backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 30 comment(s) - last by rcc.. on Jun 23 at 5:34 PM

Past 12 months saw increase in broadband Internet

A new research study carried out by the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project indicates that broadband adoption has increased over the past year even with a struggling economy.

The group surveyed 2,253 Americans in April, asking about broadband adoption, usage, etc.

"Broadband adoption appears to have been largely immune to the effects of the current economic recession," according to the report.  "In the April survey, more than twice as many respondents said they had cut back or canceled a cell phone plan or cable TV service than said the same about their Internet service."

  Around 63 percent of U.S. consumers now have broadband Internet service, which is up from the 55 percent figure from one year ago.  Along with more people adopting broadband, the price of service has also increased, with an average price of $39 per month in April 2009 -- the average was $34.50 last May.

  The economy has forced many families to eliminate extra services that may not be necessary, helping reduce monthly bills.  As noted earlier, the study also found that consumers are twice as likely to eliminate cable TV or cell phone service instead of home Internet.  Just nine percent of Internet users cut their service over the past year, while 22 percent have canceled cell phone subscriptions and cable contracts.

The reason for keeping the internet given by most people surveyed was that they found it to be a vital information finding resource, while cable TV subscription was more of a luxury.

Internet use also increased among people over 65 and low-income Americans, with a 58 percent increase in elderly Internet use, and 40 percent increase of Americans who make $20,000 or less.

The current global economy and rising Internet prices haven't, and aren't expected to, stop users from continuing this trend throughout the rest of 2009 and into 2010.


Comments     Threshold


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

Thank goodness...
By Bender 123 on 6/19/2009 9:29:25 AM , Rating: 3
Remember the old days of 28.8? Sitting there, clicking on a link and waiting 15 minutes for your pR0n to load...Then it would stop loading just below chin level of the picture, because some darned telemarketer called and the call waiting system booted you off the connection.

Those were the days :P




RE: Thank goodness...
By Proxes on 6/19/2009 10:09:01 AM , Rating: 2
*70 FTW?


RE: Thank goodness...
By IcePickFreak on 6/19/2009 10:12:50 AM , Rating: 2
You really need to look back to 300 baud modems - you could literally type faster than it could transfer ASCII text. Then the jump to 2400 baud where a 100kB file took half an hour or so to transfer. When it made it up to 56k I couldn't imagine it would get much faster.


RE: Thank goodness...
By rcc on 6/19/2009 3:43:52 PM , Rating: 3
I may be dating myself, but the first modems I worked with were 110 baud


RE: Thank goodness...
By christojojo on 6/19/2009 8:56:52 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah, I remember the Horses being so slow that I had to carry them when working for the pony express. :)


RE: Thank goodness...
By callmeroy on 6/19/2009 11:12:48 AM , Rating: 2
28.8........remember the old days of 300 baud accoustic coupler modems? ;)


RE: Thank goodness...
By Spivonious on 6/19/2009 11:37:09 AM , Rating: 2
Heh, my first modem was a 2400 baud. Plenty fast enough for those text-based webpages, but a PITA when some game developer decided to throw up a 1MB+ demo.


RE: Thank goodness...
By Samus on 6/19/2009 9:24:52 PM , Rating: 1
I started with a 2400 baud. Everyone else had 9600's at the time. But then the Currier 14.4's came out and changed the fucking game!

I got one of those and upgraded it all the way through 21600. Probably the best piece of computer equipment I've ever owned. That was my modem for over 6 years until I got DSL in 1998.


RE: Thank goodness...
By Jimbo1234 on 6/19/2009 1:04:39 PM , Rating: 2
You're too young to remember the real old days. 300 baud and using a keyboard to navigate through a BBS where the old days. A friend of mine had a 2400 baud modem which then was considered blazingly fast. I eventually got a 9600 baud Zoom modem and wow, 1KB/s transfers! The hard part was figuring out which terminal program was the best to use (one that supported Zmodem with resumable downloads, and color ASCII).

1KB/s wasn't so bad when a whole floppy was 880KB. Yes, 880, not 720. You'll figure it out.


RE: Thank goodness...
By Bender 123 on 6/19/2009 2:12:03 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, I remember those days...The sound of the handshakes, the BBS service...Hammering out a post on sports page using my 286 system, blazing through processes at 4 Mhz...

I remember having people think, "Only nerds use a computer and post on boards!!!"


