It didn't mention it because that's not true. This is targeted for enterprise, and there are no plans to sell cheap internet at the price the antenna costs.

My understanding is that this would become more widely available as it rolls out, and the article supports this idea as well:

> This is not just a game changer for people like you and I, living in relatively populated places struggling against greedy last-mile monopolists

So I was wrong that it was omitted, the article explicitly makes it clear that it's going to be a game changer even for people with existing internet.

Also it makes it pretty clear that the service is going to affect individual users and not just enterprises:

> Starlink means that you can go live in the woods in Siberia if you like

> some automakers will likely build them into the roofs of cars or trucks

The article uses no factual basis to back it up, though. In order for it to be competitive against existing internet, it needs to be as cheap. Their current pizza-box phased array antenna was likely too expensive, so now they have a motorized hybrid that moves the phased array on top. That will be significantly more money and less reliable than your existing cable.

There are existing solutions, like o3b to cover underserved areas with high speed internet. They pivoted to cruise ships because the equipment is too expensive. If you have a link other than this blog showing otherwise, please provide it.

fuck xfinity. AT&T fiber at my apartment is 300+ mbps up for half the price of comcast's 75+ i've been using last 6 years

That’s kind of my point, Comcast generally sucks and anyone with a choice avoids them.