funding

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 2 weeks ago
  • Acknowledged
  • (Edited)
 Has anyone else seen the article in regards to ViaSat  receiving around 82 million to improve on services in rural areas? Hopefully ,some improvement in the near future!
Photo of david lightsey

david lightsey

  • 43 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 3 weeks ago

  • 1
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
That is called extra profit for Viasat. The only way Viasat can improve their service is to launch another satellite and $82 million ain’t going to make that happen.
Photo of Homeskillet

Homeskillet

  • 470 Posts
  • 182 Reply Likes
Might as well flush the money down the toilet.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Here is how this works. Viasat takes money for select areas of the country. They offer certain plans to those zip codes nobody else can get. Nothing goes to infrastructure improvements
(Edited)
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
https://www.gainesville.com/news/20191217/viasat-to-receive-5m-for-broadband-in-rural-alachua-county they will offer cheaper plans with more data according to this article
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
Not exactly. The CAF II auction was based on census blocks, not ZIP codes. And Viasat can’t “build out” to areas it already covers with a beam. It sounds like they are using the money to not offer service to any new areas (how do you do that when the beams already over pretty much the entire US?), but rather to subsidize the service to get the cost down a little.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
There will be new "special" plans. That is how they did it the last time. In many areas, current plans dont meet the standards for the money.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
As I said, no new service provided, just more profit for service Viasat already offers. It helps rural users a little, but it really stretches the objective of the Connect America Fund objectives. Our cooperative is using the funds to provide real broadband to those who don’t have any real alternatives (and satellite is not really broadband by modern definitions). DSL and satellite are not broadband. Only fiber and cable with fiber backbone are true broadband.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
There will he "new" service plans Let me explain again. To get that money, they have to offer 25Mbps and x amount of data. Chances are where this money is being applied, that isnt offered now. The same thing happened years ago when they took money for a similar program.

Now I agree with you, it is a joke Viasat gets this money and will not invest it in the infrastructure. They are just playing the game get grant money that I too would prefer to be spent on true rural fiber broadband.
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
dont guess you seen this post exsatuser but this question is for you: I currently Have a Yagi Antenna Installed and it currently boost my cell to 5 Bars and my hotspot modem to 5 bars but does NOTHING to increase internet speed so if I run a cable from the booster to the modem it should increase the speed?
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Your antenna is not connected to the hotspot?
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
No The antenna is connected to a booster and than I have a little antenna which broadcast the signal in the room to boost the cell signal
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
it boost hotspot signal to 5 bars but not the speed so I ordered TS9 cable male with a SMA Male so I can hook it to the booster to the modem too see if it helps any at all
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Really only need a passive antenna hooked directly to the modem. And make sure antenna pointed directly towards the tower.
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Ok I will have cable in on Friday so hopefully it helps a little for me!
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2337 Posts
  • 1425 Reply Likes
To get that money, they have to offer 25Mbps and x amount of data. Chances are where this money is being applied, that isnt offered now.
And, unfortunately, all that does is further stress an already stressed system.  :(
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Oh most definitely. But the government awarded it to them.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@ExSat You better study up a little more. It is a lot more complex than just 25 and some data. The auction algorithm was amazing complex and had many tiers of service and the FCC even offered a special category to allow satellite to bid as the original latency requirement of 100 ms completely ruled out satellite. Penalties and/or bonuses were allocated based on the performance levels committed to, etc. I read many of the auction documents and they were written by lawyers for lawyers and were nearly impossible to decipher. We had to hire consultants to help prepare the applications and auction submissions.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@mferner What modem are you talking about? If you have a Vmobile hotspot and it is broadcasting wifi to your phones and such, I am not sure what modem you are referring to. The mobile hotspot is the modem for the cell signal. I am not getting what your hardware configuration is.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Yes. There was a push to lockout satellite companies from this money, yet Viasat still managed to get their hands on it. Probably in areas where nobody wanted to step up to the plate.

Unfortunately there are novice decision makers that are buying the story fiber will be obsolete in a few years as satellite technology replaces it (or they believe the 5G hype).
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Voyager: I have a LTE netgear LB1120 and I have it hooked to my router in order to have wifi I get service off the at&T tower I have cell booster but as I stated above I dont have it directly plugged into the modem I have 5 bars on my phone now and also on my modem but the internet speed hasnt improved sooo when I get the right cable Im gonna plug directly into the cell booster too see if that improves speed!

Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2337 Posts
  • 1425 Reply Likes
mferner,

By "modem" you mean the hotspot, right?  I think this is what Voyager was questioning.  
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Yes Correct Gabe
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
Bars don't equate to speed. All bars show is relative signal strength, and even then there is no standard as to what bars actually mean other than more are better -  just as a strong signal on satellite is no guarantee of speed as we all know.

I've got a signal booster that bumps me up to a reliable 4-5 bars of LTE (as defined by my cell phone vendor), but speeds fluctuate wildly throughout the day - congestion, which cell tower I connect to, which sector of that tower's coverage all play a role in the speed received.  Reference Signal Received Quality (RSRQ) is a more important measure than raw signal strength. The signal booster serves only to achieve a reliable signal (99% of the time in my case with no signal drops in their entirety).

It took me a month of locating the cell towers and playing around with aiming the yagi antenna at the 3 red towers in range using cell mapper (https://www.cellmapper.net) on an android device to determine which general direction yielded the best performance (measuring speeds, dropped packets, TCP latency, etc). Also trialed the magenta network with their free 30 day test drive and may switch in the spring and know exactly where to re-aim). There's much more to it than aim and shoot if you've got more than one tower in range for your provider Turned out to actually be the red tower furthest away for now - even then it occasionally will hand off to a different tower (more often a different sector on the same tower and cell mapper allows monitoring that). Typically 5Mbps to 12 Mbps (18 Mbps occasionally and about the same as Viasat) but lays a real beat down on Viasat due to 1/5 to 1/8 the latency. Higher speeds don't buy me anything other than speed test bragging rights and faster sustained downloads (I generally don't watch downloads any more than paint drying). They do little to enhance the browsing or streaming experience unless having multiple devices in use at the same time.

Still Viasat serves as a backup and generally yields better performance during evening hours and even with cellular unlimited doesn't really mean unlimited. The Viasat free zone helps me manage the data better on both to avoid "prioritization" behind others on both. It's simply a matter of dealing with the hand I've been dealt or moving to The Villages - do they allow 3 cats???

On topic and if similar to past funding, this round will do nothing for existing customers except load up your beam with new customers thinking they're getting a good deal (those same new customers already have Viasat access if they want it but it'll help fund Viasat-3 and now Viasat-4). My guess is that much of that funding will be promoting it to those who don't think they have internet access aleady available and subsidizing them.
(Edited)
Photo of david

david, Champion

  • 564 Posts
  • 399 Reply Likes
The lb1120 is a modem, not a Hotspot. You connect it to a router with an ethernet cable. 
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@mferner. OK, I think I got your configuration. You do NOT have a mobile hotspot. A hotspot would be something like a Jetpack that converts traffic from the cellular network to wifi. It sounds like you have a cell booster with a directional antenna for the cell tower which simply boosts and rebroadcasts the cell signal to all of your mobile devices which includes your Netgear modem. The Netgear modem is then cable connected to a wireless router which provides your home wifi signal. Do I understand correctly?

This is very unlikely to give you good performance. Boosters are more marketing hype than anything else. Boosters only work if you have a pretty good signal already available to boost. The real key to speed is the SNR and boosting a crappy SNR generally only makes it worse, not better. You just convert a weak crappy signal into a stronger, but crappier still signal. I can think of very few situations where I would use a booster. They almost always cause more harm than good.

I would omit the booster and connect your directional antenna directly to the Netgrear LB1120. That is the way it really is designed to be used.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@ExSat Yep, the purveyors of FUD are in full force. I know at least one coop in my state that has one or two board members who have bought into the “fiber is an obsolete investment” message and are holding up their boards from moving forward. Most electric coops are very conservative beasts (and that has a lot of upside so I am not really knocking it too hard) and often their boards operate on a consensus basis. I have had more than one initiative I have proposed get stopped because a single director opposed it and the rest, even though they supported it, would not vote against another director. This means that most large initiatives need unanimous board support and for anything with any risk at all, getting unanimous support can take a lot of time at best and often is impossible to get at worst.

That is why electric cooperatives are generally well behind the power curve in many areas os technology and services. When every initiative needs 9 directors to move forward, but only 1 to get stopped, it filters out a LOT of initiatives.

