vansprinkle said:Pinochet said:Jason_Roofer said:
I agree. I ditched Dish after 20 years for YTTV and then we pick and choose other streams as we want. It's still a metric ton cheaper than dish. I don't know how dish or direct is still in business. With Starlink, you have no speed internet anywhere in the world. Those satellites serve crucial services and will always be updated. As long as that's going, streaming is where it's at and satellite tv is dead.
What happens when Starlink and DTV make a deal and create a combo dish/Starlink antenna, that is really just a the latter with a fake dish in it so they can sell you on the combo package and stream it to you anyway? Then we're all right back where we started.
I can't believe Dish or Direct haven't figured out how to run internet through their current satellites. Either run it into the existing home dish, or have the homeowner upgrade the dish and update the set top box to double as a modem/router. They should have jumped on this before Starlink was even an idea, but certainly at least have jumped to it once Starkink was announced as an idea.
They basically did a variant of that with the old HughesNet service. The problem is that the laws of physics are not your friend in this scenario. You're talking about a very small number of satellites in a very high orbit (geostationary at 22,300 miles above the equator). So you have a relatively small pipe shared by many users, with a long throw that adds a lot of latency. In contrast, the Starlink satellites are only a few hundred miles up and there are thousands of them with more being added all the time. Extreme levels of spatial re-use of the same frequencies and much lower latency too.
