I would assume that the BEAD funds would just go to offset the cost of the subscriber equipment.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 11:31 AM Ken Hohhof <khoh...@kwom.com> wrote: > Since you mention Starlink, answer this for me. They have expressed > interest in getting BEAD funds. How does that work? What specific > infrastructure gets built if a state awards them BEAD money? I’m not being > snarky, I genuinely don’t understand what they propose to do with the money > to bring service to those locations. > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Dan P via AF > *Sent:* Friday, August 9, 2024 11:09 AM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Cc:* Dan P <d...@webnx.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Hughesnet Fusion > > > > I assume hughes will die a quick death as even over subbed starlink will > miles ahead of it, and non over subed? Well its just laughable. We just > recently got one of the small portable ones and damn its pretty neat when > traveling. I was always a fanboy from the beta days but now its getting > pretty neat if you want to go get way off the grid and still have good i-net > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *dmmoff...@gmail.com > *Sent:* Friday, August 09, 2024 9:37 AM > *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Hughesnet Fusion > > > > Never seen it, but my employer in 2005 or so was a retailer for one-way > satellite with dialup return. It basically worked like that. They > referred to it as a “dialup return” and the literature described it as > using dialup for the uplink only, but in practice we found a lot of stuff > used the dialup for downlink as well. DNS obviously, but also email > traffic. I don’t remember what else, but I recall we were a bit surprised > by how much the satellite was NOT used. But if you think about it, every > dialup connection to their data center added another 24.6k of bandwidth, > while the satellite just is what it is. I say 24k because presumably > these were rural people with long loops and they were never getting 56k. > > > > Most people ended up on 2-way satellite because the cost was lower after > you accounted for a phone line and dialup account. > > > > I guess I’m saying it’s been done before and nobody liked it then, and > they won’t like it now. Maybe it’s a way for Hughes to try to stay > relevant so they can exploit the tail of the business cycle a little > longer. > > > > -Adam > > > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof > *Sent:* Friday, August 09, 2024 9:54 AM > *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* [AFMUG] Hughesnet Fusion > > > > Has anyone tried (or know somebody who has) Hughesnet Fusion? > > > > The scheme to reroute latency sensitive traffic over a cellular connection > sounds like a Rube Goldberg to me, and it seems like at that point you’d be > better off with Starlink, or 5G Home Internet from TMo or VZW. I mean, if > your important traffic is going over 5G, why not just use 5G. > > > > Does it actually work as promised, for things like gaming? > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
