backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 190 comment(s) - last by DjiSaSie.. on Sep 15 at 4:10 AM

America's Internet continues to grow, along with its infrastructure woes

Every day, across millions of homes in the United States, most Americans are happily surfing along with high-speed internet from one of two different providers: the cable company, or the phone company.  While most users have been relatively satisfied with the service itself, the industry as a whole has become fat and lazy: whereas American consumers are just now beginning to receive asymmetrical speeds of 10-20 Mbps, in many cases shared amongst their neighbors, Japanese consumers are surfing along at symmetrical connections of 100 Mbps.

In the United States, where most consumers get to choose service plans between two or three regional providers, customers in the UK – even far away from London – have a choice between 20 and 30 different providers, or more.
 
On top of suffering slow connection speeds, U.S. consumers face terrible customer support no matter who they turn to: whether it’s an AOL representative fighting for his bonus by preventing cancellations, Comcast technicians sleeping on a customers’ couch during a service call, or Verizon accidentally setting fires during FiOS installations, many consumers loathe having to actually interface with the companies they receive their service from.
 
Even the concept of Net Neutrality – something that many would argue as responsible for the internet’s freedom and success – has been continually under siege, with the latest attack coming from the Justice Department.
 
Although forays into metropolitan wireless networks have made and are making progress, the solutions these service options offer – even long-term plans with the newly-opening 700 MHz band – are too little too late. European and Asian web surfers will soon leave American consumers in the dust, every time.
 
Highlighting the recent state of affairs is an editorial that appeared Friday in The Huffington Post, titled “Our Internet Policy is a Disgrace: Here’s the Proof.” In it, writer Art Brodsky describes a surreal experience he had during a conversation with a vacationing couple hailing from the 233,000-strong city of Derby, UK:
“This U.K. consumer did something not one U.S. consumer can do. This broadband consumer in the U.K. has so many options - 59 Internet Service Providers that he needed a spreadsheet to figure them out. Here in the U.S., a similar customer might have two - the telephone company and cable company.”
A comparable spreadsheet, made for Montgomery Country, Md., reveals a handful of plans available from two providers: Verizon and Comcast. Notably, the spreadsheet includes Verizon’s Fiber-to-the-Curb option, “FiOS,” and excludes any DSL service. In most urban and suburban areas in the United States, FiOS is simply unavailable, so one would replace the Verizon options on with whoever offers DSL.
 
Others have put together similar comparisons, writes Mr. Brodsky. Which?Magazine, a UK publication for consumers, published an evaluation similar to the Darby couple, listing 125 separate service plans from 25 different providers. Another website, ISPreview UK, lists about 200 different providers.
 
“It's time to start asking some pointed questions of policymakers, beginning with the House Telecommunications Subcommittee, a pivotal point for the development of telecommunications legislation and policy,” writes Mr. Brodsky. With a government that seems bought and paid for by the telcos, he advocates that it’s time for consumers to start taking matters into their own hands.

Brodsky adds, “You have to ask your member of Congress and your Senator, ‘Why don't we have the same choice for the Internet that people in England do?’ You have to ask what your representatives are going to do about this deplorable situation. And you have to keep on asking until there's an answer.”
 
Change won’t be easy, he warns, but without proper resistance from consumers the United States will continue to fall behind in broadband speed, proliferation, and policy: “The telephone and cable companies will spend millions to keep competition from flourishing. They will employ their in-house lobbyists and their contract lobbyists. They will deploy their fake support groups. They will trot out the racial and ethnic interest groups, which take the company money while betraying their constituencies. They will gin up dozens of papers from bought-and-paid-for academics and economists. They will contribute hundreds of thousands of dollars to Congressional supporters."

Brodsky closes, "If they lose in Congress, they will fight in the courts and through the underbrush of implementing the FCC rules implementing a law.”


Comments     Threshold


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

Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Teetu on 9/8/2007 8:11:50 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, conditions in the US are far from perfect, but the fact is the US is a huge country with many inhabitants spread out over a tremendous area. Japan and the UK are smaller than California, so it isn't a fair comparison. I've heard the same complaint about mass transit in the US, and it's really a ridiculous argument.




RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By xsilver on 9/8/2007 8:21:08 PM , Rating: 3
exactly; here in Australia we have that large country minus the large population and its even worse here.
Regional areas cant get more than 1500k speeds (more like 512k in reality)

and in large metro areas like sydney and melbourne there are only 2 providers and resellers of those providers. Prices are also going up rather than down which is a very worrying trend.
New plans are offering 15gb of data for $70AU ($50+ US) on adsl2+ speed (up to 20mbps) but uploads are also counted.
what a joke.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By jajig on 9/8/2007 10:44:37 PM , Rating: 4
It is painful reading through the majority of the posts here complaining about internet we dream of here in Australia. The worst thing of all is not the speed but data limit caps. I work in tech support and constantly have to tell people that it is too bad their connection has been shaped to 64/64k because they have gone over their 12gig data limit on the $60 plan. At least once a week I have to tell people they are getting charged hundreds of dollars for going over their 200meg plan and that every meg over 200 is charged at 0.15c.

I pay $130 a month for 36gig (12gig during peak times 24gig during off peak time), only a few years ago I was paying $80 for 3 gig a month.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By iGo on 9/9/2007 2:21:16 AM , Rating: 3
Wow.... US, UK, Australia, I hear your complaints.
You guys should really come down to India. You'll experience what real Internet Pain is. The best we get here for consumers is 2 MBPS speed, and it comes with high cost + download cap.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By StevoLincolnite on 9/9/2007 4:15:35 AM , Rating: 4
Most people should feel lucky they can even receive broadband in Australia, I'm about 100km's from Port Lincoln (I live in Wharminda), which has the full 24mb ADSL 2+, Everything.
The only connection I can get is Dial-up 56k, even then I don't get even half the 56k speeds.
I tried going with Telstra's 3G Wireless, but there is no signal out this way.
Then If I was to goto Cummins which is about 40km's away, they also have the Normal ADSL 1.5mb connections, and I still have no hope.
Whats left? 2 Way Satalite at incredibly expensive prices with a Download limit so small an email would put you over the limit? I think not.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By CollegeTechGuy on 9/9/2007 3:15:59 PM , Rating: 1
My Parents home is out in the country in the US. We can't get DSL or cable...we don't even have Cable TV. The phone company said we are 2 miles out of range for DSL and they don't have any plans in the near future of setting up a repeater or anything. They live 45 minutes south of Indianapolis, and about 15minutes from well populated cities (Driving time). That to me is ridiculous.

