dslreports logo
Average U.S. Upstream Speed: 371kbps
CWA offers updated speed data, state by state

The Communications Workers of America organization has been directing users to their Speed Matters blog in order to test their Internet speeds. As the LA Times and ComputerWorld explore, the CWA has released a more comprehensive report (pdf) and interactive map exploring the average upstream and downstream speeds from state to state.

Click for full size

According to the CWA's data, the average broadband download speed in the U.S. is only 1.9 megabits per second, compared to 61 Mbps in Japan, 45 Mbps in South Korea, 18 Mbps in Sweden, 17 Mbps in France and 7 Mbps in Canada. The average upstream speed in the United States sits around 371kbps.

The union, obviously concerned with increased deployment (more jobs, more members) is putting its support behind the the Broadband Census of America Act -- a newly proposed bill that aims to improve the mapping of broadband penetration, while increasing the FCC's minimum official broadband watermark from 256kbps to 2Mbps.

view:
topics flat nest 

ColorBASIC
8-bit Fun
Premium Member
join:2006-12-29
Corona, CA

2 edits

1 recommendation

ColorBASIC

Premium Member

Speedtest.net's global results say differently

Speedtest.net which has speed test host members all over the world says differently in terms of global averages. Japan for example is only averaging 10Mb locally.

»www.speedtest.net/global.php

While some Tokyo highrises have 100Mb service, the average people (and companies) are actually seeing across Japan is NO WHERE near 60Mb.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

3 edits

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

said by ColorBASIC:

Speedtest.net which has speed test host members all over the world says differently in terms of global averages. Japan for example is only averaging 10Mb locally.

»www.speedtest.net/global.php

While some Tokyo highrises have 100Mb service, the average people (and companies) are actually seeing across Japan is NO WHERE near 60Mb.
Reports( »www.itif.org/files/Broad ··· ings.pdf ) like these have an agenda. Make the US look worse than actual and make other countries better than actual. The people who developed this report( »www.innovationpolicy.org ··· ?s=board ) are lobbyists and the Board is controlled by 2 ex-congresspersons. They create a report and then go lobby Congress to spend HUGE dollars to remedy the solution.

So 2 questions arise:
Who is paying for their research and provides their funds?
CWA

Who benefits if the Congress decides to lay out a lot of money to fund infrastructure?
CWA

John Galt6
Forward, March
Premium Member
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp

John Galt6

Premium Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

We should stop deploying or improving broadband so that the Unions will not be able to accomplish the nefarious goals of their fiendish plot.

Bastards!

::rolls eyes::

/sarcasm

DaBavarian
Premium Member
join:2006-02-22
Saginaw, MI

DaBavarian

Premium Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

If reports like these actually bring out positive things like real broadband deployment...all the power to it.

Maddogmike
Premium Member
join:2007-06-21
Cleveland, OH

Maddogmike to John Galt6

Premium Member

to John Galt6
Hmmm interesting

moko
join:2002-12-22
Fayetteville, GA

moko to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
that was smart tch.....i agree with you on this...its a manipulitive way for them to make money using lies....and trying to push the "pride" buttons of a government....in this case ....ours

spg6
Grrrr
join:2001-10-31
NOT Texas!

1 recommendation

spg6

Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

Okay then. There we have it! We will oppose raising internet speeds just because the union for the telephone workers want more work for their members!

Let's all get slower speed packages until that union is destroyed!!!

Good grief. Give me a break. You folks want more bandwidth, but you don't want people earning decent wages to provide it.

Would slave labor be better?

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

1 recommendation

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

said by spg6:

Okay then. There we have it! We will oppose raising internet speeds just because the union for the telephone workers want more work for their members!

Let's all get slower speed packages until that union is destroyed!!!

Good grief. Give me a break. You folks want more bandwidth, but you don't want people earning decent wages to provide it.

Would slave labor be better?
The average CWA member at Verizon made $53,000/yr in 2003 and their contract called for a 10.6% increase over the next 4 yrs and has fully paid by the company health benefits.

