Average U.S. Upload Speed: 435kbps - CWA Union test site suggests things could be much better....
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·

Average U.S. Upload Speed: 435kbps
CWA Union test site suggests things could be much better....
09:10AM Wednesday Aug 13 2008 by Karl Bode
tags: business · bandwidth · stats
The Speed Matters blog, which was started by the Communications Workers of America, has been tracking the average American Internet connection in each state, down to the zip code level. According to the organization's latest data, comprised of 230,000 online speed tests, there has been little progress over the previous year in the last-mile speed of a user's Internet connection. According to the organization, the average real-time download speed increased only 0.4 megabits per second (mbps) to 2.3 mbps. According to the report, things get a little uglier if you examine global averages, and even uglier if you examine average upstream speeds:
Click for full size
The median download speed for the nation was 2.3 megabits per second (mbps). In Japan, the median download speed is 63 mbps, or 30 times faster than the U.S. The Internet Speeds Across the United States & Puerto Rico Speed Test results for May 2007 through May 2008 U.S. Internet Speeds In 2008 Show Little Growth Over Previous Year U.S. also trails South Korea at 49 mbps, Finland at 21 mbps, France at 17 mbps, and Canada at 7.6 mbps. The median upload speed from the speedmatters.org test was just 435 kilobits per second (kbps), far too slow for patient monitoring or to transmit large files such as medical records.
Obviously CWA has a vested interest in the work created by broadband network expansion, so they're pushing hard for some kind of national broadband strategy. "As a first step, it is long past time for the Senate to pass The Broadband Data Improvement Act (S.1492), which would improve our nation's broadband data collection and provide funding to states for public-private partnerships to increase broadband deployment and adoption," says Allex Kellner of the policy firm Blue State Digital, hired by CWA to nudge lawmakers.

"We are the only industrialized nation without a national policy to promote universal, high-speed Internet access -- and it shows," says CWA President Larry Cohen. "Most of our Speed Test users logged on with broadband connections such as DSL, cable modem or fiber. People with dial-up connections didn't take the test because it took them too long, so even these dismal statistics paint a rosier-than-reality picture of connection speeds across the country."

Of course getting people to agree on what that national broadband policy should be is no short order. Many continue to believe we don't need one. Others would like to see some of the money spent on, say, war -- used to improve the national fiber infrastructure. The Broadband Data Improvement Act has broad approval because it puts its weight behind public-private partnerships such as Connected Nation, though it's not entirely clear that such organizations have anything more than the incumbent duopoly's interests in mind.

Related:
  1. Friday Morning Links
  2. Delaware Is A Broadband Beast
  3. Monday Morning Links
  4. Tuesday Evening Links
  5. Thursday Morning Links
  6. Thursday Evening Links
  7. Friday Evening Links
  8. Global Broadband Prices Plummet
Links: New Topic
Forums »

openbox9 @ 13th Aug 09:09AM:
I seriously doubt

I doubt that residential ISP connections (where a majority of the data most likely comes from) are used for patient monitoring or transmission of large medical records.

The median upload speed from the speedmatters.org test was just 435 kilobits per second (kbps), far too slow for patient monitoring or to transmit large files such as medical records.

reply
tiger72 @ 13th Aug 09:12AM:
Re: I seriously doubt

in remote parts of the United States (the areas without ANY, or with very slow broadband) this would be a likelihood.

Also, there's the issue of caps that some of the above nations (Canada) has...
reply
ossito16 @ 13th Aug 09:24AM:
Internet has become a utility

Internet usage has become IMO a utility and thus should be regulated as such. It is time for everyone to be on fiber optic lines (sorry comcast). Caps are fine but make them real world caps not the "I'm being a cheap ass and don't want to expand my network" kind of caps. Create a national sales tax to pay for maintaining the system. Basically use this to create an entirely new media delivery system. All advertising monies tv or Internet based will go directly to fund system.
reply
GeekNJ @ 13th Aug 09:24AM:
...

My only thought is, if the current cable infrastructure (FIOS, cable TV, etc) could handle the increased speed so no new cable needed to be run, would the CWA still care? This is a "project" by a union of cable workers. Nothing wrong with the union or the folks - just what my thought is on the overall "project".

My in-laws are more then happy with the low end DSL service. They don't need anything faster.

