republican-creole
site Search:


 
   
story category
U.S. Still 12th in Broadband Penetration
OECD rankings: song remains the same...
by Karl Bode Friday 13-Oct-2006 tags: stats · world
Whenever you hear someone complaining about the United States's dismal showing when it comes to global broadband stats, they're likely referring to the yearly OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) broadband rankings. This year's statistics have been released, and nothing has changed for the U.S. We still have the most total connections, but remain in twelfth place in broadband adoption, behind countries such as Canada, Belgium, and Denmark.

Some of the report's findings:
•Denmark now leads the OECD with a broadband penetration rate of 29.3 subscribers per 100 inhabitants.•The strongest per-capita subscriber growth comes from Denmark, Australia, Norway, the Netherlands, Finland, Luxembourg, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Each country added more than 6 subscribers per 100 inhabitants during the past year.•Japan leads the OECD in fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) with 6.3 million fibre subscribers in June 2006. Fibre subscribers alone in Japan outnumber total broadband subscribers in 22 of the 30 OECD countries.•The total number of ADSL subscriptions in Korea and Japan have continued to decline as more users upgrade to fibre-based connections.•DSL continues to be the leading platform in 28 OECD countries. Cable modem subscribers outnumber DSL in Canada and the United States.•The United States has the largest total number of broadband subscribers in the OECD at 57 million. US broadband subscribers now represent 36% of all broadband connections in the OECD, up from 31% in December 2005.•Canada continues to lead the G7 group of industrialized countries in broadband penetration.
You can find the full report, including graphs, here.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:

rachelsfx

join:2004-09-27
Pensacola, FL

1 edit

We may be behind Canada

But probably not in quality.

Small industrial countries should be ahead.

I still do not support any fees or taxes to bring us to #1 though. S. Korea only accomplished it because the Telco is a monopoly pretty much owned, I think, and controlled by the gov't. A nuke from N. Korea would end that real quick though.

brooklynman4

join:2004-09-07
Brooklyn, NY

Re: We may be behind Canada

Come on we can do better than that right??

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
said by rachelsfx:

But probably not in quality.

Small industrial countries should be ahead.

I still do not support any fees or taxes to bring us to #1 though. S. Korea only accomplished it because the Telco is a monopoly pretty much owned, I think, and controlled by the gov't. A nuke from N. Korea would end that real quick though.
Most ISP are basically monopolies here too. People at most have TWO choices for an broadband ISP.

Also the whole "the US is so much bigger" excuse is just lame. Ok let's look at it by state. Let's compare small but very populated states to some of these countries. I bet those states still lag behind in broadband penetration in comparison. What is Rhode Island's broadband penetration % compared to these Euro countries. Half the COUNTIES in the US are bigger than Rhode Island.
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

1 edit

Re: We may be behind Canada

said by BF69:

Most ISP are basically monopolies here too. People at most have TWO choices for an broadband ISP.

Also the whole "the US is so much bigger" excuse is just lame. Ok let's look at it by state. Let's compare small but very populated states to some of these countries. I bet those states still lag behind in broadband penetration in comparison. What is Rhode Island's broadband penetration % compared to these Euro countries. Half the COUNTIES in the US are bigger than Rhode Island.
You "bet" that those states lag? If you're going to state that the arguement that lower penetration numbers is due to US population density and size is "lame", you might want to come up with something other than a guess

footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
said by rachelsfx:

A nuke from N. Korea would end that real quick though.
KJI isn't going to nuke South Korea. His whole manic plan is to reunite Korea. He wants to use the nuke as leverage so that he can invade SK without American or Japanese intervention.
--
What's certain about Darwinism is that it would take less time for (1) a single-celled organism to evolve into a human being through mutation and natural selection than for (2) Darwinists to admit they have no proof of (1) - Ann Coulter

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Re: We may be behind Canada

said by footballdude:

KJI isn't going to nuke South Korea.
He just wants to nuke Japan and us!
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk.

footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO

Re: We may be behind Canada

said by pnh102:

