Neyland
join:2003-02-04
USA
| reply to fishacura
Re: 768kbps downstream and 200kbps upstream?
That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200.
How does the US plan on having a good broadband plan if they start off by defining broadband using such a dated measuring stick.
As Patcat88 points out below... you're just going to see ATT put up cell towers and rake in money for a 3G deployment. |
|
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| said by Neyland  :That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200. How does the US plan on having a good broadband plan if they start off by defining broadband using such a dated measuring stick. As Patcat88 points out below... you're just going to see ATT put up cell towers and rake in money for a 3G deployment. I agree, more is better, but it's better than nothing. At least now I can finally get a chip in on this game. I only need a million to cover my entire county in broadband, so I guess I better ask for 100 million just in case 
--
Fight Insight Ready (Was NebuAD) and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data |
|
fishacura
join:2008-01-25
Phoenixville, PA
2 edits | reply to Neyland
The problem is really that the choice at hand is how much can you do for $7.62BB. Say they went for the new technology for this same price tag...they wouldn't be able to reach nearly as many people. Better to have more people up on something good than fewer people up on something better. Of course, you could argue which one is the "better" solution but you're talking about the Dems. They're going to want to get penetration (ha ha in my best Bevis laugh) to as many homes as possible and this is the best solution for that.
The other issue here is that this speed is probably fine for 90% of people. Keep in mind the people on these boards, myself included, are not the average users.
--
People who don't get good service on average tell 10 others while people who do get good service on average tell 1. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to Neyland
said by Neyland :That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200. How does the US plan on having a good broadband plan if they start off by defining broadband using such a dated measuring stick. As Patcat88 points out below... you're just going to see ATT put up cell towers and rake in money for a 3G deployment. This is just the first part of the stimulus plan. This is not the official broadband policy. The article addresses this. |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
 ·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to Neyland
said by Neyland :That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200. That's the great thing about over Government--- it's the best money can buy.
In the United States we pay the most and get the least back for our dollar everytime, as most of it goes in profits to companies and little return to the public for THEIR money.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by KrK :said by Neyland :That's not my point. If we're going to throw $7.62 BILLION at something, it should offer something better than 768/200. That's the great thing about over Government--- it's the best money can buy. $7.62 billion is nothing folks. Verizon's rollout is running upwards of $28 billion to cover a select few densely populated state with a 65% or so coverage goal. This is rural American we're talking about with vast areas where the population density is as low as 1 person per square mile.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USA-2···sity.gif |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
 ·Hollis Hosting
·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| said by Matt : $7.62 billion is nothing folks. Verizon's rollout is running upwards of $28 billion to cover a select few densely populated state with a 65% or so coverage goal. To put these numbers into perspective there are about 110 million households in the US. Cost to deploy fiber to the premise (FTTP) is about $2000 per household or about $225 billion to provide fiber to everyone.
The goal of the stimulus is to invest in under-served areas and quickly deliver some form of broadband. As others have posted 768 kbps is significantly better then dialup.
/tom |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH | Where'd you get $2000 per household??? Verizon's cost to deliver FTTH has thus far dropped to significantly below $1000 per household. I guess if you're factoring in the higher cost of delivering to rural areas that would make sense. |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Hollis Hosting
·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| said by sonicmerlin : Verizon's cost to deliver FTTH has thus far dropped to significantly below $1000 per household. Cost to pass + cost to connect is about $1500. Since rural areas are more costly, fewer homes per mile, I arbitrarily increased it to $2000 as an national average.
/tom |
|
downstream and
@apollogrp.edu
| reply to fishacura
said by fishacura :The problem is really that the choice at hand is how much can you do for $7.62BB. Say they went for the new technology for this same price tag...they wouldn't be able to reach nearly as many people. Better to have more people up on something good than fewer people up on something better. Of course, you could argue which one is the "better" solution but you're talking about the Dems. They're going to want to get penetration (ha ha in my best Bevis laugh) to as many homes as possible and this is the best solution for that. The other issue here is that this speed is probably fine for 90% of people. Keep in mind the people on these boards, myself included, are not the average users. actually the ones who use the internet all the time are not the average users of the internet. |
|
