Slashdot Mirror


Two-Thirds of US Internet Users Lack Fast Broadband

jbrodkin writes "Two-thirds of US Internet connections are slower than 5 Mbps, putting the United States well behind speed leaders like South Korea, where penetration of so-called 'high broadband connectivity' is double the rate experienced in the United States. The United States places ninth in the world in access to high broadband connectivity, at 34% of users, including 27% of connections reaching 5 Mbps to 10 Mbps and 7% reaching above 10 Mbps, Akamai says in its latest State of the Internet Report. That's an improvement since a year ago, when the United States was in 12th place with only 24% of users accessing fast connections. But the United States is still dwarfed by South Korea, where 72% of Internet connections are greater than 5 Mbps, and Japan, which is at 60%. The numbers illustrate the gap between expectation and reality for US broadband users, which has fueled the creation of a government initiative to improve access. The US government broadband initiative says 100 million Americans lack any broadband access, and that faster Internet access is needed in the medical industry, schools, energy grid and public safety networks."

24 of 402 comments (clear)

  1. The way of things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's the slow inevitable decline of a failing empire.

    No one is to blame.

    Everyone is to blame.

    1. Re:The way of things by zeroshade · · Score: 4, Informative

      You seem to be missing a few: (in Mbps)

      1. South Korea: 36.90
      2. Lithuania: 29.49
      3. Latvia: 26.19
      4. Republic of Moldova: 24.13
      5. Romania: 23.65
      6. Sweden: 23.31
      7. Aland Islands: 23.08
      8. Switzerland: 18.54
      9. Portugal: 18.19
      10. Germany: 17.58
      11. Japan: 16.91
      12. Iceland: 16.31
      13. Bulgaria: 15.94
      14. Singapore: 15.81
      15. Denmark: 15.62
      16. Belgium: 14.65
      17. Finland: 14.50
      18. Luxembourg: 14.14
      19. Hungary: 13.73
      20. France: 13.57
      21. Ukraine: 13.08
      22. Andorra: 12.37
      23. Russia: 12.32
      24. Norway: 12.30
      25. Estonia: 12.13
      26. Liechtenstein: 11.47
      27. Austria: 11.10
      28. Slovakia: 10.32
      29. Czech Republic: 10.28
      30. United States: 10.16
      31. United Kingdom: 10.10

      .... and so on

      Sure, we're 31 out of 168. Still, why are we so far down the list?

    2. Re:The way of things by gravis777 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, I remember living in Austria 10 years ago, and many places charged per megabyte. Broadband penetration at the time was EXTREAMELY limited. Why? Because its freakin hard and expensive to run fiber through those mountains.

      However, the entire country of Austria is the size of the state of Maryland, with half its population living in Vienna. Germany is the size of Montana, and Switzerland is just slightly bigger than Austria, but not as big as Germany. Germany, Austria, and Switzerland can all fit inside the state of Texas, and still have room for Luxemburg and a few other small countries.

      Shoot, the entire CONTINENT of Europe is only 2/3rds the size of the CONTINENTAL US, yet the population is about equal to Italy, Germany, Austria and Switzerland combined.

      What does this mean? The population of the US is way more spread out than the rest of the world.

      Shoot, remember how I said that Germany was the size of Montana? Look at the population difference, Germany, roughly 80 million in 2000, Montana, roughly 500,000 in 2000.

      Remember those costs that I mentioned earlier about Austria complaining about the costs of running fiber through those mountains? I wonder what the cost is to run fiber out to Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska and the Dakotas, and how much it would cost to run broadband to each of those users homes. Pretty sure it won't be offset by paying $19.95 a month for service.

      I am sorry, but there is a perfectly good reason that the AVERAGE speed of broadband in the US is not the same as the AVERAGE speed of broadband in the rest of the world.

      In our defense, Russia is just barely above us, China, Canada, Mexico, India and Brazil are below us. What a concept - big countries with a lot of area rank low on the list! Gee, I wonder why?

  2. Usual Excuses by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cue the usual excuses about it being simply too difficult to offer broadband in such a big country as the United States.

    Somewhere far beyond a bunch of ghostly settlers are looking at their descendants very, very ashamed.

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    1. Re:Usual Excuses by guruevi · · Score: 3, Informative

      And as brought out time and again, there are much less dense countries in the world that have bigger pipes and even metropolitan areas in the US don't get all that great of a broadband. Look at individual states and I would say most of the East Coast and West Coast is pretty densely populated but still many don't have broadband or very fast broadband. I don't think there are any providers in the US that provide more than 10Mbps other than those that can afford a business package.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    2. Re:Usual Excuses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ironical isn't it? How the "can do" country has now become a "can't do" country. Same thing with high-speed trains. Just excuses about how it can't be done in the US even though Europeans and Asians have done so for years.

