First of all, Digital Trends needs to stop with the ads when you copy paste.
Quote:
The latest US broadband report issued by the Department of Commerce has found six out of ten Americans are theoretically covered by "very-high-speed" broadband service of 100Mbps or greater, which is not so bad. Well, the actual number is 59.4 percent of the United States population, so less than six out of ten. That's short of South Korean perfection, but it's still pretty good.
What's troubling, though, is that less than eight percent can choose between two ISPs capable of offering 100Mbps. And a measly 0.9 percent have three very-high-speed options at their disposal.
Access doesn't mean accessible. It also doesn't mean that the entire area can get it.
Verizon FIOS / Fiber to the premises or fiber to the home (AT&T Uverse gigapower) is on a block by block basis.
BTW Last I checked TWC Maxx is fully deployed in LA and NYC.
edit: see this *facepalm quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://www.fiercetelecom.com/story/subscribers-are-still-unaware-about-gigabit-internet-service-says-report/2014-12-18
The study revealed that nearly half (54 percent) of survey respondents did not know a gigabit was faster than a megabit. While Google Fiber (NASDAQ: GOOG) has set the competitive pricing threshold at $70, nearly 70 percent of respondents indicated that price is too high. However, two-thirds (64 percent) of respondents would prefer to pay slightly less per month for their current speed than pay slightly more for a faster connection.
Despite the emergence of new players like Google Fiber, the research indicates consumers may favor more traditional Internet service providers like AT&T for Gigabit services.
supposedly my street has FTTN, but more than that I can't get details from my Cinci Bell provider on just what i can actually get. Some claim that even if they ran fiber to my physical property, the inside wiring would slow the connection significantly. That would be true except I know they can use a NiD on the outside of my house to route the fiber to, and then run more inside so that my actual speed decrease of any merit would be negligible.
When I bring all that up, 'oh, well it would cost thousands, would you like us to get a quote?'.... sure.... thousands considering i'm on the corner with the freaking dslam not 100 ft from my front door :| Hundreds, sure... thousands? NOPE
Meh, don't care too much atm, but when i'm ready to upgrade, you'd better believe i'll be one of the 59.4% making myself heard lol.
If I lived 1 mile away from where I do now, I could get 1000/1000 for $125/month. Unlimited. However, since my house is slightly over the city line, I have to pay $150/m for 100/10 with a 1TB cap with another provider that has much more downtime and is still using coaxial instead of fiber.
I'm in the same boat as that 60%. I gotta use Optimum, but they've actually been really good so I don't mind. I just cry a little inside every time I see the prices on Google Fiber.
The study revealed that nearly half (54 percent) of survey respondents did not know a gigabit was faster than a megabit. While Google Fiber (NASDAQ: GOOG) has set the competitive pricing threshold at $70, nearly 70 percent of respondents indicated that price is too high. However, two-thirds (64 percent) of respondents would prefer to pay slightly less per month for their current speed than pay slightly more for a faster connection.
Despite the emergence of new players like Google Fiber, the research indicates consumers may favor more traditional Internet service providers like AT&T for Gigabit services.
I feel like either the companies are lying, or the study didnt look hard enough at coverage. Sure companies can advertise they cover all of LA, or the greater LA area, but actual speeds over 30mbps are only available on specific blocks. Further, having access to them does not mean being able to afford them. When companies charge well over $100 for speeds such as 100mbit then that isnt accessible to the majority at all. Prices need to get more in line with performance really, instead ISPs just rape everyone cause they can.
I feel like either the companies are lying, or the study didnt look hard enough at coverage. Sure companies can advertise they cover all of LA, or the greater LA area, but actual speeds over 30mbps are only available on specific blocks. Further, having access to them does not mean being able to afford them. When companies charge well over $100 for speeds such as 100mbit then that isnt accessible to the majority at all. Prices need to get more in line with performance really, instead ISPs just rape everyone cause they can.
Originally Posted by http://www.fiercetelecom.com/story/subscribers-are-still-unaware-about-gigabit-internet-service-says-report/2014-12-18
The study revealed that nearly half (54 percent) of survey respondents did not know a gigabit was faster than a megabit. While Google Fiber (NASDAQ: GOOG) has set the competitive pricing threshold at $70, nearly 70 percent of respondents indicated that price is too high. However, two-thirds (64 percent) of respondents would prefer to pay slightly less per month for their current speed than pay slightly more for a faster connection.
Despite the emergence of new players like Google Fiber, the research indicates consumers may favor more traditional Internet service providers like AT&T for Gigabit services.
I'd love to get 1gbps speeds from Google if they decide to come to Portland. Frontier is just starting to give out 100mbps to residential customers in the Portland metro area after many years of being stuck on 25/25.
I'm in downtown San Diego and my building is connected to 100/100. I paid $500 upfront for a year's service. Speed test just now was about 85/80. My previous place was TWC 20/5 for $50/month.
So... What exactly counts as available? TWC says 100Mb/s is available, but not in anywhere near me. Dayton, Huber, and most of Columbus can't get it. Same thing for AT&T, except their package stops at 20Mb/s or something. the next three tiers aren't available just like TWC 100Mb/s
EDIT:
Quote:
has found six out of ten Americans are theoretically covered
Both the Digital Trends article and the positions expressed in this thread really reflect the sad, sad state of internet access in the west.
In Asian countries, 100 Mbps isn't perfection, it's basic internet. The kind of internet package that people get for grandma and grandpa. Enthusiasts in those countries typically go for higher tier packages, because from their POV their basic internet is pretty slow...
40 is the fastest advertised here... im at the end of the line so I'm not actually sure if I'm applicable. Yet this tiny ass town SW of me (10k ppl) that's not close to ANYTHING (I don't think it even has a Walmart) has 105MB/s. However it's comcast (the only non 56k option) so I'm sure it's more pain than anything.
I have RCN and I really enjoy their pricing and customer service. The customer service alone makes it a pleasure. The DVRs they supply are TIVOs which gives you a lot more flexibility for customization. At the moment I am paying $49.99 a month for 110/15
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Overclock.net
27.8M posts
541.2K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!