, and I thought to myself "damn... I could get rid of that 2nd phone line..." Of course, we should have cable modem access in a few weeks... they finally rolled it out and I have 2 friends who got it hooked up last week... They told us it would be 3 more weeks when we called... I'm guessing there's quite a waiting list.... but anyhow, I'm babbling... I just spent 20 minutes looking around to see if anyone else had posted about Radio Shack having the setup in the stores... I figured I'd post something anyhow... It's Sunday morning, no one's awake... I'm bored. Somehow I don't think MSN is going to make much money around here, with cable and DSL now being rolled out everywhere... oh well.
And is it just me, or is this thread looking a little more childish than most? Must be that Sunday-morning shit...
I know some people who live out in the boonies who would love satellite broadband. This means they're stuck with MSN, though, since AOL is still one-directional, just like the stuff that flopped a few years back. Look at my locality. Cable only goes one-way here. Hence, DSL outnumbers it by something like 40:1 as of a few months ago. AOL will lose this round to MSN if they don't get some up-to-date tech.
WARNING: there is a trojan on your
---
Ok I hear a LOT of people talking about how they'd rather just get a t-1 run to their house (read pipedream).... :)) So go figure about another $1650 a month
Anyway... just incase you were really thinking about it.
1st.... contact your regional Telco and check out the pricing to lease the line. Depending on your location to the POP of the ISP/Tier service provider you want, this will run about $1500/mo
not to mention hefty install prices
2nd... Contact an ISP/Tier Service provider to see what the cost of the Internet connection would be.
(Better to go with a Tier1 provider like Sprintlink here... That way you KNOW your on a fat backbone rather than having your T run to an ISP that has 2000 dialups, a couple dds56K circuits and 3 more T-1's all going on a 3MB outbound pipe
3rd... don't forget the extra equipment, CSU/DSU (I recommend a good Kentrox), get yourself a decent router, Cisco 26xx would be good..
4th... Get ready to dowload your pr0n!!!!!
so all in all, figure into about 3K/month for your T-1 and about 10K in setup fees...
This is one of the reasons why mid-high speed access is expensive, the ISP's must expand their network infrastructure so you don't have similar problems that the telco's have today, and bottleneck all their customers.
(Most phone networks were created using the average call time of 5-10 minutes.... PRE-INTERNET days)
-- Life: Hate the Game... Love the cereal
For me neither Cable nor DSL is going to be available for years. My current dialup connection is fine for Usenet and mail (I use a text based shell account); I don't do games and do few file downloads. This leaves surfing the web as the internet activity which is very sluggish with my dialup, in particular web discussion forums (of which Slashdot is one) [unfortunately fewer and fewer web sites are Lynx compartible]. Gilat beta testers, what is your experience surging the web?
"but why can't the dishes and setup be free like they are with satellite TV promotions? "
Simple...Have you ever had to deal with an MSN/AOL user? They have to pay the install Techs "Danger Pay" to go in, and the possability of Millions in "Work Related Phyciatric Damage"
"Even Prophets don't know everything"
The satellite is a downlink. You have to place requests via landline with a standard analog modem (if you're using ISDN, xDSL, or Cable, you're already beyond the service level that this would provide...)- these requests would go to a central facility that would then pull it across the 'net and then beam them back down, not unlike the video feeds that you already get from the DBS satellite right now. This was something that missed it's time, I'd say. This would be useful if you already have a DBS system, didn't want to do much of anything but surf the net (it's not going to do much good for things like Quake gaming or IRC/ICQ/etc. chat.). If it's cheaper than xDSL or Cable (or you don't have either) then you might want to consider it. Otherwise, it's got no value proposition for anyone who they'd try to sell the service to.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
We have had this down here in New Zealand for ages - They call it Ihug ULTRA (http://www.ihug.co.nz/ultra/). No setup costs here!! And only NZ$59.95 (which is roughly USD$29.95 I beleive) a month, with no data limit (but a 300 hours limit before you pay 0.50c US an hour after that). It's pretty sweet. I've got a service guy coming in this week to install my dish (it's a 90cm dish, which feeds down from an orbiting satilite). I'm getting the 512kbps deal, but they reckon it can do up to 8mbps or something. It's only downstream through the Sat though - Upstream traffic through your modem or ISDN ect. Can't wait!! - Murray Fox
I personally can't wait for the service (starting 2005) and it will revolutionize net access in places that don't have the cabling infrastructure that current net-leading countries have (particularly North America). The possibilities for Africa and high-density countries like China and India are incredible. I wish I had stock;-)
Check it out at http://www.teledesic.com
"The Age was called Dark not because there was no Light, but rather because the People refused to see It."
