DailyTech - 640M Homes to Have Broadband Globally by 2013

Submit News

Internet 640M Homes to Have Broadband Globally by 2013
Shane McGlaun (Blog) - July 8, 2009 9:59 AM

10 comment(s) - last by rainyday.. on Jul 10 at 5:36 AM

Asia-Pacific region will hold 49% of global broadband market

Many parts of the U.S. are still mired in limbo with no infrastructure in place to support broadband in many rural communities. The roll out of broadband across the country in rural areas is gearing up though and the improved availability will help spur broadband growth.

InformationWeek reports that a new study from Parks Associates claims that by 2013 the households globally with broadband internet access will be over 640 million. The firm reports that homes with broadband worldwide grew by over 18% in 2008 exceeding 400 million.

Rapid growth of broadband adoption in the Asia-Pacific market will make that area account for more than 49% of the worldwide broadband market by 2013. The Asia-Pacific market has over 160 million subscribers currently.

Kurt Scherf from Parks Associates said in a statement, "Bandwidth will continue to be a focus as the operators re-architect their networks to deliver multiple services over the same infrastructure. However, in such a competitive field, bandwidth alone is not enough to win subscribers. Blended applications, combining services such as online video and customer support, offer operators an opportunity to increase average revenue per user. In addition, innovative new services will help differentiate service providers, which can then compete on factors beyond pricing or raw bandwidth."

Much of the growth in broadband adoption in the U.S. will be spurred by the release of stimulus funds from the government to provide money for rural broadband networks. The digital transition is finally complete meaning that companies can also start rolling out wireless services on the analog channels previously used for TV broadcasts.

InformationWeek reports that in the first quarter of 2009, 3 million broadband lines were added in the U.S. and globally 16 million were added in the same period. Last month Pew Research issued a report that showed broadband adoption was on the rise in America.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

more is good

By Moishe on 7/8/2009 11:26:18 AM , Rating: 2

We need more broadband and to make it grow quickly it would help if it were available at a reasonable price for those of us who already have it.

The prices we are stuck with (in the USA) are ridiculous, especially considering that the infrastructure in populated areas has been in place for a very long time.

We need more competition, and I think that the wireless push will eventually lead to that because the cost of entry for new providers will be lower. Instead of costly underground lines, entry will require WiMax(or equiv.) access points. Maybe then companies like TimeWarner (in my area) will no longer have a stranglehold on the market.

RE: more is good

By mdogs444 on 7/8/2009 11:35:37 AM , Rating: 3

quote:
Maybe then companies like TimeWarner (in my area) will no longer have a stranglehold on the market.

They don't have a stranglehold on the market due to not enough competition. There are plenty of companies who would like to start up and offer you their services at a lower cost to add clients. However, look no further than your state and federal governments who push through legislation for the big companies to be your only option.

Parent

RE: more is good

By Spookster on 7/9/2009 7:10:40 PM , Rating: 2

The reason they have that stranglehold is because the local governments would allow the first cable company to come through and bury their cables in the public easements through neighborhoods. It wouldn't make sense to allow every company to lay their own cables through every neighborhood would it? No. And of course the first company that laid the cable is not going to allow any other companies to use their lines. The solution would have been to have either the government own/lay the cables or have a third party company not affiliated with the cable companies lay the cables and lease out the use of them to one or more cable companies. Then you could have competition. As it stands now either the government would have to step in and buy the currently laid cables from these cables companies and allow all cable companies use of them or come up with an alternate solution to burying cables such as wireless or satellite.

Parent

RE: more is good

By Omega215D on 7/8/2009 5:31:46 PM , Rating: 2

640M ought to be enough for any company....

Parent

RE: more is good

By bjacobson on 7/8/2009 11:10:07 PM , Rating: 2

Think I'm going to have to disagree with you. Have you seen the deals lately? $20/month Comcast Highspeed, no contract. I know it's Comcast, but these are the prices we wanted.

FCC has already mandated DSL rates at $15 or $20 no phone subscription required (you have to ask for it) if you can get DSL at your house. It's only 768kbps down (96kBps down) but that's all you need to start browsing wikipedia, sites like this, and generally learning all around.

Free market actually getting close to solving the situation. WiMAX is currently deploying in my (admittedly larger) city, but it's a new Tech and it will expand across the country providing competition to the cable/phone companies.

Lets wait this one out before we run for a huge government handout that gets frittered away like the last $200B telecom handout. We have enough other infrastructure improvements to spend on.

Parent

RE: more is good

By marvdmartian on 7/9/2009 10:07:54 AM , Rating: 2

And that's where the problem lies. The broadband companies have pushed for the past 7-8 years for people to sign up for broadband, they've wired all the neighborhoods that were easy to reach, and are now reaping the profits.

However, in that same time, they have failed to improve the infrastructure that brings the signal to those neighborhoods, by plowing those profits back into the company. That has brought us to the point we're at now, where the same broadband companies that pushed so hard for everyone to switch, now don't have sufficient bandwidth to take care of everyone. They sold us a limitless package to get us to switch, and now wish to place limits on that package, or make us pay a significantly higher price for it.

In the area where I live, my broadband choices are Time Warner cable (6 Mb/sec down/500Kb/sec up), AT&T dsl (up to 6Mb/sec supposedly, but only 768Kb/sec where I live), wireless through Xanadoo or Clearwire (1.5Mb/sec max, or lower, depending on your location), or satellite (no idea how fast, probably no more than 1.5Mb/sec speed). Either that, or get a wireless card from your cel phone company, and pay those exhorbitant fees.

Personally, I look forward to wireless service from the old analog tv frequencies, and hope we'll see Verizon FiOS here soon as well. Anyone that can challenge the $47 a month I pay for Roadrunner, at the same or better speed, will be very welcome indeed!!

Parent

of course there are more households with broadband!

By kevinkreiser on 7/8/2009 11:46:36 AM , Rating: 1

There are more households period. Where I live suburbs are growing like crazy. It seems even with poor economic times developers are still building. Anyway my point is, that if you build more homes in an area where broadband is already available, of course the rate of homes with broadband will increase. And my second point is that I hate developers building McMansions on .25 acres. Stop ruining our land. Ok rant over, sorry about that.

RE: of course there are more households with broadband!

By Jimbo1234 on 7/8/2009 1:31:58 PM , Rating: 3

quote:
And my second point is that I hate developers building McMansions on .25 acres.

But how else could you shake hands with your neighbor from bed or while sitting on the can?

Parent

RE: of course there are more households with broadband!

By HrilL on 7/9/2009 10:58:34 AM , Rating: 2

The sad fact is a lot of Americans want a big house but don't want to deal with having a yard and this is also in the developers interest. Because people don't want a yard so they cram more houses in the same amount of space.

Parent

quantity is not quality

By rainyday on 7/10/2009 5:36:16 AM , Rating: 1

most of the new subscribers (mainly outside americas,EU and Far-East) will have a "broadband internet" with 128kbps or 256 kbps, which is not a broadband at all, but still end up being in the statistics like these. the problem is that many country have a shitty definition of broadband. what we need is statistics that shows the number in terms of a respectable definition of broadband (example: ITU/IEEE).