Comment on 10 to 100 Times Faster than a Starlink Antenna, and Cheaper Than Fiber: Taara Unveils a Laser Internet That Could Shatter the Status Quo

HurlingDurling@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

• renard_roux@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Asked cgpt to compare lasers to microwave for data transmission; take with a grain of salt, but seems transfer rate especially isn’t comparable.

  ---

  🔄 Comparison: Laser vs Microwave Data Transmission

  📋 Comparison Table

  Feature	Laser Transmission (e.g., Taara)	Microwave Transmission
  Medium	Free-space optical (light, like a fiber-optic cable without fiber)	Radio/microwave frequencies (GHz range)
  Wavelength	~780–1600 nm (near-infrared)	~1–100 GHz
  Typical Data Rate	10–100 Gbps (Taara targets ~20 Gbps and higher)	100 Mbps – 1 Gbps (modern line-of-sight microwave)
  Max Practical Range	~10–20 km, highly sensitive to weather	~30–50 km, more tolerant of weather
  Line-of-Sight Requirement	Yes, with tight beam alignment needed	Yes, but more forgiving alignment
  Weather Sensitivity	High — fog, rain, dust degrade performance	Moderate — heavy rain can attenuate signal
  Latency	Low	Low
  Power Usage	Lower power for same data rate	Slightly higher power use
  Security	High — narrow beam, hard to intercept	Moderate — wider beam, easier to jam or intercept
  Deployment	Harder — requires precision mounting and stability	Easier — flexible mounting, ruggedized equipment
  Cost	Higher upfront (optical gear, alignment systems)	Lower per-unit, mature market
  Use Cases	High-throughput backhaul (rural, terrain-constrained areas)	Medium-throughput links, often as telco backbone

  ---

  📌 Key Insights

  • Bandwidth: Lasers have a much higher data capacity, similar to fiber optics. Microwave is far more limited in throughput.
  • Range: Microwave wins in raw distance, particularly in less-than-ideal weather. Lasers struggle with any visibility obstruction.
  • Stability: Lasers require precision alignment and environmental stability (wind, vibration can disrupt link). Microwaves are more forgiving.
  • Security: Lasers are harder to intercept due to their tight beams. Microwaves, being broader, are more vulnerable to eavesdropping and interference.

  ---

  🧠 When to Use What

  Use Laser Links (e.g., Taara) when:

  • You need fiber-like throughput without laying fiber
  • The link is short to medium range (under 20 km)
  • You can ensure clear line-of-sight and good weather conditions
  • You prioritize security and low interference

  Use Microwave Transmission when:

  • You need a reliable, moderate-speed link over 30–50 km
  • Operating in all weather conditions is a must
  • You want easier setup with more flexibility in alignment
  • Budget constraints are tighter

  source

  • hendrik@palaver.p3x.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    It is misrepresenting the facts quite a bit. I think microwave links might be able to do a bit more bandwidth. And laser can do way more than ChatGPT attributes to it. It can do 1 or 2.5 Gbps as well. The main thing about optics is that it comes without electromagnetic interference. And you don't need to have a fresnel zone without obstacles, and you don't need a license. The other things about laser being more susceptible to weather, etc should be about right.

    source
  • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Sooooo… microwave is still better, got it.

    source