We're #1 In Broadband (Sort Of) Assuming you look at completely irrelevant data like SMS use.... Monday Feb 23 2009 10:50 EDT The US currently ranks fifteenth in penetration, thirteenth in average price per connection, and nineteenth in average advertised download speed, according to OECD data. Still, the New York Times says we're actually "number one in broadband," assuming you look at the Nokia-funded Connectivity Scorecard, which measures technology use and skills by consumers, and not necessarily broadband. The measurement is crafted by comparing countries on five criteria: Internet penetration, penetration of Internet banking, wired and wireless voice minutes per capita, SMS messages per capita (OMG LOL), and consumer software spending (full methodology on page 38 of the report). Article author Saul Hansell recently proclaimed that broadband coverage gaps were "hooey" and continues that theme here, though with a bit more subtlety. |
maartenaElmo Premium Member join:2002-05-10 Orange, CA |
maartena
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 9:57 am
So all those teens........that say "like" about 5 times per sentence, and are messaging each other while in the same room got such a high SMS & mobile internet count, we actually measure up to something in the totals? :P | |
| | |
Re: So all those teens....Yes. "OMGLOL CU L8TR QT" helped improve our broadband ranking, apparently. | |
| | 1 edit |
to maartena
AND LIKE!!! 99 percent of facts are made up.. According to my free study.. Almost all Americans have 50/50 home connections. Verizon has a 99 percent penetration rate. How did I come up with this figure? Seeing how one person in a given area can get it, I assume everyone in the entire state can have access to the service!!! | |
| | | S_engineer Premium Member join:2007-05-16 Chicago, IL |
Re: So all those teens....said by jc10098:AND LIKE!!! 99 percent of facts are made up.. According to my free study.. Almost all Americans have 50/50 home connections. Verizon has a 99 percent penetration rate. How did I come up with this figure? Seeing how one person in a given area can get it, I assume everyone in the entire state can have access to the service!!! According to your free study???? Source your sample group with all variables please. Thats like saying....According to me....50 % of people believe that the other 50% of people are wrong, but of those people 50% believe there could be variables that could change their mind, which could lead to be the 50% that were believed to be wrong actually being 75% of the people being right! | |
| | | | moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
moonpuppy (banned)
Member
2009-Feb-23 3:25 pm
Re: So all those teens....said by S_engineer:said by jc10098:AND LIKE!!! 99 percent of facts are made up.. According to my free study.. Almost all Americans have 50/50 home connections. Verizon has a 99 percent penetration rate. How did I come up with this figure? Seeing how one person in a given area can get it, I assume everyone in the entire state can have access to the service!!! According to your free study???? Source your sample group with all variables please. Thats like saying....According to me....50 % of people believe that the other 50% of people are wrong, but of those people 50% believe there could be variables that could change their mind, which could lead to be the 50% that were believed to be wrong actually being 75% of the people being right! That's asking a lot out of him. Different teens will say different things but I can say with a lot of certainty that many kids do weird spellings to save space and time typing in their text messages. Can't tell you how many times my own friends (who have kids themselves) send me text messages that take me an hour to decipher. Something like: quote: can u hlp me tngt @ my hous ltr?
