Americans Paying More For Worse Internet

[Allspice]

I hate how Americans think they are the focus of everything.

I keep hearing about these people, but I rarely ever see them. How many average Americans actually think we're that great? I certainly don't, and I don't know any who do. Most badmouth America as much or more than anyone else.

OT: That should be a surprise to no one, it's been this way for a while. Mine is alright (30Mbps) and it stays fairly steady no matter what I'm doing. I checked to see how it compares, and it's about double the average for the state I live in. That's really surprising to me.

 

[Lunar Templar]

And NOBODY is surprised.

It amazes me how often Americans think of themselves as 'exceptional', but ignore the reality that they're not even in the Top 10 of the 'good lists'.

what morons have you heard this from?

No body here that actually pays attention thinks the internet service is good here.

It's passable but that's about it.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Yeah UK has this monopoly problem too. And it's BT (Sky and Virgin customers sorry to burst your bubble but BT still owns most of the lines, they are merely rented at a price to stick into the other companies cute little packages)strong arming the government, plans to increase infrastructure are continuously pushed year after year. And the prices seem to continue to rise for a glorious 4mbps.

Also the USA is huge, it's not a surprise to me that the average is pretty low still, since there's millions of rural places where better cabling and access to internet has yet to receive funding and attention.

The tiny little ol' part of England can't even recable it's villages and some towns. If you want good internet you kinda have to be in London or Birmingham, or a decently sized town that isn't run by dinosaurs who are content if the landline phones work and divert funding to goddamn plaques for bridges that were alleged to have been built in some year that apparently meant a thing.

The one good thing with Northern Ireland at the moment is that our politicians (while completely useless at everything else) managed to somehow agree on sticking high speed fibre optics down across the whole country, so even in my sleepy rural village of suck I get fairly cheap and reliable unlimited download capacity with good latency.

But don't worry about England, once you get your 50 billion pound high speed railway track I'm pretty sure it's been promised to solve all your problems forever

EDIT:
Decided to add this just to compare to other peoples:

 

[TristanBelmont]

Man...
Lotta politics in these comments...

 

[Denizen]

It sucks having to explain this to people whenever Internet speeds come up. People are way too in disbelief that this isn't the best that Internet can get right now but meanwhile other countries easily enjoy 250 megabits for just as low if not cheaper than standard rates in the US.

 

[Baldr]

Since you work there may you mind telling me what sort of idiotic problem is causing ISPs to not give same upspeed as downspeed? as soon as i find this is the case that ISP isnt even in my consideration list when looking at internet, as far as im concerned that should never happen and the only explanation i ever managed to recieve was because "lol it stops piracy".

As for cable, the signals(basically radio/tv waves) are being sent at the speed of light down a single copper wire. Since there is only one wire, if you send the same signals back down the wire: both signals would cancel each other out. So Upstream has to be on different frequencies than Downstream. On top of that there are also frequencies for the digital cable TV.

The main problem is broadcasting those signals, the cable companies have the equipment to send the downstream signals to the modem, however it would be quite a large modem in order to match those signals on different frequencies with the Upstream.

Fiber had the advantage of multi-filaments in stead of one wire and can evenly split the transmissions. However in the future Fiber does not have the ability to be upgraded without adding more Fiber lines, as where in DOCSIS, there is always the ability to add more frequencies still within the capacity of that one wire.

 

[infohippie]

Of course we pay more, we're the wealthiest country in the world. We pay more for everything.

Hohohoho. Come visit Australia and enjoy paying five bucks for a loaf of bread, or nearly ten bucks for a fast food meal for a single person. Or just try to buy a house, such as my teeny tiny little two bedroom place that doesn't even have a separate kitchen but includes that as part of the living room, for nearly three hundred thousand.

At least I have fibre internet at a reliable 25mbit. (Or more, if I were willing to pay for more.) And I can go see the doctor without taking out a second mortgage.

 

[ace_of_something]

Unsurprising as we are the most populous nation that allows total internet access (meaning very little censorship) and even people on the lower rungs of society are expected to have some usage. That many people, that big of space... it's not going to be easy to keep it top tier.

Before someone points it out: Most people in China has censorship problems and rural communities can't really get internet.
India same thing rural communities can't really get internet, and from what I've anecdotally heard a lot of people don't have it in there homes. It's seen as a 'work tool'

 

[ace_of_something]

I hate how Americans think they are the focus of everything.

No, Scandinavia has the best internet, you twat.
No, Japan and other Asian countries have the best transportation, you idiot.
No, India has the best cosmetics, and safest, cheapest plastic reconstruction surgeries, you fuckwit.
No, many poorer countries around the world even have better health care than you, many of which offer it for free.
And there are many other places in the world that are better than you at other things. Just because you're one of the biggest doesn't mean that you're good at it. (+1 Freud)

As for the whole Internet thing, this is a suprise to no one. And I have no idea what anyone's expecting to be done about it. Airlift American?

Never heard anyone in America say any of that... I've spent time in 47 of our 50 states (someday I'll get to Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire!) ... except the stupid health care thing but that's a vocal minority.