Whats even more ridiculous is my father just bought satellite from a company called Wild Blue (well its actually through Dish Network). He pays $70 a month for the internet alone with a 13,000k download limit, and a 3,000k upload limit. Max download speeds of about 100k/s and upload is about 60k/s. The bandwidth limit is a rolling 30 day limit..not reset at the end of every month, as a day passes the 30th day previous gets dropped and todays is added.

Now all of these speeds are limited to weather, not only where they live, but also in Texas...since their main ground hub is down there...and Texas has been getting lots of storms this year so it goes out alot. Plus theres a delay between upload and download. So actually internet browsing is not different than Dial up. You click a link...wait about 8 seconds or more...then bam the whole page shows up.

[/rant]


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Lord 666 on 9/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Lemonjellow on 9/10/07, Rating: -1
RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By 3kliksphilip on 9/9/2007 7:13:27 PM , Rating: 6
I was on holiday in Sri Lanka and it took literally 15 minutes to load up Daily Tech. 200 rupees poorer, but with an experience that I'll never forget!


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 9/9/2007 7:38:22 PM , Rating: 2
Such devotion. At least you can say 200 rupees guaranteed you a 6 post on DT once :)


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Lord 666 on 9/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Misty Dingos on 9/10/2007 8:16:16 AM , Rating: 2
Because he whent to Sri Lanka. Minus the terrorism there it has to be a great place for a vaction.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By wordsworm on 9/10/2007 10:55:55 AM , Rating: 3
You say that as if you've never read the murder rate in the US, not to mention fatal automobile deaths. I'd be more paranoid about going to LA than Sri Lanka.

In Indonesia, for broadband, in Jakarta, expect to pay about $300/month for about 150kbps. It's the one chink in the whole idea of my settling there. I'm considering moving to Batam, which is only 10-20 km from Singapore. Last I heard they've got it all over the country. I wonder when wifi is going to reach 50km+. Maybe, hopefully, by the time I'm ready to retire from this teaching gig in S. Korea.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Fulvian on 9/12/2007 5:56:39 AM , Rating: 2
I hope that was a typo, because afaik it costs less than $ 30 to get a 256-512Kbps cable here.

The funny thing is that cellular connections (HSDPA & EVDO) are much faster than any DSL/cable that You can get here... now that's what I call pathetic


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Cobus on 9/10/2007 6:21:15 AM , Rating: 3
Try 1MBPS, 3gig cap, shaped ADSL for US$100... Good ol' sunny South Africa...

We even have the situation where wireless internet is competing with fixed line ADSL on a price basis...


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By splines on 9/9/2007 12:48:43 AM , Rating: 3
Actually, I recently switched to the TPG 150GB plan, getting 15-16Mb down/1Mb up at around 2km from the exchange. It's 40GB peak and 110GB off-peak, so I just schedule stuff to run at night. My uploads aren't counted either, all for $70 a month.

That said, TPG are about the only guys making internet cheaper in Australia these days. A lot of plans are starting to count uploads nowadays due to the popularity of torrents. And if you're unlucky enough to live in a suburb where nobody has put their own equipment in, you're stuck with Telstra or a reseller offering a maximum of 8Mb at horrendous prices with crappy caps. That or paying through the ass to have cable installed.

As soon as I saw the TPG deal I was sold, and switched over within a week. It's the best of an increasingly worsening situation over here.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By xsilver on 9/9/2007 1:42:42 AM , Rating: 2
yes, the higher up the $$ tree u go in aus, some more value can be had, the scary thing though is that there are no plans available in AUS for "mom + dad" situations. either you pay $40 for 1 gig of data which is not enough or pay $60 for 15 gigs which is probably too much.

The tpg plans sound good but the service is apparently crap and they dont have the policy of grandfathering plans; so if they decide that the plan is no longer viable, they force price rises and u cant do squat.
with optus and telstra at least if you're on an old plan, you will be able to keep it indefinitely unless u change address or something.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By drebo on 9/9/2007 2:19:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
New plans are offering 15gb of data for $70AU ($50+ US) on adsl2+ speed (up to 20mbps) but uploads are also counted.
what a joke.


Joke? God, I'd kill for a 20mbps connection here in the good-ol-US-of-A.

I live along a 20-mile stretch of highway which is like the fourth largest metropolitan area in California. What do I get? $60/month for a 5mbit cable connection that I had to fight with the cable company for THREE MONTHS in order to get the thing to stay up for more than 10 minutes at a time.

I spent God only knows how many hours on the phone with the moron tech support, and I finally had to go in to the local office and demand a refund for my last three months of service, on pain of lawsuit, before I could even get a technician out to my house to test the line!

And you're complaining about a 20mbit connection that you "only" get 15gb/month of bandwidth for $50? I would take that in a HEARTBEAT!


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By jajig on 9/9/2007 2:40:42 AM , Rating: 2
The speeds are advertised 'up to 20mbps' doesn't mean you'll get anywhere near that speed unless you live next to the exchange in one of the few areas that has ports available. ISP's use to advertise 'up to 24mbps' for ADSL2+ but got in trouble from the government for false advertising.

quote:
And you're complaining about a 20mbit connection that you "only" get 15gb/month of bandwidth for $50? I would take that in a HEARTBEAT!


To get a deal like that you would have to bundle a phone line for at least $30 and as I said above live in one of the few areas thats it is available in. I live 10km from Melbourne in Victoria, our second largest city, can can't even get ADSL2.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By drebo on 9/9/2007 2:49:28 AM , Rating: 2
I live in a metropolitan area, and 99% of people here don't even know there is a thing called ADSL2.

I have a landline, and use it regularly. I bundle TV with my Cable internet, and my rates are still not that good...for "up to 5mbps".