| |
| | | | | |
| | lesopp join:2001-06-27 Land O Lakes, FL |
to jc10098
If something is made up then how can it be a fact? | |
| | | TzaleProud Libertarian Conservative Premium Member join:2004-01-06 NYC Metro |
to jc10098
said by jc10098:AND LIKE!!! 99 percent of facts are made up.. According to my free study.. Almost all Americans have 50/50 home connections. Verizon has a 99 percent penetration rate. How did I come up with this figure? Seeing how one person in a given area can get it, I assume everyone in the entire state can have access to the service!!! WOW? Like Verizon has a 99 percent penetration rate? Even when I am really suave, I only get about a 15% penetration rate. (Not including all areas and time periods). -Tzale | |
|
| richdelbGo Hawks Go Premium Member join:2003-01-22 Algonquin, IL |
to maartena
said by maartena:....that say "like" about 5 times per sentence, and are messaging each other while in the same room got such a high SMS & mobile internet count, we actually measure up to something in the totals? :P You have the best Avatar on this entire site. | |
|
Matt3All noise, no signal. Premium Member join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC |
Matt3
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 9:57 am
Wireless Voice = Broadband?Talking on the phone and SMS messaging equates to broadband how? Wow, looking at page 38 and even 39 shows how far of a stretch they went to make us #1 .. literacy rate, e-Government spending, number of internet servers, Mobile enterprise messaging B2B ARPU ... yeah, ok. | |
| vdiv Premium Member join:2002-03-23 Reston, VA
1 recommendation |
vdiv
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 9:59 am
Huh?None of the five categories listed have much to do with broadband. We are #1 in absurd claims and delusions though. | |
| | StevenB Premium Member join:2000-10-27 New York, NY ·Charter
|
StevenB
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 10:01 am
Re: Huh?said by vdiv:None of the five categories listed have much to do with broadband. We are #1 in absurd claims and delusions though. Welcome to the United States of Quackery. | |
| | | woody7 Premium Member join:2000-10-13 Torrance, CA |
woody7
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 10:03 am
Re: Huh?said by StevenB:said by vdiv:None of the five categories listed have much to do with broadband. We are #1 in absurd claims and delusions though. Welcome to the United States of Quackery. | |
| | | FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
to StevenB
said by StevenB:said by vdiv:None of the five categories listed have much to do with broadband. We are #1 in absurd claims and delusions though. Welcome to the United States of Quackery. Maybe you missed the part of the report(or intentionally ignored it) where it was developed by Nokia(a Finnish company) and the London Business School. It wasn't a puff piece put together to make the US look good. | |
| | | | StevenB Premium Member join:2000-10-27 New York, NY ·Charter
|
StevenB
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 11:22 am
Re: Huh?said by FFH5:said by StevenB:said by vdiv:None of the five categories listed have much to do with broadband. We are #1 in absurd claims and delusions though. Welcome to the United States of Quackery. Maybe you missed the part of the report(or intentionally ignored it) where it was developed by Nokia(a Finnish company) and the London Business School. It wasn't a puff piece put together to make the US look good. I read the report. It was intentional to make the US look good. Lobby money sent that way? who know's! But my opinion still stands. | |
| | | | Jim Kirk Premium Member join:2005-12-09 49985 |
to FFH5
said by FFH5:said by StevenB:said by vdiv:None of the five categories listed have much to do with broadband. We are #1 in absurd claims and delusions though. Welcome to the United States of Quackery. Maybe you missed the part of the report(or intentionally ignored it) where it was developed by Nokia(a Finnish company) and the London Business School. It wasn't a puff piece put together to make the US look good. Considering the vast majority of things they based the score on had nothing to do with broadband, their conclusion is crap. Doesn't matter if it was done by the London Business School or Burger King. | |
| | | | | Matt3All noise, no signal. Premium Member join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC |
Matt3
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 12:44 pm
Re: Huh?said by Jim Kirk: Doesn't matter if it was done by the London Business School or Burger King. I disagree, that study would have been much tastier flame-broiled. | |
|
| | | lesopp join:2001-06-27 Land O Lakes, FL
2 recommendations |
to FFH5
Some folks are upset because the report is counter to "the Agenda" | |
|
| | |
to StevenB
said by StevenB:said by vdiv:None of the five categories listed have much to do with broadband. We are #1 in absurd claims and delusions though. Welcome to the United States of Quackery. LOL! Where facts are based on deception that are 100 percent madeup from thin air to keep American smiling while receiving really slow broadband service at higher cost then it does for the average japanese, korea, swedish, or netherland. I call it turtle broadband for the uninformed Download is adverised while upload is kept hidden Many of us believe that something like 10/1 is 10mbit 6/1 is 6mbit They are not the same as 10/10 or 6/6 This is only true if you are downloading but when you upload its only a fraction of it This is how americans are deceived and mislead due to false advertisement 50/20 is not same as 50/50 their is a world of difference 50/5 or 50/10 is not same as 50/20 When the upload is much lower then download, it is inferior 100/1 is next to useless IMHO cause all you can get out of it is 20mbps while 5/5 or 10/10 is a lot more useful Not only is our broadband in America slower, our upload is always handicapped by only a fraction of it to compensate for the advertised speed which is based on how fast you can download from shady company whos motive is money not good service. | |
|
woody7 Premium Member join:2000-10-13 Torrance, CA |
woody7
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 10:05 am
hmmmm.....wash, scrub, repeat,just part of the "spin" cycle....this is why we are behind the curve. | |
| | 3 edits |
Re: hmmmm.....said by woody7:wash, scrub, repeat,just part of the "spin" cycle....this is why we are behind the curve. True. What is missing from most reporting are all the relative factors in the countries which make up these lists. • Population (Sample size) • Geographic size / Population density (Cost / Homes Past) • Price / competition (Easier in highly dense areas) • National Policies (Government broadband plan) • Government subsidies (taxes funding infrastructure) Here is a basic break down of some of the details: » computer.howstuffworks.c ··· rld1.htm | |
|
|
Not apples here.I like how they compare the US internationally to a lot of smaller countries. Its a lot easier for a small country to get 100% wired up for fiber than it is for a nation as vast as the USA. If they were to compare South Korea or Holland to say just New Jersey, how would that compare?