So personally, I'd rather see the same speed I have for less cost vs faster speeds I'm not going to use now anyway. Doesn't mean I won't want it faster in the future, but I'd rather have lower cost right now.
--
Tweaked your connection? | Mail Parse | Speed Converter

reply
anon @ 13th Aug 09:29AM:
looks like an at&t coverage map

Time Warner and AT&T havent rolled out any faster speeds in a long minute here. I cant complain tho its kinda shocking to see how some of the rural areas are ranking.
reply
mb @ 13th Aug 09:33AM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

said by ossito16 :

Internet usage has become IMO a utility and thus should be regulated as such. ...
I agree. It is essential. We are fast becoming a third world country. Capitalism seems to be running amok here.
reply
anon @ 13th Aug 09:34AM:
Corporate America

As long as we are a nation that let's corporate America write our laws through extensive lobbying of our government this will never happen. We could see 3rd world countries eclipse our speeds if the greed of wall street gets what they want.
reply
anon @ 13th Aug 09:35AM:
Got funds?

Sounds like a good place to put the Universal Slush Fund to work.
reply
openbox9 @ 13th Aug 09:38AM:
Re: I seriously doubt

So people will be transmitting large medical files from their residences?
reply
openbox9 @ 13th Aug 09:40AM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

said by ossito16 :

Create a national sales tax to pay for maintaining the system.
Great, another USF type of fee. That is not what this country needs
said by ossito16 :

All advertising monies tv or Internet based will go directly to fund system.
Wow. How exactly do you expect that to work?
reply
tiger72 @ 13th Aug 09:46AM:
Re: I seriously doubt

Local physicians in remote areas who need assistance would likely transfer large medical files to specialists and hospitals far away. Real-time patient monitoring requires a high throughput also. Think remote Montana, Wyoming, Maine, Alaska, etc.
reply
Dogfather @ 13th Aug 09:47AM:
Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

Every time I ran a test there using my FiOS service (with both 50Mb and 20Mb tiers and my Cox service which typically gives me 20-25Mb results elsewhere) it would report 1/2 of the speeds I typically see even from distant servers and about 1/3 that local high capacity speed test sites report.

And you can't draw any conclusions from this other than their speed test server capacity is sorely lacking.

Meanwhile this time last year »Average U.S. Upstream Speed: 371kbps they reported upload speeds being 371kbps so even if we took these numbers at face value (which we obviously can't) it represents a 17% improvement.

And since when are people using residential upload speeds to send gobs of medical records? You think hospitals have 1500/384 DSL from Verizon?
reply
Matt @ 13th Aug 10:04AM:
One more thing

This is just one more thing where the US is lagging behind and moving to the middle of the pack. We're rapidly losing jobs, the economy is in the crapper, the dollar is plummeting, our healthcare/insurance system is a joke, and now we're moving the wrong way in broadband statistics.
reply
TK Junk Mail @ 13th Aug 10:14AM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

The union has their own special interests in reporting skewed data - like having gov't pour in billions of dollars in taxpayer money to subsidize building out broadband infrastructure, resulting in adding a lot of union jobs. It wouldn't be surprising that the system they set up was designed to lowball the actual numbers.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?

reply
wifi4milez @ 13th Aug 10:23AM:
In other news...

...The Elevator Operators Union has proclaimed that elevators are too slow in America. They propose a $25 billion upgrade to the nations elevators, and the hiring of an additional 100,000 elevator operators and technicians.

The president of the EOU, Jack Q. Swindler, had this to say:

"It takes the American worker an additional 4 seconds on average to reach his/her intended floor due to the outdated elevator infrastructure in this country. Independent tests have also concluded that the act of simply pressing the button (to indicate your desired floor) is confusing the American public. Thus, to increase productivity and improve the US economy the EOU insists all elevators revert back to having a (union) operator in each car."
--
If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly.
-Ronald Reagan-

reply
jc100 @ 13th Aug 10:25AM:
Re: I seriously doubt

I would hope they would do so encrypted. Also, I would imagine the hospitals they work for would have fiber. Then again, if they are TRULY remote and like a field doctor, they would have to rely on what's available. Still, I think MOST palces, MAYBE Alaska aside, would have adequate medical facilities within a 20 or 30 mile drive. Therefore, this might be a far stretch but it isn't implausible.
reply
tschmidt @ 13th Aug 10:27AM:
Re: I seriously doubt

said by openbox9 :

I doubt that residential ISP connections (where a majority of the data most likely comes from) are used for patient monitoring or transmission of large medical records.
That is the whole point.

Applications are not going to be deployed that need substantial bandwidth until a high enough percentage of the population has access to that capability.

This is a classic chicken and egg situation. Providers are able to claim (with some justification) there are no application that demand higher bandwidth. However once that bandwidth is made available you will see all sorts of novel applications being developed and deployed.

Do you thing You Tube, et al would have happened if we were all still using dialup?

/tom
reply
Corydon @ 13th Aug 10:33AM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

If Internet access is a utility, then why not bill for it as such?

