Where did you get that information? The last article I read (I believe TechCrunch) said the latency would be somewhat slower then cable (which isn't bad).
Both is kind of correct. I can't find the interview right now, but to paraphrase Elon's math: you have ~2 ms from earth to satellite + ~2 ms from satellite to earth + travel time throught the satellite network (which happens at speed of light in vacuum + routing delays). Normal fiber travels at the speed of light in fiber (which is significantly lower than speed of light in vacuum), and usually takes a route signifiantly longer than a straight line. In the end satellite could be faster, but in reality typical performance will be slighty slower than fiber (for example the datacenter is probably not directly connected to the satellite network, so you have the network route to the nearest uplink to account for)
> Normal fiber travels at the speed of light in fiber (which is significantly lower than speed of light in vacuum), and usually takes a route signifiantly longer than a straight line
A rule of thumb is that the speed of light in fibre is 2/3 the speed of light in air, or in a vacuum.
LEO satellites will have the ability to adjust faster to changing conditions than GSO will. Packet loss need not be any worse than any other wireless system.
There will be some rain fade, but can power through that by increasing power and/or temporarily reducing bandwidth to prevent packet loss.
Where did you get that information? The last article I read (I believe TechCrunch) said the latency would be somewhat slower then cable (which isn't bad).