Proof That U.S. Broadband Speeds Are SUPERFANTASTIC!

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The cable industry is trying hard to convince everyone that broadband speeds in the U.S. are just peachy and getting better every day. :rolleyes:

Once again, the latest survey of the current state of broadband around the globe [PDF] shows that, while improving, the U.S. still lags behind other developed countries, like South Korea, Japan, Switzerland, Latvia, and Romania in average broadband speeds and access to decent Internet. But leave it to the cable industry to try to convince America that everything is A-OK, and to try to do so without mentioning that this message is being brought to you by the cable industry.
Click to expand...
 
Steve said:
The cable industry is trying hard to convince everyone that broadband speeds in the U.S. are just peachy and getting better every day. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
IMO it's about quality not quantity. I'd feel a lot better if Comcast stopped pretending it's an ISP instead of a cable TV company. By allowing the medium and the message to become the same company (e.g. Comcast owns NBC etc) the race to the bottom for the internet in our country has already begun. IMO we must stop the problem now, by correcting the classification for internet traffic and giving it proper Title II and other common carrier utility protections. The only alternative is to allow Comcast to convert the internet into just an alternate delivery method for their last century business models (forced advertising, limited and/or speed-degraded site access etc). "Fast lane, anyone?"
 
I like how, in the small picture provided, they pick out Kansas as having a 90 percent jump, which we all know was caused by Google moving in and the cable industries reaction to it. What a bunch of flat out con artists. I really how this all will come to a head in the United States. Some of the crony capitalism is just so apparent, the proverbial elephant in the room. How much bigger does the elephant need to get before someone (general populace) does something about it?
 
Lets explore some of those claims
49 states experienced double digit speed growths. So a 1.5Mbps dsl line that now goes to 3Mbps is actually a 100% growth, that's triple digit!!!!

10 states have 50Mbps connections "on average", I'm guessing small population states that don't have much DSL and primarily cable?

Kansas increased it' average connection speed to 37.1Mbps... notice that is not above 50Mbps as per the previous claim, i.e. large populations, large urban areas... and is it really surprising considering Google wired KC (I'm assuming the Kansas side as well as the Missouri side) with 1Gbps fiber, of course that's going to increase the average for one small area of the state.

Also a bit of a picky thing... the post puts MBPS in capital letters, highly deceptive and ultimately wrong, Mbps yes, MBPS no, Megabit vs Megabyte. Probably can blame the company who designed those "infographics" though.
 
I think all ISP should by law in Canada and USA have to maintain a minimum of x speed and x uptime, quality is very important. This whole concept of 5mb down 1 up is fine, but, all ISP tend to throttle to make sure it rarely hits this number, it should be this is the MINIMUM not expected maximum. Doesn't hurt them a lick to give proper speeds.

Now if one is in the middle of no where and they offer DSL it should have to be a minimum of 3 and 1 cause more often then not they charge the same price they would expect you to pay as if it were a "high speed" line when in fact it simply is not given the speeds.

Prime-minister and President need to smarten all these fools up, not our fault TV services went down cause they dips, and certainly not letting massive companies merge to screw people who are relying on these services especially communications, health, insurance, food, lodgings.
 
Still more than enough bandwidth remaining in the pipes hosted by the ISPs of ISPs, from coast to coast. Of course, a higher allocation would mean spending a bit more money tp get happy customers and business-customers.
 
the amount of bandwidth they can give vs what they actually do give is insane, we could all be torrenting constantly with the best speed we can get and it still wouldn't stop up the pipe. They (ISP) just don't want to clean the rust from the old system, and certainly do not want to put new oil in the engine sort of speak to ensure that it runs properly, and lord forbid if they ever have to make quality checks by sending techs out random nodes to ensure QOS is being given.
 
OMG DUDE, the internet is like so fast. I can't even comprehend what their made up numbers even actually mean - Says most people who understand nothing about a computer except how to turn it on and launch IE.
 
I don't need more speed. In fact I'd gladly trade some of the speed for a lower price.

The problem is that there isn't much of a choice. If I step down to the next lower tier, it's 1/4 the speed, but the cost only drops 35%
 
None of these inflated claims are surprising in light of the fact Comcast is listed as #1 in the USA. Is it listed as #1 for service, speed, customer care, value? Of course not. It's ranked #1 by amount of money spent on lobbying congress yearly.

Yes you read that correctly. A "Cable company" outspends our entire military industrial complex each year in lobbying.
 
that just shows how much $ they make for obviously something they are not putting back into the service where it should be being used for at least a portion, for the amount of pure profit, I wonder what the overall amount invested into the actual infrastructure to keep it up, .0000001% xd
 
not to mention they all get massive breaks from federal and fed provincial in our case to keep it alive cause govt and such needs it as well.
 
