Astranis vs Starlink: Satellite Coverage with GEO Deployment

In the ever-evolving realm of satellite technology, where every advancement inches humanity closer to a seamlessly connected world, Astranis emerges as a pioneering force, reshaping the dynamics of satellite deployment. While companies like Starlink have made significant strides in providing global internet coverage through constellations of small satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), Astranis is charting a different course by placing its satellites at Geostationary Earth Orbit (GEO), approximately 100 times farther away. This strategic positioning brings forth a myriad of benefits, fundamentally altering the landscape of satellite coverage and connectivity. 

Geostationary Earth Orbit, situated approximately 35,786 kilometers above the Earth's equator, holds a unique advantage:

What Does Elon Musk Starlink Look Like?

In a world increasingly dependent on internet connectivity, innovators like Elon Musk are constantly pushing the boundaries of what's possible. One such endeavor is the Starlink network, a revolutionary project that aims to reshape the way we access the internet.  What Elon Musk's Starlink network is, how it works, and the potential impact it could have on our digital lives.

What is Elon Musk's Starlink Network?  

What Is Super WiFi?

"Super WiFi" typically referred to a concept or proposal to use the unlicensed portions of the radio spectrum, primarily the unused or underutilized TV spectrum known as TV white spaces, to provide wireless broadband connectivity over longer distances and with better penetration through obstacles compared to traditional WiFi.

The idea behind Super WiFi is to leverage these lower-frequency bands to create wide-area wireless networks that can cover larger geographical areas and potentially provide internet access in rural and remote regions. By using lower frequencies, Super WiFi can have better signal propagation characteristics, making it suitable for reaching areas where traditional WiFi signals might struggle due to distance and obstructions.

However, it's important to note that as of my last update, Super WiFi had not become a widely deployed or standardized technology in the United States. Various technical, regulatory, and commercial challenges needed to be addressed before any large-scale implementation could occur.

How is Verizon's New 5G Home Gateway Any Better Than Fast Wifi?

Is it true that in many cases it is faster and cheaper than the internet or “WiFi” from your cable or telco company?  

Verizon 5G may be getting a lot bigger. Today Verizon exclusively revealed to PCMag that it's launching the first 5G home router powered by Qualcomm's long-awaited QTM527 antenna, which has the potential to greatly expand the range of the carrier's fast, but short-distance millimeter-wave 5G.

The new router, made by Wistron for Verizon, can be placed inside by a window, so there's no external install needed. A smartphone app guides you on where to put the unit. The device has Wi-Fi 6 and one Ethernet port. The Ethernet port is important because Verizon's millimeter-wave system is sometimes faster than the maximum speed of Wi-Fi routers; in tests in my neighborhood, I've gotten up to 1.7Gbps. Boulben said home users will get between 300Mbps and a gigabit.

For a while now, Verizon executives have been talking about this: the latest customer premises equipment (CPE) that is going to make its 5G Home fixed wireless access (FWA) offering so much more convincing. Well, it's finally coming to eight cities, including two new cities beginning on October 1 in Verizon's 5G Home Internet coverage area: Minneapolis and St. Paul.

The 5G Home Internet equipment, including a single-device 5G internet receiver and Wi-Fi router, was designed for the user to easily set up in their home. It comes in a single package and consumers can find the perfect location for mounting on a wall or window using a mobile app; the 5G gateway can confirm that a 5G signal is usable.

Wistron NeWeb Corporation (WNC), an Original Design Manufacturer (ODM) based in Taiwan, is the maker of the CPE hardware. Verizon announced that the home router is operated by the long-awaited QTM527 antenna from Qualcomm, which PC Mag first mentioned.

Verizon notes that including step-by-step instructions, all the user requires to install the unit is in the box. The operator didn't say how long it would take to set it up; during an earnings call in July, CEO Hans Vestberg suggested that he expected the self-installation to be less than an hour. It beats the old paradigm of waiting weeks for an installer to come into the home to set it up, although that didn't happen. Verizon is promising to do it for them for those who don't want to set it up themselves.

The company says that clients can expect average speeds of about 300 Mbps and maximum speeds of up to 1 Gbps, depending on the venue.

For Verizon subscribers, the cost of the service is $50 per month and $70 per month for non-Verizon subscribers. Verizon is tossing in YouTube TV for one month and Disney+ for one year for potential 5 G Home Internet users to entice customers. It also throws in a free Amazon Smart Home Package for smart home fans, which includes an Echo Display 5, Ring Stick Up Cam, Echo Dot, and Amazon Smart Plug. 

In areas of Chicago, Detroit, Houston, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, and Sacramento, Verizon provides its 5 G Home Internet service, in addition to Minneapolis and St. Paul. The new equipment is available in all those cities except Sacramento, where the 3GPP 5G New Radio (NR) variant will be converted by customers in 2021.

Through this service, Verizon has said it plans to be in parts of 10 cities by the end of 2020. According to a spokesman, the 5G Home Internet product is designed to use millimeter wave (mmWave) signals at 28 GHz and 39 GHz.

"The new 5G Internet Gateway from Verizon is a game-changer for our customers," said Frank Boulben, Verizon's SVP of Consumer Marketing and Products, in a statement. "The extension of 5G Home Internet to new markets with new and enhanced hardware would provide consumers with the convenience and efficiency to enjoy more digital interactions and increased productivity from the comfort of their home, with people spending more time at home during these tough times."

Verizon suggested earlier this year that it would not wait for its 5G Home service to be completely baked, introducing an FWA service using its 4G LTE network. The LTE service helps the company to grow and develop beyond its Fios and 5G Home footprints into more rural areas.

Back to School Cell Phone Data Issues?

Has Covid-19 crashed or congested our cell phone networks?  Are you experiencing a full cell phone signal but your data connection is slow or non-existent?

Are you experience more data congestion issues on your wireless network in the last six months since more people are working from home during the Coronavirus started?

We are looking for someone with some knowledge to help us write an article about how the wireless carriers are doing since more people are working from home. I and others have noticed a lot of bandwidth issues traveling around. Curious if you have any data on this?

Back-to-School Help for Students Without Internet. For millions of families, broadband access is a challenge. These resources can help bridge that digital divide.

The global internet will probably survive coronavirus, according to stats from Ookla Speedtest, but America's home service plans and the UK's 3G mobile networks might not.

Empty offices and full homes during the Coronavirus.

A new state-by-state report on America's K-12 students by Common Sense and Boston Consulting finds that almost 16 million students and 10 percent of teachers lack adequate internet or computing devices at home. Minority households are among the most affected. Though 18 percent of white homes lack broadband, the figure rises to 26 percent for Latinx homes and 30 percent for Black homes. The percentage is even higher among Native American house olds.

Read this excellent article and see where slow cell phone speeds are happening.

Are 5G Phones Worth It? 5G vs Fiber to the Home

5G vs Fiber to the Home

Are 5G Phones Worth It?  Our overall assessment is that 5G isn't worth it at this time and you should focus on getting fiber to your home to achieve 500Mbs to 1Gbps speeds.  You home is where you need these speeds the most and you really don't need these speeds in your car or on the road.  Here are some additional reasons why 5G is a waste at this time and instead invest in fiber to your home. 

5G phones are fast, but it's not yet worth the money to get it currently. The networks are small and very inconsistent and you have to choose a phone specifically to get 5G. They're way too expensive, and aren't the best phones available on the market today.

Looking at consumer-ready 5G coverage maps in the U.S. in 2020 it is a frustrating balance of hype and the typical network overstatement of what the networks really are like. Verizon and Sprint were the first wireless carriers to roll out a 5G consumer-ready mobile network, and while the speeds are impressive the coverage maps are not.

Verizon doesn't show 5G specific coverage areas on its regular network coverage map, and instead offers a list of neighborhoods within specific cities that should have 5G coverage in theory.

To Sprint's credit, it has started showing its 5G coverage alongside its 4G and 3G coverage on the their regular Sprint network coverage maps. You have to look for it specifically in the markets Sprint lists to have 5G already, and zoom in to an appropriate map level where you can see its distinction from 4G.

Tests have shown download speeds well over 500Mbs to 1Gbps when there is a clear view of the cell tower. During peak usage locations speeds inevitably drop with more devices on the tower.  The strange thing about using 5G phones is it requires the phones to be in a specific location to receive the faster speeds.  Often a few feet can be a huge difference in download speeds.  Objects can often blog a signal from a cell phone tower to a phone.

It's easy to see the potential of 5G speeds networks when you experience fast downloads.  Expectations have to be tempered by the reality that the networks just aren't large yet. So even if you're lucky enough to live in one of the very specific areas with 5G coverage, and already use that carrier, you may still be disappointed by how often you can actually get and hold a signal.

I am also very curious why someone needs such high speed downloads to their phones while traveling?   Maybe if you are streaming super high quality video or gaming.  However, these speeds are already attainable on most WiFi networks at home or at the office.  It remains to be seen what mobile applications will require 1Gbps speeds.  Please comment below if you know of any consumer related applications that will require such fast speeds. 

Overall I don't think 5G is worth the price yet and think its best to wait.  4G LTE is already pretty good when you can get coverage.  I think the carriers would be better service filling in the network coverage gaps on freeways and in rural areas where they don't have coverage.  5G marketing hype is worth a read as well.  There has also been lots of speculation that some of the small cells and 5G cell phone towers might be emitting too much radiation for nearby residences.  Read this article on living near a 5G cell tower.    

Top 25 Cable Provider Coverage Map

 Some of the prominent cable operators in the U.S. include:

Frontier Billing Problems

Ever since Verizon FIOS was acquired by Frontier customers in Southern California have been experiencing massive problems.  Frontier continues to have customer billing problems.  Several customers have experienced problems with their automatically billing and notifications

Even if you have automatic billing on your account the company has not charged many customers.  Instead of notifying you that your credit card or account is past due.  Frontier simply shuts off your TV or internet service.  This has happened to several customers in the area.

To make problems worse, departments within Frontier do not talk to each other.  You first have to speak with collections and then collections send you to another department.  It often takes 5 to 10 calls just to reach the right person who knows how to turn your service back on.  It is probably the worst customer experience ever.  The amount of incompetence by customer service teams is really amazing.

Time Warner / Spectrum was hanging around our office building.  They were able to hook up internet service in less than 12 hours.  We dumped Frontier's service today after waiting 6 days for the service to come back on.

I would not be surprised to see this company go into bankruptcy or see a private equity company come in a buy them out.  The number of drastic changes that need to happen are obvious to everyone in the marketplace and their stock price reflects this.

See all the Tweets below about the problem.

Tweets about @askfrontier

Tools for Emergency Responders to Combat Dead Zones

A lack of coverage can be inconvenient in the best of circumstances, but for first responders in an emergency situation, it can be hazardous. A poor signal or dead zone can lead to miscommunication between first responders, and even cause casualties when the time of response is critical. However, technology can be used to bridge the gaps when necessary. Here are a few ways that emergency responders can improve reception in the field.

Advance Preparation

The FCC recommends taking the time to prepare for this type of situation, identifying your processes with communication or IT technology in advance. Take all necessary actions to protect computers and secure equipment before storms, and back up databases at key moments. There are three federal programs in the USA that can provide for call queuing. The Wireless Priority Service Program can improve connections for authorized national security or emergency preparedness mobile numbers, but these must be prioritized in advance.

Data Storage Systems

Part of advance prep is backing up databases. One potential solution is to use the power of the cloud to store data at distances away from the dead zones. If the infrastructure has failed, the cloud storage can be used as a backup. This is particularly important after the fact, when responders need access to data collected during the event. Because cloud storage can be adjusted to scale, it works in a variety of situations on the ground.

Portable Broadband

Another useful tool in dead zones is a portable mobile broadband network. Often when a natural disaster hits an area, the telecommunications networks are the first things to fall. Portable networks are one way to address this common problem. Telecom providers have been working on these portable networks which can then be used for emergency situations. For example, Nokia Networks public safety solutions include their “broadband in a box,” which transmits its own network within a small area. It can be brought directly into the dead zone where emergency workers are traveling so that they don’t miss out on any vital communications.

Unmanned Drones

Drones are now used increasingly in the public safety sector. One area where they’re frequently used is in combating forest fires. Drones can be designed for any particular situations, whether it’s to withstand extreme temperatures or fit in small spaces. A drone can go to areas where reception may be poor, and take high-quality audio or video recordings to transmit back to the first responders. This gives the emergency responders access to real-time data before they enter the dead zone, which is useful on multiple levels. They can also be used a form of communication by hosting communication platforms. This is particularly useful in rural areas where they may not be a usual network, or in urban areas where the network has gone dead due to the disaster situation.

