RE:RE:StarLink Starlink doesn't have the scalability to meaningfully compete in densely populated urban areas and I don't think that's their target market anyways. Each of their satellites can only provide a limited amount of bandwidth shared among customers connected to each satellite. Just googling it, one answer says each satellite has 20Gbps capacity shared among users. Granted, that means a satellite can support 2000 customers at 100Mbps which is a speed that can support the needs of many customers currently.
Compare that to Telus' fiber to the home which currently has standard plans starting at 300Mbps and topping at 1.5Gbps download speeds to each home. And the top plans will likely grow to 10Gbps in the upcoming years. FTTH upload speeds are significantly faster than Starlink too. It's way more bandwidth than an average person needs today but applications will likely be developed to utilize that bandwidth when it become more widely available.
Wired connections will also more stable than a satellite connection that is susceptible to inclement weather like heavy rain and obstructions like trees. In addition, that's why bundling of other Telus services (phone, tv, and security) through the same fiber connection is so important to Telus' strategy.
Where Starlink will likely compete well against Telus (and Shaw) are more rural and remote locations where it's not economically feasible to cover with their fiber footprint or 5G wireless footprint. Telus' competing offering would be a fixed point 5G wireless connection which would likely be competitive in price, functionality, and performance. However, even then, Telus will not have 5G wireless coverage everywhere whereas Starlink can be set up at a cabin in the weeds, a boat/cruiseship, a plane, or mobile with you in an RV for example. These are Starlink's key usecases IMO and I would consider getting it if I had one of these specific situations. However, even then Starlink doesn't have coverage everywhere yet either.