RE: Thank goodness...
By rcc on 6/19/2009 3:48:44 PM , Rating: 2
OK, unless you underclocked your system they didn't make a 4MHz 286. The XTs (8086) were 4.77 MHz as I recall.


RE: Thank goodness...
By Bender 123 on 6/19/2009 7:20:23 PM , Rating: 3
Good call, but you missed the first batch...The part number on mine is the Intel C80286-4, stock speed of 4Mhz. I have it in a frame hung in my office with the rest of my processors through the ages...It lives in with my:

286 12 Mhz, 386, AMD am486, Cyrix x86 100 Mhz, Pentium MMX Overdrive 166, Celeron 300A, AMD K6 III, Pentium III 800, Original Athlon 1Ghz, Athlon 64 1.33, Athlon x2 3200+, and Q8600 Core 2 Quad.

The 4Mhz is my pride as it was my first computer, the Celeron 300A is still my favorite OC CPU...and the Athlon 1Gz because it was the first stock Ghz CPU on the market...Memories...


RE: Thank goodness...
By rcc on 6/23/2009 5:34:25 PM , Rating: 2
lol, ok, you are one of the 200 people that got those?

My first actual system was a TRS-80 Model 2, 4 MHz Z80. With the memory upgrade from 4kB to 16kB. Wow!!!

That doesn't include the tetra trainer they taught us on in Uncle Sam's Canoe Club. That was a 1MHZ (or sub 1 MHz) 6502.

I myself predate microprocessors, much as I hate to admit it. : )


RE: Thank goodness...
By Ammohunt on 6/19/2009 3:30:24 PM , Rating: 2
I used Procom Plus on my mothers packard Bell 386SX "Sucks" with 1Mb RAM. used to play a game called "The pit" on Wildact BBSes was a lot of fun.


RE: Thank goodness...
By JediJeb on 6/19/2009 4:20:49 PM , Rating: 2
Atari 800XL was what I had, man you were using the super sonic system with that Packard Bell lol.


RE: Thank goodness...
By Bender 123 on 6/19/2009 9:37:27 PM , Rating: 2
This is pure geeking out...Remember the awful Aztec Sound/Modem combo card for Pack Bell? They would fry, just looking at them funny...Then they when you tried to replace them, all you would get is IRQ conflicts, no matter how you installed it...The only way to get one to work right was a complete OS reinstall.


RE: Thank goodness...
By MHz Tweaker on 6/20/2009 11:13:31 AM , Rating: 2
I can remember my first PC, an IBM XT with RGB color monitor. It did something like 320x200 with 4 colors with the CGA card. My first modem was a 1200 baud generic unit. There were not too many BBS's in my local dialing area so I started one in 1992 using the Galicticomm Major BBS software. As I remember, I had about 6 or 8 lines with 28.8 USR Courier modems. I still have 1 or two of those somewhere. The BBS ran off a 486-66 PC connected to another 486-100 DX4 Novell Netware 4 server that had several 1.7 and 2gig Micropolis SCSI hard drives. I think I had like 12gig which was massive back in the day of 200 to 500meg IDE drives. I think those drives were like $2000 each. Fast forward to today where most phones have this much processing power and some have more storage. From that humble 8088 4.77MHz to my current i7 920 @ 4GHz on EVGA Classified, it has been an amazing 24years.


RE: Thank goodness...
By Durrr on 6/21/2009 5:51:40 PM , Rating: 2
Man, I had a Micropolis UltraSCSI drive that ran at about 80 degrees C on the casing lol. One of the first 7200 RPM drives :D. If I remember, it was a 40GB model. I had a dual P-Pro 200 board from TYAN with a built in SCSI controller. What a badass machine lol.


Verizon Fios here
By shaw on 6/19/2009 9:30:27 AM , Rating: 2
Verizon Fios as 15Mbps and I love it. Sure, I can't get the max speed on every website, but the ones I do it rocks!

I remember when my first computer had a 14.4 modem in it and I was patiently waiting for my dial-up ISP to upgrade their lines so I could upgrade to a blazing fast 56K modem, haha!

Good times.




RE: Verizon Fios here
By afkrotch on 6/19/2009 10:34:49 AM , Rating: 4
I started on 28.8k. I remember throwing up Napster and waiting 30 mins to an hour for a single 3 meg mp3.


RE: Verizon Fios here
By Akrovah on 6/19/2009 11:28:49 AM , Rating: 2
Those were the days.

I remember waiting 9-10 hours for the 109 MB download of Wing Commander: Secret Ops.


