

FCC Announces "100 Squared" Iniative:100mbps to 100 million homes - CoryOndrejka
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/02/fcc-wants-260-million-people-on-100mbps-broadband-by-2020.ars

======
jmtame
Verizon has been promising this for quite a while now. From what I've heard,
the third and highest tier of FiOS can only get up to 50mbps (if you're
lucky). <http://www.newnetworks.com/tellthetruthverizon.htm>

"We estimate that nationwide, through tax cuts and overcharging, customers
have paid an estimated $70 billion dollars for non-existent broadband
services. In Pennsylvania alone, we estimate that Verizon already collected
$785 per household for services customers never received."

------
rbranson
As long as the US leads in suburbia, we will follow in last mile bandwidth.

------
aswanson
Wonder if this will disincent private sector innovation and investment.

------
Devilboy
10 years is a long time to implement this with only 100Mbps. By 2020 many
other countries will be on gigabit connections. I think they're aiming too low
here.

~~~
mdasen
What are these "other countries"? Yes, one can point to some countries that
are doing considerably better on broadband on speed to some customers -
specifically Japan, South Korea, and France. After those three, speeds drop
off a cliff (to the 10-20Mbps range).

And Not everything is perfect in those countries. About 35% of Japan's
broadband users are on lowly DSL. And Japan, while having one of the most
urban and tech-savvy populations out there, has _lower_ broadband penetration
than the United States. That's right, a greater percentage of Americans have
broadband than Japanese people. France, despite its urban population, barely
beats the US on broadband penetration and most of it is DSL! A tiny fraction
of it (a few percentage) is cable of fiber.

Part of the problem is how the OECD reports on broadband. They report on
advertised offers of service (and what speeds companies are advertising as
their theoretical maximum). US companies tend to create a uniform structure
where they serve their urban areas in the same way they serve their suburban
areas.

And it should be noted that the US is 7th in fiber connections and 15th of 30
in penetration all with one of the most subruban/rural populations. So, saying
that we're behind is factually wrong. Saying that we're mediocre could be
correct.

The US should improve. It needs to improve. However, the situation isn't as
dire as many like to make it seem. Many countries are getting in the 10-20Mbps
range and the US is on the low end of that at 9-10Mbps. It should improve. It
should be a priority. However, it also needs to be noted that the situation
isn't as rosy in other countries as people make it out to be and the US does
have a more difficult challenge due to its suburban/rural population.

*All statistics come from the OECD broadband statistics.

~~~
nzmsv
Many countries simply don't have the kind of cable infrastructure that North
America has. That makes DSL the only sane choice for existing construction. I
would not call ADSL2+ inferior to cable though.