Internet, Transportation and Health Care are 3 of the 5 biggest things we like to complain about. That cosmetics thing just came out of left field to me though.

 

[BoogieManFL]

The amount of American hate that anything like this brings out is kind of sad. To me, the statements of like "americans think they are the best at everything, blah blah" is far worse than anything you accuse us of having. Where do you get this information? Do you know me? Do you personally know many Americans at all? It's like being racist. Lumping everyone together to fit your hate spewing.

But back on topic..

Something a lot of people don't realize is simple logistics. The United States is MUCH larger both in amount of area and population than almost every other country in the world. Out of some 249 countries, the US ranks in at 3rd in both population and land. Sometimes 4th in area depending on how water is calculated or some such.

A lot of countries are smaller than a lot of our states. It's easier to bring nice broadband to an area so small. I'm sure that plays a role. Same thing applies to mass transit.

Something I've often wondered about other countries, do you have a bunch of competing companies? I imagine if there are fewer companies trying to do different things it might be easier in that area too.

I'm pretty happy with 50-70 megabits that I get in my region, but a lot of people have it much slower. I don't think I got good high speed cable internet until something like 2007. A few years prior to that it was DSL which was so much better than dial up, but nothing like what it is today.


But the main thing that most people seem to be completely missing is something that is in no way surprising. Companies will overcharge us because they can. A lot of regions don't have much (or any) choice in other companies. So they can overcharge you and there isn't anything you can do about it.

Greedy companies are greedy. Nothing new to see there.

 

[Carlmike94]

35th? I've always believed you were at least among top ten.
But look at it from the bright side: everything else is much cheaper (except healthcare) than most places.

 

[lachlan4567]

And Here I am in Australia waiting.. Just waiting..
Seriously we pay more for almost everything and have worse internet.
So be happy with what you have, it's more than we have.
Ps( we have terrible and I mean terrible internet caps down here.)

 

[Strazdas]

so whats everyone elses results, out of curoisity

I use a "cheap" plan here so theoretically i have 100/100mbps, while real life performance often relies on how fast the servers are since thats usually the holding down factor (for example WOT updates only go at 2MB/s, while steam downloads at around 4.5MB/s. Highest performance i got to experience was 7.3MB/s which was limited by peers as well sadly. Another factor could be that im using an old computer that does not seem to be made for these speeds. the hard drive actually starts telling me its overloaded if i ask him to download at these speeds and starts dropping the speed. Its a 5400 rpm 2.5" drives so yeah....
No speedtest since im typing this from work.

They cant, your local ISP can sue them for doing so and win, because "unfair competition".

Sure they can. I live in Chicago where there's plenty of competition and choices. (Well not plenty, but all the big players are here) It's not some backwoods' town with only one ISP available.

EDIT: The thing is, all the services are overpriced (as compared to Google Fiber), as if they have an agreement not to outdo each other. Interesting... Maybe you're right. I f***ing hope not.

Well there was a case that google lost and was denyed the ability to move in google fiber to some town becuase the local ISPS that were charging 80 dollars for barely above diapup would be "forced out of business" by it. so basically they sued google for being better than them, and won.
American ISPs look extremely close to market cartel agreements, and those are illegal even in US. Of course, i cant prove it, for if i did i would already be meeting them in court.

No, Scandinavia has the best internet, you twat.

No, they dont. Sweden is ok, but thats it.

I hate how Americans think they are the focus of everything.

I keep hearing about these people, but I rarely ever see them. How many average Americans actually think we're that great? I certainly don't, and I don't know any who do. Most badmouth America as much or more than anyone else.

You wont find many of them on these boards, btu all you need to do is go to some place like IMDB boards or games where servers arent seperated between american and the rest of the world and there is plenty of them. They really exist in spades.

Man...
Lotta politics in these comments...

Welcome to escapist.

It sucks having to explain this to people whenever Internet speeds come up. People are way too in disbelief that this isn't the best that Internet can get right now but meanwhile other countries easily enjoy 250 megabits for just as low if not cheaper than standard rates in the US.

while we dont have a 250 mbits plan here we have a 300 one, that one costs 60 LTL, which is roughly 25 dollars. Per month.

As for cable, the signals(basically radio/tv waves) are being sent at the speed of light down a single copper wire. Since there is only one wire, if you send the same signals back down the wire: both signals would cancel each other out. So Upstream has to be on different frequencies than Downstream. On top of that there are also frequencies for the digital cable TV.

but that would still allow same bandwitch for upstream on different frequences, or are there simply more frequences dedicated to downstream, if so, who was the "Genius" deciding that?

The main problem is broadcasting those signals, the cable companies have the equipment to send the downstream signals to the modem, however it would be quite a large modem in order to match those signals on different frequencies with the Upstream.

How is upstream special that it would need a large modem? or do you just mean that modem would need to have same amount of extra power for upstream as it needs for donwstream? because if thats the case take what you have and divide it in two. upstream is as important.

Fiber had the advantage of multi-filaments in stead of one wire and can evenly split the transmissions. However in the future Fiber does not have the ability to be upgraded without adding more Fiber lines, as where in DOCSIS, there is always the ability to add more frequencies still within the capacity of that one wire.