I still fail to see what your gripe with "up to 20mbps" internet is.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By xsilver on 9/9/2007 4:05:34 AM , Rating: 2
yeah, sorry I was already painting as "best case" scenario for australia.

most people here are probably using a 512k connection with 1gb download per month for around $40au per month.

broadband to most people in australia probably means 256k connection. adsl2 is only available to about 20% of the suburbs in the 5 major metropolitan centres in the country.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By gt1911 on 9/9/2007 4:28:04 AM , Rating: 2
You guys aren't being fair.

I am with TPG and pay $60 for 30GB, no uploads counted. I have been with them for almost 2 years and while their customer support is not sparkling, the service is stable so it doesn't matter too much. Most of my friends are with them as well on the 18GB/$50 plan. IInet offers almost the same thing except you have to get your phone connection with them. I get stable 15Mb connection, one of my mates who is closer to the exchange on IInet gets 17Mb.

My parents live in a seachange style country town and they still have access to a 1.5Mb for a reasonable price connection if they want.

If you haven't already you should check whirpool. You guys certainly aren't posting 'best case' Australian scenarios.

Just for reference I am in metro Sydney.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By mikeyD95125 on 9/9/2007 3:52:13 PM , Rating: 3
I wouldn't kill for 20MB/s over my 6MB/s with a stupid data cap. I'm not really sure how much bandwidth I use a month but having to watch my internet usage like I watch my phone bill is retarded. Thats like Comcast saying I can only watch 100 hours of TV a month. I have never heard of any kind of data cap in the U.S. at least out in California. We may have less competition but it sounds like people in other countries just get ripped off.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By NagoyaX on 9/9/2007 12:06:03 PM , Rating: 2
I live in Vancouver B.C. Canada. We really get 2 providers. Telus for ADSL or Shaw for Cable. But @ least i say one thing for them. Their customer serives is excellent. I have had techs come to my house and fix problems before for both companies and they where intelligent and pleasant. Even the customer service now is great


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By videoclone on 9/9/2007 7:10:39 PM , Rating: 2
Everything you just said is BS .. other then 1500kbps “only” for remote regional country area's

It just takes a quick look at the whirlpool forums to see plans for 150GB per month on 20Mbps DSL at $60AU

I'm on a $99 plan for 80GB per month on 25mbps and I get every single kb when downloading .. 2.5MB's a second isn’t a bad at all i also have about 10 companies i can get that same ADSL 2+ plan with.

I started on the net with a 14kbps Dial up modem and seen the ups and down's but at the moment i see only good nothing bad. in comparison to the past.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Director on 9/10/2007 5:48:15 PM , Rating: 2
IMO the pricing and lack of service has more to do with the restriction of information flow rather than any of the traditional excuses they give. The internet has given a historically unprecedented availability of information to the masses and they can now see what western governments dont want them to see (do some research on APEC, PECC, SPP, amero and 'The emperor wears no clothes' by Jack Herrer. Just for starters). Of course in authoritarian countries such as China and North Korea they simply block everything they possibly can. Although in the west, while we are largely ignorant and apathetic there would still be riots if our 'government' tried that kind of thing here ATM. So the next best thing is to make the internet unattractive. But that's just me... ;-)


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Ralph The Magician on 9/8/2007 8:32:53 PM , Rating: 3
No, what's ridiculous is that whenever something is done poorly in the US it's because of its size, and whenever we do something well it's because of how great the US is. Stop with the bullshit. The US is big, but if their was more competition, or a better system for broadband competition, there would be more providers at higher speeds. The current cable and phone companies just have little incentive to do anything in most of the US because people have no options; so someone like me has no choice but to pay Comcast $50+/month for 6Mbps cable internet.

The size of the US really doesn't matter, because the amount of money to be made is enourmous. These big telcos are swimming in buckets of money, but don't have the incentive to do anything for consumers in most areas because they completely dominate.


By Gul Westfale on 9/8/2007 8:47:10 PM , Rating: 2
size is definitely a factor here; i know taht there are many choices in physically small germany, yet here in the great canada i can choose between crappy bell DSL and somewhat less crappy videotron cable. that is more or less it. in a smaller country the companies do not have to worry about huge infrastructures, but here they do.

on teh other hand, these copanies usually complain that they are not making enough money, then fire staff, reduce customer support, and then announce record profits... so maybe they should whine less about market conditions and try to improve service. after all, they have significantly less competition here than in europe.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By rsmech on 9/8/2007 11:40:43 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The size of the US really doesn't matter, because the amount of money to be made is enourmous.


quote:
The current cable and phone companies just have little incentive to do anything in most of the US because people have no options; so someone like me has no choice but to pay Comcast $50+/month for 6Mbps cable internet.


First The size & COST of the infrastructure does matter. Next you contradict yourself. You state that the amount of money to be made is enormous but then complain about your $50+ a month. It sounds like you wouldn't be a good investment for a more expensive infrastructure. If infrastructure cost more your cost will be more. You talk about all the money they have well be thankful it's there to pad your retirement account. If they didn't have it you or a broker wouldn't invest therefore no capital to build an infrastructure at a price the customers won't piss and moan about. You can't have it both ways unless you expect someone else to pay for it.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By pugster on 9/9/2007 12:31:27 AM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't agree with you on that. I live in Brooklyn, NYC and houses are very close to each other where Verizon or the cable company could've easily put in the infrastructure for cheaper than the suburb areas. With their infrasture that they laid out, they could've easily pump out 50mb speeds but they decided to cripple it by not bumping speeds for the consumers. Hell FIOS wasn't even deployed in my area.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Polynikes on 9/9/2007 12:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
That's not true, because they have to connect you to the rest of the country and the world. Sure, you may get 50mbps on a server your friend down the street hosts for Counter-Strike, but when you try to go to Apple's website in sunny Silicon Valley, you're not going to get those speeds. There's more to improving infrastructure than laying down a line from the cable backbone to your house. Laying down fiber optic cables across the entire 3000 mile span of the US is no easy or cheap task.

That being said, the whole situation of having no choices is complete bullshit, and I think if we can get the government to fix that, the competition that will spring up will force the telcos to start investing in those expensive pipes.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By drank12quartsstrohsbeer on 9/10/2007 3:08:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Laying down fiber optic cables across the entire 3000 mile span of the US is no easy or cheap task.


True, but that part is already done. The backbone is already in place (and has been since the late 90s.)