I have a hard time feeling that the USA is broadband crippled when I have access to FiOS, Cable Modems, DSL, and several Wireless technologies here in Maryland. If I head out a little further into the rural areas, I may just be limited to wireless or satellite, but I could still get online.
I just find it amusing that everyone complains about how ISPs aren't willing to spend $10k to trench fiber to someone's home in the sticks so that they can provide $40/mo internet service. Of course the way that technology has been evolving this would could be obsolete in a a decade anyway and would take over 20 years to just recover the cost.
The rural areas are only going to be covered by a next generation wireless technology. Any efforts to bring a "wired" solution to the rural community will only be eclipsed by that wireless tech once it becomes available. | |
| | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY 3 edits
3 recommendations |
kamm
Member
2009-Feb-23 10:44 am
Re: Not apples here.said by CycloneGT2:I like how they compare the US internationally to a lot of smaller countries. Its a lot easier for a small country to get 100% wired up for fiber than it is for a nation as vast as the USA. If they were to compare South Korea or Holland to say just New Jersey, how would that compare? Can we stop with this BULL***T about "VAST COUNTRY" and other nonsensical, irrelevant crap, spread by industry corporatist shills?New York City is NOT a vast area and it's the BIGGEST market yet our speeds ARE SLOWER THAN ANY EU city's.Moreover according to the latest Census Burequ data OVER 80% OF AMERICANS LIVE IN LARGE METROPOLITAN AREAS - this immediately kills the BS fake arguments about "vast countries" and similar lies.quote: I have a hard time feeling that the USA is broadband crippled when I have access to FiOS, Cable Modems, DSL, and several Wireless technologies here in Maryland. If I head out a little further into the rural areas, I may just be limited to wireless or satellite, but I could still get online.
But that's just because you can't see further than your backyard and probably have no clue about what's going on abroad. THe fact that you are satisfied with your speeds does NOT change the fact that we are waaay behind the Western world, period. quote: I just find it amusing that everyone complains about how ISPs aren't willing to spend $10k to trench fiber to someone's home in the sticks so that they can provide $40/mo internet service. Of course the way that technology has been evolving this would could be obsolete in a a decade anyway and would take over 20 years to just recover the cost.
Of course, these numbers are complete BS again: sticking with the most expensive of all (your example, FIOS) the numbers show it only costs $1,200 per subscriber - considering the AVERAGE 1000-1500% BANDWIDTH MARKUP that's rather a 2-year return, I bet.Let me guess: you pulled these number out of your bottom part, right? The rural areas are only going to be covered by a next generation wireless technology. Any efforts to bring a "wired" solution to the rural community will only be eclipsed by that wireless tech once it becomes available. What an ignorant nonsense. Break down the greedy monopolies, the grasp of profit-only crooked corprations on the markets and there you go, you get broadband everywhere.
