Starlink’s newest competitor is using next-gen satellites to create internet for all | Hard Reset

[@1stPrinciplesFM]

Hey, that's me! ✌🏻 Glad you all enjoyed the tour. Stop in again early next year, we're launching four satellites on a dedicated Falcon 9 soon!

[@nunya___]

12:07 Well, first you'll need a containment field and a Einstein Rosen bridge...

[@nicolasdujarrier]

The big drawback with geo-stationary satellites is latency, which prevent some use cases, and even can make surf the web frustratingly feel laggy… Starlink doesn’t have as many limitations, and new emerging technologies (satellite communication from a regular mobile phone, meta-antenna,…) may make communication from a regular mobile phone being near seamless (with huge lower cost advantages thanks to the HVM of mobile phones). Also I would think that Startlink is funded by the profits generated by SpaceX, and therefore already have a huge monthly cash flow that they using to iterate fast, lower cost,… on each new Starlink satellite generation. Starlink subscription is already in the 40€/month price ballpark !!! Therefore geo-satellite internet is a non-starter as 1. it won’t be better and 2. it will also be much more expensive.

[@astranisspace]

​@@nicolasdujarrier I think you'd be surprised on the cost side. Generally speaking, we are ~50% less expensive than Starlink in most markets. The difference is deploying many assets vs. deploying a single asset to cover one part of the world.

[@nicolasdujarrier]

@@astranisspace Sure but if your unit asset cost is significantly low enough, there may overall not be much cost difference between 1 Astranis geo-stationary satellite and 10 Starlink satellites. Furthermore, as I said Starlink as the big advantages to get a lot of funding from SpaceX profits, and much bigger scale (which helps in R&D and create a positive feedback loop to develop new technologies to lower cost of each satellite, as Tesla is doing). So my guess is that Starlink will be able to reasonably align their prices to yours, and either be cheaper, or a bit more expensive but provide much, much better service. Don’t get me wrong I am in admiration with your goal, just I don’t think it is the right way to achieve your goal, as I am very skeptical you can lower your prices low enough to be competitive with Elon’s Starlink / SpaceX…

[@nicolasdujarrier]

@@astranisspace I am not a specialist, but in admiration of Elon’s methodology. When he decided to enter the Electric Véhicule (EV) market, he wanted an EV that had better (sport) performance than most Internal Combustion Engine (ICE), because as it would be small scale manufacturing/sales, he knew it will be more expensive, and so decided to go for a luxury EV to generate a positive cash-flow, that could then be re-invested in R&D to develop new technologies to create a cheaper model. Your product will unfortunately NOT be better than Starlink, and won’t have the advantages of scale and huge funding from SpaceX that provides the cash-flow to invest in R&D to develop cheaper technologies. Starlink will likely iterate fast, and each new generation of satellite will be better and cheaper, and use new generation cheaper SpaceX launcher (Starship). Even if we assume you have a small cost advantage now (which I am skeptical), there is a high probability that it will be short lived, as Starlink will likely be able to modulate their prices easily in order to be competitive. Their scale also allow them to possibly have anti-competitive prices (they can use the profits of other part of the world, to cover the losses of some other parts) to become a worldwide satellite internet provider by ~2030, that will be accessible through a regular mobile phone (no need to pay several 100 of dollars for a specific dedicated equipment). Furthermore, according to a CNBC article, it seems that Starlink is already cash-flow positive, and so could theoretically already lower their prices…

[@eafortson]

Satellite Network Engineer here. It was really strange to frame LEO as being some cumbersome design and GEO as being a "new outside the box" solution to this problem. GEO has been around for decades. It's the OG solution. But the problem is latency and it's caused by the extra distance. The average latency for a GEO stationary Sat is about 700-800ms compared to LEO which is like 32ms. That is a VAST difference (which admittedly is addressed later in the video). The Phase array tracking system in Starlink antennas is literally bleeding edge tech. 3:16 this sequence was very misleading, considering that the starlink antenna (dishy) is phased array not mechanical tracking. So the antenna isn't literally "moving around" to track the satellites as they pass in LEO. And that being the case it doesn't "jump" to track the next sat (or at least very very very rarely if there is an issue). It switches faster than you could perceivably notice and long before a packet hits its timeout counter or is dropped. So the internet wouldn't "go down" as described. These guys aren't really doing anything revolutionary here tbh. They are just iterating and aiming for a cheaper solution that serves a very specific niche at the very bottom end of the market.

[@kennethferland5579]

Lets not forget that SpaceX is losing money on each Dish instelation because the things are so bleeding edge, the costs is simply out of reach for poorer markets to ever used the phased array ground stations even if the satalites could be put into orbit for free.

[@eafortson]

@@kennethferland5579 This has been the modus operandi in the tech space for decades now. Losing money is not an issue as long as you are gaining significant market share from your competitors. And as someone who works in the industry I can tell you Starlink is gaining market share at a ridiculous rate. You also need to keep in mind that the constellation isn't anywhere near completed. Less than half actually. They also continue to roll out new service offerings, such as satellite to cellular, and various tiers of enterprise solutions. As well as refining and adjusting existing offerings. They have barely scratched the surface of what they intend to provide long term. The scope is ambitious, and the logistics daunting, and I'm not 100% sold they will succeed and the end product will remain commercially viable for the long term. But the factoid you mentioned, absent relevant context, doesn't represent a full analysis of the longterm financial situation of Starlink.

[@krishnayogi]

Yes they aren’t doing any thing bleeding edge but they identified a niche and they will make money Starlink will acquire them for few 100 million

[@AltHistoryX]

Great Points, couldn't have said it better. Also they are dependent on SpaceX to launch, basically paying their competition.

[@mateogomez8413]

@@kennethferland5579 I think you missed the announcement that they have already achieved a balanced cash flow, which means that the same thing they spend on Starlink is the same as the income their customers generate, Space X is estimated to have an income for the next year of 15 billion, 2024, if all goes well, will be the year in which they see Starlink benefits. More needs to be added, such as the coverage they will do for mobile phones, but I think this can be achieved by the end of 2025

[@jmreagle]

The latency to satellites in geostationary orbit is significant, that's why starlink went for low earth

[@backacheache]

I guess if their customers can put up with sub-optimal video-calls and gaming they'll be okay, but I would think that would need to be reflected in their pricing.