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Polynikes on 9/10/2007 6:38:07 PM , Rating: 2
Ah, well then. Unfortunately there's still the rather daunting task of upgrading lines in residential areas. The US, due to its size, has a lot more neighborhoods to upgrade.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By FS on 9/8/2007 8:57:38 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
the fact is the US is a huge country with many inhabitants spread out over a tremendous area. Japan and the UK are smaller than California, so it isn't a fair comparison.


makes perfect sense, we shouldn't be comparing countries.

But even if you compare NYC to Tokyo, you won't see 50Mbit/50Mbit(half the speed) compared to 100Mbit symmetrical.

or

compare London to NYC and you won't even see half as many providers in NYC as in London.

and most of all, we shouldn't be making excuses, when we are the most technologically/economically advanced country. This is one of the reason we are seeing so many complaints now days about the broadband speeds in the US.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By rsmech on 9/8/2007 11:55:25 PM , Rating: 2
Just a thought but if the major providers didn't provide acceptable service in the rural or smaller towns or cities the gov't would get involved like they did with the telephone. Aren't we still paying that tax today? So on the business side the company spreads the revenue for infrastructure out of the big cities. If you didn't have to worry about the Federal gov't telling you how to do your business you could deal with it on a state for state basis which is easier to handle & the way the power structure of gov't should be. Therefore you could compare NY or CA to these other countries.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By excrucio on 9/9/2007 1:48:24 AM , Rating: 4
[quote]makes perfect sense, we shouldn't be comparing countries.

But even if you compare NYC to Tokyo, you won't see 50Mbit/50Mbit(half the speed) compared to 100Mbit symmetrical.

or

compare London to NYC and you won't even see half as many providers in NYC as in London.

and most of all, we shouldn't be making excuses, when we are the most technologically/economically advanced country. This is one of the reason we are seeing so many complaints now days about the broadband speeds in the US.[/quote]

Wait, what? most advanced technologically and economically?

where you've been the past couple of years? The strongest economy in the world is Europe with the euro, dollar is losing grounds. Technologically advanced only in military technology, because we are so far behind in things such as cellphones, and broadband connections. Asia and almost all of europe are using 3g technology communication while AT&T just set up the first 3g band in the US which only supports FILE TRANSFER and not video communication.

Connection in the US do hit the high points only if you got the money to drop on it. Home affordable connections here is max of 50mb with verizon fios. Optimun Online comes right next to it with its 30mbs except it only offers in CT NY and NJ.

Seriously, pick up the pace.

US used to be a very powerful nation, still is, just that its losing grounds quite quickly


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By rdeegvainl on 9/9/2007 8:12:02 AM , Rating: 2
Well yes the Euro is doing better than the dollar, but then again, the combined economical powers of the vast majority of Europe would either have to be better than the dollar, or it would be a terrible embarrassment.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Muirgheasa on 9/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Laitainion on 9/9/2007 2:44:14 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Well you say that, but in both population and geographical terms the US is bigger than the Euro zone, so your point is a little bit uninformed.


The US may be bigger (geographically) but the population of the EU is roughly 200 million greater than America's 300 million. That's not too far off double.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Muirgheasa on 9/10/2007 9:08:55 AM , Rating: 2
The EU isn't the same as the Eurozone. Last estimate I heard placed the eurozone just under 300 million in population, which is more or less the same as the US. In fairness wikipedia lists the eurozone population as 320mil, which is bigger than the US, but not by much, and also includes somewhat underdeveloped nations such as Greece and Slovenia.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Ringold on 9/9/2007 12:51:58 PM , Rating: 4
Um, sorry. The relative value of a currency can get whacked around on the whim of currency traders or government-influenced central banks and, to a degree, has absolutely nothing to do with underlying economic "greatness" or failure.

The United States is far and away economically superior in almost all regards to Europe. If you wanted to qualify that, then yes, Europeans live better life styles in that they don't eat themselves to death and if you want to think socialized medicine is a superior system then that's an acceptable opinion. But if you had to choose a country to live in for long-term growth, mobility and potential to weather economic storms, you'd want to be in the US rather than the EU.

On the other hand, I'd argue Hong Kong is better than both the US and EU in terms of its economy, but hard to compare a city-state to continent-sized macroeconomies.

Technologically advanced consumer goods, though, you may have a valid point. But the "strongest economy in the world is Europe" is laughably wrong and has been for decades, so not sure what rock you've been living under.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By TestKing123 on 9/9/2007 2:50:51 PM , Rating: 4
The question is, where have YOU been? The world's largest and most powerful economy is the United States economy, as has been the case since the end of WWII. The eurozone economy is often quoted larger based solely on the grouping of all the nations of the bloc, but fail to account that each nation sets their own economic policies DEPSITE the directives set forth by the European Union. France and Germany are common culprits for deliberately bypassing E.U economic policies for their own backyard benefits. It is among these reasons (among many others) that the European Union economy is not quite comparable to the United States economy.

I also don't get where you got "strongest" from. For the past decade, the European Union's economy has LAGGED and stagnated behind the United States for almost every single year in terms of real growth rate, a pattern which continues to this day.

As far as technologically, I can see why you can only name telecommunications aspects as the deployment infrastructure favors the population density and layouts of smaller regions. Sorry to break it to you, but when it comes to "advanced technologies" (such as semiconductor technology and aerospace), the United States is the leader of these areas (and not just for military purposes).


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By jabber on 9/14/2007 7:21:12 AM , Rating: 2
I thought China owns and is the US economy?

As said before if China wanted to go to war with the US it would be a bulletless war as China could shut down the US production machine as most of it is.....in China.

Be careful now. There is no such thing as a single super economy, its all a house of cards and its looking a little shaky all round at the moment.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Christopher1 on 9/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Ringold on 9/9/2007 12:56:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Add to that the stupid amounts of dividends that shareholders in these companies want to have each period, and you have a big problem.


Heaven forbid the theoretical owners of the firm want a small payday, eh?

If a telecom doesn't want to pay dividends then they can always buy back their own stock and take themselves private over time. Raising capital on the exchange by selling ownership and then whining about the new ownership expecting returns doesn't get much sympathy with me. Alternatively they could even issue bonds and not have to deal with part-owners, but they would have to service that debt.

