Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_itti701 wrote

[deleted]

56

firthy t1_ituifs7 wrote

Not available in Mercedes or BMW

1

oo_Mxg t1_itwllrb wrote

I think it’s funny reddit is only starting to talk about this stuff like an issue (which it is) when it affects them

0

SigmaLance t1_ittvd4e wrote

“ Whereas Starlink for stationary vehicles costs $599 for the standard satellite dish, the RV-in-motion service requires a flat high-performance Starlink dish costing $2,500. The monthly fee comes in at $135. “

I’m curious as to why there is a cost difference for monthly service between a stationary object vs a moving object…

I understand the hardware fee, but what is the difference in service costs beyond that?

19

whoisrich t1_ittxy09 wrote

Technically it probably has to do with capacity planning, so you have one sat overhead that can serve X number of people, so you sell that number of dishes to that area. With people moving, you have to leave X number of spots unsold as a buffer for people driving into an area or degrade everyone's service.

I believe this has already been a problem with people buying a dish in an available area only to use it in an area that is 'sold out'.

Also it's another opportunity to make more money.

26

benfranklyblog t1_itub34z wrote

The RV service can be activated month to month, so you only need to pay when you’re traveling.

8

Cman75 t1_ituhhbb wrote

We pay $135/month for the rv service. Only cost difference is hardware...which is a lot.

2

uncoolcat t1_ituobdh wrote

The RV dish is currently the same one as the residential dish, and costs $599. The only $2500 dish that's currently available is the "business" version. I'm guessing the $2500 "RV" dish is the upcoming one that can work while moving. The price difference is $20 a month, but RV users are first to get throttled if there's insufficient capacity in a given area.

7

Cman75 t1_itv5pxd wrote

My mistake, I misunderstood the question to be between the current rv service and the new in-motion service. So yes, there is a monthly cost difference between stationary and current rv service ($110/$135) and yes, we're the first to get THROTTLED in higher usage areas. Also, if there is anything (leaf, tree branch, telephone pole) even in the peripheral view of dishy with an otherwise wide open view of NNW skies, signal will drop every 40-60 seconds (called a "disruption") and sometimes sooner. It's great when it's great, and rip it out and toss it in the trash frustrating when it's not.

2

uncoolcat t1_itul8qf wrote

According to Starlink's website the RV dish costs $599, which is the same cost as the residential dish. As far as I know, the residential dish can be used with the RV plan and vice versa, because it's the same hardware.

Currently the only $2500 dish available is for the "business" plan. Starlink will be offering a new RV dish that can be used while in transit, which I suspect is where the $2500 number is coming from. The current $599 hardware should still work, albeit while stationary.

2

blue-ocean-event t1_itv8x4r wrote

This is a huge deal for those of us who boondock for weeks deep in the natl forests

2

SigmaLance t1_itwlttx wrote

I am on a boat most of the year so I totally get it 👍

I just wasn’t aware that they charged more for the RV service than they do for the home service.

1

croninsiglos t1_itteqoh wrote

Yeah ok, while nearly half the United States is listed as "Waitlist" or "Coming Soon"

13

OcculusSniffed t1_itw3kkt wrote

Well before this there was no option at all, so it's progress.

1

croninsiglos t1_itw40pl wrote

Oh there are a couple satellite internet providers and they have been around for years.

Starlink will arguably be much better when complete.

1

Cman75 t1_itui12s wrote

We are full time nomads and use the rv service. It's great if you're in the desert, but get a few leaves anywhere in the dish's view and it goes to hell. That part has been really frustrating.

2

bradyso t1_ittwzkq wrote

I have Starlink and it's mostly satisfactory but it does cut out for a couple of seconds every hour or so. I wonder if getting one of these would fix it.

1

disgruntled-pigeon t1_itu6qna wrote

That will improve as more satellites are launched. More are being launched almost every week.

7

blue-ocean-event t1_itv86j8 wrote

The time has come my fellow van-rv-overlanders!!!

1

reddit_anti_bot t1_itw890a wrote

I'm hoping this takes off and everyone gets it or at least gets starlink. Maybe then campgrounds won't be so WiFi congested. Cell towers as well. :)

1

Hyalus33 t1_itu73nc wrote

This is way overpriced. Hopefully in the coming years we can see prices like we did in the 90’s

0

uncoolcat t1_itumljr wrote

It is not overpriced if you are one of the people that the service is intended for. I have Starlink myself because the only other Internet option in my area is dial-up or other satellite Internet providers (which are far more expensive than Starlink).

3

OcculusSniffed t1_itw3pgo wrote

No kidding. Sell my house, buy an RV, and travel the country while working a full time remote gig? Hell yeah

2

Hyalus33 t1_itx5bnx wrote

We also use this service. Still feel it’s overpriced. 🤷

0

uncoolcat t1_itzw24q wrote

That's fair; it's certainly expensive when compared to ground-based broadband.

Compared to other satellite Internet services I've used it's substantially faster and less expensive, plus not having a data cap is a huge bonus.

2

seanbrockest t1_ituazei wrote

You had mobile broadband services available to you in the 90s?

1

uncoolcat t1_itunmdx wrote

Not the OP, but I had a cable modem in '98. I believe that it was 1.5 mbps down and 256 kbps up, and I think it cost ~$50 a month (which was a steal because it meant being able to get rid of a second phone line that had been dedicated to Internet use). I got super lucky though, because it turned out the local cable company used that very rural area as a testing ground for new equipment (I heard they did so there due to the harsh weather). Some people in that same area were able to get cable modems as early as '96.

1

seanbrockest t1_itupz32 wrote

I also had a cable modern in roughly '97, at roughly the speed you quoted.

Starlink is over 100x faster, and this is about a mobile option. Literally no comparison.

2

Junkstar t1_itv70j8 wrote

Yeah, I’m going to avoid Elon Musk internet for as long as possible, thank you.

−4