11 ms·

Report: Most Americans have no real choice in internet providers

314 points by rmason 6y ago

vondur 6y ago
Heck, many Americans in metro areas have only one choice for internet providers. I've helped people here in SoCal whose only choice has been 5-10MB DSL service, and they were getting charged like $70/month for it.
- vinay427 6y ago
  Was this in the outer areas (San Bernardino, Ventura, Imperial, etc.)?
  - vondur 6y ago
    Actually it was in a weird part of Costa Mesa. No one had fiber close enough and the cable provider wanted thousands to install the cable to the premises. You can be a block away and get cable or Verizon/Frontier
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  Helped how? Getting charged that for 100mb in LA, and feel it is too high.
  - vondur 6y ago
    Sorry, done tech support for them, only to find out how slow their internet was.
fireattack 6y ago
Questions for the people from areas that do have: do the different providers have separate infrastructures and facilities (optical fiber cables, switches, etc.)?
- vinay427 6y ago
  My parents' current and previous homes both had two choices. One was AT&T's fiber option (probably FTTN, not FTTH) and the other was cable through the local provider.
  - t3rabytes 6y ago
    AT&T Fiber is FTTH.
- zombielinux 6y ago
  Typically, you'd have one fiber provider and one cable (coax) provider. I've never met anyone that has two fiber, or two coax providers to the same residential address.
- just-ok 6y ago
  In our case they definitely do. We finally had an opportunity to ditch AT&T’s pathetic 3Mbps DSL offering in our area (which was their best plan...) recently in favor of Comcast’s 200Mbps which was cable-based (so obviously different infra). Same price, too...
- Spooky23 6y ago
  In my area, you used to be able to sign up for 2-3 different cable internet providers on the Time Warner Network. I’d bounce between EarthLink and TWC to get new customer bonuses. EarthLink was cheaper ($25 iirc vs $45 several years ago) but slower.
- wtallis 6y ago
  Local loop unbundling hasn't been a thing in the US for a long time, and never applied to cable or fiber to begin with. Separate ISPs means separate infrastructure. The coax, POTS and fiber cables in my yard all go to different places. However, a well-placed backhoe at the nearest major road can probably still take them all out in one swipe.
- oneplane 6y ago
  We have 3 different media options and 14 different providers. 4 media options if you'd allow for 3g/4g/5g internet, 56k modem internet and satellite internet, but I don't count those. Differences: Media is DOCSIS, DSL or Optical fiber Providers have differences in facilities and services, differences: - Plain internet vs. user-selectable filters (i.e. SMTP protection, SMB protection, content filters at the ISP level) - VoIP options - IPTV options - Connectivity options (i.e. auto failover to LTE or special managed hardware) - Addressing options (single IP, multiple IP, routed subnet if you want) So you might find yourself wanting an all-in-one package over DOCSIS using the coax cable media, which is a common choice (at least before fiber rollout). Or you may like very fast internet in your own control, so you'd take fiber with no bundled stuff. Costs about the same as the other option. Other things like having HD or 4K broadcasts may limit your choices, not all providers have all channels available in all formats, and not all kinds of media support all kinds of bitrates. So for non-cable (non-DOCSIS) you'd not be able to use 4k with DSL for more than 2 IPTV receivers. Some providers come with extra on-site support in the package, like someone who will set it up, check that it works with your computer, setup your email if you still have ISP-bound email for some reason, and do your WiFi with extra access points (no repeater!) as needed. Others may be cheap and have no default service like that included and you then have the option to buy it on-demand at a higher price.
jtxx 6y ago
in NYC, I’ve only ever had the option for one cable provider at any given location, either Spectrum / Time Warner or Optimum, maybe RCN. but never more than one to pick from, unless you’re in a fios building then I think that’s an option. and there’s usually DSL but that’s not a real competitor.
- JohnTHaller 6y ago
  We don't have FiOS or even have RCN on our block in NYC. Spectrum or "up to 3 to 7Mbps" Verizon DSL. That's it.
  - jtxx 6y ago
    same
djaque 6y ago
This is what frustrated me the most with some of my friends "free market" arguments when net neutrality was in the news. I am also a believer in the invisible hand, but it doesn't work when I can literally only choose from one provider.
- pascalxus 6y ago
  it's not the invisible hand's fault when that hand is tied behind it's back. there's so many politicians that have been creating legislation that prevents new entrants from coming into the market with regulatory capture. that's not a free market.
  - throw0101a 6y ago
    > there's so many politicians that have been creating legislation that prevents new entrants from coming into the market with regulatory capture. Politicians paid for by the incumbents. Not everywhere though: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_In... * https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-if-switching-fiber-isps-was-as-easy-as-clicking-a-mouse/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-...
  - msla 6y ago
    The fact it's impossible for everyone to build cable everywhere means it isn't a free market.
    - posguy 6y ago
      The cost of the labor to build and maintain said cable makes it economically infeasible for a second ISP to build out service in many areas of the US. Permissive regulation will only enable competition in urban cores, as being a 3rd or 4th provider in suburban areas is not profitable. Some areas have so few possible customers per mile that a fiber build by the incumbent provider would not break even for decades even with an 80% take rate by every building passed.
war1025 6y ago
This seems fairly unsurprising to me. Internet is a utility. Most people also don't have a choice in who they get electric, water, gas, etc. from. It's unfortunate that internet service quality is so varied from location to location, but utilities tend to form natural monopolies.
- avmich 6y ago
  > It's unfortunate that internet service quality is so varied from location to location, but utilities tend to form natural monopolies. You're missing the crucial difference. Public utilities are supervised by the public.
