Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why broadband service in the US is so awful
svann
Member RarePosts: 2,230
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=competition-and-the-internet
Basically the broadband market is enforced monopoly instead of competition. Especially sad considering the US is supposed to be built on free market capitalism. I called comcast to see if if they serviced my area and was told that cox services that area so "we arent allowed".
Comments
Well, they are -allowed-, but they'd have to run their own lines instead of piggybacking on the lines that Cox has laid. In other countries the government forces the other businesses to "share" lines (note the lack of free market D=) . Similar to what we did with telephone lines (previous to this AT&T was THE phone company). It's largely unfair, but it's resulted in a better service for consumers.
edit: from your article...
In such countries, the company that owns the physical infrastructure must sell access to independent providers on a wholesale market.
They MUST make a decision that negatively impacts their business...ain't that some shit o_O
It's much worse in Canada...
There's only three, and two of the three are split by geography so you only ever get two choices between ISPs.
The same ISPs are pretty much also the only choices for TV, phone, and wireless as well.
There are other smaller private ISPs for commercial connections, but in reality all of them are just subcontracting under Bell, which is the owner of of all of the lines in Canada.
Capitalism failed once again? I thought it was a communism exclusive...
"Traditionally, massively multiplier online games have been about three basic gameplay pillars combat, exploration and character progression. In Alganon, in addition to these we've added the fourth pillar to the equation: Copy & Paste."
Have done several college papers on Net Neutrality. One touched on how the Bell companies are partially the reason we are so far behind other countries. They got a bunch of deregulations on what they could charge for certain services, took MILLION percent profits (not an exaggeration) on things that only cost fractions of a cent to offer, and then never used the money for the promised fiber optic backbones they were supposed to install.
In some states, they flat out ripped off the state governments. There was a time that they reported larger figures than Exxon mobile. So, in short, phone companies are to blame for being so far behind in our broadband. We were supposed to have a FULL fiber optic backbone by 2006, IIRC. Glad to see we're right on schedule.
That is the way Cable has always been. Each cable company has the area it covers. The reason it isn't a monopoly is the fact that you don't have to use cable companies. Just like with TV you have competing forms of delivery for your internet service that you can choose. So if you don't like cable then use DSL from the phone company and if you don't like cable TV then use a satellite provider.
In my area Comcast and Verizon are very competitive on internet/phone/tv packages which is how the market is supposed to work. Granted it would be nice to have more then two choices but it is an expensive market for companies to try and compete in.
If you look at cell phones there are several options on the surface but really there are only a couple real options since coverage is expensive. So you get AT&T or Verizon with Sprint as a smaller third choice and then T-Mobile down closer to all the pay as you go pseudo services. For most people it boils down to two choices, AT&T or Verizon. Most major services have only a couple choices.
Comcast isn't allowed because they would own too much of the market, and there would actually be less competition (I have no doubt that the person you called at Comcast didn't bother to offer that bit of context).
Could the regulation in the country be more efficient? Absolutely. But that isn't going to happen until you take care of all the money companies like Comcast are spending on lobbying congress to keep things the way they are (unless they can change the regulations so they can have an even larger share of the US market). Why do you think internet services got classified the way they did in 2002 (per the article you linked)? It wasn't accident...it was the product of lobbying.
Err let me save you the trouble. Comcast sucks. I have it because of the monopoly they have on my area... I can't get the services I want here and they blow I would have triple the network speed and double the channels for a little bit more money if I could get Verizon Fios here...
"Sometimes people say stuff they don''t mean, but more often then that they don''t say things they do mean"
Not always true. I have cable to choose from over dialup, but too many trees for satellite (not going to cut down an entire forest), and DSL isn't available. There is only ONE option for cable and nothing else. Wireless also sucks to the point where it's dialup speeds.
And no, I don't live in the middle of nowhere. It's right outside the city limits of DC.
