seven of the top 10 are European…
Edit: I said gigabit is a norm. Not a standard.
I agree they are better than us. Perhaps because they have a higher population density, hmm.
It looks to me like 17 Mbps is “a norm” too.
They pay less too. yay
It’s cheaper to provide internet to a lot of people in a small area rather than spread around a bigger one. Just saying it’s not a fair comparison unless it takes other things into account. Also, it’s kind of hard to compare shades of green, but it looks like the speeds are about the same, which makes sense looking at the Wikipedia averages
except New York City isn’t rural, and you apparently didn’t read the article because they were comparing cities.
Nope, I just looked at the graphics (which obviously show that they are comparing cities), do those cities have the same population density? I honestly don’t know. New York may very well be higher than Dublin for example. Or is Kansas city higher than Berlin, as another example, becuase it looks like we should all move there :D. I guess maybe because of Google fiber like someone said went in there above.
From the Article:
pop density
New York: 6,700/km2
London: 1,510/km²
Bucharest: 9,237/km2
Hong Kong: 6,544/km2
tokyo: 6,224.66/km2
Paris: 3,700/km2
new york is one of the most densely populated places on the planet.
then yeah, they have cruddy internet - don’t move there
The issue clearly isn’t all about population density, then. It’s how we as a country treat internet.
In most of Europe, these speeds of the internet are considered a right and protected by the government. For example, in Estonia (IIRC), the government ensures that all citizens have access to 100Mbps down
Well I get 42 Mbps down in the suburbs because capitalism is ideal!!! Those socialists don’t understand the FREEDOM they are missing out on, because they can’t look past their overwhelming happiness and wealth and economic stability!
Well, apparently people aren’t actually getting 100 Mbps down, looking at the wikipedia page above
It looks like Cox has 300 Megs available in your neighborhood, so I don’t know what you’re complaining about?
Hmmm… I guess that my parents are cheap.
I know my uncle near Dallas gets 1gbps down for cheap, so I just wish there was a more consistent standard.
EDIT: Another problem is that you often get way less than you pay for, and companies aren’t often held accountable. My brother proposed a solution. Say you are offered 100mbps. It might dip below that, obviously. His idea is that there should be meters that will occasionally measure the actual speed, and whatever fraction of what you were offered that you are getting, you will pay that on your bill (only up to 100% obviously). So if they offer 100mbps for $50/month (entirely hypothetical), and you only get 50mbps on average, you only pay $25/month. Right now, ISPs get away with it.
Yeah I feel you, I wish the speeds would improve faster. At least it’s coming. Although past a certain point, I don’t really see the advantage of that much speed.
Meanwhile here I am with my 25Mbps down and it’s literally the most (and very) expensive option, but that’s what happens when you move to the boondocks
The report above is a little outdated. Here are the latest numbers I could find (early 2017): (source)
The US is 10th in the world and steadily increasing in both metrics. Not sure about price comparisons, though.
If there was a way to provide speedy Internet service at a reasonable price for every person in a diverse country with over 300 million people, I’d probably be for it.
Not sure how all this is related to net neutrality…