He just wants to nuke Japan and us!
I'm not convinced he really wants that. Maybe Japan as there's some long standing hatred of Japan in much of Asia. As far as the US is concerned, I think he just wants us to go away. As in, you can stop me from taking South Korea but it will cost you Seattle.
--
What's certain about Darwinism is that it would take less time for (1) a single-celled organism to evolve into a human being through mutation and natural selection than for (2) Darwinists to admit they have no proof of (1) - Ann Coulter
jseldon

join:2003-04-22
Auburn, WA
I don't know about that. I live in Canada and I have 10mbps/1mbps service here. Certainly not the top tiers available in the major US markets but pretty darn good for not being in a major metro area. The problem lies in geography, while Canada is a huge country so much of our population is in a very small percentage area. As a result the US has far more cabling to do to cover everyone. This would also account for smaller countries ability to do the same.

James
older dog
Premium
join:2005-06-09
Norwich, NY
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: We may be behind Canada

While the higher speeds in some areas get the press coverage a lot of us are still at 1mbps and 128, and are not likely to see any upgrades unless the Government steps in.
Many have no broadband options even though the uptake on broadband has been far higher in rural areas than expected where it is available.
Tikker_LoS

join:2004-04-29
Regina, SK
said by rachelsfx:

But probably not in quality.

Small industrial countries should be ahead.
I'd take that bet any day of the week.

Most of the large DSL providers here also have TV over DSL, with SaskTel rolling out HDTV over dsl

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Canada leads G7 in broadband penetration

Way to go!
of course, when you've got some companies running their broadband fiber backbone (oc-192) through towns of ~1000 and deploying Cable Internet cheap, you're going to get good broadband penetration.
eg. »www.bigpipeinc.com/pdf/network_m···line.pdf
»www.bigpipeinc.com/pdf/network_m···bone.pdf
My old hometown of White River has +5Mbps cable w/o TV for CDN $37.95
»www.vianet.ca/cable_nwestern_on.php
»www.vianet.ca/hsa.php
Blame Canada...

major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA

Keep Dreaming

The U.S. will never achieve similiar penetration levels of the EC or Japan. Never. At least until the telcos have their pet politicians pass a law that allows them to nix Net Neutrality and double dip. And the pending AT&T giveaway will be especially conducive to keeping the country at the bottom of the broadband penetration chart.
--
The Toll

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: Keep Dreaming

It should be also interesting to note, that the US has at least double the overall amount of broadband users than the next nearest country, and in some cases, more broadband users than some of the other countries total population (i.e. Canada has only ~30 million people vs. 54 million US broadband subs).

Yauch

join:2005-06-24

Re: Keep Dreaming

"We still have the most total connections" You mean we're #1!!!

U S A! U S A! U S A! U S A! U S A!
nalaregeork

join:2004-08-25
Yorktown Heights, NY
Statistics are a great tool that politicians and people with a political agenda use to manipulate us all into thinking one way or the other.
I think monopolies are really our worst enemies I beleive in free enterprise the trouble is we are regulated to the hilt. If a small town wanted to wire themselves I think they would meet with a lot of roadblocks. Try and see if you can put a wire up on a utility pole (legally) and you will find out who really owns what.

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
said by en102:

It should be also interesting to note, that the US has at least double the overall amount of broadband users than the next nearest country, and in some cases, more broadband users than some of the other countries total population (i.e. Canada has only ~30 million people vs. 54 million US broadband subs).
It should be noted that the US has more because only China and India have more people than the US.

So a country that has say 100 million people where 20% are literate is more educated than one that has 10 million, but 95% are literate, because the bigger country has 20 million literate people while smaller country only has 9.5 million?

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: Keep Dreaming

I never said that the US is more broadband connected than the other countries...
To take your analogy in a different perspective...
A country that has 300 million people and 58 million of them are educated, while a country of 30 million has 7 million educated, the percentages are 19.3% vs. 23%, however, the overall amount of educated in the first country are almost double the entire population of the first. Ratios are one thing, raw numbers are another. 1 in 5 is easier to obtain than 1 million out of 5 million.

