Taara has just broken free from Alphabet and is making waves in the internet world with its cutting-edge laser technology. Its new approach promises faster speeds and lower costs than traditional satellite systems.
  • renard_roux@beehaw.org
    1·
    4 days 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
    • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
      2·
      4 days 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. (And I don’t know a lot about cost and alignment, so I don’t really know if that’s accurate and substancially more effort for lasers. They sure both cost some money and you have to point both at the receiver.)