|
Magic Jack Latency Question
I have a dish Internet setup at my remote cabin. Sheesh, we have Internet
and HD TV, but no phone. It's a cell phone dead zone. I tried Skype, but because of the latency problem, it would not work. Does anyone have a Magic Jack set up on a satellite dish at a remote location, and if so, does it work? Anyone know if the latency problems with VOIP units has been worked out yet? Steve -- "...the man who really counts in the world is the doer, not the mere critic-the man who actually does the work, even if roughly and imperfectly, not the man who only talks or writes about how it ought to be done." Theodore Roosevelt 1891 |
Magic Jack Latency Question
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:41:37 -0800, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas
wrote: I have a dish Internet setup at my remote cabin. Sheesh, we have Internet and HD TV, but no phone. It's a cell phone dead zone. I tried Skype, but because of the latency problem, it would not work. Does anyone have a Magic Jack set up on a satellite dish at a remote location, and if so, does it work? Anyone know if the latency problems with VOIP units has been worked out yet? Steve I used to have satellite internet, and the latency was way too high for VoIP. From what I heard, it's the upstream connection that has the problem. You'll be able to hear people but they can't hear you. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com "DISCLAIMER If you find a posting or message from me offensive, inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know how to ignore a posting, complain to me and I will demonstrate." |
Magic Jack Latency Question
Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:41:37 -0800, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote: I have a dish Internet setup at my remote cabin. Sheesh, we have Internet and HD TV, but no phone. It's a cell phone dead zone. I tried Skype, but because of the latency problem, it would not work. Does anyone have a Magic Jack set up on a satellite dish at a remote location, and if so, does it work? Anyone know if the latency problems with VOIP units has been worked out yet? Steve I used to have satellite internet, and the latency was way too high for VoIP. From what I heard, it's the upstream connection that has the problem. You'll be able to hear people but they can't hear you. It's a geostationary satellite. That means a 50,000 mile trip out and back, or _minumum_ 1/4 second latency. In the real world you put all other sources of latency on top of that. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
Magic Jack Latency Question
How well does majic jack work with cable internet..Anyone using one..?
|
Magic Jack Latency Question
SteveB wrote:
I have a dish Internet setup at my remote cabin. Sheesh, we have Internet and HD TV, but no phone. It's a cell phone dead zone. I tried Skype, but because of the latency problem, it would not work. Does anyone have a Magic Jack set up on a satellite dish at a remote location, and if so, does it work? Anyone know if the latency problems with VOIP units has been worked out yet? Think 10,000 feet of wire unspooled from the back of an ATV... |
Magic Jack Latency Question
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:12:45 -0400, wrote:
How well does majic jack work with cable internet..Anyone using one..? The cable here has lower latency than dialup. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com "Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." -- Isaac Asimov |
Magic Jack Latency Question
The cable here has lower latency than dialup.
-- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.laughingsquid.co --------------------- What does this have to do with my quesiton..? I can't win a race with a car either... |
Magic Jack Latency Question
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:55:53 -0400, wrote:
The cable here has lower latency than dialup. [snip] What does this have to do with my quesiton..? Did you actually read the post I responded to? It was about cable internet, and it's suitability for VoIP (as in Magic Jack). Where's the problem? I can't win a race with a car either... No, Magic Jack is not a vehicle :-) -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com "Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." -- Isaac Asimov |
Magic Jack Latency Question
On Jul 30, 3:41�am, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote:
I have a dish Internet setup at my remote cabin. �Sheesh, we have Internet and HD TV, but no phone. �It's a cell phone dead zone. �I tried Skype, but because of the latency problem, it would not work. �Does anyone have a Magic Jack set up on a satellite dish at a remote location, and if so, does it work? �Anyone know if the latency problems with VOIP units has been worked out yet? Steve Steve is there ANY cell phone working spots nearby? Nearly all cell phones have jacks covered with plastic to plug in a remote antenna. there are high gain yagis for this purpose. have suggested this to several friends all got phone working. yagis are high gain directional you walk around to find a good spot, sometimes attached to a high spot like roof peak. getting above dense tree growth helps. the cell phone tech folks at the stores know nearly nothing about remote antennas. if you want more info let me know. |
Magic Jack Latency Question
|
Magic Jack Latency Question
|
Magic Jack Latency Question
|
Magic Jack Latency Question
"Uncle Monster" wrote in message ... wrote: How well does majic jack work with cable internet..Anyone using one..? Yes, it works fine on my 3meg cable. The best performance depends on which PC you use it on. I've used mine on a variety of computers and found that it works best on the faster boxes. It will work fine on DSL Lite if you're not downloading torrents of goat porn at the same time. [8~{} Uncle Monster Have any idea how it would work on a satellite dish hookup? Toshiba laptop through N freq. wifi router. Steve |
Magic Jack Latency Question
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:14:03 -0800, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas
wrote: "Uncle Monster" wrote in message ... wrote: How well does majic jack work with cable internet..Anyone using one..? Yes, it works fine on my 3meg cable. The best performance depends on which PC you use it on. I've used mine on a variety of computers and found that it works best on the faster boxes. It will work fine on DSL Lite if you're not downloading torrents of goat porn at the same time. [8~{} Uncle Monster Have any idea how it would work on a satellite dish hookup? Toshiba laptop through N freq. wifi router. Steve I thought that was already answered. Satellite internet has high latency, and VoIP won't work. You can hear them, but they can't hear you. What WiFi you use is irrelevant. It's the satellites that have poor latency. BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com "Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." -- Isaac Asimov |
Magic Jack Latency Question
On Jul 31, 1:32�pm, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote:
"Art Todesco" wrote in message ... wrote: On Jul 30, 3:41?am, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote: I have a dish Internet setup at my remote cabin. ?Sheesh, we have Internet and HD TV, but no phone. ?It's a cell phone dead zone. ?I tried Skype, but because of the latency problem, it would not work. ?Does anyone have a Magic Jack set up on a satellite dish at a remote location, and if so, does it work? ?Anyone know if the latency problems with VOIP units has been worked out yet? Steve Steve is there ANY cell phone working spots nearby? Nearly all cell phones have jacks covered with plastic to plug in a remote antenna. there are high gain yagis for this purpose. have suggested this to several friends all got phone working. yagis are high gain directional you walk around to find a good spot, sometimes attached to a high spot like roof peak. getting above dense tree growth helps. the cell phone tech folks at the stores know nearly nothing about remote antennas. if you want more info let me know. As I am building a house where there is marginal cell service, I would like info about these. �Please post for all of us. Thanks, Art We do have to drive a couple of miles up the mountain, and then we can get cell service. �The antennas are essentially on the other side of the mountain we live on. �But a couple of the cabin owners say they have powerful cell phone models, and if they hang out one of the upstairs windows and move around they can finally get a line. �Would like to hear more about your idea. Steve- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - the external antennas are avaiable for all cell services:) Depending on the company the antenna can be different they are tuned to the frequency your carrier uses. Highly directional you may have to experiment a bit to get service, and your phone MUST be plugged into the external antenna cable, although you can get a cell phone dock to connect a cell phone to a standard cordless or regular phone. e bay is a good source http://cgi.ebay.com/24db-gain-yagi-c...QQcmdZViewItem here is one, I see they now have adapters so one antenna can be used for different frequencies |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
snip
BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
On Aug 2, 5:49�pm, Reed wrote:
snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) there was a plan for low orbit sats that would be in constant motion, as the earth rotates. similiar to iridium and after iridium went thru bankruptcy the low earth orbit internet business model failed. no doubt from the high costs of hundreds of satellites and launch costs, while ground based wi fi has taken over |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
Reed wrote:
snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
Smitty Two wrote:
In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
Smitty Two wrote:
In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Iridium was launched in late 1998. AMPS cell systems were available ~1985. I had a cellphone at least 7 years prior to the launch of Iridium. Iridium needs a clear view of the sky so it could never deliver the expectations people have for cell phone use. Its major niche was providing global service where other services couldn't. I think the major failure was they kept the price too high which scared people off. The equipment cost would never allow them to compete with terrestrial systems on price but users will pay for value. They could have acquired a much higher user base if they lowered their price. |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
Smitty Two wrote:
In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. If "millions of executives" would do this then why does Iridium only have about 250,000 subscribers? -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
On Aug 4, 1:16�pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
Smitty Two wrote: In article , �"J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , �"J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. �That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. �People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. �Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. �The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. If "millions of executives" would do this then why does Iridium only have about 250,000 subscribers? -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - iridium would of done better if it had been owned by a cell company with a twist. in no cell service areas, the phone would automatically go to sat mode. iridiums big problem, it took so long to get operational by that time most folks already had cell phones, which were smaller, cheaper, more convenient, and cell service areas were growing. |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
J. Clarke wrote:
Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. Iridium is still alive and providing communication services to your gummint. The company that stepped in and bought the infrastructure for pennies on the dollar (actually, less than 1/2 cent on the dollar, if you believe Wikipedia) after the bankruptcy was able to make a profit when they didn't have the debt service for putting 66 satellites in low earth orbit (72 if you count the on-orbit spares). Jerry (an ex-Motorolan who thankfully didn't work on Iridium) |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
Jerry wrote:
