Comment Re:There's already satellite internet (Score 1, Informative) 98
It wouldn't take much to beat these. Both in speed and the bandwidth caps.
It would take a way to break the speed of light - Pretty tricky problem, that one!
As a former Hughesnet customer, yes, the cap sucks, but overall the system has acceptable bandwidth. The real problem? The god-awful latency.
Nothing any ISP can do will ever solve the basic limitation of physics that a satellite somewhere around 40,000km has a round-trip time over half a second (130ms per trip, times a minimum of four trips - Request from me to satellite, from satellite to ground, then the response from ground to satellite, finally from satellite to me).
Never mind making many games unplayable, this makes SSL all but unusable. Add a little bit of ground-based latency into the picture, and literally a quarter of the time the connection would time out before it could finish the several rounds of handshaking.
Viable satellite internet doesn't need more bandwidth or lower caps, it needs faster radio waves.
It would take a way to break the speed of light - Pretty tricky problem, that one!
As a former Hughesnet customer, yes, the cap sucks, but overall the system has acceptable bandwidth. The real problem? The god-awful latency.
Nothing any ISP can do will ever solve the basic limitation of physics that a satellite somewhere around 40,000km has a round-trip time over half a second (130ms per trip, times a minimum of four trips - Request from me to satellite, from satellite to ground, then the response from ground to satellite, finally from satellite to me).
Never mind making many games unplayable, this makes SSL all but unusable. Add a little bit of ground-based latency into the picture, and literally a quarter of the time the connection would time out before it could finish the several rounds of handshaking.
Viable satellite internet doesn't need more bandwidth or lower caps, it needs faster radio waves.