said by kamm: said by CycloneGT2:
I like how they compare the US internationally to a lot of smaller countries. Its a lot easier for a small country to get 100% wired up for fiber than it is for a nation as vast as the USA. If they were to compare South Korea or Holland to say just New Jersey, how would that compare?
Can we stop with this BULL***T about "VAST COUNTRY" and other nonsensical, irrelevant crap, spread by industry corporatist shills?New York City is NOT a vast area and it's the BIGGEST market yet our speeds ARE SLOWER THAN ANY EU city's.
Moreover according to the latest Census Burequ data OVER 80% OF AMERICANS LIVE IN LARGE METROPOLITAN AREAS - this immediately kills the BS fake arguments about "vast countries" and similar lies.
I have a hard time feeling that the USA is broadband crippled when I have access to FiOS, Cable Modems, DSL, and several Wireless technologies here in Maryland. If I head out a little further into the rural areas, I may just be limited to wireless or satellite, but I could still get online.
But that's just because you can't see further than your backyard and probably have no clue about what's going on abroad.
THe fact that you are satisfied with your speeds does NOT change the fact that we are waaay behind the Western world,
I just find it amusing that everyone complains about how ISPs aren't willing to spend $10k to trench fiber to someone's home in the sticks so that they can provide $40/mo internet service. Of course the way that technology has been evolving this would could be obsolete in a a decade anyway and would take over 20 years to just recover the cost.
Of course, these numbers are complete BS again: sticking with the most expensive of all (your example, FIOS) the numbers show it only costs $1,200 per subscriber - considering the AVERAGE 1000-1500% BANDWIDTH MARKUP that's rather a 2-year return, I bet.
Let me guess: you pulled these number out of your bottom part, right?
The rural areas are only going to be covered by a next generation wireless technology. Any efforts to bring a "wired" solution to the rural community will only be eclipsed by that wireless tech once it becomes available.
What an ignorant nonsense. Break down the greedy monopolies, the grasp of profit-only crooked corprations on the markets and there you go, you get broadband everywhere.
BTW for pointing out the cluelessness even further - you couldn't be more wrong about rurals and wireless: [b]countries with vast rural areas have FAR BETTER broadband, BUILT ON FTTH - look at Norway or Swedenfor example.
Homework for you (it's from last May but still relevant): Cold, dark countries whipping US in broadband usage @ Ars
Some don't want to admit that the united states is behind the rest of the world. American get fed by the mouth about how their country is the greatest and others are behind us in technology
Americans don't realize that they are getting poorer while only few are getting richer. What good does it do us if bill gates is the only privilege few with 1gpbs connection while most of us crawl on crappy dsl and cable internet
If you say that few are more rich then the rest of the world in America then that is true but like most 3rd world country the American are no better off
Americans are completely brainwashed from birth LOL
They believe anything and are easily deceived by ancient copper thats has been here for over a century
The greedy corporation are lazy and they too represent lazy American.
We like to have faster connection but we like to get it through dsl or cable but distance is always an issue and copper has many problem too like limited bandwidth, slow no matter what you do with it or how much you try to squeeze into it using faster hardware.
Its too hard to change to fiber optic connection, too much work!