Also, many countries have a lot higher urban to rural ratio than the US does, which, in typical business speak, 'are not profitable' (actually should be seen as 'not profitable enough'). I may not always agree with the politics on it, but hasn't USF/FUSF slush fund already been paid into ?

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

Re: Keep Dreaming

said by en102:

Also, many countries have a lot higher urban to rural ratio than the US does, which, in typical business speak, 'are not profitable' (actually should be seen as 'not profitable enough'). I may not always agree with the politics on it, but hasn't USF/FUSF slush fund already been paid into ?
Also as I said compare the small US states with large populations and ask why their broadband penetration is far behind those other countries. Aren't they of similar size and popuation density?

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: Keep Dreaming

I'm sure there's some politics to it...
Most countries: DSL/Cable 'somewhat' subsidized to deploy, but higher cost
US: DSL/Cable corp will fight for market share where it is profitable, but ignore the rest. E.g. I'm sure NYC has a high availability and competition, while portions upstate may be left unserviced or serviced by one provider at a high cost.
nalaregeork

join:2004-08-25
Yorktown Heights, NY

Re: Keep Dreaming

Funny you should mention it

I don't live up there but I do get up there a bunch. Somone asked me to look into what could be done in a low population community. I asked a number of people who might be clued in and came to the conclussion that there was almost nothing that could be done. The CO was far from everyone and not all that well provisioned.
Bottom line was that even the most extreme distanced community wireless was going to cost them more then they could stand to pay. I had to assume that not everyone up there was going to contribute funds and some just flat out couldn't afford it. That bothers me a bit that it was nearly insurmountable to get them even a minimal broadband connection so they remain dialup users...
squid7
Premium
join:2006-09-02
With the US population as large as it is, I wouldn't be surprised if Comcast alone has more broadband users and entire countries do.
short09

join:2006-07-21
said by major marco :

the pending AT&T giveaway will be especially conducive to keeping the country at the bottom of the broadband penetration chart.
i wonder hoe much money fcc is gonna get out of this deal

Romney2012
Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe in
Premium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4

148 million broadband users in US

The United States has the largest total number of broadband subscribers in the OECD at 57 million.
And I read subscribers as households subscribed, not broadband users in that stat from the OECD.

And when you take into account that their are 2.59 persons per household(2000 US census) in the US, that means there are 148 million people with access to broadband in the US. With a total population of 296 million(2005 census estimate) in the US, that means 50% of the US population has broadband access. And that number isn't based on the often derided FCC definition of broadband by zipcode.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page

Gwailo

join:2000-07-16
Richardson, TX

Re: 148 million broadband users in US

Tkjunkmail, you make a very good point as if you look at the raw statistics, it says 16.8% of the USA "population" is connected but in fact, homes are connected, not necessarily people.

I looked through the report and never did see anywhere where it says the percent of homes connected by country. Some countries in the list statistically have larger family sizes and others smaller family sizes so it would appear to me that homes should be the common denominator, not people.

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
said by Romney2012:

And that number isn't based on the often derided FCC definition of broadband by zipcode.
But is it using the FCC definition of "broadband" which they say is 200 kbps or higher? Let's compare apples with apples. How many houses have ACCESS( because not everyone wants the internet )to at least 1.5 Mbps broadband( which would by my minimum speed for "broadband" ). I would say that number in the US is far smaller than 50%

Romney2012
Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe in
Premium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4

Re: 148 million broadband users in US

said by BF69:

said by Romney2012:

And that number isn't based on the often derided FCC definition of broadband by zipcode.
But is it using the FCC definition of "broadband" which they say is 200 kbps or higher? Let's compare apples with apples. How many houses have ACCESS( because not everyone wants the internet )to at least 1.5 Mbps broadband( which would by my minimum speed for "broadband" ). I would say that number in the US is far smaller than 50%
The OECD definition of broadband is 256k or higher in at least 1 direction. I assume the stats about US broadband and other countries in this released report meet those requirements.

»www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/33/2475737.pdf

And an easier to read confirmation of info in the above OECD PDF document is here:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_access
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has defined broadband as 256 kbit/s in at least one direction and this bit rate is the most common baseline that is marketed as "broadband" around the world.

