3 ms·

The percentage of households with a landline was quite shocking. Based on quick googling the percentage here in Finland is ~11%. Gives perspective to the pricin

by rapala 11y ago

The percentage of households with a landline was quite shocking. Based on quick googling the percentage here in Finland is ~11%. Gives perspective to the pricing of internet services in the USA vs Europe.

scott_karana 11y ago
Multiple reasons. (And they pretty much boil down to: "why put hundreds/thousands of expensive cell towers in the sparsely populated cornfields and plains that cover the country")\ 1) The USA is geographically massive. Infrastructure between isolated "neighbouring" cities can be hundreds of kilometers. Cell towers, needless to say, are more expensive when attempting to cover a larger geographical area. 2) The population density varies dramatically 3) There are many rural pockets of thinly-distributed populaces, which can make the ROI lower in aforementioned large coverage areas 4) There are many mountainous, isolated communities, whose topography negatively affects coverage 5) Unlike Finland, where coastal/southern communities contain the vast majority of the populace, and nobody living up north,[1] the US Midwest contains a large populace, thinly spread over an enormous area... [2] Copper landlines are reliable and simple to fix. Cellphone towers are expensive, have a limited range, are highly affected by topography, and thus only make sense in areas above a certain threshold of population densities. And even still, living in a neighbouring community of a metropolitan area, you may be out of range of the metro's cell towers, and the ROI for your smaller community may not justify the expense! 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#/media/File:Population_map_of_Finland.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#/media... 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_states_showing_population_density_in_2013.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_states_showing_pop... Size comparison: http://overlapmaps.com/index.php http://overlapmaps.com/index.php, or http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/US/FI http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/US/FI

by rapala 11y ago

scott_karana 11y ago

Multiple reasons. (And they pretty much boil down to: "why put hundreds/thousands of expensive cell towers in the sparsely populated cornfields and plains that cover the country")\ 1) The USA is geographically massive. Infrastructure between isolated "neighbouring" cities can be hundreds of kilometers. Cell towers, needless to say, are more expensive when attempting to cover a larger geographical area. 2) The population density varies dramatically 3) There are many rural pockets of thinly-distributed populaces, which can make the ROI lower in aforementioned large coverage areas 4) There are many mountainous, isolated communities, whose topography negatively affects coverage 5) Unlike Finland, where coastal/southern communities contain the vast majority of the populace, and nobody living up north,[1] the US Midwest contains a large populace, thinly spread over an enormous area... [2] Copper landlines are reliable and simple to fix. Cellphone towers are expensive, have a limited range, are highly affected by topography, and thus only make sense in areas above a certain threshold of population densities. And even still, living in a neighbouring community of a metropolitan area, you may be out of range of the metro's cell towers, and the ROI for your smaller community may not justify the expense! 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#/media/File:Population_map_of_Finland.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#/media... 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_states_showing_population_density_in_2013.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_states_showing_pop... Size comparison: http://overlapmaps.com/index.php http://overlapmaps.com/index.php, or http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/US/FI http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/US/FI