Sure sounds like slave wages to me./sarcasm

Uncle Paul
join:2003-02-04
USA

Uncle Paul

Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

Yea this report in its bias is soooo much different than the reports paid for by Bellsouth, At&T, the Cable Industry, Verizon, or any other group. It's simply more of the same from the other side.

Perhaps it really is best to have all ISPs provide the areas of coverage and levels of service.

John Galt6
Forward, March
Premium Member
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp

John Galt6 to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

The average CWA member at Verizon made $53,000/yr in 2003 and their contract called for a 10.6% increase over the next 4 yrs and has fully paid by the company health benefits.
The poorly educated and technically unskilled will always complain about how much money someone else makes rather than do anything to increase their own skill set.

JE
JE 's BACK BABY
Premium Member
join:2000-12-15
Charlotte, NC

JE

Premium Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

said by John Galt6:
said by FFH5:

The average CWA member at Verizon made $53,000/yr in 2003 and their contract called for a 10.6% increase over the next 4 yrs and has fully paid by the company health benefits.
The poorly educated and technically unskilled will always complain about how much money someone else makes rather than do anything to increase their own skill set.
That sure sounds like SARCASM to me! U know nothing about this guy or how much he makes in his life or what he does.
$53,000 is decent for any low budget bum like a telephone company worker.
No one told them to go buy a house, get some hooker pregnant, then marry her, and have 12 more kids to feed. Buy 2 LUXURY cars, and then refuse to pay the bills when they get out of control. Come on, Americans can do things to control their own, but the average bum just sits on sites like this and all they do is talk and talk about improvement.

HELL, WE ALREADY KNOW THIS REPORT IS NOT 100% TRUE! Shut this down already!

JE
59126125 (banned)
join:2006-01-21

1 recommendation

59126125 (banned) to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
Making middle class wages and actually having insurance? The problem with that is?

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK

Premium Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

said by 59126125:

Making middle class wages and actually having insurance? The problem with that is?
Because it goes against the modern Corporate mantra!

These days employees should work long hard hours and be paid a pittance. Hell, they are lucky these generous companies even hire them, they should donate most their work for free out of gratitude!

FiL25
Premium Member
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD

FiL25

Premium Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

lol, exactly my sentiments...slave labor, slave labor, slave labor for all! Again...! For the 3rd time!

Makes me sick...These guys get paid the bare minimum to live out the aMurrrikan dream if those stats are correct tch...

AnonymousPerson
@verizon.net

AnonymousPerson to KrK

Anon

to KrK
You do realize that you are paying for that salary through your bill, right?

Regardless of the cost of labor, unions are businesses in themselves. They make their money by legally extorting it from other businesses, but regardless of how they make their money, this bill is meant by no means to benefit this union's members. It is meant to benefit the union, namely the wallets of those running it, as if telecommunicatons companies had more broadband customers, they would need more employees and if they need more employees, those new employees (who will likely be coercised into joining the union should they refuse upon the first offer) will pay union dues, which increases union revenues, making those running the union wealther as they will have more money in the union treasury that can be lost due to things that will be said to be "overhead."

By the way, if companies did not pay enough for workers to earn a living, their workers would quit. Imagine how long a company will last if it announced that it will begin paying all of its employees a salary of $1 a year. The market determines how much people are paid; unions attempt to manipulate that to earn money, like all businesses in their position would.
59126125 (banned)
join:2006-01-21

59126125 (banned)

Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

Actually, the Unions in general determine the wage level. Even if you are not a Union member, you still benefit from the work they do. Unions set the bar for wages in all industries.

You actually think that if the market is good, companies would generously give the employees a fat raise? That's funny.

It would be in the best interest of all workers for the Unions to have more members and a stronger influence. Unions are not perfect like everything else, but they are about the only way for the little guy to demand a decent living in exchange for making a corporation millions.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK to AnonymousPerson

Premium Member

to AnonymousPerson
said by AnonymousPerson :

You do realize that you are paying for that salary through your bill, right?
I think the CEO's compensation and retirement package cost me more on my bill then 1000 CWA workers do....