Teledesic keeps getting pushed back, and back and back. When it was first anounced, it was going to be 2001 andit's still "just 5 years away".
I can only imagine they're waiting for the cost per pound into orbit to fall so their constelation can be used for something other than "making really cool shooting star thingies" as they burn up in the atmospere like Iridium will do.
Launch cost (~10,000 per pound * 288) is what's keeping teledesic on the ground. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting on teledesic.
GPS units calculate your location based on the position of satellites. They don't ever send data to a satellite. Each satellite beams down its current location in the circle orbit, and the GPS unit calculates how far away each satellite is by analyzing the time difference between pulses.
Get 3 signals and you're set. So don't worry, GPS isn't like big brother or anything. *You* are finding out where *you* are. You transmit nothing.
As for MSN's thing, transmitting back is quite a feat. I also wonder how fast their uplink really is. Just look at Iridium and Globalstar. Iridium could transmit 2400bps (although they went out of business) and the newer Globalstar can transmit 9600bps. I don't think MSN's thing is going to upload fast at all.
-Justin
Ok, I've got DSL (ADSL and SDSL....hehe). I've got many friends with cable modems, and one friend with a (pilot project) two-way satellite uplink.
I'll start with cable... all the old rumors are true. If you're on a cable segment with a bunch of non-netophiles, your experience is likely to be quite good, although odds are your provider is "censoring" your connection by blocking certain ports entirely, namely netbios. Doesn't affect me as a Linux devotee, but wreaks havoc with folks trying to do winderz shares. If you're not going to give me all the ports, don't call yourself an ISP.... And then there's that good old slowdown when the Jones's and the Smith's up the street start leeching every night about 7:00. I've heard of these massive daily slowdowns, but alas, with DSL never experienced it.
The satellite thing was cool. Upstream AND down. The dish is oval, much larger than my DirectTV dish, and had to be professionally mounted on their loft. Downstream was around 400k (typical for satellite-based downfeeds) but the upstream was on the order of 56k. And then there's the latency... pinging my house from theirs over that was a 360ms per ping affair. Don't plan to play Counter-Strike over one of those connections.
Nope, nothing's going to beat DSL in the in-town market anytime soon. I've got a 1.5Meg/256k ADSL line that gives every ounce of that "rated" speed 24/7 for $49.99 a month. And I've got an SDSL 768k/768k line that gives me more like 835k/835k for $39.99 a month. Can't beat that, no siree. Microsoft and AOL are just going for market share, not quality of service with this satellite venture. They'll advertise it as "high speed" and "good as DSL" but it won't be... yet they'll get millions of subscribers. And tell me... just how much data CAN be piped up to the current generation of satellites?
Avoid any satellite system (unless you don't have an alternative and MUST HAVE bandwidth) until the advent of the LEO (Low Earth Orbit) systems in the next two years or so. Until then, latency is unacceptible.
I don't know of too many applications where you need more than the original internet requires that are done at any of the colleges that I have seen. I would like to see some hard core examples of good need or of actual implimentations and how they are being directed.
Respond to s
Unless, I'm mistaken, this dish that you put on your house must be very big and very powerfull to be able to send to a GEO sat.
Has there been a quantum leap in technology?
The only satellite uplink dishes I've seen have been 4 meters across, and have had little brick houses next to them.
--- I hate my sig
So now I can watch my cable TV, talk to grandma on the phone, be hooked on the internet, have my am/fm radio at full blast, and find something new to gripe about..
Come on guys, really, what I want is FASTER connections, not MORE connections.
We don't need no Net Explorer We don't need no Thought control
Doesn't 2 way sat communication have a huge latency problem?
I'm sure you will get decent bandwidth (I remember 400kbps about 2 years ago so I'm sure it has improved) but who wants 2000msec pings?
I wonder what has better latnecy the new 3G phones or this satellite setup.
Now, that said, if you live in the middle of nowhere, it's still a heck of a lot better than 56k. But DSL or cable is what's going to drag this country into broadband, not satellite access.
