Fibre to replace satellite?

[rpm]

Fibre to replace satellite?

Submarine cables will not replace satellite

 

[Kalvaer]

I can understand and agree with some really remote locations where the costs would out-weigh the benefits.

Though I really would like to see his "low latency" sat connections he is talking about. There is a huge difference to ensuring there is almost no delay when talking via a sat phone, to expecting 60ms pings to another location?

 

[pkid]

Fibre +1
Satellite -1

 

[MaD]

Fibre to replace satellite?

Submarine cables will not replace satellite

*cough*
Answering one's own question = first signs of madness!

 

[Kalvaer]

*cough*
Answering one's own question = first signs of madness!

MaD... OMW... Its alive... (ok it could be my own mis-guided view of the world but still)

I think Sats will one day over take fibre.. but only when we have crossed inter-galaxy travel, and found ways to transmit via lightwaves (without refraction) other than radiowaves.. until then.. Fibre is the only way.. or am I missing something

 

[Kalvaer]

OK scratch that... Just got explained to me that light and radio will move at the same speed.. so my argument is pointless

 

[spykoss]

I jau like satelite for the ease of connectivity, I hate wires and although I know fibre is the shizz, satelite is kinda spunky - wouldn't mind havin a 16Mbps satelite connection rather than a 16Mbps Telkom line (yes, I'm talkin distant future) provided the price was equivalent...

 

[ToxicBunny]

Why would you rather have a high latency wireless connection over a low latency wired connection if they were priced equivalently?

 

[zamicro]

Why would you rather have a high latency wireless connection over a low latency wired connection if they were priced equivalently?

Because it is like driving a fancy car: IMAGE

(EDIT: not that I would want satellite)