Another issue is the fact that all the tech giants want us cloud connected. Many ISPs are asymmetric. My connection is 16Mb DL 750K up. In my house we have 4 computers and 2 phones backup to a local server. From there the server picks out the important data and sends that to Crash Plan and Onedrive. As you can imagine if the wife has been editing a stack of photos sending even a couple gigs through that connection sucks. Even with QOS rules set the upload degrades performance severely. The fastest I can get is 20Mb but the up stays the same so I see no point.

The consumer definitely needs more options not less. These local monopolies aren't working.
 
yep, and read another article, they want EVERYTHING on the cloud as its easier for them but, the ISP generally want nothing on the cloud especially given the average crap speed for big $ and especially the data cap almost everyone has now.

5/1 60gb would not kill them for a fair cost. Hell wherever they give DSL/cable they can EASILY do very high speed, they just do not want to, almost like game servers that like to throw numerous folks on the same kit, means more $ in their pocket if everyone has bad performance they can capitalize on getting more consumers constantly throttled a bit here and there. Imagine, 1 million folks that lose even kb here and there on purpose that easily amount to thousands of gb per month "extra" speed.
 
Wait, are they claiming things like Fiber adoption as part of their own cable speed growth for consumers? Or at least implying that it's cable's doing?
 
see the problem with most of Asia, they are closed in kind of like consoles are, very high speed and such, but, take it outside of that ring and it drops drastically. G fast is the next "big one" for us. Having huge distances to cover drops speed like crazy, and ISP are not about to pay massive $ to get the infrastructure to give these ludicrous speeds sustained rate anytime soon.

They do have tech to allow extreme distance ultra speed DSL/Cable but, they simply will not foot the bill as it doesn't help them and the average person simply will not pay what they would ask for this level of speed, hell most of us cant afford it their "basics" let alone the speeds we will all eventually and essentially require.
 
still much of my state, Missouri, has ZERO broadband access. I have 30mbps cable here where I live, and 100mpbs is available. But LITERALLY 10 miles from my house you can't get shit other than dial up for cellular.
 
heh heh, I got one better. If we lived across the road literally one power pole across to get access to other line we could get 16/1 for only $9 more per month then we are paying for the current speed of at best 5 and .6 but paying for a 6/1 connection($56/mth CAN dry loop thank god its not Bell directly anymore useless tools) the lines on other side of road are direct to ISP building, ours are not, they are new lines laid up ~14 months ago whereas the ones we currently have are god knows how old that are hung lose from poles, constantly lose connection etc etc.
 
I actually don't have any complaints against Cox aside from my minimum latency being 20ms. I pay for 150mbps/20mbps down/up and that's exactly what I get. Sure they have a "cap" of 400GB, but they won't cut you off unless I go over 1.6TB, which even for me would be pretty much 24/7 blu ray piracy.
 
JeffDC said:
IMO it's about quality not quantity. I'd feel a lot better if Comcast stopped pretending it's an ISP instead of a cable TV company. By allowing the medium and the message to become the same company (e.g. Comcast owns NBC etc) the race to the bottom for the internet in our country has already begun. IMO we must stop the problem now, by correcting the classification for internet traffic and giving it proper Title II and other common carrier utility protections. The only alternative is to allow Comcast to convert the internet into just an alternate delivery method for their last century business models (forced advertising, limited and/or speed-degraded site access etc). "Fast lane, anyone?"
Click to expand...

THIS^^^
 
I am stuck with one of the most un trust worthy ISP in states, and they are known as CENTURYLINK. From my personnel experience they have poor customer service along with poor internet service itself. Also each time you talk to their customer service, double check they are giving you a reliable information since I have been lied upon by Century Link to keep me in the loop.

I do hope one day we have reliable and efficient Internet service here in states.
 
Ask my friends and co-workers about Time-Warner Cable Internet in North Carolina. Then take several steps back as the flames fly.

All that the cable companies care about is the money you spend each month. Period. Because they are the ONLY choice in many communities for high-speed Internet, you have to take whatever they give you. This is one thing that I miss about the dial-up days.... you had your choice of local providers. For me, the choice is between DSL from the phone company (max speed 15/3) or Comcast. Did I mention that I really hate Comcast?
 
I'm on a 100Mbit line right here in central US. Can't complain. I think the cap is only like 250GB though
 
I pay $96 a month for 150 Mbps down, unlimited traffic. I'm in Ontario Canada though.
 
Cox upped all the speeds here in hampton roads. I was getting 16MB/s last night.
 
ravx25 said:
I like how, in the small picture provided, they pick out Kansas as having a 90 percent jump, which we all know was caused by Google moving in and the cable industries reaction to it. What a bunch of flat out con artists. I really how this all will come to a head in the United States. Some of the crony capitalism is just so apparent, the proverbial elephant in the room. How much bigger does the elephant need to get before someone (general populace) does something about it?
Click to expand...