It's not uncommon, either, this practice. Another large, low-growth industry that has to use dividends to attract any love: tobacco.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By leidegre on 9/9/2007 3:06:28 AM , Rating: 2
So it's an excuse to not do it? Even though your point isn't really just that, your not beeing constructive, or suggestive of alternative methods and it's bascially the same as saying it cant be done, not by us...

Obviously it's a lot more difficult, Sweden happen to be a very good country when it comes to IT infrastructure, and mind you, it's actually one of the biggest in europe, hardly comparsiable with the US but, we to have a small number of people scattered across huge land mass. Something which currently is beeing approched with wireless and radio technology. So don't tell me that it's a rediculous argument, it simply a fact that development went fat and lazy.

Put the presure on the companies and they will have deliver.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By rdeegvainl on 9/9/2007 8:16:48 AM , Rating: 2
We don't have enough leverage to put the pressure on the companies that we would like to. The huge lack of competition is the whole problem. In allot of areas, the streets are divided up, and only one provider has access to a house. With only one choice you can't really say to a provider that you're gonna switch on them, all you can really do is go without access, or (PUKE) use dial up.


By Stablecannon on 9/9/2007 8:28:39 AM , Rating: 2
You're absolutely right. However, that sounds like an excuse. Are you saying because we're bigger we've earned the right to be lazy with our broadband connections? The article is right about the disparity in broadband connections, if you want to stick up for the US (I'm a citizen), UK, Australia, using the "we're so much bigger than them, so we can;t go as fast" excuse; By all means do what you must.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Continuation on 9/9/2007 11:01:10 AM , Rating: 3
What's ridiculous is your argument. You made it sounds like everyone in US lives in Montana with no neighbors within 10 miles. Sure US is huge, but a majority of the population lives in densely populated metro areas, no different from UK or Japan.

Take Manhattan for example. It's really not that different from London or Tokyo or Hong Kong in terms of population density. Yet the broadband offerings in Manhattan is 100 times worse than those in London/HK/Tokyo. What's your excuse for that?

Your comments on mass transit in US is equally ridiculous. Mass transit in US sucks because the government pay close to zero attention to it, not because US is huge. If the US government could spend trillions covering the entire country with countless miles of roads and to spend hundreds of billions a year subsidizing cheap gas (US gas prices are routinely half that of those in other developed countries), it surely could have use those same resources to build mass transit systems instead.

This "US is a huge country" as an all-purpose excuse for the failures of the government is getting old.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By FITCamaro on 9/9/2007 5:36:49 PM , Rating: 2
Our government doesn't subsidize gas. They just don't charge the huge taxes that the EU does. Our gas tax from the federal government is like thirty cents. In the EU its a couple dollars.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Continuation on 9/9/2007 9:09:32 PM , Rating: 1
That's only because you're ignoring the costs of pollution. When factories all over the world are spending billions buying carbon credits to offset the pollution they're producing, the fact that motorists in US can generate all these pollution without paying for any offset means that they're getting subsidized.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By michal1980 on 9/10/2007 11:06:30 AM , Rating: 2
your post makes no sense.

how many dollars of those taxes on each gallon of fuel do euro countries use on helping pollution? probably not much.


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By Continuation on 9/11/2007 12:10:00 PM , Rating: 2
It makes no sense to you only because you can't see the big picture. It's not that EU countries spend the gas taxes on pollution. The point is that gas taxes raise gas prices, which in turn reduces gas consumptions, which reduces pollution. Hence gas taxes reduce pollution. Economics 101.

Look at the per capita pollution (tons of CO2 per capita per year) of various countries:

US: 20
Germany: 10
UK: 10
France: 6

Is it simply coincidence that US has much higher pollution than EU countries but much lower gas taxes? yeah right.


By Shadowmaster625 on 9/10/2007 2:58:34 PM , Rating: 2
ok if what you say is true then why is service so crappy across the entire country? Why is it that even in a major metropolitan area, our rates are so much higher?


RE: Barking up the Wrong Tree
By trivik12 on 9/11/2007 3:38:39 PM , Rating: 2
Is Wimax a solution . There should be competition like we have for cellphone. Wimax is promising insane speeds as well. If Intel is behind it, we can hope to see wimax based laptops under $400.


By GeorgeOu on 9/8/2007 7:42:34 PM , Rating: 1
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=512
A rational debate on Net Neutrality

Prices in Europe and Japan aren't as great as you think. My friend lives in Germany and he pays a fortune for local phone calls. South Korea just banned Vonage and other VoIP service providers, even for our soldiers stationed there trying to call home.

Neutrality is a good thing, but Net Neutrality should really be called Net Stupidity since they want to ban all intelligence on the Internet.




By wordsworm on 9/8/2007 9:17:30 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
South Korea just banned Vonage and other VoIP service providers, even for our soldiers stationed there trying to call home.


I do believe that the reason for the ban is because those companies don't pay any fees to the Korean government. Could I hazard to guess that Vonage et. al. pay the American government certain fees that they might sell their services there? Telephony is always a hot issue in any country. I remember in Nova Scotia it was about $70/month for low quality broad band. Here in Korea, I pay $25/month for much faster broadband. My bosses call the USA all the time, for hours every month. I think they pay about $5 or $10 a month for this privilege. Are you trying to tell me that American military are so dirt poor that they can't cough up that amount?


By rdeegvainl on 9/9/2007 8:27:36 AM , Rating: 2
hmmm the military probably isn't given the option, where i am stationed now, we have wireless everywhere, with about 5Kbs, max. we all want better connections, but we aren't even given the option to pay for it.


By wordsworm on 9/10/2007 11:56:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
hmmm the military probably isn't given the option, where i am stationed now, we have wireless everywhere, with about 5Kbs, max. we all want better connections, but we aren't even given the option to pay for it.

Look on the bright side... at least you don't have to pay for 5kbps. Where are you stationed?


By GeorgeOu on 9/9/2007 6:09:08 PM , Rating: 2
No, there are no significant fees for Vonage and that's why it's so cheap. US Soldiers are being forced to use expensive S. Korean services.


