dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

Bloom County

1 edit
reply to sonicmerlin

Re: I'll beat the 3/768 dead horse

And yet those other countries are easier to lay fiber in because of population densities. When there are hugh population density in large cities it is EASY to get the majority of the population with high speeds as less fiber needs to be run and more people per run = higher percentage of the population that has high speeds. This is NOT the case in the US and the cost WILL be far higher than in other countries to get the same % of people on fiber as in say most of Asia.

Verizon is spending 20+ billion to lay fiber in niche pockets and not even coming CLOSE to laying fiber in all of their markets in cities much less rural markets. To wire 99% of our population - a conservative cost I would give is around a half trillion dollars. In a lot of Asian countries they could probably do it for around half of that and get 99% of their population on fiber. Huge, huge, huge difference in cost.

In the US the companies that lay the fiber have to make money - it is demanded by the shareholders. Therefore - as more rural areas are wired with fiber and more and more fiber is laid down with less and less customers per mile - the cost gets exponentially higher and those have to be paid for by the end user.

It is going to be many years before a rural person can have a 20\10 connection for $40 - this is simply a pipedream and so unrealistic it is not funny.

EDIT - Wiki population density maps:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_America - approx 33.x per km2 for NA.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia - most Asian countries that have uber fast connections and a large population with fast internet connections (like Japan): Japan - 331.x per km2, Singapore - 6547.x per km2. South Korea - 490.x per km2. Looking at this info - to me it looks like most Asian countries have large population densities. Much larger than the US which makes it easier and cheaper to get fast internet to large swaths of the population.

From this map »maps.howstuffworks.com/united-st···-map.htm we CAN see that there are a number of large population centers with lots of people. This is the reason why large cities generally get the faster internet speeds. It IS the reason why Verizon wired a swath of the East Coast first. But the issue is the larger area that have low population densities (midwest to Washington State - even Northern CA has low population density) - those will be exponentially more expensive due to less people per line while the cost of the wire and deployment stays the same. In reality the cost would not remain the same but go up as more RTs and repeaters\amps would likely be needed. And I am not taking geography into the mixture yet.

and the innovator of new IP services.
This can still happen even with what we have today - it will just be very expensive for a good while unless you want to dismantle the economic system and make the US govt an ISP.