[@1stPrinciplesFM]

It's just a question of what you value more: low latency, or low cost. There will be different solutions for different use cases / parts of the world.

[@mhxxd4]

Starlink will be cheap enough. No one like latency, its just frustrating even if you're poor

[@Kazmology]

I just came here to say this. Exactly.

[@Freshbott2]

Not all applications need low latency. Geostationary is way cheaper. The more segments of the market covered the better.

[@palpytine]

The animations here are misleading. The antennas that Starlink uses are phased arrays and can track satellites without needing any physical movement whatsoever, which also means that they can re-track to a different satellite *extremely* fast. All this so the satellites can be physically closer. Yes, GEO orbit is 6x further away, which eliminates that need and gives it a much bigger footprint, which is why it's the approach that was traditionally used in satellite internet (and TV). The problem with this approach is that signals have to travel a much longer distance, meaning they take longer to arrive, in both directions. You can still send impressive amounts of data, but the delay shows up in how long it takes to start receiving a response to e.g clicking a URL. This latency is unusable for gaming, and causes enough of a delay that it becomes hard to use for realtime phone calls or video conferencing. That's exactly why Starlink very explicitly opted for LEO. Closer satellites = Lower latency. As a bonus, the workload is shared over more satellites which means they'll be able to service more users with higher total bandwidth. The catch is that It means higher costs and demands far more sophisticated engineering.

[@nicolasdujarrier]

I would think that if Qualcomm would be able to develop a Snapdragon modem and meta-antenna that allow to directly receive Starlink signal directly in a mobile phone / laptop, it would open the possibility to any new generation of smartphone to get a Startlink subscription, or to be used in emergency scenario. It would increase the Total Adressable Market (TAM), and provide bigger opportunities to generate cash-flow. This could then be used to iterate faster and decrease costs further. Also Starlink is likely funded thanks to the big profits/cash-flow from SpaceX, which further helps reduce costs.

[@s3_build]

That last line is the key one. Our satellites are insanely more affordable, that's what the last 4B people need to get connected. We have traveled to places all around the world we'll be connecting soon and people's requirements are (1) super affordable internet and (2) high bandwidth. Unconnected folks simply don't about latency right now.

[@nicolasdujarrier]

@@s3_build According to an article published by CNBC, Starlink is already cash-flow positive. Until it stay profitable for them, they are in a very good position to lower their prices if needs be… Furthermore, with their Direct-to-Cell technology, I would think that in the coming years, smartphones equipped with Qualcomm Snapdragon modem will be able to access their services, which will limit (or even eliminate) upfront costs associated with a dedicated fixed satellite equipment to get Starlink satellite internet access…

[@mhxxd4]

GEO is actually 60x further away, big difference

[@NealWoodall]

Yes, agree. Those misleading animations made me quit watching the video.

[@GregBurghart]

Satellite communications engineer here with 3 decades experience designing and building large data networks using geostationary C & Ku band satellites. This is one of the most disappointing and least informative videos I've seen on the subject. As many other commenters have correctly pointed out, the video completely leaves out the issue of GEO satellite latency, viewing angle from extreme latitudes and total network available bandwith, as compared to LEO satellites. The Starlink terminal phased array antennas (not parabolic reflectors, as incorrectly shown in the video) represent an engineering achievement that I would never have imagined possible or economically feasible just a few years ago. I'm amazed that they have found a way to scale production to make such complexity available at such a low cost. Truly remarkable engineering by SpaceX!

[@Andre_RDX5]

Thank you @GregBurghart for pointing out the obvious based on almost hald a lifetime of experience. The fact that this video is misrepresenting or more blatantly misleading people, makes me wonder if this is pre-sseding stunts for IPO? Why do people still try these stunts with 50% of the people on this planet being far better informed than a decade ago baffles me. By the time they are ready to sell their "snakeoil" in 3~5 years, 70% of the planet will have access to all that is out there on the net, thanks to... Starlink & SpaceX. Had it been done properly, stating thier possibilities and endeavours without riding on the back of a giant that has already worn 5 T-shirts or more to shreds, this might have gotten better responses from all of us. Astranis' first launch was only an "hour ago" in terms of what has been acheived with Starlink's trackrecord, and it failed. Oh it wasn't our fault... it was due to a "bad vendor product" WTAF...!?

[@kennethferland5579]

You aparently did not watch the video because it clearly states the latency issue.

[@co_bby]

off topic. whats the career path of becoming satellite communication engineer

[@xmorse]

@@kennethferland5579500ms is not a detail, it’s a non starter compared to starlink, this company has no reason to exist

[@redneckadventures9122]

I’m currently on a geo sat after I lost my 5g tower and wow it’s bad why anyone would want more of this blows me away! Starlink should be delivered before the end of the week! And fiber installed in the next 6 months !

[@ashtonb111]

Living in Alaska and using geostationary satellite Internet for over 16 years, this show completely failed to mention that in the northern latitudes, geostationary orbiting satellites are extremely low on the horizon and so are easily blocked by obstacles.... Such as trees, other houses....and mountains.

[@kristinaF54]

Yeah, these satellites use line of sight. If it's below the horizon it 100% won't work.

[@acmefixer1]

You're going to have to move. Preferably south. 🤷🤷

[@johnuppole]

That depends on where they park their satellites at. They don’t have to park them on the equator

[@hackman88]

@@johnuppole except when he says they have to be exactly at the equator 4:21

[@kandle54]

@@MQJ007 unclesam is completely uninterested in your MILF relish.

[@mrwjs]

I don't think the Starlink antennas have to disconnect when switching satellites; the benefits of a phased-array antenna. Multiple, simultaneous connections. The antenna doesn't even move once positioned correctly. The arrays do the “moving”. Whenever I hear something in an 'educational' video like this that sounds speculative or uninformed, I stop watching. The video starts to sound like a promotion for the product.

[@Me__Myself__and__I]

"Imagine..." the whole end of this video is silly. Imagine no one has already done this before... Imagine you're spending millions to offer a lower bandwidth, much higher latency service that isn't usable for many use cases. Imagine there is already a competitor that offers vastly superior service worldwide. Imagine the investors in this company losing all their money...

[@avgjoe5969]

Well said.