--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

Re: 148 million broadband users in US

said by Romney2012:

And an easier to read confirmation of info in the above OECD PDF document is here:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_access
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has defined broadband as 256 kbit/s in at least one direction and this bit rate is the most common baseline that is marketed as "broadband" around the world.
Well that's all fine if they are using the same number, but 256 kbps is still a joke to consider that broadband. More like dial-up delux.

Romney2012
Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe in
Premium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4

Re: 148 million broadband users in US

said by BF69:

Well that's all fine if they are using the same number, but 256 kbps is still a joke to consider that broadband. More like dial-up delux.
I wouldn't call 256k download real broadband either. But that is what the OECD is using to create the report listed in the news item.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page

dc economist

@cwa-union.org
The OECD and ITU numbers are all connections. These include business lines, as well as any cellular line that exceeded 256K.

The U.S. household penetration is somewhere between 30% and 38%, depending on whose dataset you look at (survey methods).

But the best way to do this is use the FCC's data (which is where the OECD gets their info from). If you assume the 43 million residential lines represent one per houshold (which b/c of cellular, slightly overstates that), and you use the latest census estimate of 115 million U.S. households, then you have a U.S. household penetration level of about 37%. Nowhere near the 50% you calculated.
Eric Martin

join:2005-06-19
66308

What is the highest expense for fiber optic ????

Networks ?

Is it the wire or the labor ?

We could use public assistance for munis.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Re: What is the highest expense for fiber optic ????

said by Eric Martin:

Networks ?

Is it the wire or the labor ?

We could use public assistance for munis.
I'd say it was the government. Local and State governments all over this country are imposing inane requirements on broadband providers who want to deploy service. A lot of these providers are finding that it is simply not worth the effort to deal with these restrictions.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk.
squid7
Premium
join:2006-09-02

1 edit

So what?

All this means is we have a population who seeks other sources of information for their news and entertainment including dial up.

Not wanting it and can't getting it would be two different statistics.

A lot of people CHOOSE not to buy it and to that I say, so what?

Next up, Bush sucks, the UN rules and FiOS installers break a water main.
netdopey

join:2002-01-14
Monroe, WA

It's cool and all to know about broadband access.

But what is the percentage of homes with internet access per country. AOL still had 19 million U.S subscribers as of June 2006.

Let alone I know of many people that use the library for net access and at least in my part of town the local library offers free wireless access.

And how many broadband connections are their in China and India? Hard to find information in my quick search but according to www.internetworldstats.com in 2004 China had over 25 million DSL subscribers which is like 2.5% of China had access to broadband. Which reminds me..

Where is Hong Kong on the list, or is it just a part of China? Back to www.internetworldstats.com, in 2004 11.5% of Hong Kong had broadband penetration.

Apparently 69% of the U.S. is connected to the internet. What that means is that the U.S. still needs to upgrade the infrastructure, big deal, it's happening everyday. Comcast in the first quarter of 2006 *added* 437,000 high speed customers. That is 1/4 of all of Denmark in 3 months. Kinda puts a little perspective on things.
nalaregeork

join:2004-08-25
Yorktown Heights, NY

This is something I just came up with...

I was pondering some of the issues pertaining to Community Wireless in badly connected remote regions and got an idea.
So ponder this idea before you say I am crazy and then if there is anything to it spread the word.
I am also an Amateur Radio Operator (Ham radio) there has been much talk in Ham circles about a proposal for a wide band digital segment. The traditionalist hate this suggestion intensely but some find it enticing. Now there are issues where Amateur Radio is concerned particulary about type of usage and type of content. But another similar alternative could be to create a Citizens Band Packet Radio segment which if they let it be allowed in the current 11 meter band should/could provide good connectivity over longer distances.
If this could be done/allowed then one could setup a community WIFI by getting a high speed digital connection from a distant location and feed that signal to the distant community and then the community could distribute the signal via standard WIFI equiptment for less money. The speed might not end up being the greatest but it would provide one more opportunity to connect up people that might desire it in a remote location.

Monday, 04-Jun 06:42:31 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.