I always use what the majority of the population will experience as my examples. There will always be a few areas that don't have as many options but that is almost always because they don't have enough population in the area for companies to compete over and make a profit.
I live right outside of DC with a population that is larger than most areas in the US that have choices for their broadband.
**In fact, I made an account here just to argue your point.
The article also compares countries that are much much smaller in size than the United States. Countries like Italy that have a little more landmass than Arizona are easier to upgrade basic infrastructure due to not having to make 2000+ mile runs of cable for internet backbones. Not to defend the ISP's who charge a rediculous amount of money for internet service. They need to be updating their infrastructure but hey as long as people dont complain too loud and you can make ridiculously large profits why spend the money. It just goes to show how ineffective our system here in the US is at accomplishing anything. Unfortunately the government is going to have to get involved and thats just going to make it that much more of a clusterfuck.
The funny thing about this article is comcast isn't offered in our area but as long as I've played mmo's (since launch of SWG) I have only heard bad things about there service. I live in Wisconsin and comcast may be available up north but not in southeastern wisconsin and we have some pretty stiff competition. As many posters have noted usually in a region the lines are all owned by one company but subcontracted out and I can say since I started playing mmo's I've had about four different providers and didn't have too many problems with any. Once I had a company that was so small they didn't have techs so it would took them a while to come and get some hardware fixed once but other than that they've all been great. Out of my area though I hear the most complaints about time warner cable (which is probably the biggest provider in the area), but I never used them for internet since I already knew they were unreliable.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Since they take public funds for that infrastructure (in the US at least) I would say that is no shit at all and they should be mandated to share it. You know, since our taxes paid for the fiber and cable and all and they still haven't met the promises they made in the 70s and 80s to get that tax money.
Shadus
If you live in a densely populated area I guarantee there are other options for high speed internet that you don't know about. Or you think your specific area has more people in it then it does.
It is very common for one town (even parts of a town) to have more options then someone a mile away because you crossed into an area that the other companies haven't felt is worth investing money in based off the small returns they are likely to get back. I lived not far from people who only had cable option (verzion hadn't wanted to setup DSL in their area yet) and I had multiple options. Over all our whole area is highly populated, but you have to break down the whole area into small groups. It isn't like a company says "Let's setup DSL to all os the suburbs around DC." They look at a specific section of population down to a square of a few miles per side and decide if that area is profitable enough to move into. They then rank the areas by proftiability and start installing lines in the best area first and work their way down, this takes years. My parents didn't have DSL options for years when the towns next to them did, when they asked the company they said their plan was to have that area installed in 1 1/2 to 2 years. It isn't like the company just gets to point somewhere and say "Boom service is now available there."
Simple. A corporate monopoly with few providers. A few large corporations are the ISPs in the U.S. so they take that opportunity to jack up the prices and lower services to maximize profits. It's the exact same thing here in Canada.
Oh no, a few mega-corps with hundreds of millions of dollars in profit every year have to do something that's for the public good instead of lining their own wallets with even more of your money.
Capitalism is a failure and represents everything that is wrong with the Western World today.
Or, God forbid, you might be wrong :O
The laws governing the county I live in are so ridiculous that nearly 100,000 people aren't able to get a fiber optic connection because the county executive won't allow Verizon to put down any FI lines.
Again, there aren't always other choices for people even if they live in a densely populated area. You're just assuming without any real knowledge of the subject. Politics play a role in the matter as well.
I also live right outside of D.C., in an area, according to the census bureau, that is the 20th most densely populated neighborhood in the U.S. We have only 3 high speed options.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
I think some of it has to do with how close you are to a major internet backbone. There are some fairly large gaps around densely populated areas in the US i know the map below is very basic but it maps the major internet backbone around the US. There are a lot of smaller pipes that come off the backbone to service areas but the major pipes (thank god it runs through phoenix i get fantastic service through Cox) need spread out to service the growing number of internet users in the US.