[@abolfazlakbarzadeh9689]

Yep, exactly😅

[@azpcox]

3:15 um, Starlink terminals don’t do that. Phased array antennas move them instantly and electronically to the next satellite WITHOUT impact to a stream. You won’t even notice it.

[@doujinflip]

That's if another satellite is already within the sight cone. Where my service is in the tropics where it's second only to the polar latitudes in lack of density, my dish does have to jerk around somewhat regularly to catch the next bird.

[@ausnorman8050]

I know, sounds like a PAID presentation hyping up their geo sats, not mention any ANY of the downsides and fear mongering BS fact about 'how' StarLink tracks lol.

[@ausnorman8050]

Would u rather that or 1-2secs latency on everything all the time... @@doujinflip

[@avgjoe5969]

@@doujinflip The tropics should be heavily covered, I believe all the satellites cross the equator. With 5600 active satellites, I do not think you should be getting dish jerking. You may have another problem. I would call it in. The sensitivity thresholds (if there are any) might be set too tight. There was another guy online complaining of this but he had the dish 3 feet from his RV with most of the sky blocked.

[@doujinflip]

@@avgjoe5969 They cross the equator... quickly. The orbits are often slanted such that they're the most dense over the Europe and Australia latitudes, which is why those places that far north/south got service first with coverage gradually extending towards the middle. Equatorial orbits are crowded and polar ones are difficult to maintain, so that's why I think Starlink satellites get usually deployed at those oblique angles.

[@tomjaeger1]

The starlink dish does not move as it tracks sats. It uses a phased array to steer the beam and tracks multiple sats at the same time so there is no loss of signal as it moves to a new sat. The starlink dish only moves on startup. The new starlink dishs dont move at all as they do not have motors. Starlink being closer via LEO puts the latency between 30ms and 100ms vs geo stationary sats at 500+ ms. That is 1/2 second delay....try a phone call with a 1/2 second delay.

[@denzelhandiwomoki5357]

I second this

[@lorenzos-g9o]

I think what's missing from the video is that nearly all existing satellite internet offerings are actually in geostationary. It seems like the main innovation here is reduced satellite cost and newer tech compared to existing costellations like ViaSat?

[@apdjwivjekdif]

I was thinking the same. I really don't see what they are doing differently here

[@Liberty2358]

The reason why GEO is preferred is the lowest cost, you don't need tenths of thousand of LEO satellite.

[@apdjwivjekdif]

@@Liberty2358 I get that but the video makes people think that what this company is doing is something new when it was out for years and years and frankly the latency and bandwidth sucks. This is why people prefer to pay double the cost for spacex.

[@Coecoo]

There is no innovation. They are jumping on a bandwagon from 1962 using a higher frequency microwave.

[@ScienceDiscoverer]

@@Liberty2358 And won't create LEO space trash disaster that can block humanity for space exploration forever.

[@gokkiyoutube]

Starlink doesn't lose connection each time it switches and doesn't have to track the satellites mechanically - it uses beam forming to instantly switch between them. Might wanna research a bit more before making false statements.

[@backacheache]

And I think their cruise-ship solution uses multiples dishes so that perhaps they can be connecting to the next satellite before the current connection drops

[@Mallchad]

It would be unusable if it lost connection each time it switches, it would likely keep the connection up and keep the transmission as seamless as possible, you could in theory even have multiple satellites pointing at the same area which is probably what they are doing. Also "lost connection" is a massive misnomer in tech, a connection is a request to data transmission, if the connect is "lost" then somebody in the pair asked the connection to be terminated, which you would _never_ do if it was such a big problem, you just keep transmitting till you get valid packets

[@AustinCooper90]

@@backacheacheeven for single star links it doesn’t drop connection

[@SpiraSpiraSpira]

@@backacheachecruise ships use multiple terminals because there is a limit to bandwidth on a single terminal and a huge cruise ship needs a large pipe. Starlink terminals can track multiple Starlink satellites simultaneously using beam forming.

[@TurboElectricLtd]

If I were making StarLink I would have the dishy talk with multiple satellites all the time. Just like the cellphone network. Then there would be no connection drop. Also, as has been pointed out many times: Starlink dishy's are phased arrays so the communication with satellites is directed electronically not mechanically. Presumably, they add the mechanism to just optimise the angle for the array so it's not trying to project at low angles to the array.

[@chrisstearns10]

I have Starlink works great, even for gaming while streaming to 4 other tvs and video conferenceing. The reason Starlink is in low earth orbit is because of the latency speed. Can't game on satellites in geostationary orbit.

[@astranisspace]

True! We're not a good answer for the gaming market. We're trying to connect people who are currently unconnected.

[@chrisstearns10]

@@astranisspace what's going to be your cost to the end user?

[@backacheache]

@@astranisspace could you at least partner with a CDN provider so that common content could come from an SSD in space instead of making the roundtrip to Earth?

[@astranisspace]

"Cost to end user" isn't really a 1:1 comparison because we sell to businesses. But per unit of connectivity, roughly 1/2 of Starlink prices.

[@chrisstearns10]

@@astranisspace starlink is unlimited data use, at $120 per month. What would your average per month cost be?

[@IanHobday]

Brutal latency. 500ms ping times in an absolute best case scenario but it will be worse than that. 600ms to 800ms will be typical. Maybe okay for streaming but not workable for anything interactive (gaming, voice calls, video calls, etc). Starlink is killer because of the low latency.

[@asandax6]

Most internet usage is stuff that doesn't require low latency so this model works. If you have cheap high latency internet you can compensate with a capped solution for low latency e.g 10GB mobile data for calls and gaming + unlimited GEO satellite internet.

[@IanHobday]

@@asandax6 If you want to watch KZbin, sure, no problem. If you want to use the internet for work, which a LOT of people living remotely want to do, high latency is untenable. Useless for any sort of real time communication

[@asandax6]

@@tripplefives1402 I don't think the new GEO satellites are going to be slow speed internet that costs $300. If they did that they would already have lost to starlink and other LEO internet service providers.

[@asandax6]

@@IanHobday Yes useless for real time communication but usefull for everything else like social media, downloading of large files (which is the most usage of the internet for work related tasks), watching videos, doing research etc.

[@IanHobday]

@@asandax6 "Downloading large files" is not the main use for remote workers, lol. There is no way this geo synchronous system can compete with what Space X is doing and what Blue Origin plans to do. It offers no benefits, only drawbacks.