My guess is that most people here wouldn't like utility-style billing. We pay for electricity by the kWh. We pay for gas by the therm. Water and sewage is also usage based. So do you want to pay for Internet access by the MB?
--
"Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too."

reply
dadkins @ 13th Aug 10:40AM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

said by Corydon :

If Internet access is a utility, then why not bill for it as such?

My guess is that most people here wouldn't like utility-style billing. We pay for electricity by the kWh. We pay for gas by the therm. Water and sewage is also usage based. So do you want to pay for Internet access by the MB?
Many here wouldn't like it - they chew through LOTS of GB per month.

Now, me? At a whopping 30GB per month... why not? My bill will surely be reduced - like maybe by half(or more).

No, internet is not a utility.
It is a luxury - can be considered a novelty.
Maybe in the future it will become a utility, but it will have to SERIOUSLY advance before that time!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera

reply
karlmarx @ 13th Aug 10:43AM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

*sigh*, that old argument AGAIN. We pay for electricity by the kWh, because it COSTS MONEY to produce. We pay by gas by the therm because it COSTS MONEY to produce. We pay for water and sewage by the usage because it COSTS MONEY to CREATE/DISPOSE.

Look at it this way, we DON'T pay by the mile on non-toll roads. You are free too use the roads as much as you want. If you are riding your bike, you pay NOTHING to use it as much as you want. Granted, there was a HUGE capital cost to build the roads, and there are maintenance fees, but the actual USE of the roads costs nothing.

We build FIBER to everywhere. That's a HUGE CAPITAL cost, but once that's done, the only cost is maintenance and support. THERE IS NO COST to transmit a byte, just the cost to BUILD IT and SUPPORT IT. The building cost is CAPITAL, and the support cost, like a road, is not based on USAGE.
--
The happiest countries are the most secular. The struggle AGAINST corporations is the struggle FOR humanity!

reply
Mr Matt @ 13th Aug 10:49AM:
The problem is blow jobs.

:D The ISP's are blowing too much money paying off our politicians to maintain the status quo. They could better use the money to upgrade their systems. It is unlikely that we will see much change in the governments policy on a national broadband network until there is a change in the administration. :) Wishful thinking.
reply
EPS @ 13th Aug 10:59AM:
The problem is simple.

If a company offers 20mbps, but the majority of people buy the 768kbps tier to save money, can you really take that as proof that we need better broadband infrastructure? Or should we eliminate the cheaper tiers, which would force people to get higher speed tiers, and therefore "improve" the average speed?
reply
hottboiinnc @ 13th Aug 11:00AM:
Re: ...

No the Cable companies are not part of the CWA that is the telco union.

They'll releae a "report" later on that claims they could do better blah blah blah.
reply
CarterStClai @ 13th Aug 11:02AM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

Telephone is a utility - I pay a monthly fee for all I can use.
reply
CarterStClai @ 13th Aug 11:04AM:
Re: Corporate America

The US is already suffering from third-world type corruption. 10 years ago, most people would say that the US was only minorly affectd by corruption. Now, it is widely understood that corruption is part of the process, and everyone shrugs - just like Mexiio. Bye bye USA.
reply
signmastr @ 13th Aug 11:11AM:
Re: The problem is simple.

But, I do pay for "Elite" speeds. I just don't get them...
reply
Lazlow @ 13th Aug 11:17AM:
Re: The problem is simple.

The problem is that the VAST majority of areas do not have the option of higher speeds. Add to that the fact that the other countries have the higher data rates at much lower prices than our slower data rates. For instance; in Japan a 20/20 connection is $45 a month(available in virtually any city in Japan). My 10/1 connection in St Louis is $60 a month. Now St. Louis is not exactly out in the boonies. The fastest connection I can get here at the house is 16/2.
reply
EPS @ 13th Aug 11:33AM:
Re: The problem is simple.

Which is significantly faster than the average given by the CWA, isn't it?
reply
openbox9 @ 13th Aug 11:35AM:
Re: I seriously doubt

That's not the whole point. Using patient monitoring and transmission of medical records to justify bigger pipes is not a sound way of making their point. Those practices typically occur within medical facilities that have access to business class services.
said by tschmidt :

Do you thing You Tube, et al would have happened if we were all still using dialup?
Yet somehow YouTube was able to become as popular as it has today. Seems like the chicken and the egg situation is working ok.
reply
Richard B @ 13th Aug 11:42AM:
Re: The problem is simple.

