

Akamai: World internet speed increasing except for US - codexon
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-10434930-94.html

======
s3graham
I'm not sure if it's widely true, but my provider (Shaw in Vancouver) does a
sneaky thing where they burst me to 25Mb/s downstream for the first few meg of
a download, and then put it back to normal (~8Mb/s).

It is useful for some real-life cases, but it also makes speedtest.net tests
very mis-representative.

I think the downstream is quite acceptable for what I pay. The upstream is ass
though (0.5Mb/s).

------
SamAtt
I don't dispute the conclusions in this article nor do I think the U.S. is
trying hard enough to build its Internet infrastructure. But these comparisons
are a little unfair. If you take the top 2 countries in speed (South Korea and
Japan) you realize there's a huge space disparity. South Korea has a total
area of 38,622 sq mi while Japan has a total of 145,925 sq mi. While on the
U.S. side Texas alone is 268,820 sq mi of land while the country itself is
3,794,101 sq mi total.

So yes the U.S. might be a little slower in deploying high speed lines but the
effort involved in running cables and building up that infrastructure is far
more significant.

~~~
DarkShikari
I see this argument made almost daily despite it being completely invalid.

If it was true, US cities, the high density areas, would have speeds
comparable to countries such as Estonia (12mbps), Japan (50+mbps), and so
forth. However, _US internet sucks, even in the cities_. In my experience
there is almost no correlation between density and quality of internet. And
don't make the argument that it's due to the distance between cities: fiber
trunklines cost almost nothing compared to the last-mile costs of wiring
thousands of neighborhoods.

What _is_ true is a correlation between _competition_ and quality of internet.
Areas with only one provider almost inevitably have terrible service.

The excuse that "US internet is worse because our country is larger" is a
cheap cop-out to avoid admitting that our telecommunications infrastructure is
in many ways worse than some third-world countries.

~~~
RK
_What is true is a correlation between competition and quality of internet.
Areas with only one provider almost inevitably have terrible service._

Do countries like South Korea and Japan have lots of competition for high
speed access (or infrastructure)?

~~~
henrikschroder
I can't speak for those countries, but in Sweden where I am there is a lot of
competition. I live in Stockholm and I can choose between one cable company
(up to 100MBps for ~$50/month), DSL from the three major phone companies
(~20MBps for ~$40/month), DSL from a bunch of smaller virtual providers, and
if I manage to convince my housing coop to install fiber, there's a bunch of
providers that can deliver 100MBps for ~$30/month.

If I was living in a small-town, I would probably be able to choose between a
cable company, some DSL providers, and possibly a local municipal network.

If I was living far out in the country-side, there would maybe be DSL, but
definitely mobile broadband.

So wherever you are, there is competition, even though it's of course fiercer
the larger the city is. I don't know if the broadband market is fully
saturated yet, it's probably pretty close to it.

~~~
RK
You mention DSL from major phone companies and virtual providers. Do all of
those major phone companies run their own copper/fiber or use the same
infrastructure?

100 MB/s would be nice. I'm paying about $50/month for 5Mb/s DSL in the US.

~~~
henrikschroder
There's only one copper infrastructure which is owned by Telia, the previously
state-owned phone monopoly. If you want more copper lines to your home, you
have to get it through them. However, the phone and DSL provider market is
deregulated such that Telia has to allow other companies to install DSL
equipment in the phone stations as well as use the copper cables.

Fiber networks I know almost nothing about. I know there are several country-
wide fiber networks, all the phone companies of course have their own
infrastructure there, but there are a few more companies renting out access.

I _think_ you can become a DSL provider without actually owning any equipment,
just renting access at the appropriate places, but then you are of course
dependant on the actual infrastructure owners, and you will probably not be
able to deliver the cheapest service, but have to compete on something else.

------
bmalicoat
I wish that there was highspeed everywhere and more importantly that it wasn't
so expensive. However comparing the US to other countries with way fewer
square miles to cover and more densely populated areas is unfair. Taking those
factors into consideration makes the US's position not so embarrassing. The
telco's and ISP's control of the infrastructure though, is still embarrassing
and in need of reform.

~~~
pyre

      Rank  Country        Pop.Density
      ----  -------------  -----------------
        1.  South Korea    493/km^2 (21st)
        2.  Japan          337.4/km^2 (30th)
        3.  Hong Kong      6076.4/km^2 (4th)
        4.  Romania        90/km^2 (104th)
        5.  Sweden         20.6/km^2 (192nd)
        6.  Ireland        73.4/km^2 (??)
        7.  Netherlands    396/km^2 (24th)
        8.  Switzerland    188/km^2 (65th)
        9.  Denmark        127.9/km^2 (78th)
       10.  Czech Republic 132/km2 (77th)
       ...
       18.  United States  32/km^2 (178th)
    

Sweden manages to be #5 with a smaller population density than the United
States.

source: Wikipedia

------
quellhorst
In some parts of the USA you have excellent bandwidth! Verizon provides me
with 50mbps fiber in Dallas. <http://www.speedtest.net/result/684079289.png>

~~~
ascuttlefish
When I go to that site, it gives me a "Missing License Key Error".