[@matthewk4930]

There really isn’t anything novel about providing Internet from Geo. The latency that’s introduced by having a signal travel more than 70,000 miles in order to get from point “A” point “B” renders many internet applications unusable. High speed, Internet from Geo stationary orbit has been available since the mid 2000s. Honestly this sounds more like a commercial than an actual investigation or thought through reporting.

[@abcha0s]

This is a very high risk endeavor. The competitors have been doing this for a long time already and barely break even. Starlink will take all of the profitable subscribers. It's noble to provide internet to the next 4B people but they cant afford to pay for it. This business model only makes sense as a charity. How may of your satellites would you need to launch to service 4B people at connection speeds better than dial up?

[@XKS99]

When Starlink birds are not servicing rich customers they are flying over the poor. Why not service them as well at lower cost rather than going idle?

[@eafortson]

@@XKS99 Because you still need ground stations and backhauls and that requires capitol investment and infrastructure. And that expenditure requires a business plan which shows a ROI.

[@XKS99]

@@eafortson my understanding is with laser links between satellites the ground stations are not necessarily required. Perhaps they could support a lower cost lower bandwidth service by leveraging under-utilized capacity

[@kennethferland5579]

@@eafortson Bingo, Starlink ground stations are unaffordable even in the West, thats why SpaceX has to subsidize them heavily.

[@kennethferland5579]

@@XKS99 You will always need a ground stations and just as many of them, a bit that goes up must come down. Laser based transfers between satalites just mean that a bit might come down over the horizon from the satalite which initially went up too.

[@jimdangle4579]

I can't believe this is being pitched as an alternative...

[@anthonynye1747]

ikr, I'm just laughing

[@jimhanson2860]

If you live in the middle of nowhere, you don't have much choice. If you live on a boat, you don't have much choice. There are those that have need for this. In the valley where I live, only the towns have internet because there are enough people to make it financially viable for the provider. Think out of your little box.

[@jondurr]

I had geostationary satellite internet until cable became available. It had terrible latency! Latency isn't only important to gaming; it slows your connection overall!

[@21nickik]

There is misinformation here. First of all, while Starlink terminals track the sats, they don't do it physically like shown in the video. It is done with electromagnetic beam forming and happens incredibly quickly, the antenna stays in the same place the whole time. The motor is mostly there for initial adjustment and alignment. There is basically no noticeable falloff in latency. Geostationary internet has existed for decades. The video doesn't make that clear. So there is nothing new about that, and that sort of internet is what SpaceX Starlink is currently replacing. To suggest this is some new idea that is primed to compete with Starlink doesn't really make sense. For most application the latency is terrible. They are basically just hopping they can do it cheaper. Why this should be cheaper then what SpaceX is doing is a mystery to me. The video didn't really tell me the value proposition.

[@Me__Myself__and__I]

Exactly. No one uses geo Internet even though it has been available for a long time because the service is terrible for most use cases. No one wants geo Internet. StarLink leo is much more competitive with good ground based Internet. And since StarLink is by SpaceX who does the launches for literally the lowest cost possible, competing with StarLink is risky and most likely corporate suicide for geo. This company makes no sense, I can't figure out how they expect to attract customers.

[@amosbatto3051]

The reason Astranis can do it for cheaper than StarLink is because you need far fewer satellites to provide GEO service than LEO service. StarLink currently has 5000 working satellites in orbit and plans to have 42000 satellites by 2030, which need to be replaced every 5-7 years. In contrast, Astranis plans to have 100 GEO satellites in orbit by 2030 and GEO satellites can last many decades, so Astranis will be significantly cheaper to operate than StarLink. The drawback is the high latency of around 600 ms for GEO internet, whereas StarLink is 25-35 ms, so Astranis is aiming for the low end market of people who aren't willing to pay much for their internet access, which is why the company is talking about the 4 billion people who currently don't have internet access and aren't willing/able to pay for StarLink's expensive LEO internet, which starts at about $100 per month. I don't know how inexpensive StarLink will become in the future, but if Astranis can get its pricing down to around $30 per month, I doubt StarLink will ever get that cheap, and Astranis may have a successful business model. If Astranis works, it will put Hughesnet and Viasat out of business. Essentially StarLink will be using SpaceX rockets and SpaceX-style manufacturing techniques, but Astranis is aiming for a low-end market segment.

[@Me__Myself__and__I]

@@amosbatto3051 Cheaper maybe, but then it would have to be much cheaper for the vastly worse connectivity. Fewer satellites also means much lower bandwidth for customers on top of the crushing latency.

[@amateurwizard]

I think this is banking on most people being ignorant to many things. It's far more functional to use large high power satellites in this scenario. The latency will always be absolutely huge, and this also has an effect on bandwidth because devices don't just rant to the internet with no response (often).

[@SteveWindsurf]

I missed the bit where this technology has value over existing communications capability. Starlink uses a beam steering phased array user terminal to track LEO satellites, so mostly a solid state approach.

[@skedaritou8138]

I think this a Military satelite..

[@patrickwrightson2072]

“The folks taking the internet out of tubes and putting it into space” are literally SpaceX. Like… that is literally what SpaceX is doing with Starlink.

[@bujin5455]

4:38 I love how they are trying to pitch GEO as an innovation over LEO, when LEO is the actual innovation. (We've had GEO for a LONG time now.) GEO is a 100x farther out in space, which means 100x more roundtrip latency. And having a single satellite cover a "MUCH larger area" is a bad thing, because more people are having to share the limited bandwidth of the satellite. Starlink's LEO program was the first time a satellite constellation was able offer service competitive with ground based solutions. They went LEO not because it was easy (because it's harder) but because that's what MUST be done to get REAL performance. This is basically a paid commercial.

[@FrostyDog9186]

Due to the limited real estate in geostationary orbit and the huge coverage are (slightly less than one hemisphere), they’ll either charge a few customers huge prices for fast internet or a lot of people slightly less money to have slow internet. It’s fundamentally a physics problem.