  - war1025 6y ago
    > Public utilities are supervised by the public I have municipal fiber, which is not common, so I guess that's a fair point.
- shados 6y ago
  they're generally a fair bit more regulated though (and ironically I actually have more options for electric than I do for internet).
- throw0101a 6y ago
  > […] but utilities tend to form natural monopolies. Then perhaps more local authorities should form Internet utilities: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband It's a thing in many places: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_In... * https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-if-switching-fiber-isps-was-as-easy-as-clicking-a-mouse/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-... Unless you are in one of the 22 US states that have restrictions on it: * https://broadbandnow.com/report/municipal-broadband-roadblocks/ https://broadbandnow.com/report/municipal-broadband-roadbloc... The public infrastructure provides ISO Layer 1/2 connectivity, and let the Free Market™ compete at Level 3.
candyman 6y ago
I was pleased when we lived in Boston where our building and many others was able to put microwave-based services on the roof. It was internet-only but very fast and inexpensive - just what we needed. Now we are in Louisville and back to the only two mediocre and more expensive choices - ATT and Spectrum. And if you go out into the country many homes are stuck with satellite internet service from Hughes which is damn near unusable.
- kibwen 6y ago
  As a transplant to Boston I was thrilled that for the first time in my life I actually had a choice of internet provider; I went with "not Comcast", aka RCN, because they were the one who didn't charge an absurd fee to let me use my own router, and the service has been extremely reliable and inexpensive. Apparently Verizon has just begun fiber service as well to my area, so with a whopping three providers to choose from I am perhaps the luckiest person in America. (The microwave service you mention, Starry, sadly isn't in my area yet, but HN will be delighted to hear that their microwave relays use Rust internally in embedded context.)
- derblitzmann 6y ago
  Yeah, I'm out in the country with Hughesnet, and it works fine provided you haven't hit the data cap. But streaming 720p or higher is going to be pausing rather consistently.
- umvi 6y ago
  Online games on HughesNet are unplayable. Called and complained that ~500ms RTT is unacceptable but they made up some excuse as to why it couldn't be faster, some mumbo jumbo about the speed of light
  - antif 6y ago
    They didn't make that up.. the satellites are literally no closer then 118ms (one-way). If you and the source/destination are directly under the satellite you may be able to get a packet + response in 480ms under most-ideal conditions. (that is four legs of transit between ground & space) Elevation of orbit is 35,768,000 meters [1], and light moves at ~300,000,000 meters per second. [1] https://www.hughes.com/resources/press-releases/echostar-xix-satellite-jupiter-high-throughput-technology-successfully https://www.hughes.com/resources/press-releases/echostar-xix...
darepublic 6y ago
Canadian here. For us it is Rogers, Bell or some skin of those two
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  For internet? Where are you located? Even my grandparents in Northern Ontario have some 5 or so options, and not just skins of the Big 3. I checked 8 providers when I lived in Kingston. For cell phone, you are right.
  - cmehdy 6y ago
    If you're talking about Start, Tekksavy, Tbaytel and similar, they're all bound to Rogers or Bell. I think the user you're replying to is pretty much right when it comes to Canada, and it shows in the prices you get. Same thing for phones. A couple providers are through satellite and such in rural areas and in those cases it's typically even worse since the service truly sucks while costing much, and they're in no rush to do anything about it when there are issues on the line. And I'm not even talking about middle-of-nowhere stuff, just places north of Sudbury for example.
- throw0101a 6y ago
  The telcos / cablecos run the wires, but are mandated by the CRTC (~FCC) to allow third-party ISPs access: * https://canadianisp.ca/ https://canadianisp.ca/ One is still limited to the limits of the underlying technology (e.g., copper distance with DSL), but it's better than nothing IMHO.
heavyset_go 6y ago
Same thing with health insurance.
- avmich 6y ago
  Interesting that we discuss sometimes benefits of having engineering licensed, but here we apparently see disadvantages of licensing going wrong.
chrsstrm 6y ago
In a rural area where the local telco was granted a legal monopoly, their "high speed" comes in a 5/0.5mbps on a good day. The area is now blanketed in T-Mobile 5G coverage, but questions asking T-Mobile about a 5G hotspot with a wired LAN port have gone unanswered. I'd love to use a 5G hotspot as the house's modem, but WiFi-only just won't work. Do any 5G devices with a SIM slot and a wired LAN port exist?
- donatj 6y ago
  My parents were in a similar situation. They only had terrible DSL in their area. T-Mobile actually offers a home router with Ethernet out, they got accepted into the beta about 6 months ago and it's been a godsend. - https://www.t-mobile.com/isp https://www.t-mobile.com/isp
  - chrsstrm 6y ago
    That's exactly the type of program I'm looking for but it only mentions LTE. The LTE coverage there is spotty and speeds aren't great, so really hoping for 5G. Plus the fine print in the terms talks about how some streaming services can't be used, but doesn't name them. If T-Mobile rolls out a program like this with their 5G network it would be amazing. I really can't imagine them trying to sell 5G phones to country folk, at least not until the price comes way down. What else would they use that 5G bandwidth for in the meantime?
    - joe_the_user 6y ago
      I can't imagine how 5G could leap-frog LTE. As I understand it, 5G has to blanket an area to be able to reliably transmit into a building. When the companies seem to put 2-3 towers per ridge in mountain areas, how is that going to happen? And generally, I'd expect any new 5G towers would also be LTE towers anyway.
- camkego 6y ago
