 dsoegiarto
join:2010-04-16
Kitchener, ON | Canada? how bout Canada??  | |
|
 | Feramors
join:2010-05-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: Canada? No idea!
...but you CAN buy the article for $6,999.00! | |
|
| openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | For $6,999 you might find out  | |
|
| Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL
| said by dsoegiarto  :how bout Canada?? There caps make comcasts 250g seem to be real good. | |
|
hehbo2k3
join:2003-02-03 | did they forget something These reports never seem to acknowledge the fact that the US has a much sparser population density than nearly any of the European countries we are "competing" against. Shouldn't this be a huge factor in all 5 of those categories mentioned? | |
|
| 
Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: did they forget something How dare you interrupt the America Sucks circlejerk!?! | |
|
| |
| | |
| | | Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA
 ·callwithus
·Vitelity VOIP
 ·Comcast
 ·SONIC.NET
| Re: did they forget something said by espaeth :said by Frank :in other words, i'd believe you if I saw 1gbps internet connections for $50 in NYC like I see in other cities with similar population densities and the rural areas were still unwired, While not the unrealistic $50 price level for gig, Paxio is still delivering competitive services in the highly dense San Francisco bay area market: » www.paxio.com/Residentialinternet I have been religious about attempting to get every type of Internet there is in San Jose, and so far, I have not seen what you are talking about being real (actual delivery); the best we got in January was Comcast DOCSIS 3.0 with 50/10 service, which is a far bit better than we had before.
I just sent an inquiry to paxio.com. If they are real, I'll get it installed. If not, you're just regurgitating bogus data. | |
|
| | | | 
joebarnhart
Paxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA
·Comcast
| Re: did they forget something Yep. They're real...
(Dunno why the upload doesn't show 100M like the download, but it actually transfers files at that speed.)
Paxio's footprint is small but growing... | |
|
| | | | | Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA
·callwithus
·Vitelity VOIP
·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
| Re: did they forget something Ok, thanks for that. It's real, for you definately. However, it is not that real, since I just got this email from Paxio (excerpted):
"Your address does not currently have PAXIO service available,"
They then go on to offer applying for a business case to be made to bring it to my address. Of course I consider that the right approach: that's open for business (no losses but willing to consider gains). However, just because it's a reasonable approach doesn't make it "an available option". It just makes it an option in some places.
I spent 15 minutes looking for the time-based coverage map, or any coverage map at all, or any description of its coverage, and found nothing, so there's no indication that its business model = substantial availability growth, except your statement that its footprint is growing. How is it growing?
So, I repeat: AT&T is stuck at 768kbps/384kbps, and the other option is Comcast. There's no Sonic Fusion, Paxio, or anything else I'm aware of. AT&T U-Verse, while available at my address, is restricted to those that meet extremely restrictive credit reporting agency specifications, unlike all the other carriers, so while you can hawk AT&T's business choices all you want, it is therefore unavailable and not reality. That means Comcast is the only game in town, which means it is a monopoly. | |
|
| | | | | | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
1 edit | Re: did they forget something said by Ulmo :That means Comcast is the only game in town, which means it is a monopoly. In your neighborhood, but in in the entire town. | |
|
| | | | | |
joebarnhart
Paxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA
·Comcast
| I know that Paxio partnered with Pulte Homes in some San Jose communities. I think one was called Mariana Square. Another was Altura (close to Santa Clara). I live in Talavera, a Santa Clara Pulte community. Paxio has more (non-Pulte) projects in the area as well. I just thought of the Pulte ones off the top of my head.
If you have a Homeowner's Association you can probably get the fiber brought to your area. If you live in an apartment or condo, you can probably get the fiber as well. The hardest area for Paxio to reach is a patch of single-family homes with no HOA because there's no critical mass of people to deal with.
Don't just lie there and let Comcast or AT&T do anything they want to you. Look into that "fiber advocate" stuff and help Paxio get a fiber into your community. Or, the next time you move, look for a place with fiber already installed. | |
|
| dlewis23
join:2005-04-18
Boca Raton, FL
| Thats because they don't care about facts like the US 96 times larger then South Korea.
One might think that might make it just a little easier to bring broadband to everyone in South Korea.