I am not at all against Viasat getting CAF funding, but I do think they should be required to use the money only for capital investment (new satellites or ground facilities, wherever the bottlenecks are) to provide new bandwidth and not to simply subsidize what they already make available.
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
Not my experience but ymmv. As noted it's made my experience less crappy which is all was hoping for. He's got both options to try - pick the best one but with booster be prepared to experiment.
(Edited)
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@Old Labs If only we knew which post you were replying to...
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
Yours regarding booster obviously although connecting the amplifier directly to the modem does sound a bit like hey y'all watch this.


Fwiw, for me the booster took that free magenta hot spot trial from unusable to pretty darn good. Maybe in the spring. No CAF funding in  my future - my census block apparently has 1 household with broadband ;)
(Edited)
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@Old A booster only works well if you have a usable signal to start with. Where a booster works best is where say one corner of your house has usable reception, but the rest of your house doesn’t. Putting the booster in the good reception location will now allow you to rebroadcast the signal through walls and such to the rest of your house.

However, if your cell signal is crappy everywhere, as is the case at my house, then a booster is unlikely to offer any performance benefit. Sure, you get a stronger signal (more bars - which is how these devices are sold), but you don’t get more throughput as mferner has experienced.

I’m not 100% sure what your “y’all watch this” comment is meant to convey, but my recommendation is correct. I hope mferner is able to try that as it is his best chance for throughput improvement if he can use that configuration. Unfortunately, sometimes it is hard to locate the modem such that it can be conveniently cabled to both wifi router and the external directional antenna.
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
It was meant to convey my doubts about connecting the amplifier not the antenna directly.

In my case I had a usable, somewhat decent signal. - unfortunately it was on the roof and I got tired of climbing up there to surf. I wanted to bring that usable signal indoors where it wasn't usable regardless of the room I was in, which is exactly what you're saying.

And yes it took alotof tinkering to get it optimal. I'm not questioning your accuracy just offering a different experience. Go back and read my post, you'll see my reference to RSRQ which combines a number of variables into a single measure including noise.

I hate smartphone touch keyboards ;)

I. Short do what works unless in a position to waddle up to vthe taxpayer trough demanding they pay for it.
(Edited)
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@Old. Yes, your application is ideal for a booster. Unfortunately, all too many people get sold boosters when what they need is a directional antenna. It seems that many who sell boosters have no idea how they work or where they should be used and the standard answer to a weak signal is “buy a booster.” After 32 years of engineering, I always ask a few questions first.
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
As do I it took me about a month of researching the best option for my situation and it's not point and shoot. Even then I wasn't sure and it was a $500 crap shoot. Sometimes you get lucky but the guys I dealt with were pretty up front about it all.

Then again it took me a month or more researching satellite internet before getting on board back then - maybe I'm just not susceptible to marketing hype.     
(Edited)
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
@David Yes its a modem or hotspot or whatever you wanna call it all I know is I have a sim card in it and a router connected to it and I get service off a cell tower! @ Voyager yes you are correct and I have pretty good signal 2 bars without it! and right now at 1:48 Im getting 10 down and at 2-3 am I get anywhere from 20-30 down and from 7-11 I get normally anywhere from 1-5 down and Im 6 miles from the tower soooo Im hoping when I get this cable in and plug it in directly to the modem and to the booster it will make it seem like Im 3-4 miles from the tower and maybe boost speed! I know in town when Im 1 mile from the tower I have gotten up to 115 down but normally every time I have tested there its anywhere on average from 75-100 down! But right now I have a yagi antenna on the roof and its run into the window and plugged into a booster and than on the end of the booster I have a small indoor antenna plugged in which broadcast the signal to my cell phone and modem! But in a few week when the new tower is ready which is 3 miles from me I should have no problems at all unless there is network issues so I should be able to watch tv with very little buffering! and @oldlabs Im pretty sure if it boost my speed at all it will be the tower that is closest too me! But Friday I should have the cable in and I will see what happens! Thanks to all for the info!
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
@David Yes its a modem or hotspot or whatever you wanna call it all I know is I have a sim card in it and a router connected to it and I get service off a cell tower! @ Voyager yes you are correct and I have pretty good signal 2 bars without it! and right now at 1:48 Im getting 10 down and at 2-3 am I get anywhere from 20-30 down and from 7-11 I get normally anywhere from 1-5 down and Im 6 miles from the tower soooo Im hoping when I get this cable in and plug it in directly to the modem and to the booster it will make it seem like Im 3-4 miles from the tower and maybe boost speed! I know in town when Im 1 mile from the tower I have gotten up to 115 down but normally every time I have tested there its anywhere on average from 75-100 down! But right now I have a yagi antenna on the roof and its run into the window and plugged into a booster and than on the end of the booster I have a small indoor antenna plugged in which broadcast the signal to my cell phone and modem! But in a few week when the new tower is ready which is 3 miles from me I should have no problems at all unless there is network issues so I should be able to watch tv with very little buffering! and @oldlabs Im pretty sure if it boost my speed at all it will be the tower that is closest too me! But Friday I should have the cable in and I will see what happens! Thanks to all for the info!
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
If a new tower is going up, you are in a congested area. Once the tower goes up you should be good.
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Yes ExSatUser the current tower Im on has been up since 1994 so yeah I would say its congested Because anyone within range to the North, South, West, And East within prolly 8 miles or so can probably access internet! Also the new tower will be 5G so anyone within 2.5 miles who has a 5G capable device can get 5G and if not you will get 4G regardless if you have a 5G capable device or not or at least thats what a Rep told me!
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Must be a Sprint tower. 5G doesnt have that long of range on Verizon.
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
its At&T
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Okay. Not "true" 5G with that range. More like 4G LTE plus.

