Americans pay more for slower Internet

Status
Not open for further replies.

corbintechboy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
463
Location
Corbin, KY
When it comes to Internet speeds, the U.S. lags behind much of the developed world.
That's one of the conclusions from a new report by the
Open Technology Institute at the New America Foundation,
which looked at the cost and speed of Internet access in
two dozen cities around the world.

Americans are paying more for slower Internet - CNN

I have known and have complained about this for a long time.

I am also tired of the tired old cable providers not getting with the times and having caps so one cannot get Netflix. Keep the caps because you then have to subscribe (and over pay) for their tired old services and they don't have to innovate and compete. Instead, as technology improves and the internet becomes a bigger part of our lives, the media (cable) put a stranglehold on the amount of technology one can embark into enjoying.

My solution is cable companies should compete globally (as much as allowed) and offer streaming services for a price that competes with a global market.

The problem becomes investors (I said it before), these tired old services have to continue to show profits every quarter. As long as they can force the consumer to over pay for their archaic services, they win.

We are a messed up country on so many levels...
 
Last edited:

WB4CS

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
900
Location
Northern Alabama
Here in AL, my ISP offers a 100 Mbps connection for somewhere around $60 a month. Sure, it's no where near the speed of 1 Gpbs (as in the article) but the average* consumer doesn't need 1 Gpbs of bandwidth. (*Average household with basic web browsing, HD Video streaming services, and online games. Sure, it would be easy for some households to max out a 100 Mbps connection, but the average web user doesn't even come close to that amount.)

The issue in the US in the infrastructure. The vast majority of the rural areas of the US were only just recently (30-40 years) connected via copper. It's only been in the last decade that larger metro areas are seeing Fiber being rolled out en masse. Other countries, such as S Korea and China, that have 1 Gbps connections, have just recently joined the "wired world" and their infrastructure was rolled out during a time when it didn't make sense to roll out copper.

The US will eventually get to a standard of 1 Gbps (or more). It will continue to grow from major metro areas and eventually expand into rural areas. It's going to take a long time to replace our current infrastructure, and that's going to cost money. Money generated by the payments we make to our ISP's and complain about how expensive internet service is.
 

corbintechboy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
463
Location
Corbin, KY
The US will eventually get to a standard of 1 Gbps (or more). It will continue to grow from major metro areas and eventually expand into rural areas. It's going to take a long time to replace our current infrastructure, and that's going to cost money. Money generated by the payments we make to our ISP's and complain about how expensive internet service is.


I agree with what you say.

But, there is no ambition for the current ISPs (cable providers) to offer faster speeds. Sure, they are (even in my area), but when those faster speeds come with caps, it does nothing for technology at large. Let me give an example of my cable bill:

Basic 25.50 (that's like 12 channels)
Expanded basic 34.50 (gives us 76 channels)
384KUp/6MEG down 39.99
FCC Fee 0.08
School tax 1.80
KY Excise & Reciepts Tax 3.24
Service Fee 5.00

Thats 110.11 a month.I have a 250GB cap. I get a "deal" on my internet because I have a bundle. Without the bundle my internet would be much more expensive. I am under the impression I already pay to much.

I would love to move over to some sort of streaming service, that however is not possible with the cap. There is no business service or otherwise that is offered without caps, I'm stuck over paying.

This means they (my local ISP) has no motivation to make things better. They can up the speed to the sky, with caps it does nothing but make me hit a wall faster. This represents the majority of the ISPs in this country. Yes, Google fiber is awesome... I will never see it.

Meanwhile we will remain stuck. This is the cable providers way to stay afloat in a digital age. Make people subscribe to these tired old services and they are guaranteed huge revenue.

This most assuredly sucks, but it is what happens when we drag old technology into a new technology world. And I don't believe the cable providers will close up shop and admit defeat, nope. Instead they will remain the gatekeepers and the gatekeepers can do anything they want, and they are, and we are paying.
 

WB4CS

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
900
Location
Northern Alabama
Thanks for mentioning the data caps... I meant to cover that in my previous post and forgot.

As I mentioned in my previous post, in order to pay for expanding and upgrading our infrastructure it has to be paid for somehow. That money comes from what we pay for our internet service, and that includes overage charges from data caps. Another thing that data caps do is help maintain a certain level of "Quality of Service" on the ISP's network.