It all comes down to competition, and in the US the the big 3 AT&T (the Deathstar), Verizon, and Comcast control most of the markets and they push hard with their lobbyist friends that hold political power in Washington, everything from passing bills to prevent muncipialities from creating their own fiber networks since these companies won't serve or offer better services or cheaper prices, from cockblocking rural areas from access at all, as stated in the article( In 2002 it reclassified broadband Internet service as an “information service” rather than a “telecommunications service.”) if they would have classfied it a telecommunications service instead you would see more competition plus it would've eventually lead to what electiric and water and wireline phone service a "a right" and they would have to hook you up regardless if they didnt like it or not.
When even though smaller countries can hook up their entire country with 1GBs upstream and downstream for around the cost of 25$ US dollars a month there is something wrong, when people are paying upwards to 70$ for 1mb-12mb speeds it is apparent that consumers are getting ripped off and rates still rise but with no upgrades to speeds or performance , the big 3 will gladly take your money but offer nothing in return and even try to hide hidden fees in bills as in this case right here with Verizon, http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Verizon-Fesses-Up-To-199-Bogus-Fee-Problem-110697
They got caught with their hand in the cookie jar and eventually fessed up to their decpeption, back to rural access and availability I myself hace this dilemma since I lived out here in the country which I'm moving back to the nearest town that offers services tailored to my needs, the big deal atm is LTE (Long Term Evoultion) 4G services which the big 3 will push out to the majotr markets of course the problem is there is over saturation of those same markets with the same 3 companies offering the same products for pretty much the same prices and still find ways to raise rates and screw over customers with caps and overages charges poor services when they should be pushing out solutions to small and rural communties their answer is LTE well for a person like me who can't get wired services and has even tried to work out a deal for the cost of bringing services to me and others that live in my area were told it wasn't cost effective but they did offer their 3G service USB modems with a cap of 5GB per month with speeds of 1.5 mb (which aren't guarnteed) problem with that is that is a solution for mobile users on the go not for home services so all rural users that want sub-par services that pay more that a wired user does and gets less for their money is restricted in their internet usage a solution for rural access?
Of course with the broadband stimulus money finally all doled out to different states most of the money went up north to central or northern Illinois around Chicago, whether people want to believe it or not the internet is more than just sending email and looking at pictures, playing games, watching tv, or porn, it allows you to communicate, create , innovation, and it brings knowledge to those that lack services in the areas they live in, it allows to find jobs without calling and driving to each place, it allows you to order services, etc, etc.
Of course nothing is going to change as long we have corrupted officals being bought and sold at the highest bidder by the corporations that really run our country. Until someone with some balls steps up and drastically changes the way telecommunication companies do business we will not see competition , open access, or fair pricing.
Without reading anything but the OPs post. From my conversations with friends who did semesters over seas, and gaming friends from around the world the US has nearly if not the best broadband available. In many countries it doesn't even exist and you get internet the same way you get 3g on your cellphone.
Sent me an email if you want me to mail you some pizza rolls.
There are European countries which get connections to their houses for cheaper then the US and the speed makes US connections look like dial up.
As far as the whole world is concerned the US is not that bad off. As far the technologically advanced world goes, the US is behind the curve (on many things).
I guess I'm just fortunate, I have a choice of two broadband providers, Verizon FIOS and Brighthouse and I sure appreciate them having to compete against each other.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
In many countries, yes. However, the US does not come anywhere close to having the best broadband, nor is it the most affordable.
http://speedtest.net/global.php#0
Most other countries on that list above us offer higher speeds at cheaper prices.
Makes you wonder how any company would dare to suggest tiered pricing based on what sites you visit.
You live right outside the city limits of DC??!! Because I live in the DC Metro 30 minutes outside of DC and I have Verizon FiOS. There are many choices in the DC Metro for High-Speed Internet (HSI). You have Verizon, Comcast, Cox, Charter to name a few of the "BIG" boys in the DC Metro.