Unions do not extort money from other businesses. They leverage their member's labor value to gain more return for the workers.

marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO

marigolds to FFH5

MVM

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

The average CWA member at Verizon made $53,000/yr in 2003 and their contract called for a 10.6% increase over the next 4 yrs and has fully paid by the company health benefits.
That's 2.55% annual. That's not very much. And I thought reducing health benefits was one of the concessions Verizon received in the last contract...?

$53k does not even seem like much considering the average experience level... but it is still definitely not slave labor.

DaBavarian
Premium Member
join:2006-02-22
Saginaw, MI

DaBavarian to spg6

Premium Member

to spg6
I agree....people cry all the time that they hate talking to people from India, but then the cry about actually paying someone in USA to do the work. Blah blah blah.

Maddogmike
Premium Member
join:2007-06-21
Cleveland, OH

Maddogmike to spg6

Premium Member

to spg6
spg, i couldn't agree more with you, some people are just not educated. That's all nothing else. It seems that all the little sheep just want to follow, and not let our standards of living get any higher just because they are CONTENT with things right now.

cheesy bob
@qwest.net

cheesy bob to FFH5

Anon

to FFH5
well here in qwest territory the fastest they offer here where I am at is 256/256 so I would not doubt that they are telling the truth about speeds

FiL25
Premium Member
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD

1 edit

FiL25 to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
Thats some tin-foilin' if I ever seen it. Why is it that when your Fatherlan, err, homeland gets criticized, and rightfuly so, your conspiracies come out? Easy fix; take the extreme WHATEVERs stats, and the other extreme WHATEVERs stats, and extract a median average...

Stats are stats brah.:)

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: Speedtest.net's global results say differently

said by FiL25:

take the extreme WHATEVERs stats, and the other extreme WHATEVERs stats, and extract a median average...

Stats are stats brah.:)
They came from the CWA web site announcing the contract.

John T
@northropgrumman.com

John T to FiL25

Anon

to FiL25

The ITIF report that CWA uses gives US avg as 4.8mps

said by FiL25:

Stats are stats brah.:)
Lies, damned lies, and statistics. They're comparing apples and oranges in the international comparisons. Their report, linked off the story, references this report:
»www.itif.org/files/Broad ··· ings.pdf

From page 3 of that report:
However, measuring speed is not as
straightforward as penetration because national
networks are normally composed of connections
of widely varying speeds. We calculate average
download speeds based on OECD data that
compiles the advertised speeds offered by
several major broadband providers in each
country. The OECD gathered this data from
national providers wherever possible.
Note that Table 1, on page 4 of that report, the very source for the 61.0 Mbps number for Japan, the 45.6 Mbps number for South Korea, the 7.6 Mbps number for Canada and all the others, gives a number for the US. That number for the USA is 4.8 Mbps download.

Now, there are good reasons to think that the CWA speed test numbers may be more accurate for the speeds people actually have, as opposed to the fastest advertised hypothetical claims. But you can't compare the US numbers from actual speed surveys to non-US numbers from fastest advertised speeds.
Happydude32
Premium Member
join:2005-07-16

Happydude32 to ColorBASIC

Premium Member

to ColorBASIC
The map shows my area as a mix between red and yellow. I actually had broadband for only three years now, but the past two have been 8Mb or higher.

Maddogmike
Premium Member
join:2007-06-21
Cleveland, OH

Maddogmike to ColorBASIC

Premium Member

to ColorBASIC
How sad is that, our speeds are so much slower than the rest of the world.
phills_suck
join:2004-10-11
Burlington, NJ

phills_suck

Member

Speeds

I live in the green area...but then again this is fios vs comcrap territory. I do get great speeds with comcrap though and with powerboost up/down its not to shabby.

Pashune
Caps stifle innovation
Premium Member
join:2006-04-14
Gautier, MS

1 edit

Pashune

Premium Member

They're right about where I live... =/

I'm in the yellow area (south MS), and they couldn't be anymore right. My cable ISP fails to offer speeds anywhere above 5 mbps...considering 5 mbps is insanely expensive in this area anyway. CableOne needs to go in a fire and die, I'm sorry. Comcast or Time Warner...please take over this area. Oh, and Charter...go die in a fire too.

1.5 mbps DSL is all that's available in my area. It's either that, or go with expensive CableOne.

