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

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."

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)

How well does majic jack work with cable internet..Anyone using one..?

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...

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

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...

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

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.

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

"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

wrote:

the cell phone tech folks at the stores know nearly
nothing about remote antennas.

That is a gross understatement. The cell phone store
people make the nitwits at Radio Shack look like
scientists.

Dick

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

"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

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

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

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))

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

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)

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.

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)

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.

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.

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)

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.

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)

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)

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

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...

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.

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.

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)

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.



--

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)