  I think the Netgear Nighthawk M5 for 5G Mobile Router might help you. It is announced, but not yet released. I have the previous generation, the Netgear Nighthawk M1. I believe both have a wired ethernet port.
JohnTHaller 6y ago
Living in NYC, I have one high-speed internet option (Spectrum, formerly Time Warner) and one not high-speed internet option (Verizon DSL with "up to" 3.1 - 7 Mbps). That's it.
- codegeek 6y ago
  NYC still has DSL option ? Wow. I left NYC in 2005 as a resident and would assume that it has fiber everywhere by now.
  - JohnTHaller 6y ago
    It was supposed to. NYC gave Verizon a deal in exchange for wiring fiber citywide. They never did.
    - crgwbr 6y ago
      They at least partially did. I’m in a not-wealthy area of the Bronx and somehow managed to get gigabit Fios from Verizon. But, yeah, it’s certainly not everywhere yet.
mistrial9 6y ago
right - and comparing its service to the AT&T offering, a residential Internet service provider in the California Bay Area said, "and, we don't send in those reports that most ISPs do" .. on a support call..
crazygringo 6y ago
Seriously. I don't understand why there isn't a movement to regulate ISP's like utilities at this point. Why aren't mayors and governors running on this as a major plank? ISP investments, profits and pricing would all get regulated by the municipality. Performance is monitored and guaranteed. I've lived in many, many apartments in NYC and each building has only ever had one choice -- Spectrum (was Time Warner) or Optimum. And it's always the same -- it's $24.99-39.99 at first, then after a year it's jacked up to $49.99-54.99, then another year up to $69.99. It used to be you'd call to threaten to cancel and they'd re-lower it. But they haven't agreed to do that for over 3 years now -- they'll just let you cancel. They know you don't have a choice. ISP's are so obviously by now a utility like water, gas and electric. Why aren't we treating them that way?
- cameronbrown 6y ago
  > Seriously. I don't understand why there isn't a movement to regulate ISP's like utilities at this point. Why aren't mayors and governors running on this as a major plank? Who do you think gave them these monopolies in the first place?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - ravenstine 6y ago
    Exactly. They're making money!
  - Retric 6y ago
    Your local power, water, trash, etc company's have a local monopoly and serious regulation. Internet just has the monopoly bit.
    - zdragnar 6y ago
      My local trash company, in fact, does not have a monopoly. The city I left to move to where I am now implemented a monopoly trash service shortly after I left, and gave my street to a trash hauler that is quite possibly the most consumer hostile company I have ever had the displeasure of working with... worse by far than Comcast. Also interestingly, internet options were Comcast or I think Quest fiber. Sucks to be whoever bought my house, I guess.
exabrial 6y ago
I have 4, which is unusual. To some the problem, more local competition is needed. The problem is curbing the anti-competitive prentices that prop up local monopolies. States don't seem to care about consumer choice.
darth_avocado 6y ago
What I don't understand is why do we keep repeating these same observations again and again and still nothing happens. I've been upset at Comcast constantly jacking up the prices, not having an internet only option in my area (gets bundled up with TV), making sure good prices are available only if you get a 12 month contract and so much more. I mean Southpark said it years ago and even John Oliver had a segment on it. What is new about this? And why haven't we seen an action against it?
- bleepblorp 6y ago
  There's been no action on improving Internet service for the median American because American governance is responsive to the whims of business interests (in this case, ISPs with monopolies) and indifferent to the interests of the public. This pattern is reflected across the entire spectrum of public policy and is not just limited to the market for Internet services. Put bluntly, American democracy is nowhere near as effective at protecting the interests of the American public as the American public has been made to believe. [0] Internet access is merely a symptom of a deeper American problem and cannot be fixed without fixing the deeper problems with American governance. [0] https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B/S1537592714001595a.pdf/testing_theories_of_american_politics_elites_interest_groups_and_average_citizens.pdf https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/c...
gz5 6y ago
Regulation does't always spur open competition and often has unintended consequences. Separate the last mile pipe provider/operator (infrastructure) from the service providers. All service providers compete across that pipe. Traditional ISPs, niche providers, etc. I may choose 5 of them as a consumer. It does necessitate an open, multi-tenant architecture. Let's invest there rather than investing in trying to implement a new regulatory scheme.
- noodlesUK 6y ago
  Local loop unbundling, as it’s called in the U.K. has definitely driven prices down for DSL, but it means there’s very little in terms of actual consumer choice. It’s basically one ISP (virgin excluded cause that’s docsis and a totally different network) for everyone, with different people you can buy service from. If anything actually goes wrong with the network, open reach fixes it, but there’s no way for a company to differentiate on performance, only price.
  - milankragujevic 6y ago
    There are "variants" of LLU that allow ISPs to install their own equipment in the ILECs central office buildings, which would allow the ISP to utilize their own equipment on both ends of the line (CPE and DSLAM). It is rare, though, and incompatible with Vectoring for example. Most xDSL ISPs just resell service and the ILEC uses a L2 VPN to route traffic from the DSLAM to the core network of the reseller ISP. Price is rarely lower, usually only with bundles such as IPTV or landline with cheap international calls...
  - Proziam 6y ago
    Customer service, features/bundles, and deal terms are reasonable ways for a company to differentiate itself I believe. I'd rather everyone have great internet access at a fair price and let the companies battle it out for a smaller piece of the pie. Consumers win.
  - JoshTriplett 6y ago
