4 ms·

I think it's highly market specific. Moving to NoVa from MI I have now like 5 ISP options with very competitive pricing and variety of high speed option includ

by qaq 9y ago

I think it's highly market specific. Moving to NoVa from MI I have now like 5 ISP options with very competitive pricing and variety of high speed option including Comcast Xfinity 2000 Mbps, Verizon FIOS etc.

drawkbox 9y ago
Your local anecdote is nice but the VAST MAJORITY of the US only has 0 or 1 valid ISP with decent speeds if that at 25-100 Mbps[1][2]. Removing NN will also increase revenues for ISPs that currently are already or on their way to monopolies, which will create even more fake ISP competition. Everyone saw what happened when Google Fiber was threatening, suddenly competition... [1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/us-broadband-still-no-isp-choice-for-many-especially-at-higher-speeds/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/us-br... [2] https://consumerist.com/2014/03/07/heres-what-lack-of-broadband-competition-looks-like-in-map-form/ https://consumerist.com/2014/03/07/heres-what-lack-of-broadb...
- qaq 9y ago
  I used to think the same it is likely though that in large metro areas e.g. NYC, LA, DC, Philadelphia ... etc. there is strong competition and wide availability of interesting options. Given the population numbers the VAST MAJORITY is more like 50/50
  - drawkbox 9y ago
    As seen in my links, 80% (30% with zero) of the country/population has 0-1 options for 25Mbps and 92% (55% with zero) of the country/population have 0-1 options for 100Mbps. Even areas in the big cities you mentioned most people only have 0-1 choices for 25Mbps-100Mbps. I won't even go into the small amount that has access to gigabit which everyone should be on. If you are ok with that, that is on you, we can do better and we need to, our ISPs are failing us and holding us back. ISPs said only net neutrality was holding them back from investing in increasing speeds, availability and rolling out gigabit, so I fully expect speeds and gigabit to be to available to everyone soon. /s
    - qaq 9y ago
      You do realize that's data from 2014 ? By mid 2016 it's 49% of households have at least 2 broadband providers and 68% have at least one provider offering 100/10 or better it's 2018 now.
      - drawkbox 9y ago
        The Ars data is from mid to late 2015 which not much has changed from due to ISPs stance and their spending on legislature bribes/lobby instead of on their networks. Costs have gone up but not speeds or availability. Cord cutting also increased rapidly the last couple years, so ISPs stopped expanding to increase revenues from data caps, overages and forcing people to 'upgrade' to worse service to make up the revs. Nothing has changed on ISP infrastructure/improvements since late '15/'16 other than maintenance. I see no sources on your point that it has changed and locally here just data caps have been added, no speed improvements or innovation. ISPs just worked with the FCC to LOWER the number that is rated 'broadband' to 10Mbps as broadband in their description. 10 Mbps is not acceptable for a more than a single person, 25-100 is barely acceptable -- everyone should be on gigabit -- lots of false 12Mbps competition which does not compare to 25/100 Mbps. ISPs have not expanded their networks enough at all by their own admission as they said NN was preventing that supposedly eventhough we know it is cord cutters cutting into investment because ISPs/providers got greedy. 2015-present the ISPs stopped expanding after Google Fiber pulled out of markets and they were being bratty about net neutrality passing, they put all their money in lobbying. They literally said in their lobbying that NN has hindered investment and did little '16-'18 just to stick to that talking point until their paid off lawmen killed NN. Of course, now that net neutrality is gone, what they said was 'holding up' investment in their networks, I am sure they will be expanding at a rapid clip and we'll all have gigabit internet soon now right? /s
        qaq 9y ago
        https://www.ustelecom.org/sites/default/files/US%20Broadband%20Availability%20Mid-2016%20formatted.pdf https://www.ustelecom.org/sites/default/files/US%20Broadband...
  - eropple 9y ago
    NYC has large sections with one reasonable (100Mbps) ISP. There are few places in the Boston-Cambridge-Brookline metro area where you can get more than one. FiOS rollouts are spotty and often don't even encompass entire neighborhoods, which leaves you either with RCN--who tend to be pretty okay, as ISPs go--or the ongoing garbage fire of Comcast. I strongly doubt that most "large metro areas" have pervasive, meaningful competition in even most areas, let alone all.