Not all 5G is created equal, because each carrier is using their own tech strategy in 5G deployment. Think of it as "unlimited" which really isn't but they all say it.

Still, you will benefit and see faster speeds regardless.

Now, will we get some LEO going in 2020?
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Yeah Faster speeds for sure, My Plan is unlimited but of course may slow if tower is congested! I will be happy with a stable 25 down to run 3 tv's But of course sometimes it will be faster than that and sometimes slower!
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
You won’t get 5G at 2.5 miles. You won’t get 5G at 0.5 miles in most cases. 5G is generally good for a couple hundred meters at best.
Photo of mferner

mferner

  • 332 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes
Voyager Well it may be 4G LTE Plus I dont know But I was reading about 5G for rural areas and here is a little of what it said: The multi-gigabit speeds and massive capacity you hear about with 5G is by and large an urban phenomenon, driven by the huge bandwidths of millimeter-wave spectrum, which doesn't travel very far. Rural areas will get a form of 5G called "low-band" or "sub-6" 5G, which will have less capacity but still have extremely low latency and be able to work with massive networks of industrial sensors. So I dont know they say the new tower will have 5G capabilities But it must be a different form something a little better then 4G I guess! I dont know!
Photo of Briton

Briton

  • 18 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
I agree with the others. At most this will have them offering free installation for those in the areas(that's how I got free installation 9 yrs ago was with the rural grant, I think it took $10 off my bill every month for like a year also but can't remember) I'm thankful my electric co-op decided to do fiber and that after 2 yrs since they announced they were thinking about it I'm in my first few weeks of enjoying it at my home.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1779 Posts
  • 1029 Reply Likes
That's fantastic. And congrats!
Photo of Briton

Briton

  • 18 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
We are tickled. Took 3 weeks to get my viasat disconnected but everything has been sent back, tracking is showing equipment received. It's weird being able to watch on demand with my directv as well as being able to use my phone on the Wi-Fi and actually being able to watch a video while sitting on the porch. I could check email, surf sites with viasat but rarely could watch videos without buffering. The biggest thing is not stressing about using all our data up in 2 weeks and watching YouTube in 144p or 240p max to prevent it. That and it's less than half the cost
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 528 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
Yes, you can’t beat fiber. And it is unlikely that anything coming along in the next 40 years will beat fiber, contrary to what some satellite providers would have you believe (are you listening Elon?).
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1779 Posts
  • 1029 Reply Likes
If it costs so much to deploy, why does it cost substantially less?

Think about that one.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 528 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
That requires no thought at all. It is pretty obvious.

Do you need to think about it a while longer before I spoil it or you?
(Edited)
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1779 Posts
  • 1029 Reply Likes
Well enlighten us :)!
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2334 Posts
  • 1424 Reply Likes
I still think the future of the internet, at least here in the US, is cell tower based, or something similar to it.  
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 528 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
Initial cost is meaningless on its own. What matters is cost per bit transferred. The bandwidth of fiber is so much higher than any other medium, that the cost per bit transferred is lower.

