In practice, though, at least in Ireland there's been little obvious problem, though you can definitely see an increase: https://www.inex.ie/ixp/statistics/ixp
Also, California is mostly fairly urbanised and well-off. If Germany was the only place in Europe where people were being discouraged from leaving the home, this would be less of a concern. This is really targeting places, especially rural places, with poor infrastructure.
Also, there are very large parts of California that are rural.
That's about 5%, which is pretty low.
The US doesn't have many significant neutral exchanges, but here's one: https://www.seattleix.net/statistics/
Maybe we're far behind the rest of Europe but as we are part of Europe, then it isn't that great 'literally everywhere'.
Is that competitive? I have no idea. I could however chose from around 10 ISPs that all have to compete in the network, which I understand is quite rare on the other side of the pond.
Maybe Netflix feels the need for its own business reasons (e.g. it pays for some of its bandwidth and now users are using enough that they're unprofitable) but it's not needed to ensure the integrity of Europe's networks.
Were it necessary, the ISPs can simply shape Netflix and let adaptive bitrate take care of the user experience, the same way mobile ISPs do in the US.
Rural America seems to be an entirely different story.
They had microwave for a while, but it didn't work in bad weather, and then the trees got too tall. They've finally resorted to paying the cable company thousands of dollars to bring cable to their house. It's such a ridiculous opaque process though that my mom basically has to stalk cable vans in her area and give the tech an earful to get status updates. The good techs know how shitty the process is, and one even gave her his personal phone number. However, it's not his department, so his ability to make things happen is limited.
She made the payment back in November, they got permits in January, and she hasn't heard from them since. I asked about how to get this done on DSLReports a while back, and the answer was to just keep calling them over and over and over, because every now and then you'd find someone with a clue.
I'd still do the tower and resell b/w to recoup some of the costs.
Just checked, and at the address I left in Sweden I could have gotten a 1.2GBps for ~$60/mo, almost what I pay for 100MBps here...
I'm not holding my breath.
Or even just a separate pipe for either Ethernet or Fibre Cables.
I then decide look up their average Internet speed , and turns out they are all in the Top 10.
And the contract is for 24 months minimum, so if you leave the country before the end, you end up having to pay for the rest of your contract.
But, in general, US ISPs are particularly bad in my experience (and worse even than HK)
on the other hand the web is filled with horror stories emanating from C....st customers.
Edit: same for 2018 as well: https://www.statista.com/statistics/956188/monthly-mobile-da...
I'm pretty sure you'd agree that paying 1/3rd of what you pay now for the same bandwidth is 'better'.
Is there sufficient idle capacity to handle an nearly-overnight transition to whatever the load is now? I don't know, but suspect most ISPs are going to keep similar capacity buffers - nobody sells end consumers non-oversubscribed pipes.
One of them shows a ping of 27 ms (I think it's normally ~ 10 ms)
Interesting how ISP's outside of the EU are uncapping their data limits all of a sudden..
So when people (me included) say it's better in Europe, its because the vast majority of us are not capped.. In normal times.