For example: Network traffic (data) is nothing more than electrical signals generating binary 1's and 0's. However, the ISP has to have equipment (Routers and Network Switches) that can receive, store, forward, and route all of that data across the internet. The more data to process, the more hardware intensive it becomes for the ISP's hardware. With wide-open internet access and no data caps, you could have potentially hundreds of people sending and receiving massive amounts of data on the same subnet (think of subnet to mean all of your neighbors in the same neighborhood on the same internet provider's line.) That can cause a serious amount of network latency and suddenly your new 100 Mbps data connection is bogged down to 20 Mbps. The reason for this is because the equipment on the ISP's end is having to process all of this data, route it to the appropriate networks on the internet, and in turn, slows down the equipment. To resolve this problem, your ISP now has to purchase more and/or upgrade equipment in order to process the increasing amount of data on their network. This cost is passed down to the consumer in the form of a rate increase. Or they impose data caps to help stop this latency from happening.

Now let's imagine that a new city was built out in the middle of no where. The ISP(s) in this city beginning digging trenches and installing fiber lines. They also have to build, from the ground up, their network infrastructure and include network equipment that has the capability of processing 1000's of Gigabits of data per second. This "new" network probably wouldn't need to impose data caps on it's customers because they would have the hardware necessary to hand that kind of load. I believe this is similar to countries like China where their network infrastructure is relatively new and can handle the onslaught of massive amounts of network traffic. (Either that, or there's simply not as many people on the internet in these countries as there are in the US. Less people=less bandwidth being used)

So, while I agree with you that I hate data caps, I fully understand that they are a necessary evil and the price we pay for having outdated network infrastructure.
 

corbintechboy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
463
Location
Corbin, KY
I don't agree it is for the betterment of everyone.

If this was the case, the cable companies would have already started the process of re-inventing themselves. There have been many studies on how caps are in no way tied to congestion, instead they are tied to the "fear" of congestion and that is no reason for caps. As long as they are allowed, they will be imposed... In the name of profit.

Think about it, how does an ISP (cable) provide a better service and still show investors the company is profitable and maintain the value of said company? The answer is, they cannot with the current business model. As long as the cable providers are entertainment companies before internet providers, they will find any way they can push old services. Either the cable providers re-invent themselves as modern companies that provide internet with a side of media, or we will be screwed.

There is no way to fix this problem. My ISP is a perfect example. They now offer 25MB internet in my area, complete with the same 250GB cap. The price goes up to 79.99 for the internet alone, cap don't change. They do nothing for me by offering such a service increase. The wall comes faster and that is all.

There is no motivation to compete for another given reason, they monopolize an area. I have no other choice for service. Either I pay for their over priced services, or I simply drop off the internet. They know this and this keeps them in control.

On your point of the benefit of the whole internet type thing, I don't see that. They have over charged for services for eons and continue to do so. If they wanted to give us all much faster internet, they could afford it. Case and point, T-mobile is in the process of re-inventing themselves. You can get unlimited data and talk and text for $80 a month. Yet, they are promising to have their network completely switched over to LTE by the middle of 2015. I have paid cable more then that for ages, no improvements like T-mobile.

T-mobile is doing it because they want to compete... Your local cable provider is screwing you because they don't have to compete.
 

WB4CS

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
900
Location
Northern Alabama
I don't agree it is for the betterment of everyone.

If this was the case, the cable companies would have already started the process of re-inventing themselves. There have been many studies on how caps are in no way tied to congestion, instead they are tied to the "fear" of congestion and that is no reason for caps. As long as they are allowed, they will be imposed... In the name of profit.

Well, that's certainly debatable. As a Network Engineer I can see the *potential* for no data caps to create network latency. Has it been tested with our current +/- 20 Mbps model? That I'm not sure. Is it possible that removing data caps wouldn't have any effect on network congestion? Sure, depending on how beefy the ISP's network hardware, infrastructure, and internet backbone is.

I will agree that data caps are driven by profit. I'd even go as far as to say I *believe* data caps are in place to help keep ISPs out of trouble when it comes to piracy from their customers.

There is no way to fix this problem. My ISP is a perfect example. They now offer 25MB internet in my area...

