[Rumor]

U.S. Net access not all that speedy - USATODAY.com

The median U.S. download speed now is 1.97 megabits per second — a fraction of the 61 megabits per second enjoyed by consumers in Japan, says the report released Monday. Other speedy countries include South Korea (median 45 megabits), France (17 megabits) and Canada (7 megabits).

Why can't we enjoy real broadband speeds? I pay $50 a month for a 6mb down DSL line which is rarely above 4mb down. I'll post more later, I have to go to lunch.

[Dakarʒ]

That's because we need tiered internet access.

[osiris]

I think it's the same BS associated with Cell phones in the US - corporations/government control (your pick)
Consumers are the ones who suffer.

[Dakarʒ]

I'd like to know what price the other countries are averaging for those access speeds.

[CharlesS]

You know, it's true that during the dial-up days we always wanted it to be faster, but nowadays? I don't really think I need anything faster than 3 Mbps or so. Maybe if I were downloading movies all the time, I'd care, but as it is, our current speeds don't bother me too much.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ 

I'd like to know what price the other countries are averaging for those access speeds.

South Korea gets 100Mbit lines (up and down) for $15/month.

[OldManMac]

The providers have a captive market. If you live in X city, you have a choice of X provider, so you make the choice of whether or not to have service, not which provider you want. When I moved earlier this year, I had no choice but to get Comcast, so I signed up. It was a snafu from day one. The only place I could go, once my iMac was hooked up, was to a Comcast sign-up page, but it wouldn't let me complete my account sign-up. The "technician" who hooked up the cable didn't know squat about Macs and told me that it was my iMac, and that his equipment was working fine. If I didn't sign the papers indicating that he had done the installation, he would unhook the cable modem and take it with him, as well as unhook the cable from the pole out back. So I signed, with a statement that the job was not done! He left, and then I called Comcast and left a voice mail on a supervisor's phone, indicating I was very upset at the service, and that it was their problem, and not my machine. Ten minutes later, another guy shows up, tells me that if I want him to hook my machine up, I'll have to pay another $60 for a "professional" install. I reluctantly agree, and he can't get me hooked up either! He makes some phone calls, and the problem is indeed on their end; the sign-up site won't let my machine get past it, but it is connected to the web. After about 20 more minutes of back and forth on the phone, the log jam is suddenly broken, I complete my sign-up, and everybody's happy. They didn't charge the extra fee, which I wouldn't have paid anyway. After a couple of days, the service simply stops working, intermittently, so I get a hold of them, and they give me all these instructions on clearing cache, trying different browsers, etc. Having sold Macs for a long time, including working for Apple directly at one point, I already knew this wasn't the answer, and tell them so. Things go along in this frequently dropping connection state for almost a week, and then it suddenly clears up, and has worked fine ever since, although it's not as fast a connection as when I had Time Warner/Bright House.

These companies have no incentive to upgrade anything, because they know that we have no choice.

[mdc]

We pay about $40 a month for a 10mbps line through BrightHouse. My download speed caps out at around 1.3 megabytes per second. BrightHouse will not let me upgrade to the 15mbp line unless I sign up for their telephone line.

I think the general population would be happy with a 5mbps line. ~500kps download speeds is more than enough for the general user.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

You know, it's true that during the dial-up days we always wanted it to be faster, but nowadays? I don't really think I need anything faster than 3 Mbps or so. Maybe if I were downloading movies all the time, I'd care, but as it is, our current speeds don't bother me too much.

That's a fairly limited way of looking at it. Sure, current speeds are sufficient for current uses, but by increasing the average connection speed we're opening the door for new innovations that we haven't seen yet. Maybe we will all start downloading video in the future, when it becomes easier and cheaper to download the movies than to rent the DVDs from NetFlix.

Who knows what other cool things people will come up with.

[Chuckit]

Maybe Japanese broadband prices have come down since I last checked (probably so, but I'll be surprised if it's that much), but I thought it cost like eleventy billion dollars to get anything better than a modem over there.

[Doofy]

Still on 512/256 here...

...and still in the wild and whacky world of no limits other than bandwidth. No fair usage agreement, no bandwidth per month limits other than the line speed... ...and I like it that way.

Low speed broadband is manageable if you schedule things properly - if you never turn your computers off then you probably don't need high speed... ...everything can download while you sleep.

[Dakarʒ]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

South Korea gets 100Mbit lines (up and down) for $15/month.

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Maybe Japanese broadband prices have come down since I last checked (probably so, but I'll be surprised if it's that much), but I thought it cost like eleventy billion dollars to get anything better than a modem over there.

Thanks.

[EndlessMac]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

These companies have no incentive to upgrade anything, because they know that we have no choice.

