Search results

Anything beyond what I have posted is going to be pulling numbers out of a hat, which is exactly what I will do right now. 30/5 for $70 is what I would consider right in line with a sustainable pricing tier for an area of 50k-500k population with possibility of upgrades within a 3-5 year time...

I guess you missed where I proposed the only solutions that I can see. And no, one of them was not "less corruption"

PS fuck this Dreamworks ad. Far more annoying than slow internet.

Sorry I missed that part. No, I am not with QIS. I am by no means an expert, but I do have a better understanding of the internet than 99% of posters, so I figured I would finally speak my piece. I've lived in large cities and had cable and bitched about it constantly. And then I started an...

I dont care about Comcast. You seem to be missing the point that nobody cares about YOU since you have some of the best infrastructure in the nation.

I already covered this, but its due to customer's perceived value and cost of infrastructure (or barrier to entry). Deathwing already stated that he wouldnt compare DSL to cable, cable municipality doesnt work (shared infrastructure) and fiber is too expensive. I have 4 competitors in a town...

I personally know small businesses with FTTH deployments in large cities. You don't see them due to fiber costs, not government corruption. Fiber burial subs are far more profitable.

I'll try.

Without a one of the other variables changing, no. Fundamental use, cost, or funding would need to change. In some areas it might today be profitable, but not in the future.

But more corruption has shown in Romania to provide awesome internet.

Well cost of living is so variable in the US, but I think the cost/wage/restrictions/government explain all points

Because nobody gets government cheese to upgrade and it isn't profitable enough for a competitor to build it out with limited uptake

I'll just stay here then

No, that isn't it at all.

Wait so your Internet costs 1/8th of an average persons income?

Well, at least you have sweet internet.

Yes they are. But due to our reduced density most will not see much benefit, if at all

It isn't asshole consumers. I encourage streaming. My posts have went a little to left field but I support net neutrality. My original point is exactly that. Urban Internet as a whole will not get better until one of the three limits are imposed or rates increase. Because Com cast and the...

Are there content blocks for external streaming? Shit I think hulu even blocks within the US, or at least I know they used to on PS3's and Verizon until they made apps.

EDIT: I misread. I bet it is still subsidized. They probably have a Europe interconnect agreement. And I have no doubt that you would get fast speeds, but I would bet money that they throttle it heavily to the US or elsewhere Or, romania is amazing.

The torrents is probably the only confusing thing about this, but that would require a little more analysis. My guess is, Romania owns the internal "backbone", and so within country transport is uncapped and unlimited and is completely subsidized. Outside content transport probably the only...

My guess would be due to their density, cost of infrastructure is significantly lower. Government funding is probably directed at those areas (as opposed to a focus on rural in America), and possibly content blocking of things like Hulu and Netflix. However, I do not know much about other...

Of course. It grew 10 fold over a span of 3 years, and will continue that trend. I dont think I would have saved hundreds of millions during an economic crash in anticipation of a usage boom unmatched to date for infrastructure upgrades. Pay more and I bet you will get built out. Even I saw...

Which they arent doing anymore, as pretty much all funding is going to schools and rural. That was my point. Yeah the FCC was fucking stupid with their first waves of funding. Now ISPs report coverage, and those maps are used to determine funding. See:Mapping | Connected Nation

I would say its 10%, and obviously the most expensive to serve. Nobody, including the government and competitors, cares that city folk are unhappy with their service. Nobody is building to you, because it is too expensive for what you expect, because you already have the best infrastructure in...

So what is keeping further competition out of comcast's footprint, instead of just building FTTH as Verizon did in your area? After all, print money. The whole point of this thread is null.

While I could accept this, since we are discussing cost of infrastructure, I think 90% of America is probably statistically significant.

Of course there are users like your parents. That is the only reason that you can have $50 internet. The point is these customers are reducing at a staggering rate. See 100:1 to 4:1. Huge Huge ILECs probably can get away with 10:1, but that happened over a period of 3 years. EDIT: And...

She is using oversell ratios as profit margins and saying that if you just "eat the cost of infrastructure" anything is possible. No shit. The technology is not the problem. The problem is a change in usage of the average user causing a reduction of oversell ratio, with customer ignorance...

Target speeds for application are network communities without ubiquitous 3Mbps down/768kbps up today. This is SLOWER than the last round in 2011 of funding which was shooting for 4Mbps down/1Mbps up.

They already brought it. Still wont be profitable though. Government money, IE tax breaks and grants, will be given to rural broadband expansion in the future, not bringing city folk 1Gbps upgrades to 10Gbps. Just because Google can doesnt mean ANYONE else will, or that Google will do it in...

This is true to a point. Most customers over 40 are not heavy users. However, as soon as they buy that new smart TV, they still stream 4+ hours a day.

Did you even read what you posted? Nice percentages and contradictions though

I hate torrents but only because of dumb end users. People that don't understand seeding so I get copyright violation notices I have to forward on or call to complain their Internet is slow when pushing 800 connections through their net gear router. Streaming is so easily accessible and will...

Yeah I'm sure the FAA would have a few problems with that in the US. I just hope they are working directly with Ubiquiti to solve some of their firmware issues

Well I am wrong on that point then. Their balloons look awesome though. They use the same radios as I do in their CPEs. Might be an option for flat areas with REALLY stupid zoning laws like no towers over x feet, no water tower access, etc

I cant think of a way for Netflix to cover any of the costs. Yeah it sucks that we are basically TV providers giving streaming sites free delivery to the customer (whereas before you had HUGE infrastructure costs, satellites or local copper), but then again I know they have insane bandwidth...

Yeah I mean don't feel bad for Comcast, that wasn't my point. They make fuckloads of money and occasionally do bad things, and probably have areas with really shitty CSR teams, etc. But people see this and just say "MONOPOLY! WE NEED GOOGLE" when 1Gbps FTTH is not sustainable, feasible, or...

I mean present day Comcast, in your area. They got fined for the torrent throttling if I remember correctly, so they are probably at least a little careful to head down that road again (unless like I said, the risk/reward is totally worth it). Maybe I am wrong, but when people move out into my...

Counter point, as I had never really given this much thought. I dont know much about coax network design, but it was my understanding that it is more of a mesh topology with limited total throughput and overhead, vs dedicated pair from DMARC to CO like telephone lines. So, all competitors...