Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
 ·Comcast
| reply to MASantangelo
Re: Many Changes at the FCC...
said by MASantangelo  :3) What is the current requirement? I've not heard much on it. According to the FCC, if 1 person in a zip code qualifies for broadband, then the entire zip code is considered to be broadband ready.
--
YourIP.US - Quickly Locate Your IP! |
|
MASantangelo
Premium
join:2004-07-19
Pittstown, NJ | That's just ridiculous... |
|
Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
| said by MASantangelo :That's just ridiculous... Yep.
--
YourIP.US - Quickly Locate Your IP! |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to Rob
said by Rob :said by MASantangelo :3) What is the current requirement? I've not heard much on it. According to the FCC, if 1 person in a zip code qualifies for broadband, then the entire zip code is considered to be broadband ready. I've seen this fact quoted often here in these BBR news items, but I have never seen it on the FCC web site. Does anyone have a link verifying this claim.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
PeterCollins
join:2005-05-23
Geneva, IL
| reply to Rob
and watch how quickly, just by raising the bandwidth rate from 200k to 1.5m, how many zip codes suddenly DON'T have access to "broadband."
I think that would be very telling...we may actually start to get a "closer to real" view of where we stand. Granted if only one person in the zip could get 1.5 down, you're still going to see misrepresentation, but it would be a start. |
|
PeterCollins
join:2005-05-23
Geneva, IL | reply to TKJunkMail
»hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/a···93A1.pdf
Page 2 |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| THANKS.
But I believe this statistic quoted in the same report is more relevant than 99% of ZipCodes have broadband stat.
As a nationwide average, we estimate that high-speed DSL connections were available to 78% of the households to whom incumbent LECs could provide local telephone service as of December 31, 2005, and that high-speed cable modem service was available to 93% of the households to whom cable system operators could provide cable TV service.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
ross
join:2000-08-16
 ·Digizip
| "As a nationwide average, we estimate that high-speed DSL connections were available to 78% of the households to whom incumbent LECs could provide local telephone service as of December 31, 2005, and that high-speed cable modem service was available to 93% of the households to whom cable system operators could provide cable TV service."
Sounds like this fairy tale is based on 200kbps "broadband", and if that's all you believe is needed, then, as in your myopically pedantic world, the Telco line is all you need to tow. |
|
VerizonCynic
join:2006-10-25
Lakewood, CA | reply to Rob
Should be ZIP plus 4 for an area. that is like 20 homes |
|
Asmodeus
join:2004-05-26
Spring Valley, CA
| reply to PeterCollins
said by PeterCollins :and watch how quickly, just by raising the bandwidth rate from 200k to 1.5m, how many zip codes suddenly DON'T have access to "broadband." I think that would be very telling...we may actually start to get a "closer to real" view of where we stand. Granted if only one person in the zip could get 1.5 down, you're still going to see misrepresentation, but it would be a start. and then the costs get past down to you... the providers will never foot the bill in either case however broadband is catergorized... |
|
PeterCollins
join:2005-05-23
Geneva, IL | That's not really my point.
Regardless of who pays for it, we shouldn't be calling 200k down "broadband." It pains me to call 1.5 down broadband too, but if we're looking for a minimum it seems like a better place to start. |
|