BTW for pointing out the cluelessness even further - you couldn't be more wrong about rurals and wireless: [b]countries with vast rural areas have FAR BETTER broadband, BUILT ON FTTH - look at Norway or Swedenfor example.Homework for you (it's from last May but still relevant): Cold, dark countries whipping US in broadband usage @ Ars | |
| | |
2 recommendations |
Re: Not apples here.said by kamm:said by CycloneGT2:I like how they compare the US internationally to a lot of smaller countries. Its a lot easier for a small country to get 100% wired up for fiber than it is for a nation as vast as the USA. If they were to compare South Korea or Holland to say just New Jersey, how would that compare? Can we stop with this BULL***T about "VAST COUNTRY" and other nonsensical, irrelevant crap, spread by industry corporatist shills?New York City is NOT a vast area and it's the BIGGEST market yet our speeds ARE SLOWER THAN ANY EU city's.Moreover according to the latest Census Burequ data OVER 80% OF AMERICANS LIVE IN LARGE METROPOLITAN AREAS - this immediately kills the BS fake arguments about "vast countries" and similar lies.quote: I have a hard time feeling that the USA is broadband crippled when I have access to FiOS, Cable Modems, DSL, and several Wireless technologies here in Maryland. If I head out a little further into the rural areas, I may just be limited to wireless or satellite, but I could still get online.
But that's just because you can't see further than your backyard and probably have no clue about what's going on abroad. THe fact that you are satisfied with your speeds does NOT change the fact that we are waaay behind the Western world, period. quote: I just find it amusing that everyone complains about how ISPs aren't willing to spend $10k to trench fiber to someone's home in the sticks so that they can provide $40/mo internet service. Of course the way that technology has been evolving this would could be obsolete in a a decade anyway and would take over 20 years to just recover the cost.
Of course, these numbers are complete BS again: sticking with the most expensive of all (your example, FIOS) the numbers show it only costs $1,200 per subscriber - considering the AVERAGE 1000-1500% BANDWIDTH MARKUP that's rather a 2-year return, I bet.Let me guess: you pulled these number out of your bottom part, right? The rural areas are only going to be covered by a next generation wireless technology. Any efforts to bring a "wired" solution to the rural community will only be eclipsed by that wireless tech once it becomes available. What an ignorant nonsense. Break down the greedy monopolies, the grasp of profit-only crooked corprations on the markets and there you go, you get broadband everywhere.
BTW for pointing out the cluelessness even further - you couldn't be more wrong about rurals and wireless: [b]countries with vast rural areas have FAR BETTER broadband, BUILT ON FTTH - look at Norway or Swedenfor example.Homework for you (it's from last May but still relevant): Cold, dark countries whipping US in broadband usage @ Ars Some don't want to admit that the united states is behind the rest of the world. American get fed by the mouth about how their country is the greatest and others are behind us in technology Americans don't realize that they are getting poorer while only few are getting richer. What good does it do us if bill gates is the only privilege few with 1gpbs connection while most of us crawl on crappy dsl and cable internet If you say that few are more rich then the rest of the world in America then that is true but like most 3rd world country the American are no better off Americans are completely brainwashed from birth LOL They believe anything and are easily deceived by ancient copper thats has been here for over a century The greedy corporation are lazy and they too represent lazy American. We like to have faster connection but we like to get it through dsl or cable but distance is always an issue and copper has many problem too like limited bandwidth, slow no matter what you do with it or how much you try to squeeze into it using faster hardware. Its too hard to change to fiber optic connection, too much work! | |
| | | |
to kamm
said by kamm:Of course, these numbers are complete BS again: sticking with the most expensive of all (your example, FIOS) the numbers show it only costs $1,200 per subscriber - considering the AVERAGE 1000-1500% BANDWIDTH MARKUP that's rather a 2-year return, I bet. You do realize that the $1,200/sub number is from their current deployments, right? FiOS has been primarily deployed to suburban and urban locations--those numbers increase greatly when you start talking about rural areas. | |
| | | | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY 2 edits |
kamm
Member
2009-Feb-23 11:42 am
Re: Not apples here.said by probboy:said by kamm:Of course, these numbers are complete BS again: sticking with the most expensive of all (your example, FIOS) the numbers show it only costs $1,200 per subscriber - considering the AVERAGE 1000-1500% BANDWIDTH MARKUP that's rather a 2-year return, I bet. You do realize that the $1,200/sub number is from their current deployments, right? FiOS has been primarily deployed to suburban and urban locations--those numbers increase greatly when you start talking about rural areas. It's across the board: 23B didived by 19M subs, without NYC - in other words rural deployments are easily covered by large metropolitan areas.And yes, this is the answer to rural deployments - not slow-@ss little ISPs with jacked-up price as they try to recover their costs over 10 years. WISPs' only shot to keep FTTH-based big guys honest - that's important, of course, no question about it (WISP's cost is well below $100 per sub, hehe.). | |
| | | | | |
probboy
Member
2009-Feb-23 11:49 am
Re: Not apples here.OK, using publicly available information, with a citation, please tell me one rural area where Verizon sells FiOS. By rural, I mean a place where we are talking single digit numbers of houses per mile of road (I'm using the east coast definition of rural--I'm sure some of our friends out west would think that's downright urban )--places that ever cable doesn't service because it isn't economically feasible. I'll wait... ...give up? That's because they haven't deployed FiOS anywhere remotely considered rural--and they never will (witness the sale of Verizon's VT/NH/ME business to FairPoint). | |
| | | | | | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
kamm
Member
2009-Feb-23 12:03 pm
Re: Not apples here.said by probboy:OK, using publicly available information, with a citation, please tell me one rural area where Verizon sells FiOS. By rural, I mean a place where we are talking single digit numbers of houses per mile of road (I'm using the east coast definition of rural--I'm sure some of our friends out west would think that's downright urban )--places that ever cable doesn't service because it isn't economically feasible. I'll wait... ...give up? That's because they haven't deployed FiOS anywhere remotely considered rural--and they never will (witness the sale of Verizon's VT/NH/ME business to FairPoint). I don't really see what are you challenging... did you understand my point actually? | |
| | | | | | jjeffeoryjjeffeory join:2002-12-04 Bloomington, IN |
to probboy
Apple Valley, CA Beaumont, CA Hemet, CA
Not rural by your definition, but they are considered small and a bit out of the way... | |
|
| | |
to kamm
If I had known that you were going to get so emotional I would have brought some Kleenex and perhaps some pampers to keep you dry.
You might get some millage with like minded tools when you rant about "greedy monopolies" and "crooked corporations", but in the end no one is going to dump billions of dollars on rural broadband with a wired technology because they know that they would lose their shirts doing so.
Perhaps you can form a Saintly non-profit Broadband company to bring Fiber to the un-served masses. I would however expect the likes of you to consider the "rural population" to be idiot, racist, redneck, red-staters who aren't worth the effort. | |
| | | | |
| |
to CycloneGT2
said by CycloneGT2:I just find it amusing that everyone complains about how ISPs aren't willing to spend $10k to trench fiber to someone's home in the sticks so that they can provide $40/mo internet service. Depending on who you talk to, you will get two of the reasons below around this debate: • Greedy Corporations • Corrupt Politicians • Entitled Population All of which are partially true IMHO. | |
| | maartenaElmo Premium Member join:2002-05-10 Orange, CA |
to CycloneGT2
said by CycloneGT2:I like how they compare the US internationally to a lot of smaller countries. Its a lot easier for a small country to get 100% wired up for fiber than it is for a nation as vast as the USA. If they were to compare South Korea or Holland to say just New Jersey, how would that compare? On the other hand, if you would compare the entire EU to the United States, I'm afraid that the EU would still beat us in connectivity. Granted, the EU has been expanded with some countries that aren't connected as well (Romania, Bulgaria, etc) but if you leave the post-2007 expansion out of it, the "old" EU still has well over 350 million residents, and overall is better connected for a cheaper price. I think the biggest difference is that ISP's in the EU are heavily regulated, whereas in the US they are not. | |
| | | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY 2 edits
1 recommendation |
kamm
Member
2009-Feb-23 11:13 am
Re: Not apples here.said by maartena:said by CycloneGT2:I like how they compare the US internationally to a lot of smaller countries. Its a lot easier for a small country to get 100% wired up for fiber than it is for a nation as vast as the USA. If they were to compare South Korea or Holland to say just New Jersey, how would that compare? On the other hand, if you would compare the entire EU to the United States, I'm afraid that the EU would still beat us in connectivity. Granted, the EU has been expanded with some countries that aren't connected as well (Romania, Bulgaria, etc) but if you leave the post-2007 expansion out of it, the "old" EU still has well over 350 million residents, and overall is better connected for a cheaper price. Actually you'd be foolish to leave the new countries out of it or at least some of them: Hungary's or Czech's infrastructure is top-notch when it comes to broadband, especially mobile broadband (for example HSDPA, which is still only exists in printed AT&T marketing crap, is long available in every city in Hungary, with multi-megabit speeds.) It's not an accident that latest 4G LTE tests were conducted by Verizon were mostly held in Budapest, Madrid and Düsseldorf. My bro back in Budapest upgraded his DSL to an open ended (15Mb/s was guaranteed, up to 20Mbit depending on his distance) ADSL2+ connection in 200 6 and that's when it was launched across the entire market, not some early deployment. Ironically these countries' advantage was their former disadvantage: with the large influx of Western capital in the early 90s their archaic 80s infrastructure (phone and data networks) were quickly replaced with the latest technologies in the 90s so they are reaping their rewards of their long 'tech-starved' decades now... BTW by today the Hungarian telecom giant - owned by Deutsche Telekom, of course, who else? - pretty much swallowed most of the surrounding countries' telecoms (much like MOL, the Hungarian oil company did with surrounding oil/gas companies and refineries etc.) I think the biggest difference is that ISP's in the EU are heavily regulated, whereas in the US they are not. Correct. However apparently they work better than our corrupt, crooked, quasi-monopoly-based "market" which these rotten monopolies dare to call "free market" with straight face... | |
|
| Desdinova Premium Member join:2003-01-26 Gaithersburg, MD |
to CycloneGT2
"I have a hard time feeling that the USA is broadband crippled when I have access to FiOS, Cable Modems, DSL, and several Wireless technologies here in Maryland. If I head out a little further into the rural areas, I may just be limited to wireless or satellite, but I could still get online." Then you are statistically right up there with that one person who wins Powerball and doesn't understand why others didn't win also... I live in the heart of Montgomery Village and I can get Comcast, satellite with hideous latency or dial-up (though I haven't looked too deeply into Xohm). Fios won't be anywhere near my area for at least a year and a half and no DSL provider will hook me up because I'm just a hair too far from the CO. | |
| | 88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness
1 recommendation |
to CycloneGT2
said by CycloneGT2:I like how they compare the US internationally to a lot of smaller countries. Its a lot easier for a small country to get 100% wired up for fiber than it is for a nation as vast as the USA. If they were to compare South Korea or Holland to say just New Jersey, how would that compare? Ok Japan is the size of Montana and MUCH larger than RI which has TWICE the poulation density of Japan. yet somehow RI average speed is 7 Mbps compared to Japan's what 100 Mbps? Enough with the excuses. | |
|
kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
kamm
Member
2009-Feb-23 10:31 am
He's a largely clueless and/or paid industry mouthpiece......what do you expect from this clown Han-sell? | |
| SimbaSevenI Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT ·StarLink
|
WTH!?*BUSTS UP LAUGHING*
So.. SMS is considered Broadband.. Damn.. I guess the new Broadband is.. Dialup.. Who would've thunk it.
Plus.. Consider what some companies think what Broadband is. Most think it's *ANYTHING* above 56k, meaning they can get away with a 128k link and call it "Broadband".
I think the absolute minimum cap for it to be called "Broadband" is 1mbps down *AND* up, not 1mbps down *AND* 56k (or anything less than 1mbps) up.
Anything between 56k and 1mbps would be considered "LiteBand" and still wouldn't be considered "Broadband".