    > there’s no way for a company to differentiate on performance, only price. That may be true for DSL, but for new infrastructure, you could have local fiber to the nearest meet-me room, and it's then your ISP's responsibility to light up that fiber. Fiber is capable enough that the limits on performance and service will absolutely be the ISP and the equipment you hook up.
lutorm 6y ago
Soon they'll at least have 2... https://www.starlink.com/ https://www.starlink.com/
sixdimensional 6y ago
Only Cox at the most southern point of SoCal where I live. I have only one choice, other than satellite. We can get 940Mbps down/35Mbps up w/ 1.25TB cap and mid level cable TV from Cox for.. wait for it $270/month. O_o Currently I get 150Mbps down/5Mbps up + mid level cable TV... $130/month. It’s fast enough for work, but feels so expensive.
- clairity 6y ago
  do you have neighbors within ~100 ft? if so, why not share internet (and cost) with them? with that much bandwidth, you can split it 10 ways and not even notice. an smb-class wireless router will let you segment neighbors into their own isolated vlan, and with mesh/repeaters, you can cover a fairly large area.
  - sixdimensional 6y ago
    It's a good idea for higher density. I could probably reach two of my neighbors (two shared walls), but not more without better equipment. Actually, because of how our construction is, I could probably do a 3-way mesh router setup and put one node in each place. I had an acquaintance who wanted to start a company flashing a custom OpenWRT image onto Linksys routers, he added a little captive portal with billing through Stripe so he could collect the neighbor's portion. Your comment reminded me to go check and see if he ever decided to go through with it. I recall looking into this a long time ago, certainly could do it, but recall some terms and conditions that prohibited it maybe. The other thing is even with all that bandwidth, there is the 1.25TB monthly bandwidth cap, which is one way I think they limit scenarios like this. Good idea though thanks for suggesting it.
ExtremisAndy 6y ago
It’s really depressing in rural places. I had to teach online all summer with DSL 6mbps down/ 0.3mbps up. Forget uploading any video. My students never saw my face. Thankfully, the videoconferencing software I was using managed to allow me to share my PowerPoint and voice reliably enough. Otherwise, I don’t know what I would have done.
neonate 6y ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20200814203602/https://ilsr.org/report-most-americans-have-no-real-choice-in-internet-providers/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200814203602/https://ilsr.org/...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
umvi 6y ago
Well hopefully things like Starlink can provide an alternative to terrestrial internet and force competition into the picture.
- CameronNemo 6y ago
  Frankly the problem is one of regulation and regulatory capture, not technology.
connon 6y ago
Thank you for sharing. This is exactly why Ready (YC S20) makes tools that help America's thousands of Local Internet Service Providers compete with the copper cartel. https://ready.net https://ready.net
- erikw 6y ago
  Cool, it looks like this addresses one of the toughest parts of running a small ISP, which is a chicken-and-egg problem of having enough support operatives for your users, and enough user revenue to hire for support. Fortunately big ISPs have set a loooooow bar for support, but you're still facing an uphill battle against coax providers that are already in buildings, so you have to go above and beyond.
- CameronNemo 6y ago
  FYI your layout is somewhat broken on Firefox Android.
  - connon 6y ago
    thank you Cameron. Just pushed update to site last week. Appreciate the feedback. Working on it now
qetuo 6y ago
I live in an apartment in Passaic County, NJ. My ISP, Optimum, has a monopoly on this group of apartments. They take advantage of this to charge $75/month for plain broadband Internet service, which is about 50% more than the average Internet service (including Verizon FIOS) costs in the nearby area. Just sayin'.
luxuryballs 6y ago
I may be in the minority but my Internet has only gotten better, faster, and cheaper over the years, so I am hesitant to advocate for any major change. But it should be noted that the municipalities are typically who are granting a local monopoly over the existing lines to the ISP and preventing someone else from coming in and laying their own new cables down.
- treis 6y ago
  You're not. These studies draw an arbitrary line for what counts as broadband. And they typically ignore wireless and satellite options. Most people will have a cable, a DSL, and several wireless options. The profit margin of the large cable companies reflect that. They're pretty much middle of the pack for the S&P 500. It's a capital intensive and relatively low margin business. Look at Google Fiber. They had cities falling over themselves to get it and huge consumer demand. Ultimately they abandoned it because it doesn't make enough money.
danielschonfeld 6y ago
Time and time again lately this issue comes up on HN as if it’s a single sector affected by the same umbrella of broken politics and broken system we have. It isn’t. It’s the same old, rinse and repeated. America’s evolution of the free market capitalism experiment has failed and became a plutocracy. That doesn’t mean free market as a whole doesn’t work but it means our version of its evolution has failed for a bunch of different reasons some more illogical and childish than others. The question is the same always too. How and when do we recognize it and start rebuilding it in a radically new way. Does it take a civil war? A world one? Does it take 99% poverty? Or does it just take for China to fail so we can’t have our mind numbing $5 electronics to keep us entertained. How do we all (myself included) become citizens of a nation again and not consumers in a luxury work camp who are kept pacified?
frogpelt 6y ago
I have a choice: $80/mo for Local ISP DSL - 10 Mbps down, <1 up OR $100/mo for LTE hot spot for $100+/mo. 25 MBps down, 5Mbps up with data caps and throttling. The local ISP says they're installing fiber but they're only installing it where the federal government subsidizes or completely funds it.
seesawtron 6y ago
A side remark: They also don't seem to have any real choice in Presidential candidates (like a lot of governments around the world).
Proven 6y ago
It's not the governments duty to make that possible. They have the choices of picking the one that's available, continuing without an ISP or creating their own.