Excuse me who died and made you king.
If the majority deices that cheaper 768k is enough that who in the hell are to force higher speeds on them. What most likely happen is people will go back to dial-up or are going to advocate a law banning dial-up.
reply
openbox9 @ 13th Aug 12:05PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

Your argument is old as well. Providing bandwidth and continual increases in capacity do require money. Support costs are based on usage for roads and the last mile infrastructure. The more people that use both resources, the more it costs to increase capacity and perform O&M.
reply
anon @ 13th Aug 02:15PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

Local Phone service isn't pay per minute.
reply
openbox9 @ 13th Aug 12:12PM:
Re: The problem is simple.

Wow, force price increases for the sake of padding irrelevant stats. Price is still king. A vast majority of consumers don't care if they have 20 Mbps access so long as they can surf the web and check e-mail for as little $$ as possible. Cost is the key, not the throughput.
reply
tiger72 @ 13th Aug 12:14PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

youtube only started up in 2006, when broadband became popular in the United States. In other words, thanks to broadband, youtube was able to change how we consume video on the internet.

With further broadband development, we can only see an increase in innovation. The history of the internet is full of bandwidth-based innovation. The web itself only grew popular after the advent of 14.4k and then 28.8k modems. Streaming video begun its infancy at 33.6 and 56k modems. Napster and Kazaa would never have flourished were it not for DSL and Cable, and without broadband iTunes would never have been able to exist as a business model. Without broadband, you wouldn't have internet gaming, and xbox live would never have existed. Internet video rental services like XBL's and netflix streaming video wouldn't be here were it not for internetwork development.

As bandwidth increases, applications come up to use that bandwidth, and then bandwidth needs are increased again. Eventually there will be a limit, but 480kbps up and 2mbps down isn't it.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara

reply
anon @ 13th Aug 12:20PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

It appears some of our ISPs hope to be on the forefront of low caps while not providing anywhere near the speed of the carriers you mentioned in other countries.

Take Frontier for example.
»Frontier Imposes 5 GB Cap For DSL
reply
Smith6612 @ 13th Aug 12:27PM:
lol...

Based on this result, my DSL connection has about 4 times slower upload than the Average US speed. 128kbps lol.
reply
SilverSurfer @ 13th Aug 12:33PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

said by openbox9 :

That's not the whole point. Using patient monitoring and transmission of medical records to justify bigger pipes is not a sound way of making their point. Those practices typically occur within medical facilities that have access to business class services.
It certainly is - medical records are but a single facet of the ever growing need to accomodate more bandwidth for VOD services. Clearly you haven't been paying much attention to contemporary Internet trends.
reply
anon @ 13th Aug 12:34PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

Some roads eventually need to be "widened". Sometimes you need a new road altogether.

The information superhighway... x2. It all costs money, just not in the same way that "utilities" figure costs. Most of the "more bandwidth" projects involve newer technologies being deployed. Most road projects are just more of the same old "tech" (asphalt, concrete, whatever). It's the orders of magnitude that differentiate the costs.

...and then there's wireless...
reply
karlmarx @ 13th Aug 12:34PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

Yes, but as we were discussing, there is no UNIT cost for a byte. Just as there is no unit cost if 1 car uses the new highway, or 10,000 cars use the new highway. If you build it big enough, there is no traffic problem. Everything you described is capital costs. Building new roads to handle new traffic isn't a unit cost, it's a capital cost. Sure, we will need to continually upgrade the infrastructure, but hell, we spent 25 Billion dollars to rebuild the road through boston, and THAT is a non-toll road. So, the internet, like the roads, is a utility, which CAN BE used by all, but isn't necessarily used by all.
--
The happiest countries are the most secular. The struggle AGAINST corporations is the struggle FOR humanity!

reply
openbox9 @ 13th Aug 12:42PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

And once again, those needs are relatively easily accommodated with business class services. If hospitals or clinics require more bandwidth to push around hi-res, it's time to upgrade their DS-x or OC-x circuits. My point still stands, the union could have used more relevant examples to benefit their cause.
reply
en102 @ 13th Aug 12:46PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

Exactly. I'm typically a moderate, however, I see this as a pure push for taxpayer expenditures where it isn't really needed.

- This site takes a representation from users stats. Not all (not many) customers order +10Mbps
- Not many residential customers care whether they have 10Mbps or not
- Most would probably like to see... lower taxes, and lower cost of service. I know that I do.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

reply
anon @ 13th Aug 01:03PM:
Re: The problem is simple.

You should never ask such facetious questions... some people just will not understand. ;)
reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 01:01PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

said by TK Junk Mail :

The union has their own special interests in reporting skewed data
Then let's see the "real" numbers, TK, from a source with no interest in skewing them.

(There aren't any.)

And what the CWA is advocating is to pass a law funding the collection of this data so that we can get an accurate picture.