It is a little like cruise ships. Larger ships generally cost less per passenger. Compare cruise costs of a 6,000 passenger cruise ship vs. say a 200 passenger cruise vessel. The large ship costs far more to build, but its cost per passenger is lower.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 528 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
Lifespan matters also in the total cost equation. Fiber should last 50 years at least and potentially much longer. Glass is immune to almost everything including EMP which could wipe out a satellite or 100.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1779 Posts
  • 1029 Reply Likes
So if you can get a revenue stream from something that will be in place for 50 years, why aren't these companies deploying fiber versus wasting on this money on LEO satellites that won't last that long?
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2334 Posts
  • 1424 Reply Likes
It's likely that the fiber is cheaper only when there are enough people to use it, say per mile.  For rural folks, it's likely cheaper, overall, to get their business by LEO sats.  

There are still millions of rural people, and it would cost far too much to run fiber lines for miles if it's only going to get a few customers.  LEO sats avoid that, as with them the cost is the same per person, whether they live ten miles outside of town or one thousand feet.  
(Edited)
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 398 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
So if you can get a revenue stream from something that will be in place for 50 years, why aren't these companies deploying fiber versus wasting on this money on LEO satellites that won't last that long?
It's a complicated business investment decision but as Gabe suggests it's not feasible based on household density per mile.

Consider the example given in the following article (the whole article is worth a read):

https://www.otelco.com/fiber-infrastructure/

In my case I would be on that last mile with a household density of 1 - return on investment would be around 122 years. Alternatively I guess they could charge me  $850 per month for service. It wouldn't make sense unless able to get somebody else to fund it for them - like me or the government. If I fund it at least I get the benefit. With the government that's not always the case or I'm excluded for one reason or the other. But yeah it's always easier to spend somebody else's money inefficiently than your own. I'll be setting a a go fund me page if anybody wants to help ;)

Eventually it'll get here but probably not in my lifetime, there are better ways to invest those resources that provide more bang for the buck. Maybe sooner if some developer buys up the acreage abutting my property and throws up 150 cookie cutter homes or apartments - but that'll be my cue to move, check please.   

There are other regulatory obstacles to consider as well. In many states, municipal broadband makes the most sense rural communities but state regulations throw up obstacles that prevent that from occurring. Virginia is but one and most of the regulations appear aimed at protecting the big guys - gee, I wonder why???

(Edited)
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Good news though, I checked and villages do allow a maximum of three cats.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1779 Posts
  • 1029 Reply Likes
I have a fiber backbone a quarter mile from my house. Doesnt seem like it would be difficult to run much further. Lol
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
I have access to fiber, but for some reason I can only get 50mbps through the service.

ATT also limits data at 1tb unless you bundle.
(Edited)
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 398 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
Great news on the cats... Fluffy is glad she can join the rest of us.
(Edited)
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1779 Posts
  • 1029 Reply Likes
1TB!?!? You wouldn't download RDR2 10 times with that small of data!
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
For people who have always had sat internet 1tb seems sufficient, but once you get a taste of the modernized world, it becomes rather paltry.
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 398 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
Darned inherent limitations of fiber internet.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 528 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
Only 1 TB? Oh the horror. Only 83 times more than I have with Viasat. LOL.
Photo of Homeskillet

Homeskillet

  • 469 Posts
  • 182 Reply Likes
For people who have always had sat internet 1tb seems sufficient, but once you get a taste of the modernized world, it becomes rather paltry.

Sounds like similar words would be spoken from a drug addict who just keeps needing more, more, more to get the same high,ha,ha,ha.

If one TB of data is 1,000 GB that is about 5 years worth for me.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 528 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
I can’t imagine using 1 TB a month, but I certainly could use half that without having trying too hard.
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Once you cut the cord, data gets burned pretty rapidly.
Photo of Admiral Korbohuta

Admiral Korbohuta

  • 167 Posts
  • 72 Reply Likes
1TB is nothing for those with seedboxes that are running 24/7/365.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1779 Posts
  • 1029 Reply Likes
Seed box? What are we growing?
Photo of Admiral Korbohuta

Admiral Korbohuta

  • 167 Posts
  • 72 Reply Likes
Millions of torrents of course.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
So here is the answer. And of course as we talked about it does nothing to improve the existing infrastructure....

https://arstechnica.com/information-t...