314 points by rmason 6y ago

Heck, many Americans in metro areas have only one choice for internet providers. I've helped people here in SoCal whose only choice has been 5-10MB DSL service, and they were getting charged like $70/month for it.

vinay427 6y ago
Was this in the outer areas (San Bernardino, Ventura, Imperial, etc.)?
- vondur 6y ago
  Actually it was in a weird part of Costa Mesa. No one had fiber close enough and the cable provider wanted thousands to install the cable to the premises. You can be a block away and get cable or Verizon/Frontier
mixmastamyk 6y ago
Helped how? Getting charged that for 100mb in LA, and feel it is too high.
- vondur 6y ago
  Sorry, done tech support for them, only to find out how slow their internet was.

fireattack 6y ago

Questions for the people from areas that do have: do the different providers have separate infrastructures and facilities (optical fiber cables, switches, etc.)?

vinay427 6y ago
My parents' current and previous homes both had two choices. One was AT&T's fiber option (probably FTTN, not FTTH) and the other was cable through the local provider.
- t3rabytes 6y ago
  AT&T Fiber is FTTH.
zombielinux 6y ago
Typically, you'd have one fiber provider and one cable (coax) provider. I've never met anyone that has two fiber, or two coax providers to the same residential address.
just-ok 6y ago
In our case they definitely do. We finally had an opportunity to ditch AT&T’s pathetic 3Mbps DSL offering in our area (which was their best plan...) recently in favor of Comcast’s 200Mbps which was cable-based (so obviously different infra). Same price, too...
Spooky23 6y ago
In my area, you used to be able to sign up for 2-3 different cable internet providers on the Time Warner Network. I’d bounce between EarthLink and TWC to get new customer bonuses. EarthLink was cheaper ($25 iirc vs $45 several years ago) but slower.
wtallis 6y ago
Local loop unbundling hasn't been a thing in the US for a long time, and never applied to cable or fiber to begin with. Separate ISPs means separate infrastructure. The coax, POTS and fiber cables in my yard all go to different places. However, a well-placed backhoe at the nearest major road can probably still take them all out in one swipe.
oneplane 6y ago
We have 3 different media options and 14 different providers. 4 media options if you'd allow for 3g/4g/5g internet, 56k modem internet and satellite internet, but I don't count those. Differences: Media is DOCSIS, DSL or Optical fiber Providers have differences in facilities and services, differences: - Plain internet vs. user-selectable filters (i.e. SMTP protection, SMB protection, content filters at the ISP level) - VoIP options - IPTV options - Connectivity options (i.e. auto failover to LTE or special managed hardware) - Addressing options (single IP, multiple IP, routed subnet if you want) So you might find yourself wanting an all-in-one package over DOCSIS using the coax cable media, which is a common choice (at least before fiber rollout). Or you may like very fast internet in your own control, so you'd take fiber with no bundled stuff. Costs about the same as the other option. Other things like having HD or 4K broadcasts may limit your choices, not all providers have all channels available in all formats, and not all kinds of media support all kinds of bitrates. So for non-cable (non-DOCSIS) you'd not be able to use 4k with DSL for more than 2 IPTV receivers. Some providers come with extra on-site support in the package, like someone who will set it up, check that it works with your computer, setup your email if you still have ISP-bound email for some reason, and do your WiFi with extra access points (no repeater!) as needed. Others may be cheap and have no default service like that included and you then have the option to buy it on-demand at a higher price.

jtxx 6y ago

in NYC, I’ve only ever had the option for one cable provider at any given location, either Spectrum / Time Warner or Optimum, maybe RCN. but never more than one to pick from, unless you’re in a fios building then I think that’s an option. and there’s usually DSL but that’s not a real competitor.

JohnTHaller 6y ago
We don't have FiOS or even have RCN on our block in NYC. Spectrum or "up to 3 to 7Mbps" Verizon DSL. That's it.
- jtxx 6y ago
  same

djaque 6y ago

This is what frustrated me the most with some of my friends "free market" arguments when net neutrality was in the news. I am also a believer in the invisible hand, but it doesn't work when I can literally only choose from one provider.

pascalxus 6y ago
it's not the invisible hand's fault when that hand is tied behind it's back. there's so many politicians that have been creating legislation that prevents new entrants from coming into the market with regulatory capture. that's not a free market.
- throw0101a 6y ago
  > there's so many politicians that have been creating legislation that prevents new entrants from coming into the market with regulatory capture. Politicians paid for by the incumbents. Not everywhere though: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_In... * https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-if-switching-fiber-isps-was-as-easy-as-clicking-a-mouse/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-...
- msla 6y ago
  The fact it's impossible for everyone to build cable everywhere means it isn't a free market.
  - posguy 6y ago
    The cost of the labor to build and maintain said cable makes it economically infeasible for a second ISP to build out service in many areas of the US. Permissive regulation will only enable competition in urban cores, as being a 3rd or 4th provider in suburban areas is not profitable. Some areas have so few possible customers per mile that a fiber build by the incumbent provider would not break even for decades even with an 80% take rate by every building passed.

war1025 6y ago

This seems fairly unsurprising to me. Internet is a utility. Most people also don't have a choice in who they get electric, water, gas, etc. from. It's unfortunate that internet service quality is so varied from location to location, but utilities tend to form natural monopolies.