But rather than attack the CWA or attacking the bill, shouldn't we at BroadBandReports be analyzing the numbers? Isn't that our best capability here? Doesn't this site have speedtest data out the ass?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
EPS @ 13th Aug 01:14PM:
Re: The problem is simple.

Of course we should ban dial-up. Those dial-up users are almost certainly throwing off the average, so if you banned dial-up and forced those users to get broadband, then our speedtest results would improve- and that's really what matters, isn't it?
reply
Dogfather @ 13th Aug 01:17PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

The CWAs numbers are largely worthless. DSL Reports's samples are limited in scope. Speedtest.net has test servers all over the world and certainly wouldn't be biased. It's not a perfect sample, but would be about as close as we're gonna get for comparing. I would certainly trust their sampling over the CWA who obviously has a vested interest in portraying doom and gloom.
reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 01:18PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

said by karlmarx :

Look at it this way, we DON'T pay by the mile on non-toll roads. You are free too use the roads as much as you want. If you are riding your bike, you pay NOTHING to use it as much as you want. Granted, there was a HUGE capital cost to build the roads, and there are maintenance fees, but the actual USE of the roads costs nothing.
Gasoline taxes pay for both of these.

I do see broadband becoming a utility, but it won't be bill-by-the-byte exclusively. There will be a fixed "district" charge as well which will apply no matter how much or how little you use it. Usage will be added above that.

You can still pay in a "flat" manner. I pay all my utilities on my own "fixed" plan. I estimate my 12-month usage, double-pay my first bill and pay 1/10th of that estimate for several months. Then I actually open an envelope every 3-6 months or so and find out whether I'm on track. (Some utilities will do this for you, but usually only on accounts with a year or more of history.)
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
TK Junk Mail @ 13th Aug 01:22PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

said by funchords :

said by TK Junk Mail :

The union has their own special interests in reporting skewed data
Then let's see the "real" numbers, TK, from a source with no interest in skewing them.
How about BBR? You can't say they have a bias FOR the ISPs.
»/archive/
The numbers here show the union info is skewed low.
[att=1]

And you can also check speedtest.net results here for the US:
»www.speedtest.net/global.php?con···ountry=1
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?

Click for full size
reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 01:23PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

said by Dogfather :

DSL Reports's samples are limited in scope. Speedtest.net has test servers all over the world and certainly wouldn't be biased.
If we're talking about the USA, DSLReports has test servers all over, too.

said by Dogfather :

I would certainly trust their sampling over the CWA who obviously has a vested interest in portraying doom and gloom.
And they have a vested interest in being accurate. They lobby policymakers. Let's say they were caught lying. Doesn't that devalue their stock in trade?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 01:26PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

said by TK Junk Mail :

How about BBR? You can't say they have a bias FOR the ISPs.
»/archive/
The numbers here show the union info is skewed low.
[att=1]
You took the top 29 domains and compared it to (what I think CWA says is) a nationwide average.

I haven't read the CWA report -- I guess that I should -- but I don't think the "top 29" list proves or disproves anything.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
Dogfather @ 13th Aug 01:26PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

With DSLR the sampling is too small. And with Speedtest.net they're sampling methods are perfect for determining maximum line speed.

Lobbyists caught lying...certainly wouldn't be the first time. Propaganda is their business.
reply
TK Junk Mail @ 13th Aug 01:28PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

If you look at the BBR data and only check the biggest ISPs with the MAJORITY of the users, you will see that it comes in higher than the CWA data.
reply
Dogfather @ 13th Aug 01:34PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

By design or not, the CWA data collection methods are seriously flawed thus any conclusions drawn from them also flawed.

It's not logical to stick with the CWA report simply because there is no other report. Bad data isn't better than no data. I would argue that it's worse since people come to the wrong conclusions and make bad assumptions based on bad data.
reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 02:01PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

said by Dogfather :

By design or not, the CWA data collection methods are seriously flawed thus any conclusions drawn from them also flawed.
You're not being scientific about this. What is the flaw?

said by Dogfather :

It's not logical to stick with the CWA report simply because there is no other report.
Agreed, but nor is it logical to dismiss a report based solely on its issuer.

Again, I haven't read it. Maybe it's as bad as you say -- but since you've taken a position on it ("the CWA data collection methods are seriously flawed"), you need to explain that!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
TK Junk Mail @ 13th Aug 02:07PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

said by funchords :

said by Dogfather :

It's not logical to stick with the CWA report simply because there is no other report.
Agreed, but nor is it logical to dismiss a report based solely on its issuer.