I wouldn't be surprised if the US never ranks #1 or even in the top 5 in these types of list. Our physical size and population density will always be a problem for broadband. | |
|
| toro
join:2006-01-27
Scarborough, ON
·TekSavvy DSL
| Just forget about the rural penetration and compare the speeds (and prices) for high density urban areas. You'll see there's still a huge difference.
And in Canada it's even worse.
--
»www.voipfan.net | |
|
| | 
cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
Fruitport, MI
·Verizon Online DSL
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: did they forget something said by toro :Just forget about the rural penetration and compare the speeds (and prices) for high density urban areas. You'll see there's still a huge difference. And in Canada it's even worse. Yeah, who cares where we rank in penetration. It should be all about the speed/price comparison.
Why are we being raped so badly?
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
|
| | | |
| 
tmh
@qwest.net
| said by hehbo2k3 :These reports never seem to acknowledge the fact that the US has a much sparser population density than nearly any of the European countries we are "competing" against. Shouldn't this be a huge factor in all 5 of those categories mentioned? Excuses excuses.
We're still in the middle of the pack, behind Estonia (#19) and Latvia(#18), but hey! They're much smaller nations than America, so of course these little putt-putt nations deserve to kick our butt.
There's no excuse for being #23 folks. | |
|
| | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | Re: did they forget something said by tmh :
...
There's no excuse for being #23 folks.
but there is lots of money to be made by the ILECs
we're #23! | |
|
| AlfredNewman
join:2010-03-25
Johnstown, OH
1 edit | said by hehbo2k3 :These reports never seem to acknowledge the fact that the US has a much sparser population density than nearly any of the European countries we are "competing" against. Shouldn't this be a huge factor in all 5 of those categories mentioned? Did you forget New York City, San Francisco, LA, Miami, etc... high density, sucky internet services. They are just not getting DOCSIS 3.0 and up to 50Mb services if you pay about $100+ when compared to places like Toyko that get 100MB up/down for a fraction of the price.
I'm sorry hehbo2k3 but you obviously didn't think or do your research before you posted. | |
|
| |
Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23
·Cox HSI
| Re: Did you forget something? Did you forget that the carriers in those areas aren't isolated to those areas. If VZ ONLY had to wire NYC, they could deploy any speed you wanted...but they have to be concerned with millions upon millions of other users and dedicate resources to serving them.
--
"Our goal (was to make) a billion phones Flash-enabled by 2010...We're actually going to get 1 billion Flash-enabled phones by 2009." -Adobe Chief Technology Officer Kevin Lynch in Nov 2008. | |
|
| | | 
digitalfreak
join:2005-12-09
Blacklick, OH | Re: Did you forget something? So how does wiring NYC for speeds comparable to SK and other have anything to do with speeds in Podunk, Kansas? There's nothing that says they have to offer the same speeds in every location. Hell, they're doing that now. | |
|
| | | |
Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: Did you forget something? Because they deploy using nationwide plans. If they deployed gigabit service in NYC everyone here would immediately cry redlining. | |
|
| | | | |
NuShrike
@cox.net
| Re: Did you forget something? How is that different from now where they deploy piecemeal per city anyways?
Do you see AT&T covering all of USA's square inch? Even Verizon? No, they cover only where people live and where the density justifies the coverage.
Stop being such an industry apologist. | |
|
| | | | | |
Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: Did you forget something? Big difference because they're still national plans.
Stop being a whiner. | |
|
| | | | | | | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
| Re: Did you forget something? said by Z80A :Big difference because they're still national plans. Verizon FiOS is not a national or even Verizon wide plan. AT&T U-Verse is not a national or even an AT&T wide plan. Don't even think about cable companies having the same speeds and prices everywhere. Lack of effective competition is the reason why U. S. broadband isn't better. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: Did you forget something? Of course it is. FiOS plans are nearly standard in every FiOS market and the same with U-Verse. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23
·Cox HSI
4 edits | Re: Did you forget something? False on it's face. FiOS tiers are nearly universal across all FiOS markets. They are 15-25-35-50 just about everywhere if not everywhere FiOS is available.
