dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
597
share rss forum feed

AndyDufresne
Premium
join:2010-10-30

I feel sorry for that 2%

That always seems to get left out of about every single carrier commercial and politician talking point. Seem that 98% is the magic number that is constantly used to justify some folks not having access to any kid of internet access and that is just dandy.

I'll give him credit for at least this line- "South Korean homes now have greater Internet access than we do." Maybe just maybe it will wake up these phone companies that offer low speed DSL to up their game.


openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2

said by AndyDufresne:

Maybe just maybe it will wake up these phone companies that offer low speed DSL to up their game.

You seem to believe that telecoms are unaware of the services being offered elsewhere in the world. How does a residential connection to the Internet in South Korea affect a US company's investment strategy?

PDXPLT

join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
reply to AndyDufresne

said by AndyDufresne:

I'll give him credit for at least this line- "South Korean homes now have greater Internet access than we do."

That didn't happen by accident, BTW. The So. Korean gov't made it happen; they wanted to "catch up" with the U.S.; how ironic, since they blew past us.

There's no mystery in what this speech was referring to. It was a reference to the Nat'l Broadband Plan, which is supposed to free up spectrum for both licensed and unlicensed ISP's.

As for Wildblue (which I'm on now) and existing wireless being considered broadband, I use a simple criterion - can you run the most popular broadband applications, the ones that consume the most internet bandwidth, on them. The answer is clearly NO; e.g., Netflix does not run on low-capped, slow Wildblue nor existing wireless services very well, if at all.

bn1221

join:2009-04-29
Cortland, NY
reply to AndyDufresne

And Germany has better roads. What about the promises he made 2 years ago to build infrastructure? Oh, right, the same place the energy promises went.


Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
reply to AndyDufresne

I feel sorry for all 100% because any national broadband plan based so heavily on wireless is smoke and mirrors propaganda worthy of a third world government. The countries with 95% fiber to the premises will be the future broadband leaders and they will undoubtedly also have over 95% wireless broadband before a plan to make two huge corporations even bigger profits ever achieves the same.


pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..

1 recommendation

reply to openbox9

said by openbox9:

said by AndyDufresne:

Maybe just maybe it will wake up these phone companies that offer low speed DSL to up their game.

You seem to believe that telecoms are unaware of the services being offered elsewhere in the world. How does a residential connection to the Internet in South Korea affect a US company's investment strategy?

It doesn't, but it sounds nice. Listen to the soothing tones of his voice. Just enjoy his calm determination that after he has had his last election, and can no longer be held responsible for anything, then things will magically get better for everyone. Yup, once he is done with us, all promises will be fulfilled.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."


CanAmFam

@direcpc.com
reply to PDXPLT

PDXPLT - ding ding ding. We have a winner. I'm on HughesNet and have investigated all the available technologies. Wireless will not run modern and future apps, it just doesn't have the bandwidth.

South Korea invested in Fiber to the home, that's why their internet usage is higher than ours. The difference is their government doesn't have wireless industry lobbyists lining their pockets and whispering in their ears like we do here.


jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to openbox9

He does have a point. Perhaps many regular folks weren't aware until last night. Maybe they'll be upset with that knowledge and pressure the telcos a bit?


WHT

join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5
reply to PDXPLT

said by PDXPLT:

The answer is clearly NO; e.g., Netflix does not run on low-capped, slow Wildblue nor existing wireless services very well, if at all.

Actually it does run on lots of WISP systems (to a point)...and that's the problem. Too many people are foregoing their $100 or even $200 per month cable and satellite dish for a $40 WISP account and $8 Netflix. Already in past few months, WISPs are dealing with performance issues.

jcremin

join:2009-12-22
Siren, WI
kudos:2
reply to AndyDufresne

said by AndyDufresne:

I'll give him credit for at least this line- "South Korean homes now have greater Internet access than we do."

I don't give anyone any credit when they compare the US to South Korea. Apples to Oranges. Heck, it's more like an Apples to Carrots comparison.

jcremin

join:2009-12-22
Siren, WI
kudos:2
reply to CanAmFam

said by CanAmFam :

Wireless will not run modern and future apps, it just doesn't have the bandwidth.

Wireless will handle virtually every application other than high def video streaming (and it will even do some of that, just at limited capacities). The problem is that those who want to provide the services (WISPs) aren't given the tools they need (spectrum) and instead the US likes to auction it off to huge cell phone companies so they can make a short term monetary gain that ends up costing the economy many times more by not just giving it to those who would do something good with it.