avmich 6y ago
> It's unfortunate that internet service quality is so varied from location to location, but utilities tend to form natural monopolies. You're missing the crucial difference. Public utilities are supervised by the public.
- war1025 6y ago
  > Public utilities are supervised by the public I have municipal fiber, which is not common, so I guess that's a fair point.
shados 6y ago
they're generally a fair bit more regulated though (and ironically I actually have more options for electric than I do for internet).
throw0101a 6y ago
> […] but utilities tend to form natural monopolies. Then perhaps more local authorities should form Internet utilities: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_broadband It's a thing in many places: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_In... * https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-if-switching-fiber-isps-was-as-easy-as-clicking-a-mouse/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-... Unless you are in one of the 22 US states that have restrictions on it: * https://broadbandnow.com/report/municipal-broadband-roadblocks/ https://broadbandnow.com/report/municipal-broadband-roadbloc... The public infrastructure provides ISO Layer 1/2 connectivity, and let the Free Market™ compete at Level 3.

candyman 6y ago

I was pleased when we lived in Boston where our building and many others was able to put microwave-based services on the roof. It was internet-only but very fast and inexpensive - just what we needed. Now we are in Louisville and back to the only two mediocre and more expensive choices - ATT and Spectrum. And if you go out into the country many homes are stuck with satellite internet service from Hughes which is damn near unusable.

kibwen 6y ago
As a transplant to Boston I was thrilled that for the first time in my life I actually had a choice of internet provider; I went with "not Comcast", aka RCN, because they were the one who didn't charge an absurd fee to let me use my own router, and the service has been extremely reliable and inexpensive. Apparently Verizon has just begun fiber service as well to my area, so with a whopping three providers to choose from I am perhaps the luckiest person in America. (The microwave service you mention, Starry, sadly isn't in my area yet, but HN will be delighted to hear that their microwave relays use Rust internally in embedded context.)
derblitzmann 6y ago
Yeah, I'm out in the country with Hughesnet, and it works fine provided you haven't hit the data cap. But streaming 720p or higher is going to be pausing rather consistently.
umvi 6y ago
Online games on HughesNet are unplayable. Called and complained that ~500ms RTT is unacceptable but they made up some excuse as to why it couldn't be faster, some mumbo jumbo about the speed of light
- antif 6y ago
  They didn't make that up.. the satellites are literally no closer then 118ms (one-way). If you and the source/destination are directly under the satellite you may be able to get a packet + response in 480ms under most-ideal conditions. (that is four legs of transit between ground & space) Elevation of orbit is 35,768,000 meters [1], and light moves at ~300,000,000 meters per second. [1] https://www.hughes.com/resources/press-releases/echostar-xix-satellite-jupiter-high-throughput-technology-successfully https://www.hughes.com/resources/press-releases/echostar-xix...

darepublic 6y ago

Canadian here. For us it is Rogers, Bell or some skin of those two

MattGaiser 6y ago
For internet? Where are you located? Even my grandparents in Northern Ontario have some 5 or so options, and not just skins of the Big 3. I checked 8 providers when I lived in Kingston. For cell phone, you are right.
- cmehdy 6y ago
  If you're talking about Start, Tekksavy, Tbaytel and similar, they're all bound to Rogers or Bell. I think the user you're replying to is pretty much right when it comes to Canada, and it shows in the prices you get. Same thing for phones. A couple providers are through satellite and such in rural areas and in those cases it's typically even worse since the service truly sucks while costing much, and they're in no rush to do anything about it when there are issues on the line. And I'm not even talking about middle-of-nowhere stuff, just places north of Sudbury for example.
throw0101a 6y ago
The telcos / cablecos run the wires, but are mandated by the CRTC (~FCC) to allow third-party ISPs access: * https://canadianisp.ca/ https://canadianisp.ca/ One is still limited to the limits of the underlying technology (e.g., copper distance with DSL), but it's better than nothing IMHO.

heavyset_go 6y ago

Same thing with health insurance.

avmich 6y ago
Interesting that we discuss sometimes benefits of having engineering licensed, but here we apparently see disadvantages of licensing going wrong.

chrsstrm 6y ago

In a rural area where the local telco was granted a legal monopoly, their "high speed" comes in a 5/0.5mbps on a good day. The area is now blanketed in T-Mobile 5G coverage, but questions asking T-Mobile about a 5G hotspot with a wired LAN port have gone unanswered. I'd love to use a 5G hotspot as the house's modem, but WiFi-only just won't work. Do any 5G devices with a SIM slot and a wired LAN port exist?

donatj 6y ago
My parents were in a similar situation. They only had terrible DSL in their area. T-Mobile actually offers a home router with Ethernet out, they got accepted into the beta about 6 months ago and it's been a godsend. - https://www.t-mobile.com/isp https://www.t-mobile.com/isp
- chrsstrm 6y ago
  That's exactly the type of program I'm looking for but it only mentions LTE. The LTE coverage there is spotty and speeds aren't great, so really hoping for 5G. Plus the fine print in the terms talks about how some streaming services can't be used, but doesn't name them. If T-Mobile rolls out a program like this with their 5G network it would be amazing. I really can't imagine them trying to sell 5G phones to country folk, at least not until the price comes way down. What else would they use that 5G bandwidth for in the meantime?
  - joe_the_user 6y ago
    I can't imagine how 5G could leap-frog LTE. As I understand it, 5G has to blanket an area to be able to reliably transmit into a building. When the companies seem to put 2-3 towers per ridge in mountain areas, how is that going to happen? And generally, I'd expect any new 5G towers would also be LTE towers anyway.
camkego 6y ago
I think the Netgear Nighthawk M5 for 5G Mobile Router might help you. It is announced, but not yet released. I have the previous generation, the Netgear Nighthawk M1. I believe both have a wired ethernet port.