And 18-24Mb U-Verse is slow compared to what exactly? They are also getting ready to deploy bonded service. | |
|
| | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
| said by AlfredNewman :hey are just not getting DOCSIS 3.0 and up to 50Mb services if you pay about $100+ when compared to places like Toyko that get 100MB up/down for a fraction of the price. What is that "fraction"? 10%? 25%? I suspect it is around 50%.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
|
NuShrike
@cox.net | You seem to be denying that we have any cities at all with comparable density in a small-enough area that at least justifies comparable coverage. | |
|
| |
Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: did they forget something You seem to be denying that these providers service more than just densely populated areas. | |
|
| | | sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| Re: did they forget something said by Z80A :You seem to be denying that these providers service more than just densely populated areas. No one provides equal service over their entire footprint. You're being completely irrational. What is stopping them from fibering up cities and suburbs? Why did Verizon stop their FIOS buildout entirely? Stop being such an apologist. | |
|
|
NuShrike
@cox.net | If you want to argue density, Kushiro, Japan has 140 people per square Km. They're going to get fiber fairly soon.
Orange County with 1,473 people per square Km, still no fiber. | |
|
| |
Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23 | Re: did they forget something Then move to Japan. | |
|
| | | Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA | Re: did they forget something Actually, you move to Japan, where your crap will actually become true. Otherwise you're just lying. | |
|
| sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| said by hehbo2k3 :These reports never seem to acknowledge the fact that the US has a much sparser population density than nearly any of the European countries we are "competing" against. Shouldn't this be a huge factor in all 5 of those categories mentioned? It's irritating seeing these red herring brought up over and over again. Sweden has a far lower population density than the US and they have far better broadband than us. | |
|
| |
Duramax08
Ya rly.
Premium
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX | For the record Tell us how your would address competition. | |
|
| Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | Re: For the record One nationwide fiber network that connects every home and business that any company can use to reach any consumer that wants their service. | |
|
| |
vzw emp
| Re: For the record said by Skippy25 :One nationwide fiber network that connects every home and business that any company can use to reach any consumer that wants their service. Darn, beat me to it. | |
|
|
vzw emp
| Instead of giving the banks, automakers and every other broke fat cat billions in bailout money (too big to fail my a$$) you could have used it to build a national fiber network then lease it to anyone who wants to offer service over said network. But that's just an idea. | |
|
| nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | mandated line sharing | |
|
| 
Supervisor
Premium
join:2006-03-26
Lebanon, PA | Functional separation between infrastructure and services. | |
|
squirrel83
cheers
join:2005-05-02
Missoula, MT | $$ pretty sad considering we are the creators of the internet. . . but noooo money went elsewhere . . . | |
|
| glinc
join:2009-04-07
New York, NY | Re: $$ And also pretty sad considering we're a first world country. | |
|
| | |
garmst
join:2000-09-17
New York, NY
·Speakeasy
| A fairly good 23rd We have FIOS fiber at VZ, COMCAST, TWC, Optimum OL deploying DOCSIS at 50 and 100 Mbit levels, 4G and LTE sprouting up and we're 23rd? Well, being 23rd is not bad after all! The poor in America have better internet than most of the folks in the world. | |
|
| Bodybagger
join:2010-03-30
Saint Matthews, SC | Re: A fairly good 23rd I'm sorry but I beg to differ. | |
|
| | mlcarson
join:2001-09-20
Las Cruces, NM
| Re: A fairly good 23rd Your perception of being 23rd probably depends on where you're at. If you're in an urban environment with multiple ISP options, who cares? If you're in a rural environment with a single bad option or no option, you probably think we're behind 3rd world countries. | |
|
| cw30000
join:2008-07-11
| said by garmst :We have FIOS fiber at VZ, COMCAST, TWC, Optimum OL deploying DOCSIS at 50 and 100 Mbit levels, 4G and LTE sprouting up and we're 23rd? Well, being 23rd is not bad after all! The poor in America have better internet than most of the folks in the world. only problem is these top speed are unaffordable by most of the population. Average $100/month, and for comcast, there is a 250gb cap. Advantage in technology suppose to reduce the cost, like when we used to paid $20 to modem access, now we pay a little more for 100x faster. But that's was so yesterday. Now in America, our cable and telecom industry re-define the meaning of "unlimited" by making it low cap high overage charge. At the same times, they are making record profits every single quarter. | |
|
Six Gun Kid
Premium
join:2001-07-02
Huntsville, AL
2 edits | U.S. Ranks 23rd In Broadband Development No surprise here in N. Alabama...One Cable Provider (Mediacom) and one DSL Provider (At&t) that's it. Choose between bad and worse, those are my options.