But BBR has dismissed all the data supplied by Bell Canada & other ISPs all the time because it is claimed they are biased. But somehow we should believe CWA data as unbiased. Why?
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?

reply
Dogfather @ 13th Aug 02:35PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

Scientific in that the CWA test site reported 33-50% of my actual line speed and it got worse when my higher tier connections like my old 30Mb and 50Mb FiOS tier. It's a big assumption but I'm assuming I'm not the only one getting erroneous results. Plus they're looking at what people are buying, not maximum line speed. If people buy 1Mb service but 10Mb is available to them, in a best case scenario, the CWA would average that user at only 1Mb. That is a reflection of users being "cheap", not the state of broadband (what's available to them).

And it's these flawed results that has me questioning the report. The fact that it's the CWA may be a factor in them not really caring to fix it. It's certainly in their best interest to have the results looking bad.

You can't draw any conclusion from such seriously flawed data. We can argue all day not whether or not these flaws are by design, but it's not arguable that the flaws exist.

Then the question is, where do we get good data, and my argument is that Speedtest.net would be a good source of such data because their data collection practices and computational processes are designed (according to the methodology stated in the FAQ) to compute maximum line speed.

Speedtest.net, has a HUGE sample population and while not perfect, takes only the highest result from any IP, and then takes the 95th percentile to compute the maximum throughput for a provider or locale. So the frugal buyers don't skew the "state of broadband" down because they choose to buy a lower tier.

And if we then trust Speedtest.net's data enough to draw a fair conclusion from it, it states that US broadband isn't horrible. The US is typical for industrialized nations on par with many European nations.
reply
anon @ 13th Aug 03:16PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

Canada also has speed throttling and traffic shaping. Canada snubbed their nose at net neutrality.
reply
kd6cae @ 13th Aug 03:01PM:
Upload speeds can be better, so why aren't they!

I've been wondering for years why we're not improving upstream speeds across the board here in the U.S. DSL for example if you live close enough is capable of I think 1.1Mbps upstream, so why is it that AT&T offers a max tier of just 768kbps? Even Verizon offers 864kbps sync rate while Qwest is doing 896Kbps. True at the moment not everyone will use it, but at least having it as an option at a decent price wouldn't be such a bad thing now would it?
and why is it that only one cable provider in the entire country is offering upload speeds greater than 2Mbps? And in many cases, like mine, in order to get 2Mbps upstream, you need a business class connection that costs $119 a month, while other users can have 2Mbps residential service for $65 or whatever the price is.
I've got a friend who has RoadRunner lite which in my area is 1.5Mbps/384Kbps. Why not offer for the same price that same 1.5Mbps downstream, with say 768Kbps or even 1.5Mbps upload, for those few times when they may wish to make use of it? In most if not all cable serviced areas, you can now get a top residential tier of at least 10/1, but how long before others began offering those speed options was Optimum online offering 10/1 to it's customers, while we sat at 3/256 speeds? Now they're offering 30/5, while we if we're lucky get 15/2 max? It's the same cable technology, so what's the hold up here! Just my rant on it all.
reply
karlmarx @ 13th Aug 03:17PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

Again, we see to be stumbling on the 'by the byte' part of this. Please show me how it costs any more to transmit 1 byte, vs transmitting 1 megabyte?

The COST is exactly the same. Sure, if EVERYONE is using 1 megabyte, then you need to BUILD the infrastructure to support it, but that's what the monthly fee is for. To amortize the cost of building out, and to support the monthly maintenance.

NONE of that cost will change if the network is at 1% load vs 99% load. The COST to PROVIDE the service is a FIXED COST.

So why do you propose a VARIABLE pricing scheme for a FIXED COST product? That's just plain greedy.
--
The happiest countries are the most secular. The struggle AGAINST corporations is the struggle FOR humanity!

reply
qazwsx2 @ 13th Aug 04:10PM:
Re: Corporate America

said by Plattsburgh NY :

We could see 3rd world countries eclipse our speeds if the greed of wall street gets what they want.

reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 04:59PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

said by TK Junk Mail :

But BBR has dismissed all the data supplied by Bell Canada & other ISPs all the time because it is claimed they are biased. But somehow we should believe CWA data as unbiased. Why?
BBR isn't the standard maker, either. Do two wrongs make a right all of a sudden?

I've now read the CWA report. It's too light on the technical details to be reproducible and I shouldn't have to reverse engineer the speed test to figure out how it works. It is definitely written for the end-user or policymaker who colors with the 8-crayon box.

That said, if we can make the assumption that they used the same method in 2007 that they did this year, the results are still useful for comparison purposes in the aggregate. But even here in "the silicon forest" heavy in tech workers, there were only 10 tests conducted from my zip code.

I wouldn't draw any conclusions from this study alone, including the position that the study itself is skewed.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 05:04PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

You bring up some good reasons this time -- thanks, that's what I was looking for.

