I think the number one problem with satellite streaming is not really the gear (although that can be undeniably a big part of it as well) but it’s the process. The only potential fatal flaw I see there is hoping for the best when you’re trying to bounce the signal up to a satellite nearly 200 miles up and then back down again and expecting it to sound as good as a disc. Somehow, something tells me that process is just gonna be murder on the signal. We’ve more or less seen similar troubles crop up before when trying to run digital signals along lengths of wire. And yes, I know that in that case the signal is actually analog at that point, not digital, and I don’t really even know whether the beam to and from the satellite is in analog or digital form, but my point is simply that if transmitting the signal a short distance here on earth can give us fits, just try to imagine what the hurdles to overcome must be like for the 400 mi round trip...! In the end we may wind up with the technological service we desire, e.g. the one we thought we were getting, but I suspect it may take them a few attempts to get it right...and we’re still basically in the middle of our first commercial attempt. We may have to put this idea back in the oven to bake a little longer, but I’m guessing we’ll get there.
Maybe another way to look at that is, IMO, sending a hifi signal across the room via wifi OTOH, is a right good improvement over satellite streaming sq - maybe not q-u-i-t-e as good as disc - but rilly rilly close! Using better gear in that scenario, you’d think it would pay the dividends with sq that you might ordinarily expect to see. But, with satellite streaming I think the better gear might only go so far and then effectively no farther, really. At least for now. Hopefully they will get around to perfecting the satellite part of it.