Havent they kind of reached the limit with what requences are available to them by now? i heard that somewhere. And considering that a single "wire" of fiber optics can run up to 1gbps i doubt that many constant upgrades are going to be even needed. because at 1 gbps you pretty much can have a 500/500 connection that will handle everything thrown at it with exception of really large corporate servers. the rest are jut upgrades between the switchers for ISP and does not concern end user.

Or just try to buy a house, such as my teeny tiny little two bedroom place that doesn't even have a separate kitchen but includes that as part of the living room, for nearly three hundred thousand.

i find this statement quite ironic. you have at least 3 rooms (two bedrooms and a living room/kitchen) and you dare to call it teeny tiny....

Unsurprising as we are the most populous nation that allows total internet access (meaning very little censorship) and even people on the lower rungs of society are expected to have some usage. That many people, that big of space... it's not going to be easy to keep it top tier.

Before someone points it out: Most people in China has censorship problems and rural communities can't really get internet.
India same thing rural communities can't really get internet, and from what I've anecdotally heard a lot of people don't have it in there homes. It's seen as a 'work tool'

how about all those other countries that both have no censorship, high speeds and much lower prices? you pay more and still you get less. Its not a question of easy, its a question of greed by now.

The amount of American hate that anything like this brings out is kind of sad. To me, the statements of like "americans think they are the best at everything, blah blah" is far worse than anything you accuse us of having. Where do you get this information? Do you know me? Do you personally know many Americans at all? It's like being racist. Lumping everyone together to fit your hate spewing.

its pretty much the reaction to "America fuck yeah" attitude that your international relationships seems to have. Also yes, i do know quite a few americans like that. Not very well though as i tend not to talk much to these people. I agree that generalizing it is not good, but cliches exist for a reason.

Something a lot of people don't realize is simple logistics. The United States is MUCH larger both in amount of area and population than almost every other country in the world. Out of some 249 countries, the US ranks in at 3rd in both population and land. Sometimes 4th in area depending on how water is calculated or some such.

larger population means more costumers means more income means bigger ROI, means should be more incentive to invest into fiber optics. You do have a lot of land, but a thing to note is that you also have a lot of unihabited desert and a lot of rural areas where density is miniscule. if we exclude those areas who can "deal with sattelite conenction" the rest isnt really that much out or proportion to any other country that did it better. Sure its not nice those peopel get shafted, but would you rather lay fiber optics to 1 million people or same amount of investment to 1 person who may not even know what internet is. (if your rural folk that live in middle of the woods are anything like ours thats very likely).

Something I've often wondered about other countries, do you have a bunch of competing companies? I imagine if there are fewer companies trying to do different things it might be easier in that area too.

Yes. our strongest markets usually have 3-6 companies aggressively competing for costumers.

Greedy companies are greedy. Nothing new to see there.

yep, you got the basics of it.

35th? I've always believed you were at least among top ten.
But look at it from the bright side: everything else is much cheaper (except healthcare) than most places.

Not sure if serious or joking here.

 

[fractal_butterfly]

I wonder why Germany is so highly ranked on that list. Here we have the same trends, the largest internet service provider, the "Deutsche Telekom" starts to do the same bullshit of providing shittier service for the same price. Instead of improving the service, they are starting to provide throttled internet connections. You have about 100GB Highspeed internet, but after that it is back to dial-up ISDN speed.
I think the only reason Germany is a high rank on this is that there are many other ISPs, that improve on the infrastructure and build new networks (cable and fibre). But we won't get rid of the "Deutsche Telekom" anytime soon, since they have strong ties with the German government...

 

[Do4600]

Very simple answer.

We're are very spread out and we have 158 times the population of Latvia; more people, more infrastructure; more spread out, longer cables that need maintenance and are costly to replace with a faster network.

How much do you suppose it costs to replace 64,000 square kilometers of network? How much does it cost to replace 9.8 million square kilometers of network?

 

[RolandOfGilead]

It will take direct action from the US Government, just not the Executive, but the Legislative.
All they have to do is stop taking money from the telecom/cable companies and remove barriers to competition.
Totes easy.
*that last bit was sarcasm*

 

[Maxtro]

I live in a city in Southern California that has one "choice" for high speed internet.

It's a 20 MB connection for $55 a month.

Why the monopoly is allowed, I have no idea.

 

[Vicarious Reality]

If I've understood correctly some telecommunication companies have monopoly rights to certain areas in USA? Something that is pretty much illegal here in Finland. And yeah this article didn't really surprise anyone.

I personally pay 10 euros a month for 24 mbit/s connection. I could go higher(100 mbit/s for 30 ?) but I don't really need a faster connection atm. Then again in some rural ares of this country you really can't get a fast connection in any way(or so I've heard from a friend). The government is looking into that though.

10 F??¤%&G EURO?
I pay 375 SEK (42,2?) a month for that over here i Kalix and i get like 2Mb in this old house

 

[Proeliator]

Though we do pay up the butt for it, $100 or so a month. Though that does include phone, cable, and HBO.

I did have a friend who got:

though he found a magic jack