[@onmyworkbench7000]

*_It also means that any dish down here on Earth has to track those satellites as they move across the sky._* *_And anytime that dish needs to jump to tracking the next satellite, it'll lose connection with the internet._* I have had my Starlink System for 2 years and have never seen it move to track the satellites with the exception of when I first set it up. Starlink antennas uses an electronically steerable Phased Array antenna that can switch from satellite to satellite in milliseconds and it can receive and transmit to multiple satellites at the same time eliminating the loss of signal. With much much *_LOWER_* latency. Hughesnet Satellite internet used Geosink satellites and the services *_SUCKS BIG TIME!!!_*

[@la7dfa]

I worked in the Arctic (Jan Mayen) a few decades ago and we had a slow expensive geostationary connection. A few years ago they had increased the speed, but still the same horrible latency. Now they got both Starlink and OneWeb, and in a few years there will be a 1000km fiber cable to the island. The new starlink antenna has no actuators or moving parts at all, because the number of sats always covers the sky within the electronic steered beams.

[@beltizad]

At least they admitted it isn't for gaming or any other low-latency applications.

[@1stPrinciplesFM]

It's definitely not for gaming! We're building satellites for the ~95% of internet traffic that isn't latency-sensitive.

[@beltizad]

@@1stPrinciplesFM Best wishes then, and thanks for the feedback. Looks like you guys are doing excellent work to provide service to your target customers. I'm sure the price will vary by location, but it would be interesting to know if your service would be cheaper than competitors like Starlink in a given area.

[@redneckadventures9122]

So basically everything

[@Wirmish]

SpaceX build their own rockets, they reuse their rockets, they build their own satellites (like on an assembly line to lower the cost), they use argon as a propellant and their own engine (v2), and their satellites evolve rapidly (soon Starlink v2.5). Soon there will be 10,000 satellites in orbit. Good luck.

[@furkanyuksel3263]

Amen bro

[@infocus-media]

I am from Australia and 14 years ago they had us bent over a barrel with internet speed, it was like almost primitive, and in a matter of a few years it just exploded, from buffering videos to 4K movies you can watch in every room at the same time, it was/is a leap forward for business. I am in IT and now I have clients from all over the world no just from my home town. We are spoilt for choice, from Fiber to Elons Satellite. We have a farm in the bush, and suddenly I can be 1000km from civilization and still watch Netflix and talk to family in South Africa and New Zealand.

[@Steve-y6q4q]

Since i live in a remote area, I will continue to monitor this new system using my antiquated starlink satellite system.

[@michaelogden5958]

I don't know about all Starlink "antennas" but mine, here in the Middle Of Nowhere, Texas doesn't move a single inch. It's on a solid mount. I've been quite impressed with it. I can watch streaming video at "4K" all day long without a single glitch.

[@Mr.Coffee20255]

Which starlink antenna you have? Also, do you need starlink service for the antenna to function?

[@emmettdaster]

this is not a starlink competitor. Latency is the main problem with satellite internet. Starlink solved that issue for the most part. Therefore it is not a competitor. Its good to get people connected though

[@Catge]

Too bad it is slow as hell and more expensive than ever

[@Fast1Guy]

Our satellite TV (geostationary satellite) can be out for 20min during a storm where our star link is not affected because it can see many satellites at any given time.

[@Tres1m1m1]

I don't see a solution, what I see is another company, taking money from VCs and then putting it on the stock market, and scamming retail buyers, sorry guys its my perception.

[@joseperes777]

Starlink DOESN'T make mechanical tracking.....it is electronic tracking....the dish doesn't move....stralink actually have genial system.. I have one , and it is excellent

[@jeremyp.2485]

Then they gonna go to their main competitor, Space X, to launch their satellites 😆.

[@MaKennaDuff]

The humor is real. I think it’s also funny that Elon gets to charge them for facilitating their venture 😂

[@IndyScotBrian]

Latency increases the higher earth orbit of satellites, hence why Space X & China seeking to fill LEO space smaller faster broadband satellites. Space X v2 satellites linked together with lasers thus reducing need for ground stations. Once the starship is up and running there will be many launches hundreds of satellites in LEO increasing speeds & reducing costs.

[@kevinfisher1345]

You will ALWAYS need ground stations. What goes up, must come down. What it will do is possibly decrease how often it could need to go back down to a ground station. Such as possibly being able to go to several satellites via laser across the distance needed, before then going to a ground station. And you will always need that network of ground stations so that it can go every where.

[@ericblomquist1975]

This will never compete with Starlink. This is a dinosaur model.

[@ericblomquist1975]

100%

[@brent6454]

This is a failed business strategy right off that bat in this day and age. Starlink will eventually lower subscription costs to challenge any competitor. The value starlink brings with low latency will win over the "competitors". Elon will win. In the time it takes this company or "competitor" to launch a viable network of satelites, starlink will probably have reduced their prices or improved their latency and possibly increased their subscription price. If they have increased their subscription price it would be for a reason. There is a demand for it. That being said, this company isn't really a competitor. Starlink is catered to people who want highspeed internet. It's like comparing a deep hull ocean worthy fuel efficient yacht that does 14knots per hour to a luxurious yacht with 2 high output engines that will push a 50ft boat to 25+ knots. There isn't really a comparison. Different.

[@woopsserg]

This is nothing other than a scam for investors. Smallsats to GEO? Really? Any reasonable regulatory body will GTFO them with such request. You cannot put that many of those on GEO safely, it's expensive and fill stay in orbit forever. And if it fails to move to a bit higher graveyard orbit, it becomes a whole another problem that is endangering other sattelites.

[@kennethferland5579]

Were very unlikely to see Starlink just drop its prices, they have too many ongoing costs to do that. The satatlies die rapidly in LEO due to drag and have very limited fuel and need replacing. Also ground stations are very expensive and incur a loss to SpaceX for each instalation. Lastly SpaceX has to buy backbone data service from other ISP's (the ones that have all that Fiber in the ground) to actually make the service work. Geo satalites are not even competing with SpaceX, its instalation of more fiber which is permently shrinking the number of wealthy, low latency demanding, yet fiber-option-less internet users which are the target market of Starlink.

[@mukamuka0]

Great job! I love to see more competition in Sat internet space. Geo network has high latency but it's still has many application that can be use for. It's also impossible for small startup to compete in Leo as it required tens of billions of investment. I think the selling point of Astranis is to make & send Geo sat for Cheap, resulted in cheaper price for customer. Traditional Geo sat is very big very expensive, some time in the $billion and required bigger more expensive rocket to launch.

