Forum Discussion
BirdDog wrote:Thanks for the input and I get what you're saying but I look at it more as the whole if a global system I guess.
That's what I thought, that it's supposed to be a global system. I thought that being a global system was the whole point of it.
GabeU wrote:
BirdDog wrote:Thanks for the input and I get what you're saying but I look at it more as the whole if a global system I guess.
That's what I thought, that it's supposed to be a global system. I thought that being a global system was the whole point of it.
Yea, maybe 10's of millions customers versus 3-4. Again, I'm not the designers, engineers or funders. Only trying to get an understanding and discussing here because we are nerds.
- GabeU8 years agoDistinguished Professor IV
- C0RR0SIVE8 years agoAssociate Professor
It may be a global system, but you take the amount of satellites that will be over any given area at a given time, unless there are enough customers in that region, their costs will be a good bit higher to help offset costs of the network/satellites. I am willing to bet people State-side would see the highest costs of anyone, to help off-set costs for low-income regions, and because we have such a small amount of people that would use the system.
Either way, I still stand by something I said a long while back, it's not going to work the way people want it to work. and will probably never see the light of day.- GabeU8 years agoDistinguished Professor IV
C0RR0SIVE wrote:I am willing to bet people State-side would see the highest costs of anyone, to help off-set costs for low-income regions, and because we have such a small amount of people that would use the system.
No doubt.
C0RR0SIVE wrote:Either way, I still stand by something I said a long while back, it's not going to work the way people want it to work. and will probably never see the light of day.
This is what I'm thinking, too, or at least it will be a lot longer off than what they suggest.
Related Content
- 5 months ago
- 4 years ago
- 6 months ago
- 4 years ago