BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to So What
Re: People CHOOSE not to have it
said by So What :
So it's big news and the US sucks because people CHOOSE not to buy a broadband service?
Not WANTING it not the same as can't GET it.
But then again, I don't want to spoil the morning for the America sucks ass crowd so rant on about how we suck and why S. Korea is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
There are lots of people that WANT boradband but can't get it. My best firend is one such example. He lives 3 miles from the city limits thus has no access to broadband. If someone would offer it to him he's ready to give them MONEY. |
|
So What
@nextweb.net | Apparently that is not the case. Apparently better than 8 in 10 can get it but barely 5 in 10 CHOOSE to get it. |
|
So What
@nextweb.net
| reply to BF69
To clarify, according to some sources, 80% of people who can get local phone service qualify for DSL and I'm operating under the assumption that there is near 100% penetration of local POTS service.
»arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20···874.html
93% of cable ready households can get cable modems.
Between the two is where I get the approximation that better than 8 in 10 US households can get some wired broadband connection. The 96% availability by zip code touted by the FCC doesn't hold much water with me.
So it comes down to yes, there is a tiny minority who can't get broadband but what the numbers clearly show is even when people can get it, they simply don't want it. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | quote:
To clarify, according to some sources, 80% of people who can get local phone service qualify for DSL
It's not even remotely close to that percentage in a significant number of states.... |
|
tivoboy
join:2004-05-10
Menlo Park, CA
| The unfortunate bit here, which is often referenced in other BB penetration posts involving the USA. USA has a lot of poor and uneducated. Many western european countries, scandinavia and some asian are far better off and this is a bit of the driver for beter pentration rates. :-( |
|
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
 ·Sprint Broadband D..
1 edit | reply to So What
I live in the most densely populated state in the US, NJ. That said, we do have rural areas, areas that do not enjoy the coverage of any broadband scheme. In the past, one could have expected that economies of scale in a state like NJ could have propelled deployment of services to the less-populated areas of the state. But no more.
And that's what is wrong. Both here in NJ and in the rest of the nation.
Increasingly, broadband is necessary for communities to be competitive on an economic basis, especially as regards the attraction of a business base and the resultant tax ratables, not to mention jobs. This is why those de facto redlined communities, in places where they do not meet the requirements of some arcane computer program that divines population densities like the reading of the entrails of a goat, are looking for ways to bring in government-supplied broadband services. They want to compete in the modern economy and they need the tools to compete. Broadband is one of those tools. When they try to compete, the incumbent broadband providers, with their far superior lobbying dollars and political connections that result from them, exert great political and legal pressure, far beyond what these municipalities can afford. This attrits them out of the picture and redlining continues.
There is something very, very wrong with this picture. It goes far beyond mere "choice". I suspect that, at least partially, the use of the word "choice" is a trope.
But situations like this have the nature of a pendulum and the nature of a pendulum is to swing. I expect that the broadband incumbents will, in the fullness of time, discover that the pendulum has stopped going their way and they will find themselves facing new legal realities. Realities like being named utilities, instead of "information services". Because they have pushed the pendulum very far in their favor and have forgotten that when it starts to swing back, it will just go farther in the other direction. |
|
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ | reply to So What
Who pays for that study? The question is germane when attempting to understand the quality of its findings. |
|
Siryak
join:2005-11-26
 ·WildBlue
| reply to BF69
said by BF69  :said by So What :
So it's big news and the US sucks because people CHOOSE not to buy a broadband service?
Not WANTING it not the same as can't GET it.
But then again, I don't want to spoil the morning for the America sucks ass crowd so rant on about how we suck and why S. Korea is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
There are lots of people that WANT boradband but can't get it. My best firend is one such example. He lives 3 miles from the city limits thus has no access to broadband. If someone would offer it to him he's ready to give them MONEY. Word. I am already paying $80 a month for 1.5mb on satellite and would glady pay $100 for the same speed in DSL.
--
Wildblue Pro Pack / Beam 40 / Laredo NOC / Windows Vista Home Premium |
|
So What
@nextweb.net
| reply to Karl Bode
The number of states is irrelevant. We're talking about total US households. It may be the case for a few households in Montana compared hundreds of thousands of households in urban centers.
We're not talking about deployment per sq mi, but what % of US HOUSEHOLDS can get broadband and more importantly how many even want it.
All of the data indicates that the VAST majority of total US households can already get broadband services, but barely 1/2 bother to buy it. |
|
Nuts
join:2006-04-27
Forest, OH | Where do you get the VAST MAJORITY from. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| reply to Karl Bode
I live in the metro DC area in Maryland, about 6-7 miles outside the beltway. The area I am in was rural 25 years ago, but it's been pretty dense for at least the last ten years and gets denser every year. It's also a wealthy area.
I have been able to get pots since that time, but have never been able to get DSL and never expect to get DSL - I will get FIOS eventually.
For some reason, the incumbent telco has never seen fit to upgrade equipment in this area to offer DSL.
So no service is not always because an area is rural or because everybody living there is "poor"; it's apparent the telcos have various reasons for not serving an area, but one thing is obvious - because they are/were a monopoly, if they don't want to do something, they don't have to. |
|
Nuts
join:2006-04-27
Forest, OH | Thats the biggest problem. It doesn't seem to make any sense on how those providing service decide who to serve and who not to serve. |
|
So What
@nextweb.net | reply to Nuts
I already posted this. |
|
