Average U.S. Broadband Speed Now 6.6 Mbps WOW a whole 6.6 Mbps I guess they don't look at satellite.
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
"Granted this data is skewed by the fact users may be able to get faster speeds, but just don't want to pay the high price premium for it."
You clearly didn't read... I'm glad Karl added in that last line that he did because that all so important line shaped the entire discussion.
Time Warner and Comcast, two of the largest providers of internet service, offer speeds of 10mb or better. Verizon Fios, all be it is not a HUGE provider, also offers speeds way above 10mb.
The headline of "Average U.S. Broadband speed now 6.6 Mpbs is an example of making 1+1 = 3. It SHOULD state "the average speeds subscribed is 6.6 Mbps" instead. If you took the fact that most every major metro area (the spots where the majority of population resides) has speeds available far greater than 6, this would have a different result. As Karl correctly stated, there are people that just don't pay for faster speeds and are happy paying less for a far less superior service over what's available.
Honestly, I could care less how fast the speeds are that the average person is subscribing to because that's what this is about. It would be more appropriate to know what the average available speeds are overall. Even then, it still seems like a really dumb number to spend so much money on in the first place. If any money was going to be wasted, it seems it would be much easier to mandate that the lowest basic speed be 10Mbps by a certain time and stand by it as that's the only way we're going to push forward in broadband deployment. All these studies and surveys and data collecting is just a joke.
"I'm glad Karl added in that last line"
Me too because I bitch about that every time we see this report.
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.
reply to sharkyyoung
if they park another 4-6 satellites like ViaSat-1 and Echostar 17 in orbit, and have a total of 8 birds with 150+ Gbps throughput each, they could cover all rural consumers and those that live just out of reach from wired or fiber access. Nationalize them to keep the costs low and set data capping to match cable or fiber and the average would be 12Mbps or greater. ViaSat/Exede12 can deliver 20Mbps down and 4.5Mbps up. HN GEN4 can do the same as soon as they finish tweaking it.
Nonsense. The most common internet use is web browsing. So the massive latency with satellite really slows web browsing down because you have to communicate which web page you want to look at next.
have you tried Exede12 or HN G4? They're fast.. not fast enough for gaming, but everything else you can do just fine..
reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy:There is a reason why the average U.S. broadband subscriber doesn't have those higher speeds and it's because the headline should state: Average U.S. broadband subscriber pays too much for too little! The price of those higher speeds is a lot less in some other countries.
It SHOULD state "the average speeds subscribed is 6.6 Mbps" instead. If you took the fact that most every major metro area (the spots where the majority of population resides) has speeds available far greater than 6, this would have a different result.