  3. Before the inevitable... by sznupi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, it's not because of low population density - for example most Nordic countries have typically much lower ones. And considering how situation with cellular coverage sort of mirrors the broadband one...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:Before the inevitable... by Gaygirlie · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Indeed. Finland is a great example of that: we have pretty low population density, especially in the north, yet you can get a decent ADSL-connection all the way in the rural Lapland. Though, pretty much the same applies to cellular network coverage too.

      AFAIK the problem in the US isn't really the fact that the density is so low, it's rather the fact that when they laid down the wiring they didn't bother planning it for future expansions and just did it as quick and dirty as possible. And now they don't wish to publicly admit that they did that and instead try to point to other directions as the reason for connectivity issues. Of course, I could be wrong, but I've just gotten such an image of their actions and behaviour so far.

    2. Re:Before the inevitable... by Targon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The government did the highway system, not private companies that decided that they had enough extra money to run the roads through the middle of nowhere. The US government has focused on funding companies that provide technology to the military, but has not done anything to encourage technology in the private sector. Startup tech companies have really died off since the tech crash of 2001-2002, and there has been very little recovery since then to ENCOURAGE people to go into the science and technology fields, except of course for medicine...where you find drugs to improve your skin, but it may cause heart attacks, strokes, kidney and/or liver failure, anal leakage, and other problems.

  4. actual speed by macshit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder what proportion of "fast" connections are actually fast though...

    I live in Japan, and my internet connection is nominally 20mbps -- but in actuality, I usually get less than 3mpbs, because it's a ADSL connection, and I'm just a bit too far from the central office. I understand that in many cases cable internet also has issues with the real speed not living up to what's advertised.

    Granted, there are multiple other providers I could use that have their own infrastructure (fiber-to-home, cable, etc), and maybe they're better, but still, I think I'm probably counted as a statistic ("has 20mpbs connection!") somewhere when maybe I shouldn't be ...

    [I don't switch because this connection is really cheap, and I just don't care enough; it's "fast enough" for me.]

    --
    We live, as we dream -- alone....
  5. Re:Nordic had to do it by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The size of the US really doesn't explain why my only two provider options, cable and DSL, are dirt slow and unreliable... in the most densely populated part of the San Francisco Bay area - net capital of the planet.

    --
    This space available.
  6. 5Mb OK for most people, surely? by radio4fan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm on 5Mb and it's fine for me.

    I can watch iPlayer/Hulu, download movies and ISOs, I use it for work and listening to pandora and BBC Radio.

    I honestly can't think of any time I have thought 'I wish I had faster broadband'. In fact, I could upgrade to fibre for not much extra but I don't feel the need.

    I'd worry more about the relatively large number of unfortunate Americans who can't get broadband at all due to being out in the sticks.

  7. Re:Silly comparison by binkzz · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think due to its vast size and rural areas the US is always going to be lagging behind smaller countries in the latest network technology.

    I'd much rather see a comparison and insight into why Asian countries are so far ahead of the relatively small and well off European nations. There must be some key cultural differences.

    I live in Holland, a small and well off European nation. I don't know the numbers for high speed connections here, but I don't know anyone personally who cannot get high speed internet. My father lives in a tiny village in the most rural of provinces here, and even he has a 100 mbit connection.

    Looking it up on Wikipedia:

    The Netherlands has the highest broadband penetration in the European Union. According to the OECD, in 2009 DSL was available to approximately 100 % of the population,[1] and in 2008 cable Internet access was available to 92 % of the population.[2] Statistics from the OECD also show that in 2008, 73.97 % of Dutch households had broadband access,[3] with approximately 38 subscribers out of 100 inhabitants in June 2009.[4] Several upload and download rates are available, depending on the network provider.

    That means Asia isn't ahead of us - we beat South Korea (and all other Asian countries) with our figures from 2008; we probably have an even higher percentage now.

    --
    'For we walk by faith, not by sight.' II Corinthians 5:7
  8. Re:Nordic had to do it by sznupi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Which is part of another oft-forgotten factor - those living in rural areas are relatively few and far between. With the emphasis on "few" they don't strongly influence the statistics in the first place.

    The US apparently has even slightly higher percentage of urban population than, mentioned in TFS, South Korea; and quite notably higher than Japan (though of course those two can't be directly compared, having much higher population densities)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  9. Re:Does anyone ever get over 2 Mb/s download speed by masshuu · · Score: 4, Informative

    Make sure your not mixing up Mbps and MBps
    Mbps is reported by your isp
    MBps is reported by most applications
    20Mbps / 8 = 2.5 MBps. which fits with your 2 MB/sec speed

    --
    O.o
  10. Did they ask how many want it by Shivetya · · Score: 3, Interesting

    and how much they are willing to pay?

    I bet you can find more people like my Uncle and Aunt in Ohio who own a farm. They have dial up internet. That is all they want. They use it for mail, a few government sites, and not much else. Since its a working farm they don't have much time to spend on the computer. I know, broadband would free up more of their time, well not really. When relatives send pictures those can download with no one around and when they use their PC they are pretty much doing what they need to do, not just blindly surfing. Movies, well that is what local stations are for.