There are Linux users that connect to MSN, it is no different than any other ISP. I don't care much for M$ either, but get your facts straight. Don't just assume something won't work if you are unable to make it work yourself.
Sig to stupid to use.
Its still going to be very laggy. I mean your request has to go up to the satellite then back to the earth, then for your request to be fulfilled it all has to happen again. I guess it would be fine for streaming media, but don't plan on playing quake thats for sure.
It would really be nice to get SOME FORM of high speed access where I live. In my area there is no cable access, no DSL/ADSL, not even ISDN. Nothing. DirecPC would be the only option but as far as I know they don't support Macs and since they never replied to my e-mail, I would assume they don't intend to either.
The sad thing is that I live right between two fairly large cities. In fact, there's an international airport whose runway literally crosses over the end of my street not more than 200 yards away (yes, it's loud). So it's not like I'm in the middle of nowhere.
The reason we don't have highspeed access escapes me. My cable company delivers its programming over fiber, we have a decent sized ISP/TelCo not more than fifteen minutes from my house. Everything would seem to be in order, but it's not. To my knowledge there aren't even any plans to serve high speed access to my area -at all.
I hope this broadband through the air is legitimate. I'd love to get highspeed access and I'm willing to pay a premium -as long as it works.
DigiSquid Design.
Bandwidth:
I believe, based on the height of its orbit, that a geostationary sat would have a fairly large footprint. In fact, I doubt you could place a sat so that its footprint covered a portion of the US without having it include a major urban area.
Security:
Sure, there would probably be encryption on the up and downlinks, but most encrypyion schemes can be cracked if someone wants to bad enough (although that someone may have to be the CIA or similar). Your right, though, the sat can't point its antenna at individual users, that's impractical, so technically, anyone with the right hardware within the sat's footprint can receive anyones data.
Uplinks:
This could be tough. One solution is to have a wide band of uplink frequencies. Since the bandwitdh required is proportional to the bitrate, you could work out a scheme where the uplink speed dropped as the number of simultaneous uplinks increased. If only a small number of uplink channels were available, you may have to wait for a channel to become available.
Then again, I may be talking out of my ass...
Come test your mettle in the world of Alter Aeon!
Well, the speed of light is 186,255 miles/second. So, if the satellite is geo-sync'd, it is around 22,500 miles (or so) up in the sky. That makes for a .120 ms one-way trip. Of course, that's without routing/processing overhead.
Low-earth orbit is a much better method (ala Iridium). There the satellites around only a couple hundred miles up (but moving back and forth across the sky) and can use lower power (a simple antennae on earth, versus a dish). These would have less than a 1 ms one-way trip.
You spammed moronism all over this slashdot story. Shut the fuck up.
You must have missed the part of the story where they mention it being bi-directional:
"Microsoft will also include "two-way" dishes that allow downloads and uploads just as fast as cable modems or DSL".
personally, i'd never trust my security to my ISP anyways - do you know what kind of people work at some of these places?!? (no offense to anyone, my mom works at one, and i don't really want her seeing what i'm doing...) better to use your own forms of security (whether through VPNs, SSH tunneling, using freedom, etc)
How does the satellite distinguish between different uplinks from different customers?
i'd guess through a unique identifier in the packet header. time frames seems too limiting.
-f
-f
www.blackant.net
why even bother with one phone line? i've a cel phone and cable net access - no need of a phone line. other people i know have cel + DSL, still no phone line. works great!
-f
-f
www.blackant.net
Satellite is a good technology because of all those people in the middle of nowhere and that is why it is here to stay (at least for a while) while DSL and cable are better for speed satellite can serv everyone with no trouble no need for there to be a switching station within 5 feet of your house and cable modems arent avaible dual way in all places i personally think satellite is great.
*sighs* It'd be nice if that weren't so. Oh well. :)
http://gabrielcain.com/
What I don't like about these services is that they still require a dish to receive the signal, I want broadband in my car!! Does anyone have any solutions that would work in cars that is affordable ? I would love to have the ability to download Mp3's on demand or listen to streaming radio in my car. What about if all wireless computers could communicate with each other creating a small-scale wireless network that would eventually route to the internet?
It's good to hear that there is more options coming to the broadband arena, especailly ones that will work for people in rural areas though. Unfortunenlty I doubt these services will work on anything other than Windows, and possibly the Mac (especially the MSN service!) but atleast it is a start and lets hope I'm wrong!