As for inaccurately testing your super-fast connection, the CWA report uses median speeds so that fault should have no effect. However, using median speeds and having gone through their test myself (very few instructions or other data collection) -- again, perhaps useful in aggregate. I believe the 17% number, that "feels" right. It's plausible. And while someone thinks that is an "improvement," it may simply mean that we're just falling further behind. The number should be around 40% if we're progressing like bandwidth speeds usually do.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
Dogfather @ 13th Aug 05:09PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

My point is that the new bad data reflects a 17% improvement over the old bad data. Because the data is flawed no one can make a single assumption or conclusion about the state of broadband from the CWA's numbers.

We have to go to another source and I would prefer an unbiased source.
reply
cline3621 @ 13th Aug 05:18PM:
Upload Speed

No problems here :D Thanks CDE!


reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 05:22PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

I don't propose it, in fact I oppose it. But it's not an unworkable model and I don't let the fact that I personally don't like the idea keep me from talking about it objectively.

Bandwidth is a fixed cost product up to an ISP who acts as a bandwidth aggregater.

Because, as you rightfully point out, it doesn't cost any more or less to send 1 byte than it does 1 megabyte, an aggregater can take an amount of bandwidth (say 1000 Mbps) and divide it into subscriptions (say 10 Mbps each). And because not everyone will use those the Internet at the same time, he can sell more than 100 subscriptions and make more profit and/or lower subscription costs. As long as it works out that every user can admit or get his 10 Mbps, there's nothing wrong with this model.

So let's say he sells 101 subscriptions. After months of operations, he finds that he's not even close to using half of his 1000 Mbps connection.

So then he sells more and has 150 subscribers. Still not close

So then he goes for 250 subscribers. Now the numbers are comfortable. 95% of the time, his network and gateway are congestion free.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
funchords @ 13th Aug 05:29PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

Me too, and that's the whole point that the CWA is trying to make -- someone needs to collect this data and find out where we are. The 'free market' isn't taking care of it.

This is a communications union, they work on wages, hours, and working conditions. And while this study might help them hold the threat of releasing "bad news" over the bargaining table -- they've released it.

But again, we really don't know much about the test itself. It's valuable for its anecdotal value. Maybe after ten years and correlation to other data points, we will be able to trust it more than we can now. But their point is a policy point:

CWA says they want someone watching the US broadband market. The FCC can't even accurately talk about broadband penetration or speeds. Talking to researchers who cannot get info out of Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, etc., it is something that is sorely needed for them as well.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
SilverSurfer @ 13th Aug 05:49PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

said by openbox9 :

And once again, those needs are relatively easily accommodated with business class services.
So a residential account should be a business account if you want VOD? Sure. In an alternate universe, maybe, but meanwhile back in reality where the majority of Internet subscribers live, it ain't happening.
reply
Dogfather @ 13th Aug 05:59PM:
Re: Data is inaccurate representation, but shows 17% improvement

Aside from the bloodsuckers capping, I don't see this big broadband problem people are alluding to. There are much more important things needing some watching over.
reply
NetAdmin @ 13th Aug 06:35PM:
Great, another CWA report...

It sounds like the CWA has gotten into the think tank business because they seem to be releasing an awful lot of bullshit "studies" as of late. These guys are starting to remind of the Cato Institute, AEI, Center for American Progress, etc. - start with an assumption, message the data and write the study. Too bad there isn't a decent set of untainted, un-manipulated speed test results that could be used to validate/counter their results.
--
---
Eleven years of carrying The Clue Bat...

reply
openbox9 @ 13th Aug 09:05PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

If you'll look at the chain of this thread, I'm commenting on the CWA's choice to highlight medical records and patient monitoring as "needs" for significant broadband overhaul. Hospitals, clinics, and other medical institutions should already be using business class service which is relatively easily upgraded as demand warrants. Nowhere have I said anything about VoD.
reply
dvd536 @ 13th Aug 09:48PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

said by karlmarx :

*sigh*, that old argument AGAIN. We pay for electricity by the kWh, because it COSTS MONEY to produce. We pay by gas by the therm because it COSTS MONEY to produce. We pay for water and sewage by the usage because it COSTS MONEY to CREATE/DISPOSE.

Look at it this way, we DON'T pay by the mile on non-toll roads. You are free too use the roads as much as you want. If you are riding your bike, you pay NOTHING to use it as much as you want. Granted, there was a HUGE capital cost to build the roads, and there are maintenance fees, but the actual USE of the roads costs nothing.