[@7tkh]

Very impressive company! Someone must have spent a lot of money on it. Internet over geostationary satellites exists for many years now and is available to customers. Great that they likely found a way to get the costs down and make it more flexible. But the technical limitations as seen from the ground are still the same: very high latency of at least ~230ms and big antenna installations due to the large distance. Very difficult for almost all modern internet applications, not only for gaming. I have used SSH for example over such links and it is not funny. Will the possible lower price compensate for that and bring satellite internet out of its niche?

[@tsbrownie]

Seems like a fun company to work at.

[@joelcorley3478]

Call me skeptical. Communications satellites at geostationary orbit? There are already plenty of those and I thought the slots were reserve. Also I've done some work in wireless comms. There are good reasons to want a big satellite that far out. If you go with a smallsat, you're going to need to use a flat, folding, beam-forming high-gain antenna as well as larger solar panels, because of power requirements. You can go light at launch, but it's a tradeoff between launch cost (mass) and design and manufacturing cost (complexity). Besides there are very good reasons that there are three (Kuiper only has 2 test satellites up) competing high speed broadband LEO satellite constellations. With that said, I do think we need to grow the space economy and communications is a good first place to start. But personally I'd be surprised if this company doesn't go bankrupt some time this decade. And if it survives, I suspect it will change is plans significantly.

[@woopsserg]

Looks like new Nikola to me but riding on a different hype train.

[@Josephptmk]

yeah, like what is new here? just cheaper satellites? lol

[@ChatGPT1111]

Cool, so 130% more....cat videos😂😂😂

[@robertlewis2542]

In this instance GEO is a 'one to many' type technology best suited for broadcasting one way. GEO has and will continue to have applications but for general connectivity it's a dead tech already. You might as well give them an am radio.

[@baal1969]

I lost interest shortly after hearing "Needs to track" and "Fancy dish" and "lose signal every 6 minutes"... I mean the Starlink hardware is super cheap. It needed *some* alignment in the beginning when there were fewer sats in orbit but nowadays you can literally throw the dish in the back of a moving pickup truck and it will connect as long as it sees the sky. The Astranis dish will be bigger and more costly because the sats are farther. If we're talking about cost, you need to pay attention to the details... Starlink has already reached the financial breakeven point with a lot of surplus capacity and only a portion of its satellites in orbit. That means that when the network is complete and clients continue to connect, the price can probably go down by half and it will still be vastly profitable. If you see what Tesla is able to do with its pricing while the others are still losing a lot of money, the same thing will happen to almost any Starlink competitors. The business case here is super narrow and edgy.

[@cybergigafactory]

How many connections and how fast is one of these satellites? Would be interesting to know.

[@1stPrinciplesFM]

Roughly 2 million people, or 1,000 cell towers, connected per satellite

[@cybergigafactory]

@@1stPrinciplesFM thanks 😊 And do you know the maximum speed?

[@1stPrinciplesFM]

@@cybergigafactory Effectively unlimited? It depends on how our customers chop it up, we provide "middle mile" capacity that they then turn into a customer-facing service. But to be more direct: it can be just as fast as Starlink or even fiber, depending on the use case.

[@cybergigafactory]

@@1stPrinciplesFM yea, that is great. Starlink is not really for a city but more for a rural area because each satellite can only send so much data. I would like to know if one of these satellites can handle thousands of customer at the same time with fiber speeds of 200mb or higher. Would be interesting to compare it to starlink and other competitors.

[@JetBestBuddyEver]

Starlink dishes do not physically move to track satellites. Starlink uses phased array antennas that track electronically. Poor research in this video.

[@patrickday4206]

Latency would be much greater. This latency also affects bandwith they can handle I'm sure it can be done reasonably fast reasonably cheap but definitely subpar

[@Sukshula]

your creativity knows no bounds! fantastic work!

[@a10warthog4]

What creativity?

[@camilkegels3640]

doesn't it seem like a risky bet, since Starlink is already more developed and also provides internet to remote aeria's?

[@xephael3485]

This video is probably paid for them to get more funding out gullible investors...

[@Robert-fz8lx]

I'll give this company 2 more years before it files for bankruptcy🤣

[@koyaz73]

It's a good idea if it is cheap. Im a starlink user and i can say that it is awsome, but quite expensive. To connect communities, it will be fine. I just want to know how fast is Astranis? Is there a monthly usage limit?

[@Pooky1973]

Yeah, 1 Web Page per month before the 30 days come to an end

[@mateogomez8413]

You are aware that they have only been launching about 10% of their entire constellation, just let them launch all their satellites first and then we will give our opinion.

[@jackoneil3933]

LOL, Thank you for featuring my late, great friend Ted "It's a sires of tubes" Stevens.

[@marius165]

The video says Starlink Vs Artanis, but never gives any comparison. And how ia it better then the old GEO satelites except for being cheaper?

[@friartist]

You are wrong: Starlink does not physically move anything to track satellites and shifting to a new satellite every few minutes. There are 1280 radio transmitters/receivers on my "Dishy McFlat Face" antenna. They operate ever so slightly out of phase to accomplish "beam forming", that tracks a given satellite and shifts to the next one IMPERCEPTIBLY so. Without moving the dish. Take a look at a Starlink dish yourself: it mainly moves during the first 6 hours, when it is scanning for obstacles. After that it rarely moves. I would guess, that the reason mine is at angled to the north might have to do with load balancing ground stations vs. satellites or perhaps some satellites undergoing software patching. Patching/upgrading is normal for IT systems.

[@backacheache]

I do feel they have the right attitude to do a better job of it than other geostationary internet providers

[@PresidentBob1989]

These people with SBF hairstyles seems a bit over the top in acting 😂

[@astranisspace]

Thanks for stopping by!

[@nicolasdujarrier]

The big drawback with geo-stationary satellites is latency, which prevent some important use cases, and even can make surf the web frustratingly feel laggy… Starlink doesn’t have as many limitations, and new emerging technologies (satellite communication from a regular mobile phone, meta-antenna,…) may make communication from a regular mobile phone being near seamless (with huge lower cost advantages thanks to the HVM of mobile phones). Also I would think that Startlink is funded by the profits generated by SpaceX, and therefore already have a huge monthly cash flow that they using to iterate fast, lower cost,… on each new Starlink satellite generation. Starlink subscription is already in the 40€/month price ballpark in France. Therefore geo-satellite internet is a non-starter as 1. it won’t be better and 2. it will also be much more expensive.