--
I find it hard to see the Forest for the Trees... | |
|
| 
Boogeyman
Drive it like you stole it
Premium
join:2002-12-17
Huntsville, AL
·Comcast
| Re: U.S. Ranks 23rd In Broadband Development Depending on where you are at in Huntsville, you could get Knology or Comcast as well. In my neck of the woods (south 231), Comcast has good speeds (can usually sustain 2MBps for minutes at a time) but the pings are inconsistent ( »/r3/smokeping.···2299c94f )
--
Im Your Boogeyman, Thats What I Am | |
|
nutcr0cker
join:2003-04-02
Chandler, AZ | But...but georgie said But...but georgie said that if we bomb Iraq and give tax cuts to the super rich it would have a trickle down prosperity everyone would be have mores after he completes his presidency | |
|
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
theyipper
join:2001-01-18
Oakland, CA | forgot one.. They forgot a very important category: Profitability. | |
|
| |
| | |
| | | |
| Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA
·callwithus
·Vitelity VOIP
·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
| Re: forgot one.. said by theyipper :They forgot a very important category: Profitability. Precisely.
Unfortunately, it is hard to measure, since the government-nongovernment interaction is different in every case. Therefore, it becomes almost meaningless.
If you could take away all of the implementation laws, taxes, governmental influences, etc., then looked at the profitability and quality of product, then you'd have an imaginary world that doesn't exist, unfortunately. | |
|
|
| mworks
join:2006-06-13
Faison, NC
| Re: A national broadband progam is not so complicated! They will not do anything to change it because the telco give them too much money for campaigns and such. The telco were given hundreds of billions in tax incentives and deregulation on the promise they would connect every home to broadband. It never happened of course and they ran with the money. Only 1 state has taken the telco to court over breach of contract, New Jersey. And surprisingly verizon now promises it will cover all homes. Funny how they can suddenly make it happen when pressured.
What we have here is a case of the accused paying off the judge. We the jury can complain all we like but the judge will do what the person paying wants. | |
|
jaa
Premium,MVM
join:2000-06-13
·Optimum Online
·Vonage
| Because of Competition or Lack of? Some argue we need more competitors to drive competition.
Others argue we need a regulated monopoly or government run broadband - competition is too inefficient.
So which is it that is killing us - competition or lack thereof??
--
NOTHING justifies terrorism. We don't negotiate with terrorists. Those that support terrorists are terrorists. | |
|
| Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
| Re: Because of Competition or Lack of? said by jaa :So which is it that is killing us - competition or lack thereof?? The answer is actually both! In the profitable areas we need more competition but in the unprofitable areas we need a regulated monopoly or government owned (privatize the actual service) broadband. BTW, anywhere the dominant provider or duopoly says that FiberToTheHome in the next five years is too expensive should automatically be considered unprofitable and therefore a heavily regulated area. | |
|
| | Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA | Re: Because of Competition or Lack of? That's sensible. By "more competition", I assume you mean less red tape, legal prohibitions, and tax (aka lobbyists stymieing competition). | |
|
PerfectCode
join:2009-06-12
Portland, OR | Lame! I thank JohnInSJ for this. ^_^ | |
|
|
|
|
U.S. Ranks 23rd In Broadband Development
·
A national broadband progam is not so complicated!
Broadband service should be extended to any location where there is electric service. Once electric power has been deployed the most difficult issues have already been resolved. Anywhere there is electric power there are telephone poles, a right of way already in place to install fiber and a power source to power the broadband network. The only problem is the incumbent ISP influence peddling. Our government lawmakers will spend billions on pork barrel projects benefiting their cronies while not helping our citizens. We need a national broadband program which could be promoted as the "WIRE AMERICA NOW". If our government can afford to build highways at a million dollars a mile they can afford to install fiber along a highway for a few thousand dollars a mile. Any excuse not to is Bull Feces.