|
| I used to care a lot about all of this stuff because I live a long ways from where fiber will ever be.
Now with Starlink I just don’t care.
I was on their waiting list for a year or so probably. When it finally became available in our area I was one of the first to have it running. Got a lot of sub 100 Mbps speed and some jitter and slightly unstable connections (wasn’t great for real time stuff like watching sports or playing video games (both things I don’t do) but loads better than anything we had ever had. This for $90?
Maybe 6 months later the connection was sometimes down below 50 but again, way better than anything I had ever had.
Then price increased to $120 and over time performance increased to between 200 and 300 and the stability of the connection got way better.
I loved the better stability but didn’t notice the increased speed other than on speed tests.
Then they offered the $50 plan for 100 Mbps down and I took it. I’m capped at 100 now but again I don’t notice an issue ever.
At this point I’m confused about what is better about fiber for me. Sure I’ll have 1000 down instead of 100 for a similar price but how does that help me really if I use less than 50 almost all the time?
For more populated areas, yes, fiber is the obvious way forward but honestly I would not be at all surprised to see 1,000 down on Starlink 5 years from now. It’s crazy how fast it’s getting better.
But for even a little remote, I think Starlink makes way more sense. And for me, very remote? It’s just a no-brainer. | |
|
Starlink
