Satellite Internet

[Cnynrat]

After some bad luck with ATT,I think Im going to try satellite internet.So far I see Hughs .How many providers are the for the SF east bay?

Given where you live, there has to be a better option. Cable, DSL, microwave should all provide cheaper service with better performance.

Satellite is a last resort for those living in rural areas where no other option exists. A number of folks here complaining about Hughesnet customer service, but from what I've read ViaSat's Wildblue customer service is even worse. ViaSat is using a new high speed Ka band satellite though, so their performance may be marginally better for now. In all cases the latency is a killer for traditional VPNs, and that's due to the round trip time to get to the satellite and back. These satellites are all parked over the equator about 23,000 miles away.

A few companies are looking at low earth orbit satellite constellations, which would be great for rural broadband. It's difficult to make that business case work though.

[Untamed1972]

I haven't been using DishNet for almost 2 years now. I'm pretty happy with it. Does everything I need it to do. But I'm not into gaming or anything like that. But I've streamed movies just fine, and even have a Verizon "network extender" hooked up to it to give me cell service at home, because I live in a rural area with no cell coverage. It works great for that. Crystal clear call quality, and pretty fast enough for my usual web browsing and bill paying and stuff like that.

There is no other option except dial up in my area. So by the time you factor in having to pay for a land line and the fact that dial up would totally just suck balls it's not worth it. I figure part of the cost is offset by not having to have a landline and being able just use my cell at home that I'm already paying for anyway.

[<blocked>]

Anyone try Directv ISP?

[-hanko]

There is no other option except dial up in my area. So by the time you factor in having to pay for a land line and the fact that dial up would totally just suck balls it's not worth it. I figure part of the cost is offset by not having to have a landline and being able just use my cell at home that I'm already paying for anyway.

Ignoring dial-up web, imo POTS (plain-old-telephone-service) has the distinct advantage of continuing to work when web-based or cellular service go down, especially in emergencies.

It remains generally the most reliable service for voice.

I'm happy to spend $30 a month to give me a backup technology for voice.