RE: Verizon Fios here
By StevoLincolnite on 6/19/2009 2:29:44 PM , Rating: 2
A friend of mine is stuck on Dial-up (Poor sap) and managed to stay connected for for 47 days, and downloaded 5gb worth stuff off the torrents in that time, to me that's hardcore.

I went from a 14.4k modem, to a 28.8k then to the awesome 33.6k US Robotics modem, then to a 56k modem, the 33.6k modem actually seemed to perform faster than the 56k modem, as the 56k modem was some no-name cheap heap of crap, and I got better performance in StarCraft and Age of Empires 1 with the 33.6k.

Now... I'm just waiting for my 100mbs down and 100mbps up, fiber connection to get rolled out, till then I am stuck with a 1.5mbps DSL line.


RE: Verizon Fios here
By JediJeb on 6/19/2009 4:25:36 PM , Rating: 2
I would get high speed if I could. BellSouth stops their DSL aboout 2 miles from my house. And for SWG dial up actually has better performance than Hughes Net so I haven't wasted the money on that yet.

What stinks is every county around us has wireless highspeed, though not as good as wired DSL it still beats dialup, but just like the satelite it has a very low data cap before throttling.


they sky is blue! news at 11!
By Screwballl on 6/19/2009 1:05:30 PM , Rating: 2
how is this news? As more and more websites are using unoptimized javascript, flash and massive amounts of information, loading something simple as msn.com or yahoo.com on dialup can take 5 or more minutes. People are getting frustrated with having to wait longer now than they ever have before, in many cases 10 minutes per page load... even a few years ago the wait was 5 minutes at the most, as many websites were still minimal enough to load at decent speeds on dialup.

Considering that true high speed (not just "broadband", but DSL, cable and Fiber or similar connections at or above 1Mbps) is only now covering about 30% of the land area in the US, there is still a very large chunk of rural towns and areas that have to live with either dialup for $10-20 per month, or $60 per month for "up to 1.0 Mbps" unreliable satellite connection...

The wireless cell phone signals or newly freed up spectrum from the analog TV stations should help pave the way for wider access to higher speed internet connections.




By inperfectdarkness on 6/19/2009 2:08:02 PM , Rating: 2
bingo.

the web is now BELEAGEURED with ads out the wazoo, videos that auto load, heavily un-optimized scripts, and overall MUCH larger total data per page than 10 years ago (back when i was in college).

unfortunately...the prices of broadband haven't fallen much in that time, though the domestic offerings are a bit faster. iirc, the fastest (widely) available back 10 years ago was probably 1.5 Mbps. now that figure would probably be ~5 Mbps.

unfortunately, since there is no legislation pushing telecom giants to improve their services--they are content to sit on their laurels & allow the increasingly complex internet browsing experience to pad their coffers with new sources of revenue.

thank god for the 17Mbps i clocked last week with my Cox connection. that's not "great"--but it's eons better than i've ever been able to get before now.


LOL @ 2253 people surveyed
By Shig on 6/19/2009 2:52:46 PM , Rating: 2
Can we actually get some large data sets to go off of please?

It's just silly to make these grandious claims off of these miniscule data sets.




RE: LOL @ 2253 people surveyed
By rcc on 6/19/2009 3:52:40 PM , Rating: 2
You have a point. Not just size, but was this in the Bronx, Beverly Hills, or Desert Center? OK, not Desert Center, I don't think they have 2000 bodies.


Ya know what else gets you $$?
By icanhascpu on 6/19/2009 9:43:01 PM , Rating: 1
Not being penny pinching pricks and start placing repeaters on tele lines so people in rural areas can get some freak'n DSL. People out in the sticks dont give a crap about 15MB down 7MB up. Give us 768Kbs down and 128 up and we will be happy. Id gladly pay $50 a month for that.

If anyone even mentions satellite ill bite your face off. We dont want to tether our phones or pray to the wifi gods. Give us basic broadband you monolithic greedy bitches.




RE: Ya know what else gets you $$?
By Durrr on 6/21/2009 5:52:14 PM , Rating: 2
Satellite??? *runs*


Thank you captain obvious.
By imaheadcase on 6/19/2009 9:28:47 PM , Rating: 2
Norm McDonald: ''You know, with Hitler, the more I learn about that guy, the more I don't care for him.''

Just to illustrate how obvious something is, don't need to write a whole article for it..




“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads

DailyTech Poll
Do you use copy/paste on your smartphone? 




17 Comments












botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki