[IP] more on more on U.S. broadband A-OK
------ Forwarded Message
From: Jock Gill <jg45@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 09:15:42 -0500
To: Farber Dave <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Isenberg David <isen@xxxxxxxx>, Jock Gill <jg45@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] more on U.S. broadband A-OK
Dave & David:
An interesting metric that would be useful to publish is the cost per
megabit of domestic low-band [any connectivity below 1 gigabit]
For example, Comcast charges about $45 for 3 megabits = $15 / domestic
megabit of low-band per month.
I believe that in Germany there are locations where the cost per
domestic megabit is 12.5 cents/mo! [1 gig at $125/mo]
Clearly Comcast would appear to be extravagantly over-charging -- by a
factor of about 120X -- and we customers are getting very badly ripped
off.
This suggest that that we need a mix of metrics to evaluate US
connectivity standings.
1] percent of population served
2] capacity of connectivity rating [low-band to broad-band]
3] cost per domestic megabit per month.
4] symmetric or asymmetric connectivity
5] support for end-user content creation and distribution: blogs,
podcasts, vidcasts etc.
6] other?
Regards,
Jock
Jock Gill
Meme Intelligence
http://public.xdi.org/=Jock
On Jan 11, 2005, at 8:26 AM, David Farber wrote:
>
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: "David S.Isenberg" <isen@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:13:14 -0500
> To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dewayne Hendricks
> <dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: U.S. broadband A-OK
>
> Dave,
> Dewayne,
>
> [for IP and Dewayne-net, per your editorial discretion]
>
> Declan McCullagh can't explain Canada by citing to population density.
> Canada is much more sparsely populated than the United States, yet
> Canada is
> the third most connected nation, according to the ITU. Declan
> over-simplifies.
> Population density is but one aspect of a complex picture.
>
> Also, the idea that the U.S. is 11th is obsolete and optimistic. New
> data from
> the ITU puts U.S. connectedness at 13th to 15th. Even this ranking is
> from 2003.
> Projecting growth rates, it is likely the U.S. has fallen further
> because other countries' connectivity is growing more rapidly.
>
> More detail here:
> http://www.isen.com/blog/2004/12/us-15th-in-broadband-per-capita.html
> or http://tinyurl.com/6akar
>
> An appropriate test of the McCullagh hypothesis would be to ask
> whether, say,
> equivalently dense sections of, say, Seoul and New York City were
> equivalently
> connected.
>
> David I
> -------
>
> On Jan 10, 2005, at 8:47 PM, Declan McCullagh wrote on IP and
> Dewayne-net:
>
>> By contrast, the United States sprawls over nearly 10 million square
>> kilometers--100 times the size of South Korea--with a population more
>> evenly distributed between rural areas, towns and cities and far more
>> likely to live in single-family homes. Geography and demographics
>> explain why broadband will take longer to become available in the
>> United States.
>
>
> ------ End of Forwarded Message
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as jock@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To manage your subscription, go to
> http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at:
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
>
------ End of Forwarded Message
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/