Leave it to Google to make even the
FCC's ambitions look meager. But hey, for the vast majority of Americans who will never have access to an
ISP with 1Gbps, we've got nothing but kudos to send to Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski. As the story goes, the FCC has unveiled a plan this week that would "require" internet service providers to offer "minimum home connection speeds by 2020," with a delectable 100Mbps figure being throw around. Currently, US internet speeds average just under 4Mbps, and the nation as a whole ranks 19th in the world. Naturally, companies that provide internet are balking at the idea, suggesting that consumers would revolt if they were forced to pick up the tab for all the network improvement efforts that would have to take place. Of course, Cisco Systems now appears to be the FCC's best bud, but we're guessing we don't have to explain the logic behind that one. In related news, the same entity is purportedly mulling a plan to "pay broadcasters to vacate airwaves it could use to alleviate network strain caused by the surging use of smartphones," which ought to make just about everyone happy. Well,
most everyone.
posted February 19th 2010 2:13AM
Are there any other countries out there that have this sort of speed and a big landmass like the U.S.? How's the speed in Canada, China, or Russia?
@deepdigits Canada has pretty fast pipes, and at a lower price, from what I hear. Of course, most of their population lives within less than 100 miles of the US border.
@deepdigits Yeah but it's not like there is only one Internet carriers in the US and it's trying to wire the entire country. What's really stoping everyone in the US is the FCC, which tells carriers if you try to go any faster we are goin to charge you big time.
@deepdigits
Here in China, in Tianjin (south of Beijing) the fastest connection for personal is 4Mb/s DSL. Which is close to about $65 USD a month.
At work we have an enterprise 10Mb/s fiber line- which is the fastest available.
I wonder what's the brand of those TVs. Hmm...
@fsX LG, look just a little more closely... :)
America. Faster. Wireless. For.
PFFFFFT!!!!!!!
The FCC can make it happen if they really want it too. Right now what's really stoping carriers from delivering faster Internet is the FCC with a bunch of taxes and fees that they pass on to carriers, if they lose some of the fees then carriers will have more room to expand and inovate
The thing I love about Google's plan is that they will be creating the same environment that the Gov't did with dial up selling broadband cheap so other companies can resell it at decent rates FU comcast. Companies can give us 100gps now but they will make you pay through the nose.
But I have to say that in NY FIOS has given me a taste of this and is pushing these old cable companies to be better everything used to be nicely cut up monopolies which screwed the consumer now we have some competition cable still sucks though they rather make bad commercials lying about how good their service is than make actual improvements to their infrastructure.
Still they definitely need FIOS everywhere cuz now I don't wanna move.
@vgrfx
I don't think you're going to get 100Gb/s anywhere.
@SophT You got me 100mbs lol
ooooh the WRAL mobile on CAT buses in Raleigh picture.....good re-use of a photo....I wonder if they have put that on more buses yet
Hurray. Durham is stuck with TWC at the top offering 10 down and .5 up.
Puleeze!
@kklier
hilarious that we have one of the biggest tech research areas in the country in RTP, but it's surrounded by some of the worst ISP tech in the country courtesy of TWC.
@arkweld I agree!
"pay broadcasters to vacate airwaves it could use to alleviate network strain caused by the surging use of smartphones," which ought to make just about everyone happy."
Except for the at least 15 million households who still watch over-the-air TV, it'll suck pretty hard for them.
This is why I love Google, even if its draconian, most of the stuff they push benefit us in some way.
I say we all bug the Hell out of our respective gov't official and get this plan into effect by 2015.
"Naturally, companies that provide internet are balking at the idea, suggesting that consumers would revolt if they were forced to pick up the tab for all the network improvement efforts that would have to take place."
One could argue that we've *already* paid for it, considering most of the big ISPs are making Billions in profit every year.
I'd like to know how they came up with that 4Mbps figure. I get 1Mbps down/512Kbps up for $40/month. Faster would be nice, but it definitely is usable.
I'm normally anti-big-brother stepping in to force this kind of stuff. But in this case I think it's a very warranted. In so much of the US your providers have a stranglehold and have zero urge to make upgrades or changes.
I live in a small town in the US midwest (~6k people). The absolute fastest Cable or DSL available in-town is 3m. If you live in-town, but more than about 3 blocks from "main street," the max you'll get is 1m (so yeah, I pay almost $50/m for a 1m line). If you live at the edges of town you're screwed and on either dialup or satellite internet.
I'm so sick of talking to friends in Europe or Asia that pay less than half my price and get their 20m/20m lines out in the middle of nowhere...
@Marked Move in with your friends in Europe then? That's the thing about choice, you can make it and it won't cost you anything.