I would agree with that statement. Many households in the US don't have the option to choose a different service provider. For awhile I too only had the option of cable internet access until DSL finally was available. I was a much happier customer once I switched over to DSL. In some parts of the US broadband isn't available at all.

The lack of competition is one factor in all of this but correct me if I'm wrong the US also has a smaller percentage of broadband users compared to other countries. For whatever reason the demand for faster internet service isn't very high here so the lack or competition for ISP is understandable...of course not appreciated though. We need more Americans to sign up for broadband to give the ISP incentive to upgrade and compete with each other.

[Atheist]

I think one also needs to consider the shear size of the United States as well. From both a geographic perspective (4th largest in the world) and population wise (3rd largest in the world). I can only imagine that plays a role in how quickly companies can implement new technologies (and make a profit).

[Rumor]

Another gripe I have is why is the upload speed so nerfed compared to the download speed? Why can't is just be the same both ways? If the speeds were match, wouldn't the overall experience be better since infomation could flow freely and quickly in either direction?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Another gripe I have is why is the upload speed so nerfed compared to the download speed? Why can't is just be the same both ways? If the speeds were match, wouldn't the overall experience be better since infomation could flow freely and quickly in either direction?

Companies don't want you trading content with your friends - they want you buying content from them.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Companies don't want you trading content with your friends - they want you buying content from them.

Exactly. My only other option for quick delivery is to mail you the 20k+ boobie pictures from the various festivals I've gone to. It's not right that I can't just upload them to you quickly.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by EndlessMac 

I would agree with that statement. Many households in the US don't have the option to choose a different service provider. For awhile I too only had the option of cable internet access until DSL finally was available. I was a much happier customer once I switched over to DSL. In some parts of the US broadband isn't available at all.

The lack of competition is one factor in all of this but correct me if I'm wrong the US also has a smaller percentage of broadband users compared to other countries. For whatever reason the demand for faster internet service isn't very high here so the lack or competition for ISP is understandable...of course not appreciated though. We need more Americans to sign up for broadband to give the ISP incentive to upgrade and compete with each other.

I think the reason that many do not choose to get broadband is due to the price and lack of competition, not to mention availability in some areas.

If there were faster speeds available for a reasonable price, I bet you would see the growth of broadband homes explode.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

I think the reason that many do not choose to get broadband is due to the price and lack of competition, not to mention availability in some areas.

If there were faster speeds available for a reasonable price, I bet you would see the growth of broadband homes explode.

I hate cable because you can't have more than 2 people playing a low-latency game at once (ping times get horrible) and I hate DSL because they force you to buy a voice plan to get the data plan, even though it doesn't need the voice plan.

Since I play games quite often, I'm forced to buy DSL and a phone line that does nothing but get FAX machines all day because the number used to be a computer repair business.

Of course, those are my only two options. AT&T or... AT&T.

[Dakarʒ]

Yeah, over here its get Cable with cable service or DSL with phone service.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Another gripe I have is why is the upload speed so nerfed compared to the download speed? Why can't is just be the same both ways? If the speeds were match, wouldn't the overall experience be better since infomation could flow freely and quickly in either direction?

In addition to the filesharing argument, this setup also allows them to give people more downstream bandwidth without having to invest in a bigger pipeline. By limiting the upstream, they're freeing up more capacity at the routers which they can then distribute as added downstream.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Since I play games quite often, I'm forced to buy DSL and a phone line that does nothing but get FAX machines all day because the number used to be a computer repair business.

Yeah, I've got a similar situation - I keep getting calls for some guy named Jim (or occasionally, his wife Peggy). After about a year of telling people they've got the wrong number, I'm about ready to start telling them that he's unavailable because he moved to Sri Lanka as a missionary to spread the word of Scientology.

Maybe that will get Jim, whoever he is, to start getting his friends to update their freaking address books.

[olePigeon]

I think part of the problem is (at least here in the States) is that you can't buy broadband by itself and it's almost always provided by only one company. You have to buy the whole package just to get internet, even if you don't want/need the whole package.

Pisses me off. My DSL should only be $30/month as advertised, not the $55 I'm paying now because I have to get the basic line (which includes a bunch of "taxes" and "fees" for the voice line)

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

I hate cable because you can't have more than 2 people playing a low-latency game at once (ping times get horrible) and I hate DSL because they force you to buy a voice plan to get the data plan, even though it doesn't need the voice plan.

Since I play games quite often, I'm forced to buy DSL and a phone line that does nothing but get FAX machines all day because the number used to be a computer repair business.

Of course, those are my only two options. AT&T or... AT&T.

Edit: My DSL is $34.99.

I have DSL and I have to have a landline with it, which I never use since I have a cell.