By daidaloss on 9/9/2007 5:56:59 AM , Rating: 2
George Ou, you should stop talking crap.
Are you really George Ou from ZDNET? ( http://blogs.zdnet.com/bio.php#ou ). Prices in Europe are actually great.
I'm from Romania, you americans probably did not ever heard of it.
I lived in a 200k citizen town upt in the north of the country, called Suceava. I had an internet conection, fiber optic, 4 mbps (512 kilobytes) for 45 RON (VAT=value addded tax included , VAT is 19% in this country). 45 RON = 45/2,4165=18 USD (1USD=2,4165 RON). And that include 2000 minutes in the RDS telephony network, 200 minutes in other national fix landlines phone companies, 30 minutes in mobile networks. All that 4 mbps and all those free minutes are per month.
So let's do some math:

18USD x 12= 216 USD for a year. I think that's great.
The traffic is unlimited. I can download and upload until my PC dies, and they wont charge me. The P2P traffic is not shaped, messed with. Tech support is ok. Medium, not great, but i can live with.
Don't believ me? Check this:
http://www.rdslink.ro/fiber/fiber_abonamente.htm
to see the internet offer. i have the expensive one. There are cheaper.
Also check this:
http://www.kappa.ro/ to see how much is one USD in my country.
And, let me tell you that Romania is the 2 pourest country in the EU, wich we recently joined. Bulgaria is considered 1 ( the diff. is not much).
I don't even wanna dream how great the internet connections are in sweden, or france or spain, wich are richer than us, and how cheaper.
translation from http://www.rdslink.ro/fiber/fiber_abonamente.htm:
"Latime de banda maxima in orasul tau"= bandwith in your town.
"Latime de banda maxima in internet "= bandwith on the internet.
"Trafic cu latime de banda maxima in internet** nelimitat "
<** Traficul este nelimitat 100% pentru orice tip de abonament>
the traffic is unlimited 100% percent, no matter what fee you pay per month.

PS- sorry for my bad english.
Also i forgott, in my home town, there are 3 major ISP player: UPC, ROMTELECOM - they recently slashed prices, now they have a good offer, and RDS), but also there are some LAN small time ISP, wich buy bandwith from these major player, and sell it to ppl. their offer is 1 2 USD higher than that of those big time players. but their support is actually better than those of the big time players. it;s their infrastructure that sometimes sucks.


By heffeque on 9/9/2007 10:29:00 AM , Rating: 2
French cable company Numericable offers their clients 30/1 with unlimited traffic for 19.90 euros or 100/1 with 50 GB traffic limit for 29.90 euros. Personally I think that the 30/1 offer is really attractive.


By daidaloss on 9/9/2007 1:02:04 PM , Rating: 2
Who rated me down? George Ou's acolytes?
Come on... Are u americans that pissed off that a poor romanian pays 18 USD per month for 4 mbps?
Why rate me down? so other ppl won't read my post, and see for themself that USA is't really behind a lot of countries in terms on Internet bandwith and prices?
why the hate for europe's and asia's great fiber optics
networks?
americans can't will all the time.


By kyp275 on 9/9/2007 9:08:54 PM , Rating: 2
Just a thought, but have you considered that maybe you got rated down because of your holier-than-thou attitude.

and yes, I have heard of Romania, as a matter of fact, I even have a couple of Romanian friends.


By daidaloss on 9/9/2007 10:46:53 PM , Rating: 1
ok, i'm sorry if my words misleaded you guys, i wasn't implying that americans must me stupid because they never heard of Romania, but from my own experience, a lot of americans never heard of it, why should they? it's not like we are Greece, a highly popular turist destination in the balcans, nor Germany, the richest country in the EU. Sorry if any of yuo got affended by that. i have some virtual american friends, met them on some dc++ hubs, so i don't have any problems with americans. i actually work for some of them, and earn big bucks( more like 500USD a month)
anyway, almost everyone of them complains of the internet access they have. i'm not an expert in USA broadband access, my guess would be that there isn't real competition between the big players, and that the USA government doesn't do something about it.
the recent romanian prices cuts, ( 1 year or so) are a result of the government making some market reforms, trying and "forcing" the Internet market to reform, to make it more liberal. i wont's buy the theory "americas huge, it would be very expensive to wired it all up with FIOS", because, even if it is huge, the moiney to be made are even greater than the cost of wiring it up.
anyway, again, sorry if u misunderstood me, i just wanted to point out , that a small (22 mil inhabitants) country, and one of the pourest of EU, actually has a good internet access. this should be enough of the reason for the USA to start investing big in FIOS.


By Oregonian2 on 9/10/2007 2:59:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
ok, i'm sorry if my words misleaded you guys, i wasn't implying that americans must me stupid because they never heard of Romania, but from my own experience, a lot of americans never heard of it, why should they? it's not like we are Greece, a highly popular turist destination in the balcans, nor Germany, the richest country in the EU.


I'm an American. I visited Romania for about two weeks last year, although mostly in the South in Bucharest and down on the Black Sea coast (Constanta -- furthest North I got was Brasov which I enjoyed tremendously). Don't be so huffy! You're not THAT remote! :-)

quote:
Sorry if any of yuo got affended by that. i have some virtual american friends, met them on some dc++ hubs, so i don't have any problems with americans. i actually work for some of them, and earn big bucks( more like 500USD a month)


Yes, that's part of the difference. I make almost that amount of money every working day and I'm only "middle class", not a rich person. The price of things in Romania is very low (although the EU will fix that), so it's one of those things where comparing prices internationally isn't wise -- the translations between currencies can be false. Salaries are low in Romania but so is the cost of living and it's that relationship that's important to the quality of life. But for visitors like me, it's great to get papanasi every day at every restaurant I go to and get it for nearly nothing (by my standards). Will be visiting again next year or maybe the year after. I love Romania, it's a very nice country.

quote:
i'm not an expert in USA broadband access, my guess would be that there isn't real competition between the big players, and that the USA government doesn't do something about it.


Competition is much more than characterized. Even the article above I think is bogus. Locally there probably are at least a few dozen ISP's available for one to choose from even if there's only several biggies. To one's house there are only a few actual physical wires, one from a cable company, one from one's telephone company over which DSL can be delivered, and in my case FIOS. I'm pretty sure that the fellow in the U.K. with all those choices doesn't have a different set of physical cables coming into his residence from each one of those choices -- no way that would happen. In my case, for instance, I've DSL from a company other than Verizon even though it's Verizon's physical plant that my DSL goes over -- but from the central office I'm routed over to my ISP's location and use their routing and internet connections. For businesses there are even more options such as metro Ethernet.

quote:
i wont's buy the theory "americas huge, it would be very expensive to wired it all up with FIOS", because, even if it is huge, the moiney to be made are even greater than the cost of wiring it up.


Most of Verizon's capital expenses (as much as they can spend without borrowing the money) goes into building FIOS. It's an insane amount of money (numbers are in their annual reports, etc). But the cost of installing the system is even more than insane. They do agree that the profits will pay for its building -- else they'd not build it (even though there are those who don't think it will). But they can only build it at a rate for which they have the money available to them and installation is very expensive and labor intensive (they bury hollow tubes underground up and down the street through which they can then later install the fiber cables), and even then they ONLY get revenue from those who sign up for service which will be only a small percentage of houses they build their infrastructure past. It may cost them a trillion dollars before the system is fully built out nationally. They just don't have that kind of money in their piggy bank to just buy the system instantly.


By GeorgeOu on 9/9/2007 6:15:11 PM , Rating: 2
Good for you if you have broadband. This isn't a pissing contest to see who's got better bandwidth, I'm just pointing out that it isn't the kind extreme price differences people like to cite. I don't have a problem with Romanians or Europeans and I respect all people, but your aggressive tone and insinuation that Americans haven't heard of Romania is probably what got you down-rated.


By Etsp on 9/10/2007 9:04:25 AM , Rating: 2
Do you even understand what QoS is? It isn't a magical service that lets you utilize more than your connection normally allows... It's simply a metric, that determines the behavior of your connection when there isn't enough bandwidth available. When your connection is fully taxed, QoS determines what is most important, and what is least important.

QoS does not have much to do with the throttling of certain web sites or applications, and that is what proponents of Network Neutrality are trying to prevent.

If your ISP decided it was going to let you browse google at only 56k, regardless of traffic on your connection, but allowed you to go to yahoo at full speed, which Search engine are you going to use?

Network neutrality protects your ability to use your connection to the full extent of its abilities, regardless of what you use it for. QoS has nothing to do with it, as the majority of its effects happen when the connection cannot handle any more total traffic.


Somebody mentioned Japan...
By drunkenmastermind on 9/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By JoeBanana on 9/9/2007 3:07:20 AM , Rating: 1
5MB for 40$?
That's not that good. In Slovenia we have 10up/2down for 35€(max 60/25MB on VDSL). On optic we have 10/10 for 31€, 20/20 is also nice for 56€, up to 1000/1000 which is redicously expensive at 4172€.


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By Griswold on 9/9/2007 7:36:17 AM , Rating: 1
Slovenia. We'll talk again when the minimum wage there is on par with the rest of europe.

His point was, japan is not el-cheapo to begin with, so the prices he gave are better than good.


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By daidaloss on 9/9/07, Rating: 0
RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By heffeque on 9/9/2007 10:59:25 AM , Rating: 3
Also take into consideration that the standard deviation and the variance in GDP PPP terms is a lot lower (the lower the better) than in the USA. There's a lot of middle class and barely any extremely rich or extremely poor people in the country, whereas in the USA there's a part of the population that has A LOT of money and there's a huge amount of people that live in extreme poverty. The USA is the rich country with the most percentage of people living in extreme poverty way above any European country, including Slovenia ;-)


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By Continuation on 9/9/2007 9:22:38 PM , Rating: 2
"Extreme poverty" is highly relative. In the US the poverty line for a single person more than $10,000 a year. For the majority of the population in this world, living on $10,000 per person a year would be considered an unimaginable luxury, not extreme poverty. I doubt that in Slovenia a single person living on $10,000 a year would be considered living in poverty.

And even taking the high standard of "poverty" in the US into account, the % of population living under poverty line for US and Slovenia are:

Slovenia: 12.9%
US: 12.6%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...

So it looks like inequality in Slovenia is higher than US.


By Shadowmaster625 on 9/10/2007 3:02:36 PM , Rating: 2
yeah but in slovenia you dont need 10,000 a year just to have a roof over your head and a cup of ramen noodles. You'd get a hell of a lot more for 10 grand in slovenia.


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By heffeque on 9/9/2007 10:42:54 AM , Rating: 2
Actually... you must know very little about Slovenia. It's actually pretty well off. Their economy has surpassed Portugal's and their GDP per cápita is almost as high as Spain's.

(I only know these things because I'm going to live there for a year on an Erasmus exchange program, so I don't blame you for thinking that Slovenia was poor country).


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By JoeBanana on 9/9/2007 11:20:20 AM , Rating: 2
I don't blame you if you don't know that it is actually it is with the rest of europe. After all Slovenia is a small country. But not poor.

You implied the second part from the first one, so your whole logical statement is false.:P


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By JoeBanana on 9/9/2007 11:21:56 AM , Rating: 2
TG please let us edit our posts.


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By JoeBanana on 9/9/2007 11:23:06 AM , Rating: 2
Lol i meant dailytech. You see what i mean.


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By Enoch2001 on 9/9/2007 11:28:21 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah but...Japanese woman are 10X hotter. ;-)


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By daidaloss on 9/9/07, Rating: 0
RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By drunkenmastermind on 9/10/2007 8:25:40 PM , Rating: 2
What I meant was 100Mb/5000kbps


RE: Somebody mentioned Japan...
By Chocobollz on 9/12/2007 12:13:28 PM , Rating: 2
Well I have a friend who live in Kyoto and he said that he were able to download at 5 Megabyte/s and he were only paying about US$ 20/mo and that's unlimited...

Well I myself live in Bali, Indonesia and here, we have to pay for roughly US$ 20/mo for a 16 Kilobyte/s with 1 GB quota (that's right, I ain't lie to you xD)~ It is like having hell here in my internet connection but then I remember my friend who live in Texas... She said she were using a dial-up and have to pay roughly US$ 20/mo... It is such a twist everywhere xD~

And about the statement about the "Japanese Womens is 10x hotter" then I would say, they're absolutely "100x hotter than Slovenian womens" (and yeah, I've already see some Slovenian girls before ^ ^), but of course it's all based on personal opinions ^ ^.


