Hi all,

We live in a rural America; where only crappy broadband internet is available, and we have no access to cable TV.

We're thinking of getting rid of our home telephone (which we only keep for broadband), and canceling our Dish TV (thieves). We are considering ViaSat or HughesNet- in conjunction with YouTube TV, Hulu TV, or some other internet TV provider. We're not gamers, nor would I consider us data hogs.

Which service is better- ViaSat or HughesNet?
I know what their advertised cost is; but what is the REAL cost of satellite service?

I'd appreciate any other thoughts. Thanks!

I have had Excede (ViaSat) for several years. (No other choices available till recently). Started with the 10gb per month plan but found 3-4 times per year would go over and have to purchase more data. I changed the plan to the 15gb/month plan and guess what? Still go over data several times per year. No change in users on this end, no neighbors closer than 700ft. We do not stream or game so I think it is a ripoff. No experience with HughsNet but I would think very similar to ViaSat. DSL is supposed to be installed soon-coil of wire actually hanging off pole about 40ft from house. Once we get that, will also be done with Dish TV.

Mike

We’ve always lived in rural areas. No options for broadband internet? That’s proven to be the most satisfactory for us. Had HughesNet for a couple years. Didn’t like it. Expensive, not terribly reliable (as I recall), and when we told them we were leaving their service, they offered more download speed. Don’t know anything about the other service

I would go cellular long before I went satellite. We have long-range Wifi (tower is about a mile as the crow flies) and get 4mbit down & 1mbit up. Sling worked well with 1 stream, mediocre to good with 2 & crashed hard with 3. Went back to satellite when we had a kid.

I wouldn't do streaming TV with any network that has a data cap, you can't control the bandwidth the TV uses very well.

I have heard nothing but negative about Hughesnet. Satellite tends to be expensive and not very reliable.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
I have heard nothing but negative about Hughesnet. Satellite tends to be expensive and not very reliable.

^^^This. One (very small) step better than dial-up. Slow, data caps, weather sensitive.

I dropped it in a skinny minute when DSL became available.

I've heard the same about Hughesnet, all bad. If there's a wired option like DSL that's likely best. A wireless option from a transmitter in a nearby city / tower might work, but reliability and connection issues can be common.

Some people set up dedicated microwave connections, but that requires technical people that know their stuff and may not be cheap.

I’ve had Hughes net & Excede. But got away from them both years ago.
If there is ANY kind of wired option, stay away from satellite.
Especially if you stream anything other than the occasional Pandora station.
Satellite has a lot of latency. Gaming is no bueno with long ping times reaching into 4 digits at some points.
Once my kids got old enough to have access to electronics, my data plan would only last a few days. Back with Hughesnet I’d have to buy a token to reset my connection. That drive the prices up real quick.
With excede seems like they just slowed the connection down (like to 100k or something) when I overshot my data plan.

I dislike my local phone company very much, but DSL through them is my only economical option.
Before they got DSL pushed out to me, my only option was bonded T1 lines. $200.00+ a month for 3mb up & down.
Wasn’t too bad when I was running my networking business from home, but w/o the business income to offset it...WAY too expensive.
Problem was, I signed a 5 year contract to optimize discounts. Contract wasn’t up until this past month. I’ve now turned in a disconnect notice for the T1 lines, s’posed to have DSL installed Monday.