FCC upholds denial of Starlink's $900M rural broadband subsidies

Re:FCC upholds denial of Starlink's $900M rural broadband su... by licomo on Wednesday December 13, 2023 @10:42AM (#38629003)

It has fluctuated over time, but has almost always been over the minimum limits (25/3) IMO. It is also vastly more reliable than our only WISP option in the area.

What I have seen is that the cell will start to fill up, speeds slow down a little (still better than our WISP and other Satellite providers), then the cell closes. More satellites launch, speeds go up, and the cell opens again. It's my experience, so take it with a grain of salt. I've had it since the original beta / before 100% coverage.

Most of the complaints I see are from people with existing cable options. It is not as good as cable/fiber, but a complete game changer for those of us who have had flakey connections.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC upholds denial of Starlink's $900M rural broadband su... by Coder1996 on Wednesday December 13, 2023 @12:36PM (#38630930)

I agree. I have a WISP and it is shite. $99/mo for up to (but almost never) 100 Mpbs down. Charter's trucks are now running lines to my property and we will be switching to Spectrum as soon as we can. Fuck Adaptive.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC upholds denial of Starlink's $900M rural broadband su... by SECProto on Wednesday December 13, 2023 @11:49AM (#38630059)

> It has fluctuated over time, but has almost always been over the minimum limits (25/3) IMO

SpaceX didn't apply for 25/3, they applied for 100/20. The rest of your comment matches my experience.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FCC upholds denial of Starlink's $900M rural broadband su... by licomo on Wednesday December 13, 2023 @03:15PM (#38633562)

I understand, but the original comment was saying that was worse than what was available to many. That is not true in my case.

[ Parent | on HN ]