WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Related to Modems, Hotspots, Dongles ONLY
User avatar
JimHelms
Site Admin
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:59 pm
Location: DFW Texas
Contact:

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by JimHelms » Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:36 pm

From a post on the Hacks FB Group:

5TB ATT Data Usage.jpg
5TB ATT Data Usage.jpg (17.56 KiB) Viewed 1209 times

xdavidx
Posts: 267
Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 4:04 pm

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by xdavidx » Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:43 pm

And they still have over 15% of their cycle to go! That's some heavy usage.

1337Jess
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 10:18 am

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by 1337Jess » Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:52 pm

xdavidx wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:23 pm
Some AT&T users are being shut down?

I figure that AT&T knows what is going on, but they are making money, so they don't care. It keeps people away from their competitors. And with deprioritization, it shouldn't affect other customers, so a win-win for everyone.

But I do wonder if the landscape will change and when there are hiccups, I sometimes do think the worse. :lol: There are other 3rd party services that buy in bulk from the main carriers and provide unlimited service. It just costs more than the iPad plan. Those are my Plan B.

Starlink, from SpaceX, will provide some competition, but that's mostly for fixed location internet. Hopefully it will still have some effect on pricing of cellular providers. Pricing also gets interesting when the cellular providers go all in on unlimited, fixed location internet service (home internet service).
I wasnt speaking about AT&T users specifically. I meant across the board. Like how Verizon can tell if your device is being used as a hotspot so the throttle the bandwidth. Things like that. I feel like that will become more common as time goes on.

Isnt Starlink just a system of satellites? Isnt that what we are all trying to avoid by using LTE? Unless Musk can combat the terrible latency and unreliability issues of your typical satellite carrier then I'm sticking to LTE. But you never know, that guy seems to always have surprises up his sleeve.

1337Jess
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 10:18 am

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by 1337Jess » Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:53 pm

JimHelms wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:36 pm
From a post on the Hacks FB Group:


5TB ATT Data Usage.jpg
Im curious what exact plan this user has...

User avatar
JimHelms
Site Admin
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:59 pm
Location: DFW Texas
Contact:

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by JimHelms » Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:06 pm

1337Jess wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:53 pm
Im curious what exact plan this user has...
Not sure. Did not say.

xdavidx
Posts: 267
Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 4:04 pm

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by xdavidx » Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:14 pm

1337Jess wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:52 pm
I wasnt speaking about AT&T users specifically. I meant across the board. Like how Verizon can tell if your device is being used as a hotspot so the throttle the bandwidth. Things like that. I feel like that will become more common as time goes on.
Ah, I see. Let's hope not. :D
1337Jess wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:52 pm
Isnt Starlink just a system of satellites? Isnt that what we are all trying to avoid by using LTE? Unless Musk can combat the terrible latency and unreliability issues of your typical satellite carrier then I'm sticking to LTE. But you never know, that guy seems to always have surprises up his sleeve.
Starlink is a different animal. HughesNet type solutions are geostationary orbits, way the heck up there, hence the latency issue. Starlink, and other solutions that are planned, are low earth orbit. Because they are low earth orbit, they need to move relative to the earth to stay in orbit. And because of that, they need many more satellites. They will create a grid around the earth of thousands of orbiting satellites and the antenna on the ground will track their movements and switch off from one to another as they whiz by overhead. It isn't mechanical tracking, however. It uses beamforming, so there aren't moving parts.

Because these are in various low earth orbits (they won't all be at the same altitude, but they'll all be *much* closer than the geostationary satellites), the latency is lower. We're talking about 30ms type latency vs the 600ms type latency of geostationary satellite internet.

Speeds to end users are unknown at this point in time, but best guess is many hundreds of mbps or gigabit speeds.

xdavidx
Posts: 267
Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 4:04 pm

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by xdavidx » Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:21 pm

Oh, and although there might be some sort of throttling or deprioritization, I would be very surprised if there are data caps with the Starlink system like there are with geostationary services. Assuming things don't fall apart with the LEO systems, I see the geostationary services going away.

motoguy
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:09 am

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by motoguy » Wed Sep 18, 2019 12:40 am

https://youtu.be/k73AFybi7zk

Video of how Starlink will work. Good coverage, would hate to plot a manned trajectory through that cloud. Reminds me of the snowballing collision at the beginning of "Gravity". LOL

As mentioned, the Starlink constellation will be about 350 miles up, vs the current ~25,000 miles of the Hughesnet type birds. That's where the huge reduction in latency comes from.

xdavidx
Posts: 267
Joined: Tue May 28, 2019 4:04 pm

Re: WG3526-P \ EM7565 slow speeds

Post by xdavidx » Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:23 pm

motoguy wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 12:40 am
https://youtu.be/k73AFybi7zk

Video of how Starlink will work. Good coverage, would hate to plot a manned trajectory through that cloud. Reminds me of the snowballing collision at the beginning of "Gravity". LOL
I've thought that same thing!

Thanks for posting the latest video from Mark Handley. The thing I can't figure out is how they are going to support enough people under each of those overlapping, circular, coverage areas with the capacity of each satellite (10 Gbps). I think they'll need to increase it by a couple orders of magnitude, and even then, it won't be an ultra fast connection, but might support enough people who have poor options where they live, and allow them to stream video concurrently. But with the current capacity, it will need to be a very sparsely populated area of paying users in order for them to have reasonable, concurrent speeds.

Now, there are those out there who will say that it is only meant for very sparsely populated areas. But there are plenty of not so sparsely populated areas that have horrible access to high speed internet. And I see a problem of too many of them jumping on this thing and fighting with each other for limited bandwidth. It will be interesting to see if they limit which geographic areas can subscribe, or they put a limit on how many can subscribe, or how they are going to handle it. They *could* make people pay for a quota of bandwidth per month, but everything I've seen seems to indicate that they are against that idea, since that is one of the thing people hate about the higher latency satellite internet systems (besides the high latency). And if they do that, they will limit it to only low bandwidth use, which would be a shame.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post