That part made me laugh. The cable industry highlighting massive growth done by a competitor to the cable industry.
 
Zepher said:
Cox upped all the speeds here in hampton roads. I was getting 16MB/s last night.
Click to expand...

Cox has been unstable for me lately. Last week there was about 3 outages of 15minutes or more. One was over an hour. Reporting websites showed huge bumps in reports, so I ruled out internal.
 
There's a big difference in wiring those other countries vs the US. Most of the people and thus internet usage in other countries are in the few major cities they have. Now in the US we have a lot of major cities, but then we have huge expanses of rural areas that are larger than some countries.
It costs money to get speed, and people don't want to pay for it.
 
i have suddenlink. i get what i pay for. and it is more than i need.
 
Spidey329 said:
Cox has been unstable for me lately. Last week there was about 3 outages of 15minutes or more. One was over an hour. Reporting websites showed huge bumps in reports, so I ruled out internal.
Click to expand...
I have been getting these errors on my cable modem, it goes down from 5 minutes to 30 minutes. every couple of weeks, a few times 2 days in a row.
I don't know if it's internal or Cox. I edited the MAC address from the error reports.

Code: 
Oct 24 2014 09:58:58 	3-Critical 	R02.0 	No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-
Oct 14 2014 00:55:13 	6-Notice 	I401.0 	TLV-11 - unrecognized OID;CM-
Oct 14 2014 00:55:13 	5-Warning 	Z00.0 	MIMO Event MIMO: Stored MIMO=-1 post cfg file MIMO=-1;CM-
Jan 01 1970 00:00:13 	6-Notice 	N/A 	Cable Modem Reboot from GUI/Configuration page 
Oct 14 2014 00:26:41 	5-Warning 	T202.0 	Lost MDD Timeout;
Oct 14 2014 00:26:18 	3-Critical 	T05.0 	SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Loss of Sync;
Oct 14 2014 00:26:17 	3-Critical 	R02.0 	No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;
Sep 30 2014 02:47:24 	6-Notice 	I401.0 	TLV-11 - unrecognized OID;
Sep 30 2014 02:47:24 	5-Warning 	Z00.0 	MIMO Event MIMO: Stored MIMO=-1 post cfg file MIMO=-1;
Jan 01 1970 00:00:29 	3-Critical 	R02.0 	No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;
Jan 01 1970 00:00:13 	6-Notice 	N/A 	Cable Modem Reboot from SNMP ;
 
Spidey329 said:
That part made me laugh. The cable industry highlighting massive growth done by a competitor to the cable industry.
Click to expand...

Well to be fair the Google move also prompted moves by cable and phone companies, I think the cable speeds magically jumped (up) to 300Mbps in a very short time, and AT&T is pushing gigabit service too (not sure if they're in KC yet though, I know they announced they would). Which really brings to point what are they considering how fast there speed is? What is available? Or what people actually have? If you go by what is available I think everyone in San Francisco "has available" 105Mbps via Comcast, however as Nutso mentioned price comes into, I could go fast too but it will A) cost more money and B) require me to sign a pact with the Devil (Comcast)
 
Next up in Comcast's crosshairs, digital game downloads. If they can discriminate against the traffic of companies like Netflix, delivery vehicles like STEAM are next. Especially in a world with 50gb games.
 
Tortoise time, unless going Comcast expensive. No internet upgrades likely soon.
 
6 years ago the fastest Uverse speed available in my neighborhood was 24 meg and thats still it today. They said in the "future" they will offer over twice the speed but hardly anyone will be able to actually get it as you have to be in certain range.
 
Lebowski said:
There's a big difference in wiring those other countries vs the US. Most of the people and thus internet usage in other countries are in the few major cities they have. Now in the US we have a lot of major cities, but then we have huge expanses of rural areas that are larger than some countries.
It costs money to get speed, and people don't want to pay for it.
Click to expand...

The problem with your argument is that 80% of the US population is urban. Only 20% is rural. If the ISP's would commit to build outs in the urban areas we could be at the top of those broadband lists.
 
ravx25 said:
The problem with your argument is that 80% of the US population is urban. Only 20% is rural. If the ISP's would commit to build outs in the urban areas we could be at the top of those broadband lists.
Click to expand...

His point isn't so much the percentage of the population urban vs rural, he was saying other countries have fewer urban areas compared to the US which has lots of urban areas, and what is classified as urban in the US is a little handwavy as suburban is tied in with urban as far as those population values you mentioned. Then there's different types of urban, there's high density urban, vs low density urban, think NYC vs LA. NYC is high density vs LA which in comparison is much lower density, and then compare that to someplace like Seoul and NYC (as a whole) looks almost rural (although some places definitely are higher density than others)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top