Technology now plays a major role in public safety, but it’s important for responders to be able to communicate in areas where there is no regular mobile service. With access to portable networks, responders can access emergency response apps, send out SMS alerts to citizens, and stay in touch with all members of the team. This can help save lives even in the most rapidly changing emergency environments. 

Google TV & Broadband Internet $70 Month

How many people are sick of paying $200 per month for cable, internet, phone and TV that you hardly use?  Most people don't realize it but we are all subsidizing channels like ESPN for those who don't necessarily watch the channels.  If Google launches a Nationwide fiber to the home network as it is testing in Kansas City, Missouri.

The traditional cable TV industry like Time Warner, Verizon FiOS, AT&T U-Verse, Comcast are going to be in big trouble protecting their margins if this happens.  The only reason they would disrupt the traditional cable monopolize is because they will likely make more money from local targeted advertising.

Here are some highlights from this article at FastNetNews below..

Sergei Brin and the team at Google want to move ahead on a plan to run fiber to 10’s of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of homes. That’s implied by the $70/month price, which is high enough to be quickly profitable if 20-30% of homes sign on. Google’s research says they’ll get that high a rate, but no one is sure until they actually offer the service to 170,000 homes in Kansas City.

The box has two terabytes, enough for 500-1000 hours of HD video and/or a fine home music collection. It also has eight tuners, so it’s almost impossible to have a problem with too many simultaneous shows. With two HD channels fitting in 7 meg and almost no sites effectively downloading at more than a meg or two, it's rare for most people to max out at 10 meg. For the small amount of time they do, many aren't willing to pay.

There is empirical examples of surprisingly low high speed take rates from Sweden, France, Britain, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, and California. A difference of $10 to $30 discourages 3/4ths of the customers. Google is looking for $70/month for a gig, compared to 10 meg cable at about $50 and 3 meg DSL at about $35. Cable in Kansas City can easily offer 20 or 30 meg for the same price and possibly 50-100 meg.

A $50 difference between 10 meg cable and 50-100 meg DOCSIS has been standard in the U.S. and the take rate on the higher speeds has been so low no company will reveal it. Cablevision is coming down to $70 and we’ll soon know if it helps. All of these prices are approximations and available with different deals and bundles, of course, so none of these comparisons are exact.

HBO and other networks are refusing to sell to Google at a price Google considers reasonable.

10 Reasons Why The FCC is a Joke

1) FCC evaluates competition locally and not Nationally. Are they stuck in the '90's?
2) FCC is funded by Verizon, AT&T & Comcast, and not taxpayers.
3) No transparency & FCC complaints go into a mysterious black hole

4) FCC thinks rural carriers have a fair competition with National carriers.
5) FCC violated our trademark and tried to replicate our dead zones service.
6) FCC trusts AT&T lies and propaganda.
7) It takes 10 years for FCC to force Verizon & AT&T to roam for regional carriers
8) FCC tried to ban cell phone signal boosters at the request of carriers
9) FCC refuses to acknowledge consumers getting screwed and our data.

10) FCC Staffers leaving to become a lobbyist for telecom companies.

Cox Location Based Advertising

Cox has been testing location-based advertising in Arizona and San Diego for their TV and broadband customers.  However, are they going to bring the same location-based advertising to mobile phone or wireless?  Cox has been very secretive about their plans in wireless and I only ask this question to try and get some answers that have not been covered by bloggers or the media.  Will their mobile location based advertising be for WiFi or their own regional wireless network?  Are they working with other carriers to roam on their network?  How many customers do they have and who is using their services?   Do they have enough customers to scale the advertising properly?   Please ad your suggestions and comments are below.  

How does location based advertising work for broadband and TV subscribers?  According to the Cox web site their: location-based advertising helps deliver offers and incentives from national brands and local businesses with content tailored to your area. Location based advertising uses your zip code, including the last four digits, to identify your area and display relevant ads.

Why The FCC is One Big Puppet Show

10 Reasons Why the FCC is a Joke

Despite the enforcement "lip service" you hearing from FCC Chairman Genachowski and Commissioners in the media about net neutrality or the big merger, the FCC is not working for you the consumer and are simply puppets of the carriers.  Here are two very important reasons why it's a failed organizational structure.  #1) The FCC refuses to publicly acknowledge or regulate the difference between actual vs theoretical cellular/broadband coverage and therefore cannot accurately enforce competition.  #2)  99% of their $500M of annual funding for 1,900 employees does not come from the taxpayers and comes directly from fees paid by the carriers themselves.  