So if you live in an impacted area, enjoy better Viasat service subsidized by the government.
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Like ZZ Top. Money for nothing and chicks for free.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@ExSat. As I summarized more succinctly earlier: more profit for Viasat for not adding any new service. The FCC would be much smarter to give the money to Elon Musk to help deploy a truly new service with much greater capability.
(Edited)
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2337 Posts
  • 1425 Reply Likes
Like ZZ Top. Money for nothing and chicks for free.
Dire Straits, actually.   
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Good catch. Modeled off ZZ Top’s sound.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
I know you are all knowing about this topic Voyager, but a referenced article adds substance to the discussion and us just not your opinion (which I did agree with).
(Edited)
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
He ain’t wrong, so I’m not sure where the requirement to reference an article to post appeared.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechn...
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Not a requirement, but there a lot of people that do post stupid opinions on here (i.e. Viasat is better than cable).

So anytime articles supporting a position is always a plus.

I don't blame Vissat getting the money. I blame the government for awarding it!
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Agree with that.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@ExSat I wasn’t arguing in a court of law or conducting an engineering design review so I felt no need to provide references. You can believe me or not, your choice and it matters not to me.
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Whoops. I must have gotten in a measuring contest.

I win!!!!
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
And if you place more credibility on an internet IT reporter than on someone who is on the board of a cooperative that was a very successful bidder in the CAF II auction, then that is your choice also.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
I miss the old forum...
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
I win!!!!
Congrats but speed ain't helping you there.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@Brad. What did you win?
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Bragging rights?!?!
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
Does that make you feel better? LOL.
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
No. It’s always been that way for me. ;)

Didn’t understand you and exsatuser going at it.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
If you thought that was “going at it”, you must be one of them snowflakes I keep hearing about. ROTFL. That wasn’t even hardly a discussion let alone “going at it.”
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow.
Photo of Steve Frederick-VS1/Beam314

Steve Frederick-VS1/Beam314, Champion

  • 3205 Posts
  • 2065 Reply Likes
Welcome to the weekend, and all the great entertainment that comes with it.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
What’s a weekend?
Photo of Homeskillet

Homeskillet

  • 470 Posts
  • 182 Reply Likes
I see none of the free money will go to either Ohio or Virginia. Two states that seem to get a high percentage of the complaints in here.
Photo of Homeskillet

Homeskillet

  • 470 Posts
  • 182 Reply Likes
I see none of the free money will go to either Ohio or Virginia. Two states that seem to get a high percentage of the complaints in here.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Well technically we should have much better options than satellite internet in those states!

Use the money there for something better.
(Edited)
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
Viasat didn't win any of the census block bids in either of those states. Those states did however, get free money. Viasat was only bidding in the lowest tier (baseline with high latency and easy to beat them if another bidder had some semblance of a pulse - wouldn't be surprised to find Viasat was the only bidder in those census block awarded).

Voyager can probably explain the bidding process. 
(Edited)
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
I am sure he can!
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@OldLabs I understand the basics of the auction process, but it was insanely complex and I was glad our consultant was well versed. The essence was that for each census block you had to bid as to what you thought it would cost you to provide a certain level of service. I believe there was a minimum level, but the more performance you promised the more advantaged was your bid (or maybe more accurately, it was less penalized). There were multiplication factors applied based on the performance level. This made a fiber deployment much more valuable than say cable or fixed wireless given their much lower performance. And satellite didn’t even meet the normal minimum requirements, but they were given a special exemption.

And nobody got free money. It is money paid by people on their telephone bill, as I understand it. So, we are bringing some of the telephone customer’s money home to them to now provide a much more state-of-the-art communications service. Nothing is free.
(Edited)
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@Ex You can’t be sure as I didn’t provide an article reference for you. LOL. So, you can only wonder.
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
Feel free to send me some of my money. You know what Homeskillet meant as well as I. Do you have to repay the money with interest? If not it's free - a grant. Being on the receiving side is good. Yep, nothing's free particularly for those who pay for it and get nothing.
(Edited)
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Like those of us in Ohio and Virginia???
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
If you live in Albany County, Wyoming, live it up!

https://www.laramieboomerang.com/news...
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Sad thing is news reporting from the UK tends to be more accurate as they point out truth, not hype.

Said the rural "broadband" scam continues. And it will for whoever is in charge of the next administration.
(Edited)
Photo of Admiral Korbohuta

Admiral Korbohuta

  • 167 Posts
  • 72 Reply Likes
What a joke and what a complete waste of $90 million.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Sadly, unless you have personally experienced satellite internet, you have no concept how bad it is.

