Sarge_0321
join:2002-06-27
San Diego, CA | Number
Do these add up?
22% of households...
6 out of ten...
isn't that like 60%? Versus 22%?
What am I missing here? |
|
elboricua
El Subestimado
Premium
join:2001-08-12
Bronx, NY | 6 out of 10 have internet access, not necisarily broadband. |
|
93254336
Weapons Of Masturbation
Premium
join:2001-10-20
| 12% of U.S. homes now in the fast lane
60% have Internet access, 20% of that is broadband.
Thus: 0.6 * 0.2 = 0.12, or 12% of households in the US have Internet access via broadband.
- Dan
--
This message has been modified from its original version. It has been formatted to fit your brain. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| said by 93254336  :
60% have Internet access, 20% of that is broadband.
Thus: 0.6 * 0.2 = 0.12, or 12% of households in the US have Internet access via broadband.
- Dan
that's what i got. says 22% in the article - are we missing something? |
|
BK3
join:2001-04-10
Geneva, IL | reply to 93254336
Figured this myself, seems as if someone is playing with the numbers ......
--
Intelligent discussion is invited and encouraged. |
|
93254336
Weapons Of Masturbation
Premium
join:2001-10-20
| reply to nasadude
> that's what i got. says 22% in the article - are we missing something?
No, the way the DSLR article wording is imprecise.
The actual text of the report states:
"While Internet penetration has already reached 59% of US households, broadband will be in over one-fifth (22%) of US homes this year, rising to one-third (32.2%) by 2005..."
but the DSLR blurb says:
"...indicate that six out of every ten American homes have Internet access, with more than one-fifth of them making that link through broadband connections."
- Dan
--
This message has been modified from its original version. It has been formatted to fit your brain.
[text was edited by author 2003-04-09 20:00:52] |
|
alfnoid
Premium,MVM
join:2002-02-18
| whoever posted this article misread
While Internet penetration has already reached 59% of US households, broadband will be in over one-fifth (22%) of US homes this year, rising to one-third (32.2%) by 2005, according to eMarketer's new Broadband Worldwide report.
This is from the first link »www.emarketer.com/news/article.p···#article
It does not say that one fifth of all internet access is broadband, but rather broadband will be in over one-fifth of homes this year.
peace |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| reply to elboricua
Re: Number
Wow. What a poorly written newsblurb.
If you follow the link, it IS 22% of US households with broadband, not 22% of those with internet access.
On the second number, the 57 million and 154 million household figures are WORLDWIDE, not US.
Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
Ericthorn
It only hurts when I laugh
Premium
join:2001-08-10
Paragould, AR
clubs:   | Is it just me....
or does it seem that many of the articles you read about broadband, cable, dsl, internet access, etc.. seem to be written by people who only check email?
/humorous? |
|
newbieuser
join:2003-01-13
Quaker Hill, CT | reply to calvoiper
Re: Number
the 57 million and 154 million household figures fit in perfectly with their 22% and 60% numbers. it's not that well-worded, but you should be able to at least understand it... |
|
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | reply to Ericthorn
Re: Is it just me....
That makes absolutely no sense, whatsoever. |
|
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | reply to newbieuser
Re: Number
quote:
six out of every ten American homes have Internet access, with more than one-fifth (22%) of American homes making that link through broadband connections.
Makes perfect sense to me. |
|
DannyZ
Gentoo Fanboy
Premium
join:2003-01-29
Erie, PA
| reply to calvoiper
I think it will penetrate further than 32% by 2005
doh
[text was edited by author 2003-04-09 23:17:50] |
|
murdok6100
Avatar. Get It, Avatar?
join:2002-06-20
| BAH, it is what it is.
Broadband will grow, it will (and almost is) a tool to rope more and more people to pay a bill that we feel we "MUST" have.
Stats will always make us feel like we need to buy more or have more.
And are we debating the numbers only?
murdok610 |
|
TilhasBB
Formally Goden99
Premium
join:2000-08-05
canada
| reply to Sarge_0321
Re: Number
It makes sence why the numbers for highspeed seem low.
Compair price of what Americans pay for High speed with Canadians you realize Americans are getting ripped off big time.
Dsl 1.2Megabit is 35$/month Unlimited CANADIAN dollars here.
In US it's a Lot more for the same thing (don't know edzact numbers) |
|
gomer1701ems
join:2001-08-23
Minneapolis, MN
| reply to BK3
Re: 12% of U.S. homes now in the fast lane
said by BK3 :
Figured this myself, seems as if someone is playing with the numbers ......
Could it be the RIAA?
--
"This is beginning to look like a Raisin Bran commercial; two scoops of fruit!" |
|
master1000
join:2001-02-22
Fort Pierre, SD
|  The only way
The only way BB will penetrate deaper is if this cap BS is stopped. nobody wants to pay 50-60$ a month for somthing that in the middle of there "Broad band content" will instantly freeze and a window will pop up do you want to purchase more data? If these caps or the Tiered services offering 256kb you can't watch any kind of good quality live video on 256kb you need over 600kb and even then the video quality is crappy. so if BB content is going to become main stream then these caps have to go! |
|
dyoo78
join:2002-10-25
Emeryville, CA
| It should be closer to these figures...
OECD report was just issued a couple months ago... I was astonished to see that broadband access doubled in just 4 months! Yep folks, it's not the case. It's growing at a slow pace... |
|
creepndth
join:2000-12-21
San Francisco, CA
| As I study the graph carefully, I come to the conclusion that there are actually three distinct bars for each country, for dsl, cable and 'other broadband'... to get the total broadband subscribers for a given nation, it seems that you have to tally (or add up) each bar.
So, taking the USA for example, there are roughly 4-7% for each category. If you add those up, they come out to about 15-20% which seems to come close enough to the 1 in 5 (projected) figures quoted in the article, especially when you allow for new subscribers in the past 6-12 months.
Just my two cents as I interpret the graph, which could have been more clear IMO. If I'm somehow misunderstanding your point, my apologies, and feel free to comment!
Cheers!
Creep
[text was edited by author 2003-04-10 12:57:07] |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| reply to newbieuser
Re: Number
First off, DSLR has rewritten the blurb this thread is based on so it is less confusing now. While this was appropriate, it might be nice if they had tagged the revised article as having been revised. But it's nice to know that our various comments here do have some effect, somewhere!
Second, newbieuser, I don't see how the 57 million and 154 million numbers "fit perfectly" with the 22% and 59/60% numbers as the household numbers are 2002 and 2005 comparisons and the percentages are broadband vs. dialup, current year numbers.
Third, if 154 million households was 60% of the US, that would mean the US had about 256 million households--quite an accomplishment for a country with less than 300 million people. (Lots of second home deductions on the 1040, I guess....)
Sometimes I think too many people took speed reading....
Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