[@ElectricityTaster]

How is that chair floating like that.

[@darrinbrunner6429]

11:34 I guess we're the only two that noticed. (I'm guessing the chair legs are hidden behind his legs.)

[@nicolasdujarrier]

The big drawback with geo-stationary satellites is latency, which prevent some use cases, and even can make surf the web frustratingly feel laggy… Starlink doesn’t have as many limitations, and new emerging technologies (satellite communication from a regular mobile phone, meta-antenna,…) may make communication from a regular mobile phone being near seamless (with huge lower cost advantages thanks to the HVM of mobile phones). Also I would think that Startlink is funded by the profits generated by SpaceX, and therefore already have a huge monthly cash flow that they using to iterate fast, lower cost,… on each new Starlink satellite generation. Starlink subscription is already in the 40€/month price ballpark !!! Therefore geo-satellite internet is a non-starter as 1. it won’t be better and 2. it will also be much more expensive.

[@s3_build]

Starlink actually just today broke even on cash flow, funny enough. Starlink is great but it's expensive and a single network won't ever be able to serve 4 Billion people's connectivity needs. It's taken 10,000s of companies to get the first half of the planet connected, it's going to take many more to get the other half online too.

[@nicolasdujarrier]

@@s3_build Starlink likely has enough funding from SpaceX to cover the whole earth (given enough time (5 to 10 years)), and thanks to future generation of SpaceX rocket (Starship), it will cost them even less per satellite launched. Until there isn’t any other price competitive company that could compete with SpaceX, there is near zero chance that any other private company can launch internet satellites at a price competitive with Starlink and be profitable… It is a non-starter…

[@s3_build]

@@nicolasdujarrier they will definitely cover the earth, they already do. But (a) it will never be affordable to the point that 4B more people who can't today afford internet will and (b) despite how many satellites you put up, no one network will be able to support that many people. It took 10,000s of cos to get the first 4B online, it will take more than 1 company to get the last 4B.

[@1stPrinciplesFM]

@@nicolasdujarrier Starlink needs to replenish the whole fleet every ~3-5 years as they deorbit

[@nicolasdujarrier]

@@1stPrinciplesFM I didn’t know that, but still SpaceX/Starlink seems already cash-flow positive, so in very good position to lower their prices if needs be… And as previously said, they could use the profit of one region to cover the loss of another region if they wanted…

[@jflow5601]

Latency sucks. Astranis service will fix this how???

[@luiul1]

there are 4 billion people who do not have access to broadband internet. there are 4 billion people who do not know how lucky they are.

[@tyronewashington230]

lel

[@MaKennaDuff]

Great perspective, actually. I think internet can, and does, do a lot of amazing things…. But overall, I’m not so sure the good outweighs the bad.

[@mihlalibadiwe1590]

Starlink and Astranis are two different things. Title of this video is misleading. It's like claiming AirBnb is competing with Hotels

[@Me__Myself__and__I]

It is also worth mentioning that the profits generated by StarLink will be used to benefit the human race vs just making a profit for investors. A key goal of StarLink is to use the profits to fund SpaceX goal of building a self sufficient Mars colony. And the reason for doing that is concern about humanity having all of its eggs in one basket. Yes, it is a bit crazy and a massive effort. But it isn't wrong, humanity will be safer once it is in more than one place.

[@Me__Myself__and__I]

@arjaysmithjr9083 Most humans lack vision, imagination and don't contribute to the future of humanity. So your reaction is pretty typical for most people. Just because you lack the vision does not mean its not true. Musk is not typical. No mega yaht. Don't think he even owns a single mansion currently. He sleeps in modest places and sometimes on factory floors. Not normal behavior for the world's richest person.

[@mikeomolt4485]

A colony living on Mars will never be safer.

[@Me__Myself__and__I]

@@mikeomolt4485 Sigh. "never". Anyone who says anything tech (that is technically achievable) will "never" be/do something is uninformed, neive, irrational or intentionally lying. Mars could absolutely be safer. Very hard to achieve, but 100% possible.

[@Me__Myself__and__I]

@@mikeomolt4485 On its own, correct. But having humanity in 2 places will be MUCH safer. Should something catastrophic happen to the Earth then Mars exists as a backup. Plus it helps progress science and space technologies and propels us into a better future.

[@wakanda0070]

😂😂😂Ou sound brainwashed

[@sarjannarwan6896]

Either they don't know what a phased array antenna is or they're dishonest.

[@tralfazy]

I had Viasat GEO Sat internet for years. It was quite a bit worse performance than the Starlink internet service that I have now. Seems like this is a move backwards.

[@trevor6257]

O man 10,000 latency perfect for gaming 1 hr per move

[@robindehood207]

Whenever you want clicks always make sure you include Tesla or SpaceX or anything that has to do with Elon in the title.

[@5thGenNativeTexan]

GEO sats are great for one-way transmission... ie... satellite TV, etc. But when put into use for bi-directional communications (think sat phones, or Hughesnet internet), the performance (both bandwidth and latency) is far from spectacular. For low-bandwidth internet operations, such as IOT devices, GEO is more than sufficient. But to meet the demand of ever-increasing bandwidth and lower latency, the only realistic solution is LEO sats (ie..Starlink).

[@EQ_EnchantX]

This video is incorrect. The Starlink dishy does not move to track satellites, they use phase interference to bend the signal to aim at them instead of moving the dish. Also you do not lose connection when it acquires a different satellites it happens in millisecond and is seamless. I have been using StarLink for 2 years now and its amazing for streaming videos, fast low ping gaming(less than 50ms) and more!

[@tyronewashington230]

The VOD is a bit like a used car salesmen selling a GEO ISP. A bit more salesmanship than facts.

[@panzer8299]

Soooo just an ordinary satellite internet connection? Not a great video, targeting Starlink for no reason.

[@LinuxCoder-Root]

This is kind of a 16 minutes Ad. more than an educational video. However, LEO is faster, and this company does nothing new.

[@dacnien]

It is depend on the frequency they using. Higher frequency = more weather effect.