Put these decision makers that award this money on satellite internet for one hour, and they would never give a dime of federal money to it again.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
@ExSat. I am not sure it is all that big a scam, but I would argue the money is better spent long-term on fiber and LEO satellites. I sort of understand subsidizing Viasat for current rural customers who have no other options presently. They pay phone taxes also so it is hard to say they don’t deserve something back.

However, GEO satellites time has long since passed as the technology has left them behind and average user data consumption is now 10X behind what Viasat offers. Cell technology has long ago perfected the switching problem between mobile transceivers and once applied to LEO satellites, the advantages over GEO are simply overwhelming. Still far short of fiber, but you also have the advantage of mobility so that is in its favor.

I’d like to see any government support go to rural fiber where the economics are challenging, but the lifespan is long and LEO satellites where the development and deployment costs are high but new capability is being offered.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
The scam part is just padding coffers without spending that money on technical upgrades. Use that money for infrastructure, whether more gateways, R & D, something. Just dont give "enhanced" plans and use government money to pay for it.
Photo of Voyager

Voyager

  • 529 Posts
  • 146 Reply Likes
Oops, I meant “beyond”, but autocorrect though I meant “behind.”
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2337 Posts
  • 1425 Reply Likes
and average user data consumption is now 10X beyond what Viasat offers.
But, luckily, those who've had nothing but satellite internet for years are used to it, so they never got to the point of having to cut down on what they do when moving to sat from terrestrial internet.  

Granted, there are things that are becoming more important that can't be done via GEO sat internet, and that's going to be more of an issue as time goes on, but I think for the most part, other than people complaining about the inability to stream all the live long day, those who've already have sat internet can continue to live with it.  Sure, not those who are having significant speed issues, but for those that aren't.  

I think satellite internet gets a worse rap than it really deserves. 
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Have you ever had any home internet other than satellite Gabe?
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2337 Posts
  • 1425 Reply Likes
Just dialup, and a short two year span of cable internet back in 2000 to 2002.  I've had satellite internet since Dec 2004.  
Photo of Bradley

Bradley

  • 1396 Posts
  • 452 Reply Likes
Satellite certainly beats dialup regardless of the threads proclaiming otherwise. I was acclimatized to using satellite, but when you have cable or fiber at work it takes adjustment when you return home. Even most mobile service now makes satellite feel slow. The inherent latency just becomes more apparent as everything around it becomes faster. 3g mobile was almost as annoying as satellite to me.

Besides the gaming drawbacks, I lost quite a few eBay bids back in the day trying to bid last second.
Photo of Homeskillet

Homeskillet

  • 470 Posts
  • 182 Reply Likes
Cable internet 2002? I would guess that was around 5 Mbps while paying for 15 Mbps and I don't think they used the phrase "up to".
Photo of Homeskillet

Homeskillet

  • 470 Posts
  • 182 Reply Likes
I lost quite a few eBay bids back in the day trying to bid last second.

I don't think you can beat the people with good sniping software even if you have fast reflexes and low latency internet.
Photo of Old Labs

Old Labs

  • 399 Posts
  • 356 Reply Likes
I know right? I missed out on a chance to snag a chicken tender shaped like a manatee due to latency and insufficient data to regularly visit Facebook. 

https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/manatee-shaped-chicken-tender-for-sale-for-5000-on-facebook-must-see-to-appreciate
(Edited)
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2337 Posts
  • 1425 Reply Likes
Cable internet 2002? I would guess that was around 5 Mbps while paying for 15 Mbps and I don't think they used the phrase "up to".
Actually, about 1.5Mbps, as I was a fairly good line distance from the base.  It was amazing in comparison, though.  
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2337 Posts
  • 1425 Reply Likes
I lost quite a few eBay bids back in the day trying to bid last second.
Amazingly, the only bidding war I got into with someone on ebay since I've had sat internet was for a computer game, and I actually won it.  I thought for sure I would lose it because of the delay, but nope.  And all for a sub $2 game.  I think it came to $1.46 or something like that.  "MDK2" was the game.  

I haven't purchased or sold anything on ebay in well over ten years.  
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1781 Posts
  • 1032 Reply Likes
Good luck getting an Amazon lightning deal that is in high demand.
Photo of Admiral Korbohuta

Admiral Korbohuta

  • 167 Posts
  • 72 Reply Likes
Starlink launching 60 more satellites.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UqxOvAKeuM