Great article
By FITCamaro on 9/8/2007 8:29:10 PM , Rating: 3
I for one am sick of cable and phone companies stating that more choices for the consumer HURTS competition. I would love to hear them explain that argument. Verizon would love to bring us FiOS nationwide. But they can't thanks to Comcast, Time Warner, and Bellsouth. No we still wouldn't have 100mpbs connections. But we'd be a step in the right direction.

I am one who hates with a passion my cable company. But DSL is even slower and just as expensive. I would giggle with glee if my cable company headquarters were to burn to the ground with those who run it inside. When I move, I will make sure that this company is not the local provider.




RE: Great article
By Ralph The Magician on 9/8/2007 8:35:38 PM , Rating: 3
The saddest part is that even the cable lines that have been laid are capable of 30Mbps assuming companies like Comcast would upgrade their infrastructure. But since they have no incentive to do so, why bother? They can just charge you $50/month for 6Mbps shared cable.


RE: Great article
By TomCorelis (blog) on 9/8/2007 9:29:37 PM , Rating: 2
You have to remember that jockeying for all that bandwidth is your TV and phone service as well. HD VOD, TivoHD, any kind of HD functionality not running on your home box will share the came cable line as your internet.


RE: Great article
By rdeegvainl on 9/9/2007 8:20:47 AM , Rating: 1
that would be all fine and dandy if there was a difference in my speeds when I turned off the other systems.


RE: Great article
By theapparition on 9/10/2007 12:49:51 PM , Rating: 2
Also, that 30Mb/s is shared with you neighboors. I agree the cable co's should remove limitations and allow everyone to download at full speed. My guess is that they felt people would get pissed off when that 30Mb/s connection slowed to 2Mb/s during peak usage. Much easier to justify to your customers going from 5->2 rather than 30->2Mb/s.

I don't have that problem anymore, 40Mb/s on dedicated FIOS line.


RE: Great article
By TomCorelis (blog) on 9/11/2007 12:28:41 AM , Rating: 2
I envy you... piddly 3mbps ADSL, 384k up, 5 static IPs, and I'm still paying 80 a month or so to SBC.

Though, they have yet to complain about my eggregious bandwidth usage or all the various personal servers they host...


RE: Great article
By OddTSi on 9/9/2007 1:50:44 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is that the "competition" that some members of government propose is regulating the industry and forcing the companies to share their networks at next-to-nothing prices. They feed us crap about how they're monopolizing the network, but they PAID for it why shouldn't they monopolize it? That's the same as if the government suddenly said that you had to share your house with homeless people who pay you a couple of bucks a month.

If they want to have completely open networks that any company can come in and use then they should build a public fiber network that's funded by the fees that companies pay to use it. But we all know that's not going to happen because large governments are horribly inefficient and greedy and they'll likely try to raise taxes in order to fund it while using half of the money raised for personal pet projects.


RE: Great article
By herrdoktor330 on 9/9/2007 4:50:26 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you. Big Cable is going to sell you what they can get away with at the price point they can convince you is reasonable. That's the way all businesses work. But I want to put these 3 ideas on the table:

1) I believe that FiOS is going to grow. Verizon is a very large company and will gain ground slowly in rolling out their services. AT&T is going to be rolling out U-Verse in alot of major metropolitan areas which is bringing the fiber closer in select neighborhoods, upping the speed of DSL services and offering Video-oIP services.

US Cable companies are going to be forced to address this in the coming years. Comcast has already displayed a DOCSIS 3.0 modem that can join 4 broadcast channels to offer something like 120Mbps downstream. Once that rolls out, we're all going to be dropping that sentiment and be happy consumers all over again.

Now, you're probably wondering why, if they have the technology, they're not putting it out today. It all does back to available bandwidth for the medium. Cable has about 120 broadcast channels that are available over coax and hardlines. Right now, about 65-70 of those are utilized to broadcast your analog channels (your basic and expanded basic packages). Another 40 or so of those are used to broadcast all of your digital analog channels + HD content (of which there isn't much... but I'll address that), which is roughly about 200+ channels in your digital tier including premiums. That leaves you about 10 channels for data, which includes HSI and VOD services, including any upstream communication your digital boxes and HSI modems want to do. And that's in a perfect world where coax is flawless and every channel works fine. Sometimes that isn't the case based on the hardlines being used in an area.

The point I'm making is that cable infrastructure is limited until all analog broadcasts cease in 2009. Once that happens, they'll be able to make more room for HD services and data bandwidth, thus alleviating alot of the problems consumers are having today. After that, going into 2012 and beyond, we may peak out cable company infrastructure when it comes to delivering content and bandwidth to customers. At that point, everyone will want to be a FiOS company, of which I'm sure Comcast, Time Warner (if they're still operating cable systems then... they may sell out at that point), Charter, and all the little companies in between will be forced to make the same FiOS offerings that Verizon is now in the select areas that they're operating in. That will be the new "Big Cable" game.

2) I know I'm making myself flamebait in saying this, but I remember a time when I was jamming on a 14.4bps modem and thought that was the best, when BBSes were the "internet" people like me were aware of. I used to work with small mom-and-pop ISPs that were operating off a fractal T1 line. That's about 720Kbps offered from the ISP to dial-up customers. Today, customers are getting speeds that are faster than T1 lines, which in my youth I drooled over as I sat over my Pentium 100 with 16 megs of Ram and 1 GB HD and played Duke Nukem 3d over an ad-hoc dialup connection.

Today, I have a cable modem. I get about 6Mbps down of which I share with a house of friends. And I got to be honest; I'm satisfied with that speed. My girl is able to do her Myspacing with no problem. I'm able to download my LEGAL torrents at a reasonable rate (30 minutes for an Ubuntu ISO is cool in my book). I have no real complaints.

Now I'm not saying I don't want more. More is better and everyone loves faster speed. I would love faster access so I can have instantaneous transfers from my friend's VPN across town, but if I can download his files from across town and have to do a night-long transfer to do it, I'm cool with that. I've had to wait all night before and I can wait all night now.

3) But the big thing about broadband penetration issues is rural areas. Let me explain a scenario for you: towns where the population is 300 people or less is not cost effective for a cable company to run those kinds of services to, nor for the phone company to improve their infrastructure to offer better DSL services. The money spent on that kind of endeavor delivers no immediate positive return other than the altruistic rewar