    They aren't ignorant of the internet, just a lot of features and what others call necessities are not for them. When I tell them they can watch movies on demand over the net it doesn't pique their interest. They get their news and weather from the paper or broadcast TV.

    When I tried to bump my parents internet to broad band a few years ago they were like, why pay more for that? It wasn't until a deluge of grand daughter pictures and the like did they see *ANY* value to high speed internet. Guess what, it still is all about getting the latest pictures. All that streaming/etc/whatnot is meaningless in their lives. They are very happy and content as they are.

    People on tech sites tend to vastly over estimate the need for, let alone the desire of, many for high speed internet. Hell, you can enjoy life just fine without touching the net for weeks. If anything its made a nation of couch potatoes even a worse syndrome.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Did they ask how many want it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, I know a number of farmers who use the internet an awful lot.
      From real time weather forcasts at harvest time (don't want to cut the grain in the rain) to spot prices for their products(pork belly futures)
      Then there is contacting hauliers to truck their stuff away to ordering all sorts of stuff online like they used to do from the Sears Catalog.

    2. Re:Did they ask how many want it by D+Ninja · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People on tech sites tend to vastly over estimate the need for, let alone the desire of, many for high speed internet.

      One of the most insightful statements I have read here on Slashdot. We often forget that we are so focused on technical needs that we miss what "real people" really need or want.

      Hell, you can enjoy life just fine without touching the net for weeks.

      Well...now...that's just blasphemy. :-p

      Seriously, though. Excellent post. Technology is fun, but it's not everybody's (most people's) cup of tea.

  11. Re:Not clear in TFA.. by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Funny

    By that reasoning Nigera has a very good availability, as long as you are willing to pay for digging fibre long distances.

    I took up your suggestion and while digging the trench I came across $1 billion in unmarked bonds, belonging to the late General Fornitsum Fornus. Unfortunately i need the assistance of a foreign bank account to get this money out of the country to his widow and starving children .....

  12. Re:Silly comparison by guruevi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is being driven by competition. Holland has like 20 providers to choose from for cable, DSL and there are some doing FTTH now. There are also wireless offerings which work really well.

    Their neighboring country Belgium has only 2 (major) providers for Internet (cable and DSL) where cable has literally bought a monopoly status a couple of years ago in return of putting down a 200km fiber ring (they didn't even bother doing FTTH even though their offering is called FiberNet) and DSL/phone used to be a government run (and is still government owned) company. They have 10-30Mbps lines with 10-30GB monthly caps. Just recently have there been non-capped offerings because there are 1 or 2 DSL providers that have finally convinced the government that the phone line owner (the government-owned private company) can't gouge the prices for sharing lines.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  13. Re:Is this a problem? by jibster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    640K should be enough for anyone.

  14. Cost versus Quality by Sefi915 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I pay 50 bucks (US) a month for my Earthlink DSL. I get 1.5Mb/s down, less than 300Kb/s up. Yes, you read that right - my total downloads never exceed 150KB/s and my uploads never exceed about 36KB/s.

    It works for me and my needs (though it's annoying downloading game demos/updates that are larger than a few hundred MBs - takes me multiple days)

    I wouldn't mind faster service - but I don't want to pay the 75+ a month that Comcast will eventually charge me (and no, I don't want to spend 2+ hours a month trying to negotiate them down to a "special" price) and the FiOS pricing and availability in my area is kind of stinky, too. Lots of packages that don't last long enough and price ranges that jump up 50+% at the end of the promotional period.

    If I could get 10Mb symmetrical service for 50 bucks a month and not have the price change (except to go down), I'd jump on it.

    And in the Northeastern United States, it shouldn't be a non-existent option.

  15. What will happen by AntEater · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can tell you what will happen with this government initiative. They'll do some more studies. They'll have lots of meetings with the telecommunications corporations. They'll form some committees. They'll give some tax money to the industry to encourage the development of improved broadband offerings. The industry will pocket the money and nothing will really change. On the books it'll look like they spent it all on expanding and improving the infrastructure but virtually nobody will see an improvement.

    --
    Alex, I'll take keybindings not used by Emacs for $400....
  16. Re:RTFA by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember an article about 2 months back where the government said they were going to change the definition of broadband to 5 Mb Down and 1 Mb up. So currently I would be without broadband. I could have 50 Mbit internet, but I really don't want to pay for it. I'm happy with 3M/256K internet, because there isn't anything out there that requires higher speeds. Netflix streams fine at 3Mbit (is SD). And so what it it takes a bit longer to download a Linux ISO. It's not like they have a new release every 3 days. Maybe the issue is that most people don't care to have 10 Mbit interner, because the added cost doesn't actually get them anything they wouldn't have already. What's the point of having 50 Mbit internet when even a HD movie from netflix will stream on 5 Mbit connection.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.