JohnTHaller 6y ago

Living in NYC, I have one high-speed internet option (Spectrum, formerly Time Warner) and one not high-speed internet option (Verizon DSL with "up to" 3.1 - 7 Mbps). That's it.

codegeek 6y ago
NYC still has DSL option ? Wow. I left NYC in 2005 as a resident and would assume that it has fiber everywhere by now.
- JohnTHaller 6y ago
  It was supposed to. NYC gave Verizon a deal in exchange for wiring fiber citywide. They never did.
  - crgwbr 6y ago
    They at least partially did. I’m in a not-wealthy area of the Bronx and somehow managed to get gigabit Fios from Verizon. But, yeah, it’s certainly not everywhere yet.

mistrial9 6y ago

right - and comparing its service to the AT&T offering, a residential Internet service provider in the California Bay Area said, "and, we don't send in those reports that most ISPs do" .. on a support call..

crazygringo 6y ago

Seriously. I don't understand why there isn't a movement to regulate ISP's like utilities at this point. Why aren't mayors and governors running on this as a major plank? ISP investments, profits and pricing would all get regulated by the municipality. Performance is monitored and guaranteed. I've lived in many, many apartments in NYC and each building has only ever had one choice -- Spectrum (was Time Warner) or Optimum. And it's always the same -- it's $24.99-39.99 at first, then after a year it's jacked up to $49.99-54.99, then another year up to $69.99. It used to be you'd call to threaten to cancel and they'd re-lower it. But they haven't agreed to do that for over 3 years now -- they'll just let you cancel. They know you don't have a choice. ISP's are so obviously by now a utility like water, gas and electric. Why aren't we treating them that way?

cameronbrown 6y ago
> Seriously. I don't understand why there isn't a movement to regulate ISP's like utilities at this point. Why aren't mayors and governors running on this as a major plank? Who do you think gave them these monopolies in the first place?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ravenstine 6y ago
  Exactly. They're making money!
- Retric 6y ago
  Your local power, water, trash, etc company's have a local monopoly and serious regulation. Internet just has the monopoly bit.
  - zdragnar 6y ago
    My local trash company, in fact, does not have a monopoly. The city I left to move to where I am now implemented a monopoly trash service shortly after I left, and gave my street to a trash hauler that is quite possibly the most consumer hostile company I have ever had the displeasure of working with... worse by far than Comcast. Also interestingly, internet options were Comcast or I think Quest fiber. Sucks to be whoever bought my house, I guess.

exabrial 6y ago

I have 4, which is unusual. To some the problem, more local competition is needed. The problem is curbing the anti-competitive prentices that prop up local monopolies. States don't seem to care about consumer choice.

darth_avocado 6y ago

What I don't understand is why do we keep repeating these same observations again and again and still nothing happens. I've been upset at Comcast constantly jacking up the prices, not having an internet only option in my area (gets bundled up with TV), making sure good prices are available only if you get a 12 month contract and so much more. I mean Southpark said it years ago and even John Oliver had a segment on it. What is new about this? And why haven't we seen an action against it?

bleepblorp 6y ago
There's been no action on improving Internet service for the median American because American governance is responsive to the whims of business interests (in this case, ISPs with monopolies) and indifferent to the interests of the public. This pattern is reflected across the entire spectrum of public policy and is not just limited to the market for Internet services. Put bluntly, American democracy is nowhere near as effective at protecting the interests of the American public as the American public has been made to believe. [0] Internet access is merely a symptom of a deeper American problem and cannot be fixed without fixing the deeper problems with American governance. [0] https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B/S1537592714001595a.pdf/testing_theories_of_american_politics_elites_interest_groups_and_average_citizens.pdf https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/c...

gz5 6y ago

Regulation does't always spur open competition and often has unintended consequences. Separate the last mile pipe provider/operator (infrastructure) from the service providers. All service providers compete across that pipe. Traditional ISPs, niche providers, etc. I may choose 5 of them as a consumer. It does necessitate an open, multi-tenant architecture. Let's invest there rather than investing in trying to implement a new regulatory scheme.

noodlesUK 6y ago
Local loop unbundling, as it’s called in the U.K. has definitely driven prices down for DSL, but it means there’s very little in terms of actual consumer choice. It’s basically one ISP (virgin excluded cause that’s docsis and a totally different network) for everyone, with different people you can buy service from. If anything actually goes wrong with the network, open reach fixes it, but there’s no way for a company to differentiate on performance, only price.
- milankragujevic 6y ago
  There are "variants" of LLU that allow ISPs to install their own equipment in the ILECs central office buildings, which would allow the ISP to utilize their own equipment on both ends of the line (CPE and DSLAM). It is rare, though, and incompatible with Vectoring for example. Most xDSL ISPs just resell service and the ILEC uses a L2 VPN to route traffic from the DSLAM to the core network of the reseller ISP. Price is rarely lower, usually only with bundles such as IPTV or landline with cheap international calls...
- Proziam 6y ago
  Customer service, features/bundles, and deal terms are reasonable ways for a company to differentiate itself I believe. I'd rather everyone have great internet access at a fair price and let the companies battle it out for a smaller piece of the pie. Consumers win.
- JoshTriplett 6y ago
  > there’s no way for a company to differentiate on performance, only price. That may be true for DSL, but for new infrastructure, you could have local fiber to the nearest meet-me room, and it's then your ISP's responsibility to light up that fiber. Fiber is capable enough that the limits on performance and service will absolutely be the ISP and the equipment you hook up.

