rob316
join:2005-10-17
Carteret, NJ | Kool Aid
He is drinking the Cable Company Kool-Aid. |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10 | Bullshit sells. Once again. 99 percent of facts are made up...Slap these "facts" on a nice, well conjured report, and you have congressional testimony and works cited. Money sure buys good shovels. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
1 edit |  Is is true that 92% of us can order Cable Internet?
"cable's high-speed Internet service is sitting in front of 92% of American households." - Kyle McSlarrow, National Cable Television Association
»www.multichannel.com/article/162···head.php
interview date: January 12, 2009
published: January 18, 2009 If this is true, I'm surprised.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon -- KJ7RL
... Should we pay those who are "too big to fail" more money to ensure they stay that way? ... |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA | I think someone is pulling data off the sheet that lists an entire zip code area as having high-speed internet service if just one person has it. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | reply to funchords
I would guess those stats are culled from FCC data, which is about as reliable as the Dallas Cowboys come playoff time. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | NY Times, no surprise
You know, the all knowing NY times who think big cities like NYC are the center of the universe and everyone living outside of a big city is a dumb hick. |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
 ·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | reply to Karl Bode
Re: Is is true that 92% of us can order Cable Internet?
There is always the NCTA database; however, trying to find an accurate number of total households in the US is challenging.
»www.ncta.com/Statistic/Statistic···ics.aspx
Edit: Ok, this source states that there are 128.2 million households.
»www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/us/07housing.html
The NCTA claims that 117.7 million homes are passed by cable internet. So, that is about 92%. |
|
voipdabbler
join:2006-04-27
Kalispell, MT
| Tired of the "us" vs. "them" mentality.
We've allowed the debate about broadband to become a vocal slug fest with an "us" versus "them" mentality. Those with ready access (generally urbanites) looking down on and dismissing the needs of those communities that cannot get access. In large part, I blame federal regulators and their lack of a national policy (that would hopefully also keep carriers from selectively dumping less-populated markets). I'm not sure the new administration will be an improvement, their proposed broadband spending is minimal.
Unless we're willing to understand that the lack of a national policy and broader deployment will make our country as a whole less competitive, we'll continue to get sucker punched by US carriers. In the meantime, those nations willing to invest in countrywide deployment will overtake us economically, not just technologically.
Did the debate about other "utilities" sound like this one, with urbanites saying they should be the only areas served by electric companies?
Being a former urbanite who lived on the east coast most of my adult life, I have no tolerance for the divisive "us" vs. "them" rhetoric. It doesn't serve any of us. |
|
garmst
join:2000-09-17
New York, NY
·Speakeasy
| 92% is not surprising or unreasonable
Cable in general has been in existence so long that the infrastructure (wiring) has had a long time to spread virtually everywhere. Adding 2-way and therefore Internet was just swapping in electronics.
The cable industry serves the poor neighborhoods because the poor CAN afford cable, and the cablecos want to sell. Some of my family members who are on welfare have faster cable Internet than I do (It hasn't helped them find a job....). Verizon is wiring FIOS in Buffalo which is a dying Northeast city, inner city areas included.
There is no need for a BB policy, between DSL, cable, FIOS, growing WiMax, Cellular Wireless you have to work hard to be out of Internet coverage. |
|
probboy
join:2008-01-10
Natick, MA
| reply to funchords
Re: Is is true that 92% of us can order Cable Internet?
I wouldn't out of hand dismiss that number. By covering large cities and their immediate suburbs, you can cover a large portion of the nation's population--it's the remaining 8% (or whatever) that's difficult to wire because it's spread out over a large (>50%) area of the country.
The most apt comparison is probably to Sprint's cellular network. Don't they claim to cover a very large portion of the nation's population (something like 260-280 million people out of 300 million or so) by only covering cities and freeways?
Again, it's the few remaining percentage of the population that's difficult to cover because it isn't economically feasible for anyone to do it. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
 ·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
 ·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to voipdabbler
Re: Tired of the "us" vs. "them" mentality.
Yep, though even some urban areas get lame internet. Max speed in Denver 17 Mbps on Qwest (20 mbps minus 15%) for dang expensive, with about 700k up. Comcast business cable is $90, 16/2. 8/2 is the highest end residential tier, $65. $60 for 6/1. Meh, no...
Problem: DOCSIS 3 isn't gonna get deployed in non-competitive areas, unless you've got a decent co-op-style cable company. Windjammer ain't it. Yeah... |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to jmn1207
Re: Is is true that 92% of us can order Cable Internet?
You'd need to get out into the field to confirm anything. Some new digital technologies don't work at longer distances where previous homes passed worked fine, etc.
Before we spend billions or do anything -- we need to seriously map who has service -- and who does not. |
|
kevinm5
join:2008-05-27
Willows, CA
·AT&T DSL Service
1 edit | reply to Eat Me
Re: NY Times, no surprise
That's exactly how I read this. This is just some arrogant big city hot shot who thinks America doesn't extent past big cities.