by qaq 9y ago

drawkbox 9y ago

Your local anecdote is nice but the VAST MAJORITY of the US only has 0 or 1 valid ISP with decent speeds if that at 25-100 Mbps[1][2]. Removing NN will also increase revenues for ISPs that currently are already or on their way to monopolies, which will create even more fake ISP competition. Everyone saw what happened when Google Fiber was threatening, suddenly competition... [1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/us-broadband-still-no-isp-choice-for-many-especially-at-higher-speeds/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/us-br... [2] https://consumerist.com/2014/03/07/heres-what-lack-of-broadband-competition-looks-like-in-map-form/ https://consumerist.com/2014/03/07/heres-what-lack-of-broadb...

qaq 9y ago
I used to think the same it is likely though that in large metro areas e.g. NYC, LA, DC, Philadelphia ... etc. there is strong competition and wide availability of interesting options. Given the population numbers the VAST MAJORITY is more like 50/50
- drawkbox 9y ago
  As seen in my links, 80% (30% with zero) of the country/population has 0-1 options for 25Mbps and 92% (55% with zero) of the country/population have 0-1 options for 100Mbps. Even areas in the big cities you mentioned most people only have 0-1 choices for 25Mbps-100Mbps. I won't even go into the small amount that has access to gigabit which everyone should be on. If you are ok with that, that is on you, we can do better and we need to, our ISPs are failing us and holding us back. ISPs said only net neutrality was holding them back from investing in increasing speeds, availability and rolling out gigabit, so I fully expect speeds and gigabit to be to available to everyone soon. /s
  - qaq 9y ago
    You do realize that's data from 2014 ? By mid 2016 it's 49% of households have at least 2 broadband providers and 68% have at least one provider offering 100/10 or better it's 2018 now.
    - drawkbox 9y ago
      The Ars data is from mid to late 2015 which not much has changed from due to ISPs stance and their spending on legislature bribes/lobby instead of on their networks. Costs have gone up but not speeds or availability. Cord cutting also increased rapidly the last couple years, so ISPs stopped expanding to increase revenues from data caps, overages and forcing people to 'upgrade' to worse service to make up the revs. Nothing has changed on ISP infrastructure/improvements since late '15/'16 other than maintenance. I see no sources on your point that it has changed and locally here just data caps have been added, no speed improvements or innovation. ISPs just worked with the FCC to LOWER the number that is rated 'broadband' to 10Mbps as broadband in their description. 10 Mbps is not acceptable for a more than a single person, 25-100 is barely acceptable -- everyone should be on gigabit -- lots of false 12Mbps competition which does not compare to 25/100 Mbps. ISPs have not expanded their networks enough at all by their own admission as they said NN was preventing that supposedly eventhough we know it is cord cutters cutting into investment because ISPs/providers got greedy. 2015-present the ISPs stopped expanding after Google Fiber pulled out of markets and they were being bratty about net neutrality passing, they put all their money in lobbying. They literally said in their lobbying that NN has hindered investment and did little '16-'18 just to stick to that talking point until their paid off lawmen killed NN. Of course, now that net neutrality is gone, what they said was 'holding up' investment in their networks, I am sure they will be expanding at a rapid clip and we'll all have gigabit internet soon now right? /s
      - qaq 9y ago
        https://www.ustelecom.org/sites/default/files/US%20Broadband%20Availability%20Mid-2016%20formatted.pdf https://www.ustelecom.org/sites/default/files/US%20Broadband...
- eropple 9y ago
  NYC has large sections with one reasonable (100Mbps) ISP. There are few places in the Boston-Cambridge-Brookline metro area where you can get more than one. FiOS rollouts are spotty and often don't even encompass entire neighborhoods, which leaves you either with RCN--who tend to be pretty okay, as ISPs go--or the ongoing garbage fire of Comcast. I strongly doubt that most "large metro areas" have pervasive, meaningful competition in even most areas, let alone all.