 DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
4 edits | Oddly, increased deployment of cheap tiers hurts our aver. With budget DSL and cable tiers being as successful in terms of sales as they are, results don't really tell us what we need to know. Taking actual speed test results of users (which this study did, taken from Speedtest.net's worldwide test network) reflects more about the frugality of users than what is really available to them. Researchers can try and made determinations of what is available based on what people are buying but they'll never be truely accurate. Unfortunately there is no real way to easily quantify what is available to users so we have to resort to just measuring what they're actually buying thanks in no small part to an apathetic FCC and ISP foot dragging.
For example, I have 20Mb FiOS and my neighbor 10Mb FiOS while both of us could buy 50Mb service should we want to shell out the dough. Speed tests taken from us would simply reflect the tiers we purchased, not really the "state of broadband". Same if I had passed on FiOS and stuck with cable or even DSL.
At least they used a more unbiased and vastly more comprehensive sources than some other so-called astroturf research groups and it's a good first step as to seeing where we are (currently middle of the pack) thus start analyzing where we can improve. |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Part of the point is that Japan has 20/20 for less than I have 5/512. If the price of 20/20 here was the same as it is there (sub$45/month) then I would have 20/20. I suspect a lot of other would too. |
|
|
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
3 edits | "Japan" doesn't have 20/20 for less, some parts of it do. And again, this data doesn't show what is available, only what people are buying. While 20/20 may be more than you're willing to spend today, the most important factor is that the infrastructure needs to be able to support it. Unfortunately this study doesn't tell us if that is the case or not. Prices, if high now will come down in time. It always does.
But as someone who had 50/20, it's very overrated. Some people here think it would change their lives. I had trouble finding data sources that could even serve me anywhere close to 50Mb. |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Most cities have 20/20 available and most large cities have 100/100 available(in Japan for both). The 100/100 has gone up little since the last time I checked. It is now just under $60/month.
»asahi-net.jp/en/service/ftth.html |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:4 Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Probably 80% of the population of Japan lives in cities, with as much as 60% in the larger cities. The largest cities are on the Kanto plain (Tokyo, Yokohama) and on the Kansai plain (Kyoto, Osaka). Only as far apart as San Francisco from Los Angeles, in California. Move 80% of the U.S. population to those two cities, and suddenly 100/100 Internet will be economically feasible in the U.S.A.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
1 edit | The lines running city to city part of the equation is not the problem. It is within city (node to home, etc) that is the problem. While the density argument is somewhat appropriate, it not nearly as applicable when comparing our cities to their cities. The density differences (their cities to ours) is just not that great. Certainly not enough to account for 100/100 (there) being the same price as 5/512(here). |
|
 BoogeymanDrive it like you stole itPremium
join:2002-12-17
Panama City, FL
 ·Comcast
| reply to Dogfather
Thats very true. Hell, I have had trouble maxing out my 8/1 connection. But, if we had say, two children and two adults trying to use the connection at the same time, it would slow to a crawl.
So in households where there are multiple users trying to use the connection at the same time, 50/20 would be a massive help.
--
Im Your Boogeyman, Thats What I Am |
|
| reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather:With budget DSL and cable tiers being as successful in terms of sales as they are, results don't really tell us what we need to know. Taking actual speed test results of users (which this study did, taken from Speedtest.net's worldwide test network) reflects more about the frugality of users than what is really available to them. Budget.  Only a bandwidth nerd would call a $20/month 1Mb Internet connection 'budget'. Sure, it's cheaper than the $30 tier and the $40 tier and the $90 tier, but for the needs of 95% of subscribers it's overkill.
The benefit of the researcher's approach is that it tests not only end user speed but network capacity, which is the more important determinant of current capabilities. We have a lot 8Mb and 20Mb and 50Mb end-user connections in this country built on top of very cheap, low-bidder networks. It's those networks that dictate our readiness to meet future needs. |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Lazlow
said by Lazlow:The lines running city to city part of the equation is not the problem. It is within city (node to home, etc) that is the problem. While the density argument is somewhat appropriate, it not nearly as applicable when comparing our cities to their cities. The density differences (their cities to ours) is just not that great. Certainly not enough to account for 100/100 (there) being the same price as 5/512(here). Ah. I see. There are as many people in the S.F. Bay Area as on the Kanto plain of Japan (surrounding S.F. and Tokyo Bays); as many people in Greater Los Angeles as on the Kansai plain (Kyoto, Kobe, Osaka). Gotcha!
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