lutorm 6y ago

Soon they'll at least have 2... https://www.starlink.com/ https://www.starlink.com/

sixdimensional 6y ago

Only Cox at the most southern point of SoCal where I live. I have only one choice, other than satellite. We can get 940Mbps down/35Mbps up w/ 1.25TB cap and mid level cable TV from Cox for.. wait for it $270/month. O_o Currently I get 150Mbps down/5Mbps up + mid level cable TV... $130/month. It’s fast enough for work, but feels so expensive.

clairity 6y ago
do you have neighbors within ~100 ft? if so, why not share internet (and cost) with them? with that much bandwidth, you can split it 10 ways and not even notice. an smb-class wireless router will let you segment neighbors into their own isolated vlan, and with mesh/repeaters, you can cover a fairly large area.
- sixdimensional 6y ago
  It's a good idea for higher density. I could probably reach two of my neighbors (two shared walls), but not more without better equipment. Actually, because of how our construction is, I could probably do a 3-way mesh router setup and put one node in each place. I had an acquaintance who wanted to start a company flashing a custom OpenWRT image onto Linksys routers, he added a little captive portal with billing through Stripe so he could collect the neighbor's portion. Your comment reminded me to go check and see if he ever decided to go through with it. I recall looking into this a long time ago, certainly could do it, but recall some terms and conditions that prohibited it maybe. The other thing is even with all that bandwidth, there is the 1.25TB monthly bandwidth cap, which is one way I think they limit scenarios like this. Good idea though thanks for suggesting it.

ExtremisAndy 6y ago

It’s really depressing in rural places. I had to teach online all summer with DSL 6mbps down/ 0.3mbps up. Forget uploading any video. My students never saw my face. Thankfully, the videoconferencing software I was using managed to allow me to share my PowerPoint and voice reliably enough. Otherwise, I don’t know what I would have done.

neonate 6y ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20200814203602/https://ilsr.org/report-most-americans-have-no-real-choice-in-internet-providers/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200814203602/https://ilsr.org/...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

umvi 6y ago

Well hopefully things like Starlink can provide an alternative to terrestrial internet and force competition into the picture.

CameronNemo 6y ago
Frankly the problem is one of regulation and regulatory capture, not technology.

connon 6y ago

Thank you for sharing. This is exactly why Ready (YC S20) makes tools that help America's thousands of Local Internet Service Providers compete with the copper cartel. https://ready.net https://ready.net

erikw 6y ago
Cool, it looks like this addresses one of the toughest parts of running a small ISP, which is a chicken-and-egg problem of having enough support operatives for your users, and enough user revenue to hire for support. Fortunately big ISPs have set a loooooow bar for support, but you're still facing an uphill battle against coax providers that are already in buildings, so you have to go above and beyond.
CameronNemo 6y ago
FYI your layout is somewhat broken on Firefox Android.
- connon 6y ago
  thank you Cameron. Just pushed update to site last week. Appreciate the feedback. Working on it now

qetuo 6y ago

I live in an apartment in Passaic County, NJ. My ISP, Optimum, has a monopoly on this group of apartments. They take advantage of this to charge $75/month for plain broadband Internet service, which is about 50% more than the average Internet service (including Verizon FIOS) costs in the nearby area. Just sayin'.

luxuryballs 6y ago

I may be in the minority but my Internet has only gotten better, faster, and cheaper over the years, so I am hesitant to advocate for any major change. But it should be noted that the municipalities are typically who are granting a local monopoly over the existing lines to the ISP and preventing someone else from coming in and laying their own new cables down.

treis 6y ago
You're not. These studies draw an arbitrary line for what counts as broadband. And they typically ignore wireless and satellite options. Most people will have a cable, a DSL, and several wireless options. The profit margin of the large cable companies reflect that. They're pretty much middle of the pack for the S&P 500. It's a capital intensive and relatively low margin business. Look at Google Fiber. They had cities falling over themselves to get it and huge consumer demand. Ultimately they abandoned it because it doesn't make enough money.

danielschonfeld 6y ago

Time and time again lately this issue comes up on HN as if it’s a single sector affected by the same umbrella of broken politics and broken system we have. It isn’t. It’s the same old, rinse and repeated. America’s evolution of the free market capitalism experiment has failed and became a plutocracy. That doesn’t mean free market as a whole doesn’t work but it means our version of its evolution has failed for a bunch of different reasons some more illogical and childish than others. The question is the same always too. How and when do we recognize it and start rebuilding it in a radically new way. Does it take a civil war? A world one? Does it take 99% poverty? Or does it just take for China to fail so we can’t have our mind numbing $5 electronics to keep us entertained. How do we all (myself included) become citizens of a nation again and not consumers in a luxury work camp who are kept pacified?

frogpelt 6y ago

I have a choice: $80/mo for Local ISP DSL - 10 Mbps down, <1 up OR $100/mo for LTE hot spot for $100+/mo. 25 MBps down, 5Mbps up with data caps and throttling. The local ISP says they're installing fiber but they're only installing it where the federal government subsidizes or completely funds it.

seesawtron 6y ago

A side remark: They also don't seem to have any real choice in Presidential candidates (like a lot of governments around the world).

Proven 6y ago

It's not the governments duty to make that possible. They have the choices of picking the one that's available, continuing without an ISP or creating their own.