TechWriter wrote:
way2roll wrote:
Over the next year we are looking to go full time . . .
(1) My internet demands aren't unusual so "normal" internet will suffice.
(2) We also plan on continuing to use our streaming devices for TV etc.
(3) My work provides a corporate account via ATT and I have truly unlimited internet - provided it's via an ATT supported device.
(4) But I think I need something a little more bullet proof than just a hot spot.
(5) We are touring the US, but logistics to maintain connectivity are a condition of planning.
(6) But what I do need is to ensure I have a pretty easy setup, to provide reliable internet.
Your "normal" Internet needs became much greater with (2) - streaming. To me, that means a reliable 5 Mbps connection. This can be an issue.
First, I've been a full timer for several years. Here is my Internet setup -- AT&T Mobley (unlimited), Verizon data plan (40 GB/mon), HughesNet Gen 5 satellite Internet. With these I was never without Internet last year. See my Campground Internet Report 2 (43 campgrounds).
With AT&T and Verizon coverage (+ campground WiFi), you should have "usable" Internet most of the time.
Though I've tried several, I typically don't rely on WiFi "boosters" because if you don't have a signal, then no amount of boosting will help. My HughesNet Gen 5 setup gets me out of those no signal situations because if you travel a lot, you'll find areas with very weak or no cell coverage.
I suggest you check out the Mobile Internet Resource Center.
Good info. Questions - your ATT Mobley - is that a plan or a device? Would this be the same as an ATT hostpot on my existing unlimited plan?
The hughesnet - I am assuming this requires some sort of a dome or dish, the former being self orienting and the latter being a manually positioned dish? Either seems like a costly investment. We only plan on full timing or 6 mos to a year, so I'd rather keep costs down. If I were to sell the house and FT forever, I can see where the cost is justified. I had Hughesnet years ago for Sat internet when we lived in a remote area. Latency was horrible. I ended up with a VZ hotspot and although signal was weak, it was bounds better than the HN. This was years ago and I am told things are much better now. A friend of mine is an engineer at HN, tells me things are night and day different than my old setup. I think the biggest issue with SAT is cost. But it also provides coverage where nothing else works. Would it be smarter to forego a hotspot altogether and just rely on SAT 100% or is there a line of sight issue that can make it unusable? Looks like their packages are pricey.
Are you advising against a booster altogether? I do know that no signal can't be boosted, but a weak signal that's boosted can mean the difference in being able to work or not. With my former jetpack, I know even tiny antenna sometimes made a big difference.
on Edit: I reviewed your internet report - as an analyst I geeked out on it - good info and very helpful. Seems like already having the ATT is a good bet, especially given where we plan on travelling. It also seems like having a VZ hotspot as a backup is smart, maybe on a limited plan. It does not seem like the hughesnet is a worthy investment given the length of time we plan on FT and the amount of coverage the 2 cellular plans offer. I did not see in your tests if you used a booster, wonder how that would have impacted the results.
Of course this all leads to more questions, like would I even need a router or repeater given that hotspots are in and of themselves routers? I want to keep my install clean and easy, but I also want to maximize my connection(s).
