site Search:


 
   
story category
The National Broadband Map Goes Mobile
Now You Can Get Unreliable Data on the Go!
by Karl Bode Monday 23-Jan-2012 tags: coverage · business · wireless · wireless
In February of last year the government launched the nation's first ever national broadband map. Unfortunately, the map was met with significant criticism due the fact the data collected from ISPs drastically overstated speeds, failed to include price, and the map often informed users ISPs serve their area when they don't. While the government insisted the $300 million map would improve given constant updates, the first update to the map since its February launch only just occurred late last year, and most users note the map still suffers from inaccuracy. On the plus side, the government has announced that users can access the map data from mobile devices, making it easier to obtain completely inaccurate information on service providers while you're out on the town.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:

Duramax08
A Challenger Appears
Premium
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX

Oh goodie!

They can remind me that the map shows I can get ATT and TWC but in reality, I wish I could.
AndyDufresne
Premium
join:2010-10-30

Bravo!

"making it easier to obtain completely inaccurate information on service providers while you're out on the town."

High five for that line.
bobny1

join:2004-09-10
Bronx, NY

Re: Bravo!

300+ million dollar inaccurate map?. sounds like a big pork to me!
chances14

join:2010-03-03

this map makes me mad

everytime i see it. i sure wish i could get dsl or cable like it says i can
jmas

join:2011-12-09
Hamilton, MI

not even close for me.

what a joke. I wish i had access to the speed and providers listed for my address.

they should fix this or stop wasting my tax money on it.

hopefully broadband providers don't use this data for planning expansions or upgrades.

Corehhi

join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC

Well

My local and only choice for wired board band is not even listed. Not a hard company to find they are the only wired telephone/cable/board band provider. Let me check some more zip codes around me and see if this map is truly useless.
dplantz

join:2000-08-02
Roslindale, MA

Re: Well

This is a mess. I have not heard of some of the providers for my address. The speeds they claim are available are wrong too. RCN is completely missing. This map was an overpriced joke. Very inaccurate
NWOhio

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

Re: Well

and yet people want the FCC (makers of this map) to actually regulate the ISPs. They fail at this they're going to fail at anything else they do. And they do.

Corehhi

join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC

well plused

The map doesn't do better with other zips around me.

gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall

join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA

1 edit

It's all wrong

When I enter the zip code, it goes to an area that is not my zip code and offers speeds that arent available here.
It also lists 2 companys I never heard of and leaves out the biggest clec in the county. Cruzio

Says 10-24 mb for comcast and att. lawlz
--
Let them eat FIBER!

AMDUSER
Premium
join:2003-05-28
Earth
kudos:1
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: It's all wrong

That map is largely inaccurate... it was mostly right with Time Warner Cable [except that you can get upto 50 Meg cable]..
The catch with the AT&T listing... it says I can get 10 Meg from them; [I can't- even AT&T's website says upto 3 Meg...- and No I don't qualify for AT&T U-Verse.]
ConstantineM

join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA
Reviews:
·Google Voice
·Junction Networks
·Callcentric
·T-Mobile US
·AT&T U-Verse

map doesn't include any CLECs at all whatsoever, does it?!

The BroadbandMap.Gov is absolutely horrible. I've made a review of it in the U-verse forum, in regards to AT&T and merely some Bay Area providers: »AT&T U-verse on BroadbandMap.Gov..

Basically, BroadbandMap suggests that I'm eligible for 24/3 xDSL from AT&T, whereas I can only get their FTTP/FTTH/FTTU BPON, which they artificially limit to 18/1.5. It explicitly denies the fact that AT&T FTTH does exist in the first place, anywhere, ever.

It completely omits »Sonic.net, »Paxio.net, »Webpass.net, and I'm sure every single other non-incumbent provider, provides incomplete info about SureWest (they are no longer limited to California since long ago), and overall is just about as useless and pointless as you could possibly make it so.

Thought you could use BroadbandMap.Gov to find places with FTTH? Think again — you can't!

I cannot possibly think of anyone who could find this map useful. Unless it really is intended for people to check out which incumbent telecom and which incumbent cableco provide service in a given area. Seriously? Anyone can make a better map with public data from the internet alone.
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
Schaumburg, IL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
·T-Mobile US
·Clearwire
·AT&T Wireless Br..
·Comcast
·AT&T DSL Service
·RCN CABLE

Re: map doesn't include any CLECs at all whatsoever, does it?!

yeah the map misses a lot of providers, not only landline but also wireless!

And this map does not show any "first class" connections for business from providers like XO or Covad.

Also try trick with map and filtering to docsis 3.0. Funny how it covers almost entire Indiana, but not Illinois and especially Chicagoland where D3 is standard now.
ConstantineM

join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA
Reviews:
·Google Voice
·Junction Networks
·Callcentric
·T-Mobile US
·AT&T U-Verse

Re: map doesn't include any CLECs at all whatsoever, does it?!

My point exactly! I think they literally miss every single non-ILEC provider; come on, if one of the most well known CLECs — Sonic.net — was not included, how could you possibly have faith that a much less known CLEC would be?

I also want to be able to filter for places that have FTTU, but it seems that not only no such filter is possible, they might not even have much data to back it up!

The more I think about it, the more clear it is that the map is merely an extra advertising venue for the duopoly in a given area, with no hints of the competition. Sounds like instead of doing this useless project, they should have mandated each provider to have their own map, and merely created a directory of all such providers.

Also, I don't really get how could you have a broadband map, and not have any features to actually search for places with fast broadband, e.g. FTTU? I mean, they don't even have any page with any lists of FTTU providers in the first place, do they? Not even asking for any map! It'll probably reveal just how incomplete their list of populated providers is, that's probably why they don't have it...

ArkhmAsylm
Evrythng I need isn't really what I want

join:2006-02-22
Saint Paul, MN
Reviews:
·Comcast

Lame...

What a crock! They list my CenturyLink options as being 25Mbit & higher, but CenturyLink still can't offer my location more than 1.5Mbit.

That's a bit off...
--
*Tap, Tap, Tap* Is this thing on?

Monday, 04-Jun 06:33:48 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.