Lark3po
Premium Member
join:2003-08-05
Madison, AL

Lark3po

Premium Member

Re: They're right about where I live... =/

Ditto...

John T
@northgrum.com

John T to Pashune

Anon

to Pashune
Ah, but the international comparison your area would be measured at 5mbps, since that's the highest advertised speed.

This data looks like it might be a decent measure of actual speeds (though it's not a random selection of people who participate, of course), but the international comparison is worthless.

Maddogmike
Premium Member
join:2007-06-21
Cleveland, OH

Maddogmike to Pashune

Premium Member

to Pashune
LMAO i love it

MrMoody
Free range slave
Premium Member
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC

MrMoody

Premium Member

France?!

We're being beaten by France, a country where most people don't even have air conditioning?

••••••••••••••••••••••••

ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA

ninjatutle

Member

And we need more speed for??

Torrents? Warez?

People think obtaining faster speeds will drastically change their lives It won't make hair on your chest grow any faster, a porsche will not magically show up in your driveway, you wont get 30 headshots or 30 knife kills in a single match of CS....

••••••••••••••••••

LegoPower77
Abecedarian
Premium Member
join:2002-08-03
Midlothian, VA

LegoPower77

Premium Member

Policy trade offs

Apropos that ColorBasic was the first to post on this topic because recently we concluded a thread where we touched on government action in the broadband market in regards to ala carte pricing.

There is philosophical crossover with these issues, mutatis mutandis, because my original point was that ala carte was not the "efficient" way to do it otherwise the cablecos would already be doing it; and likewise, there are many reasons why broadband speeds are so slow in the United States (I maintain that population density is the main reason why), but in both cases government direction isn't all pluses.

Just to reiterate, I'm not saying no regulatory scheme should be in place (though I'd like to see more serious consideration of that idea), just that there are relative trade-offs. Mr. Basic made good points when s/he points out that the current government-created regional monopoly would allow for the government to tell the company how to price its product. I suppose under the same umbrella it's fair to say the government move to bring faster speeds.

The proverbial fly in the ointment is, of course, the stifling of innovation that comes with regulation.

All regulatory schemes in one way or another make the market more stable for the incumbent. Most involve a "rate of return" (RoR) the company is guaranteed. This guarantee means the company no longer has to put emphasis on cutting edge technology. In fact, the accounting works such that, in the electricity industry for example, because the RoR is guaranteed, they phase out their old equipment slower making for less-efficient production (old equipment=less efficient equipment).

You can see how the same would be true for the broadband industry. In fact, in light of this, it can be said that some CWA-backed regulatory regime is exactly contraindicated. Of all the fields to try to funnel through bureaucrats' minds. . .

At the World Economic Forum on the Middle East conference this spring, one speaker said “We must do more to promote failure . . . In Silicon Valley, failure is a badge of experience.” You fall on your face a couple of times — or eight times — and eventually you get it right. Failure is indispensable to entrepreneurship, to experimentation, to economic flourishing. Government intervention prevents failure making us safe and stable, but never pushing the edge.

•••••••

netwire
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Dallas, NC

netwire

Premium Member

I'm in the yellow...

I'm in the yellow area too, but I get 28.8k... no such thing as broadband in my neck of the woods.

Fox McCloud
Crazy like a fox.
join:2006-07-23

Fox McCloud

Member

Re: I'm in the yellow...

of all places, why is there a large area in Montana listed as "greater than 7 mbps"?

Also, there's an extremely small dot of green that's south of Columbus (definitely out of the city limits, and not in the surburbs) that's listed as 7 mbps...this doesn't make much sense either.

Also, I know for a fact that there's quite a few areas in Ohio now that have 15,000k/768k from Roadrunner.

This whole "report" is complete bullcrap.

John T
@northgrum.com

John T

Anon

CWA is comparing apples and oranges

The "international comparison" that they're using uses the geographical average of the fastest advertised speed in an area, whereas their "Speed Matters" speed test rankings use the actual speed people have.