25 MBps or 25 Mbps? 25 MBps would be 200 Mbps connection speed, that's pretty sweet! (Sorry, my training kicked in and I had to point that one out, it's a common mistake :lol: )


On your point of the benefit of the whole internet type thing, I don't see that. They have over charged for services for eons and continue to do so. If they wanted to give us all much faster internet, they could afford it. Case and point, T-mobile is in the process of re-inventing themselves. You can get unlimited data and talk and text for $80 a month. Yet, they are promising to have their network completely switched over to LTE by the middle of 2015. I have paid cable more then that for ages, no improvements like T-mobile.

T-mobile is doing it because they want to compete... Your local cable provider is screwing you because they don't have to compete.

T-Mobile is a great example of what I was saying. They have been working on upgrading their infrastructure for several years. I imagine (but have no actual proof) that they have planned their upgrade to LTE to be able to handle the amount of data that they will need to pass with unlimited data packages. Of course, cellular data VS home internet aren't quite the same thing, since most mobile devices don't use anywhere near the amount of data that a home internet connection uses, although as smart phones and cellular enabled tablets continue to grow in popularity, cellular data networks will start to be on par with home internet providers (if it's not already, I've not seen numbers to indicate it's growth versus home internet use.)

In either case, I think as more ISP's upgrade their equipment to be able to handle 100 Mbps connections and beyond, the *need* for data caps will go away. But I doubt we'll see those data caps go away since the ISP's know they can make profit off of them. Maybe one day internet connectivity will be put in the same category as your home utilities and there are more regulations on how you can be charged for your data.
 

corbintechboy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
463
Location
Corbin, KY
I guess all we can do is wait and see.

I fear we are not limited by anything other then greed. In my area, they could easily offer unlimited data without issue (my provider is small and only covers rural areas). But I believe they know they are the gatekeepers and will not do such a thing.

Hardware is always a consideration when it comes to anything (I have been working on computers for the better part of my life and know this).

I guess wait and see. Inflation will up prices and we will get less for more money. "Upgrades" (as of now) come with the warnings of the greedy.

Who knows, I still hold my reserves.
 

CapStar362

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
613
Location
GA, USA!
for me, i run a Comcast 120/20 with a 350GB Cap on usage.


i have no issues with Netflix or anything. i can push ( when everyone else is offline ) a 12Mb Throughput for downloads, and about 2Mb upload.

i have heard about the Verizon FIOS and Netflix woes. a guy VPN'd his OC24 Dedicated circuit from work into the home Verizon, and ran a 4k version of a Netflix video... then the same test with his residential Verizon FIOS of which was a 75/20 Mbps package... you can already assume the results.

with the VPN - minimal to 0 Buffering.
with FIOS - CONSTANT buffering

he checked his bandwidth with speed test from FIOS, and recorded the data rates... Speedtest gave him his full bandwidth.... but the netflix test, not even 35% of his total bandwidth. then throw in the VPN... with netflix running a 200% increase in traffic, giving him the almost full usage of streaming bandwidth.
 

Elfnetdesigns

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
63
Guess it depends on the provider and where in the USA you live. AT&T DSL in Louisiana is very very poor but Comcast is rock solid. When I moved back here We had AT&T U-Verse and we were paying for 6MBps or some crap but only maxing out at 1.2 MBps on AT&T and paying $60 something
I changed to Comcast and pay $52 a month for 50 plus MBps and I have cable TV as a side effect lol
 

toastycookies

Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
726
Location
the far east
well great hope is saying it ( Neutrality ) WILL pass on tomorrow


While the proposed net neutrality keeps improving I have to say I do not think it is ready to be passed yet.

Even Google who is rolling out the fastest broadband infrastructure in the country and gives away internet access for free is fighting it.
 

CapStar362

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
613
Location
GA, USA!
im angered now, this version that passed.....

NOT THE SAME ONE WE HOPED FOR!!


JESUS! is there anything this government can do without slipping in some kind of alter-ego based stuff we hope for?
 

flythunderbird

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
988
Location
Grid square EM99fh
im angered now, this version that passed.....

NOT THE SAME ONE WE HOPED FOR!!


JESUS! is there anything this government can do without slipping in some kind of alter-ego based stuff we hope for?

Of course not! We're talking about power-hungry people who think they know what's best for us. "Do as I say, not as I do ..."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top