I hope something like this does happen, but who really knows. | |
| | 1 edit |
Re: WTH!?I believe many of us would pay more for faster connection such as 20/20 or 50/20 by verizon or 20/20, 50/50 from surewest fios Its pretty close to what the advance nation offered that are fiber wired... only a fraction of it thought I heard that speed of 100/100, 50/50 and 25/25 are offered in these location so their pricing is as follow... 40 bucks, 30 bucks and 20 bucks Here we have crappy DSL offering crap speed of 6/512k-768k for 35 bucks, 3/512k for 30bucks, 1.5/384k for 25 dollars and 768/384k for 20 dollars A world of difference! a night and day comparison!
DSL, and Cable Internet in fiber optic country is like dialup vs broadband | |
| | | SimbaSevenI Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT ·StarLink
|
Re: WTH!?Of course laying that much Fiber would be sweet, but I doubt everyone would be willing to pull it off.
For now, we have our Coaxial Cable lines and our (old as hell) twisted pair lines.
At least Coax can support faster speeds. The Telcos are trying their best to push as much as they can with old technology and they scratch their heads when it backfires on them.
I think the Telcos should lay Fiber and ditch their copper pairs. | |
|
TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus join:2001-06-20 Cheyenne, WY 1 edit |
We who are most brilliant Saul Hansell |
Kiss earth at my feet you serfs of the great unwashed. I am an better and smarter then you because I hold court at The (cross yourself) New York Times. P.S. wouldn't you like to plant a 5 fingered sandwich right in the middle of his arrogant face. | |
| | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
kamm
Member
2009-Feb-23 11:52 am
Re: We who are most brilliantI live here, I THINK know his type too well: this is the type of guy who nicely recites all the BS arguments he read all around and been fed with by corporate shills and then gets annoyed when you systematically kill ALL of them with real facts (i.e. data from independent sources) over the course of the soup or antipasti - by the end of the main course he's either annoyed as hell but admits he might be wrong or (more likely) switched to a different topic to avoid further embarrassment on his own turf in front his wife/gf/whoever he brought to the dinner... Of course, I could be dead wrong and he offers follow-up in email and next thing you know is he's publishing his new piece, with an honest comment and new, real facts this time... ...ehh, I should wake up. | |
|
elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
elray
Member
2009-Feb-23 11:25 am
Who cares?Why do we need to be "#1"? (at taxpayer expense, of course)
Please, someone, show us what the "killer app" is that needs so much speed, that will yield us greater employment or industry growth.
Show us why anyone on the farm "needs" more than 56K digital service.
If your only argument is you don't like paying $80 a month for 512KB service, well, sorry - I don't cherish paying municipal sewer and trash rates; are you going to subsidize my bill? | |
| | •••••••••• | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
kamm
Member
2009-Feb-23 12:01 pm
Funny part is that #19 is likely lower......if we look at real subscriber speeds as in many EU countries the advertised speed is NOT the fastest available nor the average but the cheapest priced.
In fact if we would consider price parity then US would be somewhere close to the bottom of the barrel with its speeds. | |
| | |
Re: Funny part is that #19 is likely lower...Funny part is that if you go to speedtest.net, and check the actual recorded speeds by country, you'll find that we compare well with other major western countries. Japan and SK are faster, but not so with the UK, france, germany, etc. | |
| | | kamm join:2001-02-14 Brooklyn, NY |
kamm
Member
2009-Feb-24 10:52 am
Re: Funny part is that #19 is likely lower...said by johnh123:Funny part is that if you go to speedtest.net, and check the actual recorded speeds by country, you'll find that we compare well with other major western countries. Japan and SK are faster, but not so with the UK, france, germany, etc. Well, using speedtest.net is anything but a statistically plausible sampling method - not even close - so I wouldn't take it seriously, not even with a giant grain of salt. | |
|
me1212 join:2008-11-20 Lees Summit, MO ·Google Fiber
|
me1212
Member
2009-Feb-23 12:27 pm
Ok we are all thinking it.. WTF!WTF! Ok, so huh?v I don't care if we are #1 or *insert # here*, 1g of speed is no good if you have no use for it, like wise 1m of speed is no good if it not enough, that being said 10m down and 1-2m up would be perfect for me, but other may need more and some may need less. Also keep in mind it is harder to connect a country as big as we are than it is one the size of Japan.
I live in a rural area, and get 512down and 128up for $45 a month and am happy to have it, but I would rather have 10m down and 1-2m up for a similar price. | |
| |
-1 recommendation |
gawdamsploicers
Anon
2009-Feb-23 1:05 pm
Re: Ok we are all thinking it.. WTF!said by me1212:WTF! Ok, so huh?v I don't care if we are #1 or *insert # here*, 1g of speed is no good if you have no use for it, like wise 1m of speed is no good if it not enough, that being said 10m down and 1-2m up would be perfect for me, but other may need more and some may need less. Also keep in mind it is harder to connect a country as big as we are than it is one the size of Japan. Again with the uneducated parroting of the corporate line. Not even our largest, richest metropolises have the cheap connections that your red kneck farmer hick counter part has in japan... or korea... or bumfuckistan europe. You can't think of a use for a 1 gig connection? Great! More money then brains, that's what we like to see here in corporate America. Enjoy your capped, slow, expencive connection that is only reliable for checking emails. | |
| | | me1212 join:2008-11-20 Lees Summit, MO ·Google Fiber
|
me1212
Member
2009-Feb-23 2:18 pm
Re: Ok we are all thinking it.. WTF!Thats not what I meant, I meant that many people don't need that much, as long as we have enough thats all that matters. I would love 1g at $50 or so a month, but I would never use that much 20m at most.
What I'm trying to say is Skrew the #s, ether do something about it or don't. If we don't stop wineing and do something nothing will get done.
And before some1 says "then start ur own ISP", I plan to. | |
|
|
Homer Simpson once said,"Facts are meaningless. They can be used to prove anything." | |
| Chaldo join:2008-03-18 West Bloomfield, MI |
Chaldo
Member
2009-Feb-23 1:45 pm
New york times... what are you smokingI still don't think we are number one. | |
| | |
Re: New york times... what are you smokingsaid by Chaldo:I still don't think we are number one. America likes to make false claim based on faked statistic to keep Americans happy with their turtle bandwagon Not only is their connnection slow their bandwidth are limited too some may brag about their 10mbit/1mbit or 16/2mbit or 22/5mbit but it cannot be used all the time only occasionally oversubscription, slow performance, downtime to solve this problem these broadband provider isp namely dsl and cable internet have a solution If everyone use less or consume less of their broadband connection, we will be surfing much faster! American are now more brainwashed then ever into believing that if the bandwidth cap are in place everyone would be happy including the ones who use their connection frequently Bravo! | |
|
Ben Premium Member join:2007-06-17 Fort Worth, TX |
Ben
Premium Member
2009-Feb-23 2:40 pm
Ha Ha Ha HaWhat a load of bull. So somehow, we're supposedly not doing too badly because of SMS, and wireless voice minutes? And consumer software spending? What?! Regardless of whether one has a mobile phone, or if one uses SMS messages on his mobile phone, it has zero impact on the speed of his Internet connection at home. My connection at home is 10/1, at a cost of $120. That's for "business class" Internet, which in my mind is truly free (as in freedom) connectivity. I'm free to run servers, no port restrictions, and so on, allowing me to use the Internet in ways that most people can't. So while I may not have a mobile phone, I'm in a better position to really use the Internet. That's just one factor that the study doesn't take into account. It doesn't seem to take into account caps, if there are any. Caps are serious because it can impact the use of video. Anyway...take a look at the following web page, and look at the picture. » www.connectivityscorecar ··· _americaLook at the part about "Consumer Infrastructure." Notice anything? Software spending is another thing that's flawed. So because I use Linux on my server/router, which is free (both as in beer and as in freedom), instead of Windows Server 2008 I'm hurting the metric? That really doesn't make any sense. | |
| Lazlow join:2006-08-07 Saint Louis, MO |
Lazlow
Member
2009-Feb-23 2:46 pm
Buying software?If the majority of people in a country are smart enough to use open source software rather than pay for proprietary software, how does that make them less "pro broadband"? I would think that it would actually indicate the exact opposite. The less a country spends on software the MORE they are tied into the internet community. | |
|
| |
|
|