[@franklincerpico7702]

At 3:17 you show the Starlink receivers moving to track the satellites. That's not how they work. The Starlink receiver is a phased-array antenna and can swap between orbiting satellites near instantaneously

[@playasdetijuas]

That’s old tech. Lost of latency and probably speed caps due to a smaller amount of birds. Starlink is much better. This is more of a sales pitch for a mediocre product.

[@michaellee7023]

I had access via fiber optic and Hughes until Starlink was available. The fiber offered little, only a fraction of starlink and Hughes latency was 200+ so phone was a last resort and streaming a no go too. Useless, but I kept it for redundancy only, but never used it. Starlink offered service in our area and I jumped on. Latency running about 15-35, and bandwidth at first was 300 mips, now about half that. But it’s more than adequate for us, as latency is key.

[@Gersberms]

GEO is also 0.119 seconds away, in terms of speed of light. Meaning, to send a packet to and receive an answer from a satellite, takes 0.24 seconds and that's before the signal went out to the internet. To ping a server on the internet, it takes 4 * 0.119 or 0.476 seconds. Why do people not talk about this? It's an insurmountable problem for GEO satellite internet.

[@RawbLV]

Only an issue if you're gaming

[@Gersberms]

@@RawbLV Or calling, or working remotely, or serving web pages, etc. It's only not a problem when downloading large files or streaming video and audio. And for those things, you seldomly get the advertised speed. Ask me how I know.

[@tyronewashington230]

Because $80/mo is 20-60ms Starlink, and the alternative is 500-600ms what for how much? And the sales pitch is that Alaskan indigenous tribes don't have good internet, so? Cringe... VC money look at us, we said indigenous!

[@Mitch-BladeCaptain]

I live in Oregon, and where we are, we still don't have broadband. We have a dish facing towards town, and our average speed is 22mbps... I'd love to get starlink or what ever. As for cell towers, it's far away enough that if I'm lucky, I get 1 bar.

[@colter0045]

Where I live the local ISP's would bend you over a desk to get your last penny and only for terrible internet speeds (Saskatchewan, Canada.) Starlink changed all of that, no installation fees because I did it myself. Also there's no "skip" where I live, until you can make your service available to the average guy then you're screwed but then again I got a deal on Starlink.

[@robertm1672]

Brad went WAY out of his way to shake his hair around when talking. Intentionally for that purpose.

[@peceed]

Insta minus and channel block for wasting 16 minutes of life by BS and false advertising.

[@JohnRWMarchant]

Starlink is in LEO for a reason, its not like they did not know what they were doing.

[@TomorowGames]

This was just marketing for this company by Freethink. Seriously... using buzzwords such as "first principles" and making it seem no one did GEO ever before. All we did for communication was GEO before till SpaceX/Starlink came along and said nah lets do LEO that's the only way to provide high speed internet to everyone in rural areas and thanks to low launch costs we can provide at a reasonable price. This is a great video for anyone living under a rock and doesn't know the first thing about satellite/internet communicate history and that's what the creator of this video comes across at first glance. DownVote

[@DaddyBusAdventures]

three points: 1. LEO connected dishes do not need to move if the orbiting satellites have overlapping fields -> SL is already there as their customer dishes no longer need to constantly tilt. 2. as other commenters already mentioned and even this company admits, GEO's biggest drawback is latency. 3. failures occur and nothing can be tested absolute but blaming a 3rd party supplier for an issue is on them -> improve your supplier selection process or at least state that an issue was found and is part of the improvement process, no need to state it was a '3rd party supplier's HW that failed' as I am sure 95% of all hardware used on the satellite is from various 3rd party suppliers. It's like BMW blaming Bosch for a failing mass flow sensor.

[@jackflash6377]

Worked on offshore drilling rigs and we used some antiquated GEO satellite. We used a 12 ft dish mounted on a gimble to track through rig motion. We paid $45,000 month for 768kb speed. Imagine a crew of 150 trying to use 768kb.

[@prasltgk2177]

If some companies want to compete with Starlink, they need to have their own launch rocket. If not, forget it

[@furkanyuksel3263]

They are still trying though kuiper-oneweb-china. I don't understand how are they gonna compete with starlink?

[@MichaelGreenLagos]

Speed of light is like saying the earth is flat

[@philipgrice1026]

This thinly veiled commercial for Astranis is so full of BS one must wonder how the presenter didn't burst out laughing. But then, if he's so ignorant about StarLink you can bet he really doesn't understand how inadequate the Astranis product is. This comment sent courtesy of my StarLink satellite system from poorly served rural America. Until StarLink came along.

[@shmayazuggot8558]

GEO is 1 second RTT, LEO 30ms. Internet must be below 1 second or commerce/end user experience is a mess.

[@robinpettit7827]

I almost worked for this company and I think it is a good deal. I have a background in space, attitude and GN&C.

[@micahtrostle1367]

no, this is incorrect, and starlink has never moved mechanically...

[@RandyWells24]

SO the headline is WRONG starLINK does not have a new competitor HughesNet and Viasat do SMH

[@mfgc2610]

Starlink has gen 1, 2 and now 3 sats. Same with their dish's. Many mods, improvements and better designs. The competition has a LONG ways to go to catch that!

[@A_World_Undone-nj8ud]

Looks great. How you going to get it up there?

[@chibidib]

2:10 $80 a month? Are you nuts? I pay $14 for a Gigabit fiber optic internet in Czech republic.

[@tyronewashington230]

Rich hyper inflated economies like the USA selling things to countries that are not hyper inflated is a big ask. Why should the world buy over priced things? Oh, it's a Apple, okay. But water?

[@JonnyD000]

For another futuristic internet provider do a video on World Mobile!

[@zyxwvutsrqponmlkh]

Clark orbit has issues with latency. This is unavoidable because physics. You can't use this for gaming or video conferencing or phone calls because the latency sucks. Even clicking around the web is slower because of the latency.

[@mikecohen2400]

Cost, talk is cheap, you got to build the birds, and then get them into orbit, and do it cheaper then Space X, then you have to deliver a cheaper service, and still make money. So bird cost, launch cost to Geo, then builds competitive network, have fun.

[@Thewatchinglad]

I didn't know Young Sheldon was working in sat business technology. 😂😂😂 Love this yooung science pioneers .

[@condew6103]

Nice video, but never answered my questions, What speed, at what price, with what latency? Also, what does the ground station look like, what does it cost? And finally, when do you anticipate having a service to sell?