Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Major ISPs Seek To Lower Broadband Definition

Posted by Soulskill on from the much-easier-than-providing-quality-service dept.

denobug sends word that major internet service providers in the US are seeking to redefine the term 'Broadband' to mean a much lower speed than in other developed nations. In recent filings with the FCC, Comcast and AT&T both came out in support of a reduced minimum speed. 'AT&T said regulators should keep in mind that not all applications like voice over internet protocol (VoIP) or streaming video, that require faster speeds, are necessarily needed by unserved Americans.' On the other hand, Verizon argued to maintain the status quo, saying that 'It would be disruptive and introduce confusion if the commission were to now create a new and different definition.' A public interest group called Free Press also filed comments with the FCC, recommending that the bar should be set significantly higher, and evolve in a way that corresponds with technological improvements.

7 of 426 comments (clear)

  1. The status quo by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What I got from reading my Verizon DSL service agreement was that they were making no warranty at all concerning the actual throughput on my line, regardless of the advertised speed. And they wonder why I don't want to subscribe to FIOS, which seems to have the same disclaimer. It would be interesting to know if other countries' ISPs commit to provide the advertised throughput.

    --
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
    1. Re:The status quo by lyml · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Nonsence.

      I pay approximately 17 USD a month for an unlimited 10/10 Mbit/s up/downstream (upgrade to 100/10 for 33 USD a month). I don't even think there is any provider selling limited broadband in Sweden.

      As an answer to grandparent, yes I regularly reach topspeed but I guess it would be harder if you have a high bandwidth connection.

    2. Re:The status quo by shiftless · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unlimited? Comcast yells if you download/upload too much in one month.

      Not if you're on one of their Business plans. I have 6 mbit/1 mbit service through them for $59/month. Sounds pricey, but get this:

      NO bandwidth caps, NO bittorrent filtering or any bullshit like that. "Customer service" in India is for the plebs; YOU as a business customer are treated like royalty. I called them up and expressed my interest in opening up an account for my (very) small business. The business account manager came over to my place the next day with a salesman. They were both genuinely friendly guys who walked me through all their plans and options and rates and answered every question I had. When I agreed to sign up they took care of the paperwork for me; I didn't have to do shit but sign my name a few times. The manager then gave me his business card with his cell phone number on it and said if I ever had any problems with the service to give him a call.

      The ONE time I thought my service went down I gave him a ring. Told him my address and he remembered right away who I was. I described my problem and he jumped right on it. An engineer (a real one who actually knew his shit) called me up a few minutes later and had me check some stuff; turned out my damn Linksys router was causing the problem and the cable was fine. I apologized for wasting his time since I'm a communications technician and should have caught that, but he said "no problem" and seemed genuinely glad to help.

      All that and I haven't even mentioned the performance. 700-800kb/sec download speeds are the norm and I've hit 900-1000 kb/sec on numerous occasions. Never measured the upstream but I'm sure it's just as good. I'm very pleased with the service. I don't have a static IP as I don't really need one, but could get 15 of them for a nominal fee ($5-10/month.) There are of course no prohibitions against running servers. I can also upgrade to 16 down/2 up for an additional $30/month but again I don't really see the need.

      Say what you want about Comcast residential service, but the business service is world class. If every company treated their customers like this the world would be a much happier place.

  2. Lowest Price is Highest Quality? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What ever happened to quality? What ever happened to people, and companies, recognising that lower cost came at the expense of higher quality? What ever happened to production and purchasing being an optimisation problem with price, quality, speed and other factors thrown into the mix?

    All I see nowadays is price, price, price. Price is everything. All encompassing, all considering and the sole and only consideration in nigh every walk of life. Companies are gouging their businesses in order to save pennies whilst their products stagnate or regress. Consumers care not for long term value or even short term utility as price is the first and last arbiter in their purchase decisions.

    ISPs in the US seek to redefine broadband because they want their packages to be treated like commodities; like wheat and coffee beans. You don't care where the bean comes from, they're all the same. So you buy the cheapest one. If all internet connection packages are "broadband", can you guess what people are going to do? ISPs aren't the only industry that wants to do this, or indeed that is doing it.

    Is anyone nowadays interesting in something more than getting, or providing, the cheapest deal. Is there room left nowadays for an ISP that seeks to provide the fastest and widest piplines for people that are willing to pay that much extra. I know I would be. But is that how our society works anymore? Did it ever work like that? Is there simply no room for companies that don't cater to misers? Should we really be blaming the ISPs here, or should we be blaming ourselves?

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  3. My suggestion by macemoneta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My suggestion to the FCC was for symmetrical bandwidth to be included in the definition. You can't really have cloud-based services, if you can't effectively move data to the cloud.

    I'd personally also like to see a 10Mb/s lower bound. This is 2009 after all, and the telecoms have already been paid for 45Mb/s symmetrical bandwidth to everyone.

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

  4. More info by fbwhrdpmtajg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comcast wants the FCC to match OCED in defining broadband at 256kbps download. The FCC has previously defined broadband at 200kbps in either direction; in March 2009 they voted to change the lower limit to 768kbps and call the lowest tier "basic broadband". 200kbps to 768kbps is supposed to be called "first generation data". http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9898118-7.html

    The rollout of the new definition does not seem to be going well, as recent FCC documents are continuing to use old definitions. From september 2009: http://www.fcc.gov/Forms/Form477/477inst.pdf

  5. Comcast by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In most of New Mexico, comcast sells "high speed internet" as 6Mb/sec and above. they also sell 1Mb/sec internet. The funny thing is, that betwwen 6pm and 12pm, no one gets even 1Mb/sec sustained. So basically the term means " would you like to pay double for no extra speed?". Redefining it down makes sense to me since that is how it is now,

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.