Monthly Service - Jun 17 thru Jul 16

1-01 Residence Flat Rate Serv 10.69
Line Sharing Basis
1-02 Caller ID Selective Blocking .00
1-03 900/976 Blocking .00

Total Monthly Service 10.69


Surcharges and Other Fees

1-04 Federal Subscriber Line Charge 4.75
1-05 Rate Surcharge .30
1-06 State Regulatory Fee .01
1-07 Federal Universal Service Fee .55

Total Surcharges and Other Fees 5.61


Government Fees and Taxes

1-08 CA High Cost Fund Surcharge - A: .02
1-09 CA High Cost Fund Surcharge - B: .14
1-10 California Teleconnect Fund Surcharge .01
1-11 Universal Lifeline Telephone Service Surcharge .13
1-12 CA Relay Service and Communications Devices Fund .04
1-13 9-1-1 Emergency System .06
1-14 Federal .50

Total Government Fees and Taxes .90

Total Plans and Services 17.20

Almost $20 a month I'm pissing away for a landline I don't use.

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ 

Yeah, over here its get Cable with cable service or DSL with phone service.

Comcast recently bought out Adelphia, which was our local cable provider. So I thought I'd take a look a the new offers and found out that they offered an 8mb/sec line for $43.00 a month for the first six months. I thought to myself, "Wow, that's pretty good.", but wait, when I go to check out, it's $66.95 a month because I don't have cable TV service from them. To top it off, because of the lack of TV service, I can't self install (my house has everything for cable and Adelphia used to have a free self-install option that Comcast charges $10 for), so I have to spend $99 for a "Professional" installation. What kind of **** is that?

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

In addition to the filesharing argument, this setup also allows them to give people more downstream bandwidth without having to invest in a bigger pipeline. By limiting the upstream, they're freeing up more capacity at the routers which they can then distribute as added downstream.

Which is a load. People will file share on 56k, I know this because I have friends that can only get 56k and still fileshare. Ultimately, I wish they would just upgrade the damn tubes, they are too small.

[CharlesS]

Pisses me off. My DSL should only be $30/month as advertised, not the $55 I'm paying now because I have to get the basic line (which includes a bunch of "taxes" and "fees" for the voice line)

You think that's bad, have a look at the prices Comcast expects you to pay for a cable TV line just so you can get Internet through them.

edit: beaten by Rumor!

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Yeah, I've got a similar situation - I keep getting calls for some guy named Jim (or occasionally, his wife Peggy). After about a year of telling people they've got the wrong number, I'm about ready to start telling them that he's unavailable because he moved to Sri Lanka as a missionary to spread the word of Scientology.

Maybe that will get Jim, whoever he is, to start getting his friends to update their freaking address books.

[Dakarʒ]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Which is a load. People will file share on 56k, I know this because I have friends that can only get 56k and still fileshare. Ultimately, I wish they would just upgrade the damn tubes, they are too small.

I remember I used to like doing torrents on 56k because it didn't matter if the connection was dropped. So I just used to connect right before I went to bed and let it run for 8-10 hours at a time.

[BasketofPuppies]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

You know, it's true that during the dial-up days we always wanted it to be faster, but nowadays? I don't really think I need anything faster than 3 Mbps or so. Maybe if I were downloading movies all the time, I'd care, but as it is, our current speeds don't bother me too much.

See if you still feel that way a few years from now when the cable and telephone companies replace everyone's cable television with IPTV.

Granted, the cable and telephone companies will have to give everyone more bandwidth when that happens, but that will mean rate increases for everyone, and I fear that they won't offer enough bandwidth, leading to problems worse than what we have now with digital cable.

What we need is the FCC to force the telephone and cable companies to lease their lines to competitors at reasonable rates. The competition between your local cable company and your local phone company for high-speed Internet service has not been enough to get regular bandwidth increases and reasonable prices.

And that's without getting into the lack of DSL and cable internet in rural and low-income areas. This is another thing the FCC has to force the cable and telephone companies to change.

[angelmb]

I'd like to know what price the other countries are averaging for those access speeds.

I get a "crappy quality always dropping" 20 MB ADSL line that really it is 40KB (down) and 80 KB (up) yes you read it right, --upload is always faster than download but just at my home-- for $54 / month…

My current ISP told me that switching to a 1 MB service would give me more speed and no drops… would you think that is true?, even so they charge $40 / month…

I have switched ISP countless times but since all them rely on Telefónica (Spain) pipelines it is always the same third world class service…

In a nutshell, here in Spain internet users are kinda like early-adopters forever… no wonder I can't even play online with the DS and the Wii… every time my connection drops I lost the game…

[EndlessMac]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

I think the reason that many do not choose to get broadband is due to the price and lack of competition, not to mention availability in some areas.

If there were faster speeds available for a reasonable price, I bet you would see the growth of broadband homes explode.

From some of the replies it looks like you guys are paying a lot more than me for broadband. My DSL cost $15 a month. We were paying twice that for cable.

You are right though. If the nationwide prices were cheaper and had more competition then the amount of households with broadband would probably increase dramatically.

[forkies]

¥5,775 (US$46.78) =

[BasketofPuppies]

$35/month (It was $28 until recently.)

But it's really $55/month because AT&T won't let met get DSL without also getting landline phone service, which I haven't used much since I got a mobile phone.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Since I play games quite often, I'm forced to buy DSL and a phone line that does nothing but get FAX machines all day because the number used to be a computer repair business.

This is only an issue if your bored. Get some fax sotware set it up to recieve then caller id them and send it back with a nice cover letter. Set it up to add another copy of the cover letter every time the same number faxes you.

[C.A.T.S. CEO]

$50/m But that includes a MSN email account.

[Doofy]

$50/m

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by EndlessMac 

I would agree with that statement. Many households in the US don't have the option to choose a different service provider. For awhile I too only had the option of cable internet access until DSL finally was available. I was a much happier customer once I switched over to DSL. In some parts of the US broadband isn't available at all.

The lack of competition is one factor in all of this but correct me if I'm wrong the US also has a smaller percentage of broadband users compared to other countries. For whatever reason the demand for faster internet service isn't very high here so the lack or competition for ISP is understandable...of course not appreciated though. We need more Americans to sign up for broadband to give the ISP incentive to upgrade and compete with each other.

U.S. Tops Broadband Usage, For Now

The latest stats I could find quickly. The U. S. ranks number 15 in percentage of people on broadband.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Yeah, I've got a similar situation - I keep getting calls for some guy named Jim (or occasionally, his wife Peggy). After about a year of telling people they've got the wrong number, I'm about ready to start telling them that he's unavailable because he moved to Sri Lanka as a missionary to spread the word of Scientology.

Maybe that will get Jim, whoever he is, to start getting his friends to update their freaking address books.

Next time, try something like this:

"Uhm, yeah, dude, Jim is not available right now. Ya know, he's having sex with da goat. If you give me your number, I'll sign you up for it as well."

-t

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Low speed broadband is manageable if you schedule things properly - if you never turn your computers off then you probably don't need high speed... ...everything can download while you sleep.

Yep, that's what I used to do back when I was on 56K. It works pretty well unless you need to download something truly massive and want it in less than, like, a month.

[kmkkid]

$48/mo

[IceEnclosure]

Comcast, $50/month or so

[Albert Pujols]

I can't wait till FIOS gets installed at my place

5 Mbps down
2 Mbps up

$40/month

[C.A.T.S. CEO]

Originally Posted by Albert Pujols 

I can't wait till FIOS gets installed at my place

5 Mbps down
2 Mbps up

$40/month

We're looking into FIOS, I was looking at Bright House, but after mdc's horror story, forget that idea...

[JoshuaZ]

hmm... my Japanese connection isn't quite that good... but it beat the hell out of what my family got in Milwaukee Wisconsin. 6,000¥ (AKA $50) gets me this:



Though I am running it from one room to the next via wireless G. I should give it a try with a direct hookup.

(Look at my upload jump when I give it another test!)

[Rumor]

[Cipher13]

Upstream in Aus really, really blows.

I think I pay around $80/month also (maybe more).

That's to Sydney though. To LA:

[gururafiki]

[USB HUB]

Just as FYI .. for those of you who have DSL with a land line. I'm pretty sure you can have the land line disconnected but keep the DSL. At VZ, you can do that. I've been checking into it also as we don't use our line that much. You can also see if you can have your land line set up to only allow for 911 callout (some companies have that option). But that may not get rid of the fees (which unfortunately are crap but regulated). Just a thought....

[Chuckit]

$34 a month.

I seem to recall getting better results (like twice that, for some reason) when I actually plug into the router rather than running it over Airport.

[Troll]

I'm in Paris, France using a service provided by Free (Bienvenue sur Free ). The service costs 29.99 Euros a month and includes Internet, TV and telephone. There are a bunch of companies offering the same services at the same price or even less.

Internet: 28 Megabits/sec upload 1Megabit/sec download.

Telephone: Free, unlimited local calls. Free, unlimited international calls to 49 countries (using a normal phone not VOIP software). Softphone allows you to make or receive calls using your home line from anywhere in the world via the net. You get charged rates as if you were dialling from home. Great when you're away from home.

TV: 80 channels free including HD content (National Geographic HD for example). Pay channels available as well as video on demand. HDTV box wirelessly connects to ADSL modem using wireless n technology. Built-in 40GB hard disc for recording channels or uploading files. You can wirelessly ftp files to the box and play them on TV. Uses Videolan so it can play most formats. All channels can also be streamed over the wirless network and watched using videolan on a computer so your computers become TV's too.

Brilliant service and they keep adding new features without jacking up the cost.

[Brien]

$45 a month with Time Warner.