how-to block ads
|
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
| Makes sense For the state with the largest population to have the largest percentage of subscribers. What would be more interesting is penetration percentages as in what state has the most per capita subscribers.
As far as DSL out-pacing cable in California, it's also no surprise that the natural topology of DSL lends itself to better deployment statistics in high density populations where the limitations of DSL reach aren't such a factor as they are in rural communities which dominate mid-west states. Think about it...you can drive from way north of Los Angeles to San Diego and never leave the "city" save for the occasional coastal military base. | |
|  
gogeta6
join:2002-06-20
San Diego, CA
clubs:
| Re: Makes sense With regards to cable outpacing dsl, in San Diego I'd think that there are many more cable subscribers than dsl just because there are two strong companies who split up the county TW and Cox. However, in Long Beach ( a city of ~500k) I didn't know a single person who had cable, everyone who had broadband had dsl. I'm not exactly sure of the reasons but I know LA was fighting with its cable company all the time. | |
| | djrobsd
join:2002-01-24
San Diego, CA
| Re: Makes sense LOL I bet if you split San Diego in half, North County would probably be 90% cable, 10% DSL, whereas the city itself probably is around 60% DSL / 40 % Cable..
Why? North County = RURAL.. LOL
Of course, SBC has added a ton of remote terminals, at least in Carlsbad and Encinitas. But they're too late, especially considering the fact that gee, let's see.. I want to pay a) $39.99 a month for 1500/128 with DSL, or $39.99 a month for 2000/256 with cable? Go fig!
[text was edited by author 2003-05-27 14:24:10] | |
| |
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA
| said by gogeta6  :
With regards to cable outpacing dsl, in San Diego I'd think that there are many more cable subscribers than dsl just because there are two strong companies who split up the county TW and Cox. However, in Long Beach ( a city of ~500k) I didn't know a single person who had cable, everyone who had broadband had dsl. I'm not exactly sure of the reasons but I know LA was fighting with its cable company all the time.
That's because Charter hasn't rolled out cable internet in large parts of Long Beach. They say they're working on it, but they've been saying that for over a year. | |
| | | 
zoom314
Superman
Premium
join:2001-04-30
Yermo, CA
|  Re: Makes sense
--
Charter Pipeline rules in Hesperia, CA, Verizon sucks..... | |
| | | 
roamer1
sticking it out at you
join:2001-03-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| said by oliphant5 :
As far as DSL out-pacing cable in California, it's also no surprise that the natural topology of DSL lends itself to better deployment statistics in high density populations where the limitations of DSL reach aren't such a factor as they are in rural communities which dominate mid-west states. Think about it...you can drive from way north of Los Angeles to San Diego and never leave the "city" save for the occasional coastal military base.
That, and the fact that many areas (most parts of the L.A. area now served by Adelphia, etc.) didn't get cable upgrades until well AFTER SBC/PacBell, VZ/GTE, Covad, etc. launched DSL, and some areas (most of San Jose, etc.) STILL aren't upgraded, thanks to cable companies constantly changing hands and/or politically-charged stalling of upgrades...
From what I've seen, DSL clearly has the upper hand in L.A. (with some exceptions, such as the part of Orange County served by Cox) and the Bay Area, mostly because of the slow pace of cable upgrades in those areas, but cable seems to do much better in San Diego and in the less-dense inland cities such as Bakersfield and Sacramento.
-SC
--
No-Bull SE US Wireless Info: »www.sewireless.info/
Atlanta Apt/Condo Cable & Broadband Info: »www.atlaptcable.info/ | |
| 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| According to the census bureau in as of July 1st 2002:
US Population: 288,368,698
California Population: 35,116,033
Which puts California at about 12% of US population. So having 16% of the Broadband subscribers really isn't all that great of an accomplishment. As far as ranking 3rd in density. Even that 3rd place by density probably isn't much to talk about as I suspect that the top 10 by density are pretty close. But I'm not paying 90 dollars to download the PDF to find out.
--
Infogrames != Atari | |
| |
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA | Re: Makes sense That's why I would be more interested in "per capita" deployment. It's a better indicator as to how both the providers and state regulation affect adoption by the consumers. | |
| | | |
|