J. Clarke wrote: Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. Iridium is still alive and providing communication services to your gummint. The company that stepped in and bought the infrastructure for pennies on the dollar (actually, less than 1/2 cent on the dollar, if you believe Wikipedia) after the bankruptcy was able to make a profit when they didn't have the debt service for putting 66 satellites in low earth orbit (72 if you count the on-orbit spares). Jerry (an ex-Motorolan who thankfully didn't work on Iridium) Well, it's kind of alive. Iridium went under and a new company that called itself "Iridium" bought the pieces for 4/10 of a cent on the dollar or thereabouts. And they've managed to attract only about 250,000 customers vs the cell phone industry's 2 billion or so. Further, the satellites are going to start dying in a few years and so far the new Iridium has talked about new launches but not done any. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
On Aug 4, 7:15�pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
Jerry wrote: J. Clarke wrote: Cell phones are what _killed_ it. �Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. �The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. Iridium is still alive and providing communication services to your gummint. The company that stepped in and bought the infrastructure for pennies on the dollar (actually, less than 1/2 cent on the dollar, if you believe Wikipedia) after the bankruptcy was able to make a profit when they didn't have the debt service for putting 66 satellites in low earth orbit (72 if you count the on-orbit spares). Jerry (an ex-Motorolan who thankfully didn't work on Iridium) Well, it's kind of alive. �Iridium went under and a new company that called itself "Iridium" bought the pieces for 4/10 of a cent on the dollar or thereabouts. �And they've managed to attract only about 250,000 customers vs the cell phone industry's 2 billion or so. Further, the satellites are going to start dying in a few years and so far the new Iridium has talked about new launches but not done any. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - the original company came close to snding all the satellites on a last dive in the pacific as to avoid a fleet of derelict satellites. it was a close thing, like within a week |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
wrote:
On Aug 4, 1:16�pm, "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , �"J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , �"J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. �That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. �People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. �Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. �The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. If "millions of executives" would do this then why does Iridium only have about 250,000 subscribers? -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - iridium would of done better if it had been owned by a cell company with a twist. in no cell service areas, the phone would automatically go to sat mode. iridiums big problem, it took so long to get operational by that time most folks already had cell phones, which were smaller, cheaper, more convenient, and cell service areas were growing. Chuckle. Right now, over in the sandbox, the satt phone most contractors, TCNs, and even a lot of USGummint folks carry isn't Iridium (even though Uncle Sam is a defacto partner in that company, with their own ground node in Hawaii). It is a Europe/SWA/Africa company known as Thuraya. Smaller, cheaper (both hardware and minutes), and also supports GSM cell service where available. Government Iridium handsets are definitely retro-tech at this point- the charger bases even have a socket for the old motorola star-tac phones. No idea if they ever came out with a modernized civilian model. You don't buy a satt phone to impress people- they are too damn expensive for that. You buy one, reluctantly, because you NEED one. First-in comms until you get your dish-in-a-suitcase ground station set up, and aw-**** comms when the big dish gets blown away or up. But things are getting better over there- most areas with regular mains power also have functioning cell systems now. In that third of the world, what little last-mile copper ever got strung has withered away badly. A lot a areas never had it, and now most never will. -- aem sends... |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
On Aug 4, 10:06�pm, aemeijers wrote:
wrote: On Aug 4, 1:16 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. If "millions of executives" would do this then why does Iridium only have about 250,000 subscribers? -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - iridium would of done better if it had been owned by a cell company with a twist. in no cell service areas, the phone would automatically go to sat mode. iridiums big problem, it took so long to get operational by that time most folks already had cell phones, which were smaller, cheaper, �more convenient, and cell service areas were growing. Chuckle. Right now, over in the sandbox, the satt phone most contractors, TCNs, and even a lot of USGummint folks carry isn't Iridium (even though Uncle Sam is a defacto partner in that company, with their own ground node in Hawaii). It is a Europe/SWA/Africa company known as Thuraya. Smaller, cheaper (both hardware and minutes), and also supports GSM cell service where available. Government Iridium handsets are definitely retro-tech at this point- the charger bases even have a socket for the old motorola star-tac phones. No idea if they ever came out with a modernized civilian model. You don't buy a satt phone to impress people- they are too damn expensive for that. You buy one, reluctantly, because you NEED one. First-in comms until you get your dish-in-a-suitcase ground station set up, and aw-**** comms when the big dish gets blown away or up. But things are getting better over there- most areas with regular mains power also have functioning cell systems now. In that third of the world, what little last-mile copper ever got strung has withered away badly. A lot a areas never had it, and now most never will. -- aem sends...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - copper is retreating in the US, fibre although initially costly, is cheap to maintain. Heck scrap copper prices are so high its getting stolen off poles. |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. If "millions of executives" would do this then why does Iridium only have about 250,000 subscribers? - Because Iridium today isn't what Iridium was when it was launched. It was launched too soon. Now it's too late to repair the bad timing, and the bad image. And besides, there's no marketing going on. AISI, of course. |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