We build FIBER to everywhere. That's a HUGE CAPITAL cost, but once that's done, the only cost is maintenance and support. THERE IS NO COST to transmit a byte, just the cost to BUILD IT and SUPPORT IT. The building cost is CAPITAL, and the support cost, like a road, is not based on USAGE.
Every gallon of gas you buy has a tax so in effect you *ARE* paying for every mile you drive.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee

reply
wentlanc @ 14th Aug 03:14PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

If the account is at the same location, then it does not matter if the service is residential or business. It's the same network drop. What if you were an ill person who needed monitoring, but it was available from your home instead of a hospital. What about security monitoring. Home care for the elderly.

Business versus Residential is a matter of service, not speed OR usage. Granted, you should not use a residential line to run your business internet access. That is that the business class of service was designed for.

cw
reply
wentlanc @ 14th Aug 03:25PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

said by dvd536 :

Every gallon of gas you buy has a tax so in effect you *ARE* paying for every mile you drive.
Not if you are making your own fuel, such a bio-diesel. Would people that do be considered pirates then?

haha

cw
reply
openbox9 @ 14th Aug 04:08PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

It's not the same network drop. There are huge differences between RG-6 or RG-11 coax from a cableco, 4 or 6-wire copper, and fiber for DS-x or OC-x circuits and the capabilities that each are capable of providing. As for health monitoring from home, I can't imagine any of the equipment that would be available/affordable in the home are capable of producing large data sizes. We aren't talking about CT or MRI scanners.

The CWA shouldn't have used medical discussion points to boast their argument.
reply
funchords @ 14th Aug 05:29PM:
Re: Internet has become a utility

said by wentlanc :

said by dvd536 :

Every gallon of gas you buy has a tax so in effect you *ARE* paying for every mile you drive.
Not if you are making your own fuel, such a bio-diesel. Would people that do be considered pirates then?

haha

cw
You're right, but for now, the rationale is that such users (as a group) are desirable for their lack on environmental impact and there isn't a large call to figure out how to tax them.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

reply
wentlanc @ 14th Aug 08:12PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

There is NO difference in the network drop used when you compare between residential service and business class service from a cable company.

Again, I'm not talking about the internals of a medical WAN. I'm talking about the potential for someone to use their residence as a recovery room instead. Just because it's not done today, does not mean that it could not be done tomorrow. Open your mind some please.

cw
reply
openbox9 @ 14th Aug 08:47PM:
Re: I seriously doubt

So you're only talking about a cable company? Some cable companies do distribute business class service over fiber to the CPE. It just depend on the service requirements.

The whole point of this discussion is that the CWA stated "patient monitoring" and "medical records" has justifications for why more bandwidth is required. Most scenarios where those requirements exist already have the capability to add capacity to their network connections relatively easily. Even with a residence as a recovery room (yikes, not for me!), monitoring equipment simply doesn't require that much bandwidth. You'd be transmitting relatively small amounts of data for the medical readings....heart rate, blood pressure, temperature, glucose levels, etc.

My mind is very open, I just expect the CWA to make valid arguments when they're attempting to push their agenda. They have failed in this case.
reply
Drew Clark @ 15th Aug 10:34AM:
Good: State-by-State Data. Great: Carrier-by-Carrier Data

We've just posted a piece about the CWA's recent report, "CWA Publishes State-by-State Download Speeds. How About Carrier-by-Carrier Speeds?" on »BroadbandCensus.com. I highlight why it is important to go beyond state-by-state data, and to publish, in a free and open fashion, data about carrier-by-carrier download and upload speeds.

Drew Clark
Editor and Executive Director
BroadbandCensus.com
reply
anon @ 16th Aug 05:48PM:
Re: Great, another CWA report...

True. and besides, the central goverment is far too fat as is. they should stay the hell away form the internet.
reply
anon @ 18th Aug 08:43AM:
Re: In other news...

Clever, but...
The piss poor uptime we get from Time Warner is noticeably costing us in payroll and production. The slow transfer rates force employees to work more slowly when connected to our remote computers. It also annoys the employees who are adept at using computers quickly, reduces morale, and again reduces productivity.

The slow transfer rates limit backup solutions. The Gigabit speeds or even 100 Megabit speeds available from the Hong Kong Broadband Network would be capable of handling us sending data backups to our office (without even abusing our connection). However, since we are a small company with lease agreements to deal with, the fastest internet we can get is an oversold 15 Mbps. With downtime, network contention, and some companies sending us data two weeks or a month at a time, networked office backups will be at best, often out of date.

We can find plenty of money in government waste and funded illegal activities (read the Constitution, there are PLENTY of those) to fund something like public data networks, which will actually be used by the people funding it, unlike funding a study to determine that people outgrow wetting their bed.
reply

Thank you for using lo-fi dslreports.com - report bugs
© 99-2008 silver matrix LLC