One of the biggest arguments in the AT&T and T-Mobile merger is that there is sufficient wireless competition and rural coverage and therefore the merger of two large carriers should be allowed.  We would argue this is totally false and we can provide thousands of consumer-reported examples of where consumers can only get one carrier and sometimes 0 in certain cases.  Competition isn't fair on a regional basis and must be carefully audited by the FCC before allowing the merger to go through.  However, the FCC can't do this because they lack the resources to do it and continue to ignore the dead zone data we generate.  This is a huge failure on the part of the Government and will come back and bite all consumers if this continues.

DeadCellZones.com has reached out to the FCC for help numerous times over the last decade and asked them to take our consumer-reported dead zone data for free.  However, the FCC would rather "try" and generate their own data to mask the problems so they don't piss off their carrier constituencies.  So what did the FCC do?   They responded by launching their own FCC "Dead Zones" reporting website a 10 years later which has failed miserably.  However, their dead zone reporting tool was "designed to fail" because the FCC doesn't really want to know the truth or regulate the wireless carriers' false coverage claims.

Folks it gets even weirder with some questions that were asked of us by FCC executives.  They asked us "why we have created dead zone the maps"?  My answer is always because its the right thing to do by showing the deficiencies of a Government agency that doesn't really work on the consumer's behalf to regulate.  It was the aha moment for me to show there is way too much corruption between the FCC and the companies they regulate.  We won't stop what we are doing until the Government and the carriers themselves acknowledge why and what we are doing is good for consumers.  A little like "David vs Goliath".

The FCC is a "Government-regulated entity" that is funded by the companies they are supposed to be regulating and not the taxpayers.  Its a huge corrupt game the public does not understand and the financial media ignores.  The FCC has 1,900 employees and is supposed to act as an "independent agency" of the US government with an approximate budget of $466 million which is funded by measly $1 million in taxpayer appropriations and the rest in regulatory fees paid by the largest US telecom companies: AT&T (NYSE: T), Verizon (NYSE: VZ), T-Mobile (NYSE: DTEGY), Sprint (NYSE: S), Cox, Comcast (Nasdaq: CMCSA), TimeWarner (NYSE: TWX), Cablevision (NYSE: CVC), etc.  The mission of every employee at the FCC is to write policy but does that really regulate if no one does anything or takes action?  Does this sound like an independent agency or a puppet agency with 99% of its' revenue coming from the companies it regulates?

AT&T is claiming this based on theoretical coverage maps not actual coverage that real customers try and receive.  The reason Deadcellzones.com was started almost 12 years ago was that carriers were being dishonest about where they were providing coverage.  In this decade coverage and speeds have expanded a lot but the same problem still exists.  No entity is auditing the coverage maps and the actual coverage that the carriers claim to provide.  This lack of oversight only hurts the smaller consumer who lives out in the middle of Iowa or Kansas in rural America.

Related Stories:
Rural Wireless Customers Have Fewer Choices
Wireless Consumers Are Getting Screwed

How to Cancel AT&T U-Verse Without Fees

Swear to AT&T Customer Service Reps

Here is a great example of how many large companies deal with internal customer service problems.  Rather than solve the problems it's more efficient to use online reputation management strategies and bury the complaints or terminate your own customers.  It's easier for these corrupt giants to terminate disruptive customers versus trying to improve service because they know consumers have few choices. This story we discovered in the LA Times highlighting a new provision in AT&T's contract now stipulates that the company can cancel your service "if you engage in conduct that is threatening, abusive or harassing" to the company's workers, or for "frequent use of profane or vulgar language" when dealing with customer service reps. If AT&T terminates your contract and service they won't charge early termination fees to anyone it decides to cut off or drop. So, I would hate to put creative ideas into your head but if you're pissed off about data usage caps, higher fees, or have to move your house.  You might think about using some creative profanity if you feel like the corporate giant is being unfair. AT&T U-Verse can have inserted language in the new contract allowing it to unilaterally upgrade your U-Verse DSL service without you knowing.

This is not an endorsement of how to terminate the contract.  We are simply highlighting how AT&T would rather not deal with problems directly and would rather fire their own customers.