So, for example, Fairfax, VA has 30 Mbps download speed FIOS available in the area, and under the procedure used in the international comparison, the entire area would measure at 30 Mbps. However, their actual measured data shows a lot of people with slower connections in the area, because plenty of people actually sign up for cheaper, slower plans, including 768k DSL.

Also, the use of advertised speeds instead of actual speeds can cause some significant differences, particularly in comparing the US and Canada, both with very strong DOCSIS cable modem presence.
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD

nasadude

Member

forget about speed, how about coverage

the real story of U.S. broadband isn't about speed, it's about coverage.

the FCC statistics are so bad, nobody has any idea what kind of coverage exists in the U.S. (one connection in a zip code = coverage for whole zip - get real)

make no mistake: the incumbents don't give a crap if there is universal coverage or not; this is not in their business plan. Their goal is to make money for their shareholders, not offer service to every household in their territory.

furthermore, because of the near total lack of competition, they don't care if you have good service either. If you are not going to make them the money they want to make, you will not be served.

as long as we have the current set up, there will be no universal service and higher speeds will come very slowly. If something isn't done to increase competition, U.S. broadband will slowly but surely, over the next several years, become at best 2nd rate and potentially third rate when compared to the leaders in the world.

if you've got good speeds now, you're lucky; if not, don't hold your breath as it may be a long time coming.

just remember: THE INCUMBENTS DON'T GIVE A CRAP ABOUT YOU.
Time4aNAP
Premium Member
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL

Time4aNAP

Premium Member

Re: forget about speed, how about coverage

said by nasadude:

the [sic] FCC statistics are so bad, nobody has any idea what kind of coverage exists in the U.S. (one connection in a zip code = coverage for whole zip - get real)
Well...since you can set up a VSAT anywhere in the CONUS, technically we have 100% coverage.
just remember: THE INCUMBENTS DON'T GIVE A CRAP ABOUT YOU.
Not even on Election Day? Oh, wrong incumbents...

PolarBear03
The bear formerly known as aaron8301
Premium Member
join:2005-01-03

PolarBear03

Premium Member

512k!

Woo hoo, I have 512k upload!

Unfortunately, I have 512k download as well.
p51d007
Naa-P51d Mustang
join:2002-06-07
Springfield, MO

p51d007

Member

Considering the size of Japan

I'm surprised they don't have a higher speed.
If the USA were the size of Japan, perhaps our download speed
would be as high. I love all these so called "USA is behind"
stories. Look at the geographic area of the USA, and then compare that with South Korea, Japan, Sweden etc....if their
land masses were the size of the USA, they wouldn't have the penetration of broadband like they do now.

Maddogmike
Premium Member
join:2007-06-21
Cleveland, OH

Maddogmike

Premium Member

Re: Considering the size of Japan

Well. you might be right there, but we are still behind when it comes to stuff like that because corporate America still only looks at their pocket books, not the interest of the consumer. Good example, a few years back with the power grid. They claim to be upgrading but are only dragging their feet.

CableConvert
Premium Member
join:2003-12-05
Atlanta, GA

1 recommendation

CableConvert

Premium Member

Guess I dont do too bad...

...by their tests. Guess Comcast aint so bad, huh
jc10098
join:2002-04-10

1 edit

1 recommendation

jc10098

Member

The Truth

People here do not think for a second. If you hate unions so much, then I hope you are willing to trade everything you cherish about your job. Most jobs are unionized and only have the luxuries as a result of them. Try looking back at America just one century ago. Work weeks were 7 days. There were no holidays or paid vacation. Sick time meant cutting off your arm and being fired. If you died, tough luck to your family. There were no causes of liabilities. Children worked in mines and were expected to carry their weight as equally as an adult. Don't believe me? Go look up the statistics of children employed around 1900. I think if i recall it was someone around two million. »www.spartacus.schoolnet. ··· hild.htm

Likewise, try reading Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. People were shredded in meat packing plants and the food still served. Conditions were atrocious.