We can barely get 50Mbps to cities let alone 1Gbps. By the time 50Mbps is affordable (~$50/mon) Japan or elsewhere will have >1Gbps. The guy has no idea what he's talking about. |
|
the_ticket
@qwest.net
| reply to garmst
Re: 92% is not surprising or unreasonable
said by garmst  :...between DSL, cable, FIOS, growing WiMax, Cellular Wireless you have to work hard to be out of Internet coverage. Thats just the thing... to some of these people, Cellular Wireless isn't good enough. They want the 20Mbps cable or fibre at their doorstep. Doesn't matter to them that its just flat out not cost effective to wire these networks out in the sticks. Maybe WiMax and LTE will be the answer, but its going to be at least another 7-8 years before these networks are built out into the rural areas. These people are just going to have to be patient. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | reply to voipdabbler
Re: Tired of the "us" vs. "them" mentality.
"Utility"?
Broadband is not a utility - not yet at least.
As soon as it is recognized as a utility, then it will surely get treated as such.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
mrbueno
join:2002-08-03
US
| Hi! American consumer here..
I don't fully understand all these fancy bit and byte words you use. Nor do I care. While it may cost a company millions of dollars to deploy some kind of service, I am entitled to use all of it for the lowest price I can pull out of my head.
If someone tries to explain the cost of providing broadband services to me I'll call them a shill and point out the profit that these businesses are making. After all I am the only one that should matter. Forget all those people that invest in and work for the company. I got musics to "share" and it's my God given inalienable right to "share" music and video with up to 3.5 million of my closest friends.
Don't you dare say the only reason I use this much bandwidth is for illegitimate reasons, because I totally need 50Mbps with no caps to web browse, watch youtube, and send pics of my kids to grandma. By the way, how do you turn on this damn porno machine. |
|
voipdabbler
join:2006-04-27
Kalispell, MT
| reply to dadkins
Re: Tired of the "us" vs. "them" mentality.
said by dadkins :"Utility"? Broadband is not a utility - not yet at least. As soon as it is recognized as a utility, then it will surely get treated as such. I think we're on the cusp of the Internet being considered as a utility. (Electricity and phone service weren't considered essential either when first introduced.) With a baby bell (Verizon) talking about moving the majority of their phone service from switched circuits to VOIP, I think we're almost to the point of having to categorize the Internet as a utility, too. Perhaps, that's the best thing to happen to change the shape of the dialog on broadband policy in this country. (Even though I worry about the national security implications of moving so much of the operations of our critical infrastructures to the Internet, which is so easily susceptible to remote attack by foreign enemies; hopefully, our national broadband policy discussions in future will also cover the very important aspect of security policy.) |
|
wifi4milez
Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice
| Syracuse?
quote:
Many profitable markets will see significant competition between FiOS and DOCSIS 3.0 cable -- eventually. But many more markets will not -- particularly across rural America. Blue collar cities like Syracuse and Binghamton, NY -- just a few hours northwest of Mr. Hansell's employer, will likely never see full coverage from next-generation broadband. Many are lucky to see 3Mbps DSL or 5Mbps cable.
Having lived in Syracuse for a few years, I can tell you that I was not aware of any significant portion of the city (proper) that couldnt get TWC, even as far back as 1997. Perhaps if we are talking about the rural areas around the city then that might be true (as it is in many rural areas!  ), however (other than maybe a small, isolated pocket) I think everyone within the city limits has at least one broadband provider available to them today. While I cant speak for Binghamton, I would imagine its probably in a very similar situation. The funny thing is that Rochester NY was one of the first test markets for TWC's higher speed tiers (7Mbps and above), a good year before we were able to get them in NYC. The cable companies have a big footprint upstate, and in fact probably pass more customers than DSL. I spent a week this past summer up in very rural Phoenicia NY, so far off the path that there was no cell phone service for miles. There was no hope of DSL, however the house was equipped with a 7Mbps TWC cable connection with full VOD and HD for the television. This place had bears roaming around, yet I was able to surf quicker than I could in the heart of Manhattan (NYC). The argument that upstate is under-served isnt working for me, especially given my personal experiences up there.
--
Комитет государственной безопасности
|
|
majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
| UGh why does everybody forget about cablevision
Why does everybody forget about cablevision. we already have 305 speed with ports 8-0 and 25 opened up.
Cablevision is also working on upgrading to docsis 3 and pretty much lites up their whole area all at once.
Whats the rush with going to docsis 3 with cablevision when they already have 30/5 speeds?
Why is it when people bash the cable sector they convieniently leave out cablevision and when they say good things about the cable induustry they include them ?
Also fios is doing the same things with their only upgrading certain areas with fios and leaving the others out in the cold. |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: Is is true that 92% of us can order Cable Internet?
said by Karl Bode :Before we spend billions or do anything -- we need to seriously map who has service -- and who does not. That would take a considerable amount of coordination and assistance from the cable/telco industries. The information coming from them would have to be audited to help ensure accuracy. And the end result of all their hard work would most certainly have a negative impact on their business and possibly get them into trouble after "exposing" their footprint, at least with regards to public opinion.
Any semi-legitimate map would have to survive the usual gauntlet of lobbyists lining the paths of our politicians' careers.
Here's to hope. |
|
