ViaSat (Formerly Exceed)

[RNeumann]

We have Viasat here (Excede/WildBlue). We can't get cable OR DSL at our house, so it's our only viable option. We tried HughesNet first but it was really bad. That was about 6 years ago, but we dumped it before signing directly with Viasat. Note that at that time, HughesNet actually leased space from the Viasat satellite to provide service... Not sure if they still do or if HughesNet actually has their own satellite now.

We are grandfathered on an older plan which gives us 150GB for $109/mo. It's expensive, but since we need it for business and for the kids, we don't have a choice. It's definitely better than it used to be (have had it for about 5 years) and like another poster mentioned, the newer modem made a big difference.

Here's a SpeedTest I just did now (with the SpeedTest Android app): 14 MB/s Down, 3 MB/s Up.View attachment 554772

The ping speed is tough. Typical wired speed is <50ms. 150GB is good.

 

[oosik]

I laugh - TSO, you can't get cable or DSL. I can't get cable, I can't get DSL, I can't get ANY land line type service. Including telephone or TV. Everything I have is via satellite & cell tower. When we first move here in 1982 - I contacted the telephone company for service. They would provide service if I ran the underground cable from the county road to my house - at that time the estimated cost - $28,000. I had two complete years of total bliss - NO PHONE. Then along came the Motorola bag phone and my coefficient of irritation skyrocketed.

Fortunately - the electric utility co-op was reasonable and we, at least, have electricity.

 

[TSO]

Yeah, ping speed definitely sucks. Something about how the transfer system is idled until demand is present, which is what causes the latency

 

[TSO]

I laugh - TSO, you can't get cable or DSL. I can't get cable, I can't get DSL, I can't get ANY land line type service. Including telephone or TV. Everything I have is via satellite & cell tower. When we first move here in 1982 - I contacted the telephone company for service. They would provide service if I ran the underground cable from the county road to my house - at that time the estimated cost - $28,000. I had two complete years of total bliss - NO PHONE. Then along came the Motorola bag phone and my coefficient of irritation skyrocketed.

Fortunately - the electric utility co-op was reasonable and we, at least, have electricity.

The cable company offered me a similar deal for $16000 !

 

[3Ts]

You all are getting off cheap, our cable was offered at $38,000 about 20 years ago. We still don't have it. We have electricity and a basic land line. Our cell phones don't work out here, we have to go into town about 10 miles to get a signal, nor can we get DSL. Satellite is the only option here and we pay for 15 MB down and typically get 1 to 3 MB down with an occasional trip up to 5 MB. This is with Hughes net. I know they have a higher speed offer now, but if I'm at 10% of what I'm supposed to get, why pay more for no improvement in speed?

 

[TheMan419]

Our cable company did not even give us an offer to bring the cable down the road! Att repair man basically admitted they hope we terminate service so they don稚 have to maintain equipment.

Likely going to sign with Viasat in June. Too many projects going on in May to baby sit an installer.