Fast Forward to the future. We now have unions that have gotten us five day a week work hours. We now have many jobs that pay decent living wages to people who have them. These jobs provide health care to the individuals. Best of all, these jobs are in America. So before you moan about how much these people make, try thinking for one second the skill they must have to perform them. Teachers are a great example. A teacher starting out with 6 years of education in Ohio (BA. + MA) will make 35-40,000 a year. Yet, someone else in a different field with the same education will make much more. While some jobs are still underpaid to skill (Like Teachers), there are many that paying appropriately. Sadly, it's people like TCH without a real clue on life that make some asinine remarks a. What do you recommend we pay them? How about work you to death and pay you 7.25 / HR. You know, why not? Your statement seems to say people with training and skill deserve the least possible salary.

As for who is behind this report, well it does play a role. Still, what they are advocating isn't bad. Why shouldn't these companies provide more? Our cities are just as dense if not more than many of those with 10+mbit. Check outour population density on Wikipedia and compare it to Seoul and other major cities. You'll see its right on par. The excuse major areas of the U.S. are not as dense as those others is a LIE and an EXCUSE. Hate to break it to you, we are about the same and more in spots. Go justify that one. It's the shills and lobbyists at the Teclos though that'd have you believe otherwise. For once, I am all for holding them up to providing more speed for my money!
Time4aNAP
Premium Member
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL

Time4aNAP

Premium Member

Re: The Truth

As a (currently) non-unionized, college-educated technology worker who, due to abuse of the salary system, made less per hour than blue-collar unionized electricians, I'm all too aware of how it was/is before/after unions came in/went out.

The day that I go back to work as a corporate IT employee is the day that I do so in an IBEW shop, for hourly wages. When the current generation of 20-somethings who make up the bulk of the IT population settle down, get married and start families, the number of people willing to work 140 hour weeks in the mistaken hope of gaining recognition and promotion will drop like a rock. When that happens, I'll be more than happy to introduce them to the benefits of collective bargaining.

The IBEW and NABET were good to me when I was in broadcasting. I'm loyal to them because they were loyal to me.

cork1958
Cork
Premium Member
join:2000-02-26

cork1958

Premium Member

unions

I can't comment on this as I work in a union shop, but, personally, I think unions suck and prevent the company from doing their job in a timely matter, big time! Just to mention one thing.

Darn! I commented, didn't I?

••••

Boredness
So bored...
Premium Member
join:2005-07-07
Fresno, CA

3 edits

Boredness

Premium Member

I'm below the U.S. average then thanks to at&t

I can only get 384k sync (325k actual) through at&t dsl so i guess I'm below the U.S.average then. The only thing that will fix that is Uverse which will never come cause I live in an apartment. AT&T needs to install more RT's if they want more business.

John T
@northropgrumman.com

John T

Anon

The CWA is blatantly dishonest here

They get their international average download speeds, according to their report, from this ITIF study:
»www.itif.org/files/Broad ··· ings.pdf

That's the one that gives the averages of 61 Mbps in Japan, 45 Mbps in South Korea, 18 Mbps in Sweden, 17 Mbps in France and 7 Mbps in Canada. But that same report gives a value for the USA, of 4.8 Mbps, not 1.9 Mbps. (See Table 1, on page 4.)

What's the difference? Well, the ITIF report is based on advertised speeds from major vendors, geographically averaged. From page three of the report, they say:
However, measuring speed is not as straightforward as penetration because national networks are normally composed of connections of widely varying speeds. We calculate average download speeds based on OECD data that compiles the advertised speeds offered by several major broadband providers in each country. The OECD gathered this data from national providers wherever possible.
This is obviously a source of bias. Not everyone who has broadband has the highest advertised speed. Plenty of people have 768k DSL even when 5 Mbps cable is advertised in their area, for example.

The CWA numbers have their own set of bias (people with slow connections might be more willing to take the Speed Matters test), but might be more accurate. However, it's completely unjustified to compare speed test numbers for the US to advertised speeds everywhere else. Particularly when the source of the international numbers gives a US number itself, more double that of the CWA number. Speed test derived numbers for other countries might indeed be slower-- as international speed test results do seem to show.
DemonChicken
join:2006-10-15
Boon, MI

DemonChicken

Member

Re: The CWA is blatantly dishonest here

How about DSL to everyone to increase our speed. Have the government fund some expantion. Were wasting tons of money as it is. Waste some more.