Smitty Two wrote:
In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. If "millions of executives" would do this then why does Iridium only have about 250,000 subscribers? - Because Iridium today isn't what Iridium was when it was launched. It isn't? What has changed about it? Hint--the one that has a bunch of dead satellites is Globalstar--all of Iridium's are still working fine--the service itself is _exactly_ as it was when launched except that since the investors were made to eat the startup costs in bankruptcy court the price per minute of airtime is less than it was then. It was launched too soon. Now it's too late to repair the bad timing, and the bad image. What's "bad" about the "image"? And besides, there's no marketing going on. AISI, of course. And yet I've heard of it and you've heard of it. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. If "millions of executives" would do this then why does Iridium only have about 250,000 subscribers? - Because Iridium today isn't what Iridium was when it was launched. It isn't? What has changed about it? Hint--the one that has a bunch of dead satellites is Globalstar--all of Iridium's are still working fine--the service itself is _exactly_ as it was when launched except that since the investors were made to eat the startup costs in bankruptcy court the price per minute of airtime is less than it was then. When I say it isn't the same, I'm talking about intangibles. A feeling, an image, a moment of glory and prestige. Now it's a rusty has-been. It was launched too soon. Now it's too late to repair the bad timing, and the bad image. What's "bad" about the "image"? And besides, there's no marketing going on. AISI, of course. And yet I've heard of it and you've heard of it. Not lately. I have a memory of it, and not just because my sister and her husband both worked at Motorola and had stock in it, but because of the grandiosity of the thing in the early days. Haven't heard a peep out of them for a number of years, although I confess I don't spend much time with radio, TV, magazines, or newspapers, so if they're still running ads then I'm misinformed. -- |
OT re Teledesic ( Magic Jack Latency Question)
Smitty Two wrote:
In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Smitty Two wrote: In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Reed wrote: snip BTW, a few years ago I heard of plans for a network of Low-Earth Orbit satellites, that would avoid this problem. I wonder what happened to that? snip check here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic I suspect the project died because it still had excessive latency, especially since they had to add an "internal" protocol to the network because the LEOs are not stationary in the sky. (never mind the *astronomical* cost(pun intended)) Iridium and Globalstar, both much less ambitious projects, failed to even come close to recovering the startup costs. That being the case, Teledisc was clearly a non-starter. People who need that kind of service will pay quite a lot for it, but not enough to pay for 800 satellites. -- Iridium was launched when cell phones were a rarity. If it had been launched today, it might have succeeded. Cell phones are what _killed_ it. Nobody's going to pay a buck-thirty a minute for satphone airtime when for a hundred bucks a month they can get unlimited cell phone airtime. The only people willing to do that are those who have to communicate from somewhere where there is no cell service. It's a niche product and the niche isn't big enough to pay for the launch costs. -- I see your point, but still I disagree. The whole concept of talking on a phone while wandering around (by foot, car, or mule) was new, novel, and somewhat gimmicky. Wireless communication wasn't seen as a necessity at all back then, the way it is now. Iridium missed the paradigm shift. Millions of executives now would happily pay that price to avoid dead zones and dropped calls. And the price would decline as the subscriber based went up. If "millions of executives" would do this then why does Iridium only have about 250,000 subscribers? - Because Iridium today isn't what Iridium was when it was launched. It isn't? What has changed about it? Hint--the one that has a bunch of dead satellites is Globalstar--all of Iridium's are still working fine--the service itself is _exactly_ as it was when launched except that since the investors were made to eat the startup costs in bankruptcy court the price per minute of airtime is less than it was then. When I say it isn't the same, I'm talking about intangibles. A feeling, an image, a moment of glory and prestige. Now it's a rusty has-been. To be a has-been it must have been. It's a rusty never-was. But that doesn't mean that it can't fill the same need it filled when it was launched. The trouble is that aside from the military and the press and a few other niches nobody has a need. And I find it difficult to believe that if "millions of executives" needed what it offered they wouldn't be finding and using it--if they can't say "Hey, minion, find me a way to yammer on the phone in the middle of the Matto Grosso" then they aren't particualarly capable executives. It was launched too soon. Now it's too late to repair the bad timing, and the bad image. What's "bad" about the "image"? And besides, there's no marketing going on. AISI, of course. And yet I've heard of it and you've heard of it. Not lately. If you know it exists that's sufficient for you to seek it out if you think it has something to offer. Since you're not a subscriber you clearly don't think it represents good value for your needs. I have a memory of it, and not just because my sister and her husband both worked at Motorola and had stock in it, but because of the grandiosity of the thing in the early days. Haven't heard a peep out of them for a number of years, although I confess I don't spend much time with radio, TV, magazines, or newspapers, so if they're still running ads then I'm misinformed. I don't recall ever seen an advertisement for their service. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:05 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter