AT&T and Verizon say 10Mbps is too fast for “broadband,” 4Mbps is enough

ARS Technica

How dare the "internet" companies try to tell us when enough is enough. I mean I have a #ty DSL connection because of my rural location but these corporations saying 4 Mbps is enough is ridiculous.

"Given the pace at which the industry is investing in advanced capabilities, there is no present need to redefine 'advanced' capabilities," AT&T wrote in a filing made public Friday after the FCC’s comment deadline (see FCC proceeding 14-126). "Consumer behavior strongly reinforces the conclusion that a 10Mbps service exceeds what many Americans need today to enable basic, high-quality transmissions," AT&T wrote later in its filing. Verizon made similar arguments.

Um, from what I've seen/read, nobody wants to invest in faster speeds unless it gets them more money. And in my book, "basic, high-quality transmission" is the baseline, not the exception. I mean where do these companies get off?

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler even suggested in a speech last week that 10Mbps is too low. “A 25Mbps connection is fast becoming ‘table stakes’ in 21st century communications,” he said. At 25Mbps, three-quarters of Americans have, at best, one choice of providers. At 10Mbps, 8.4 percent of Americans have no access, and another 30.3 percent have access from only one provider.

You know it must be bad when even the chairman of the FCC is against these corp's proposals. Didn't know where else to post this, might have been posted already so mods, do what you do.

I'm always astonished by what you guys in the States pay for your broadband too. My current broadband is £6 a month for unlimited bandwidth.

I only get 3.5mb/s because I live way out in the styx, and that's considered painfully slow, in a country (the UK) that is notorious for having slow broadband infrastructure.

Crikey.
I get 152 off Virgin.
Doubt I'd bother having the net if it was as slow as you Yanks put up with.

a reply to: Painterz

Just ran a test at Speedtest.net:

5.36Mbps download and 0.88Mbps upload in the best possible conditions with barely anybody else on the line but I've only got DSL. I had way better speeds when I had an actual broadband connection. 6 euro's is about $13-15 dollars a month I believe. I pay $40 a month for my crappy internet service as part of a bundle. It's the only option where I live unless I want to pay even more for satellite service. I can pretty much guarantee I get worse service during the day when other people are using the line, that's why most of my streaming goes on at night.

a reply to: thov420

Just wow. And I´m disappointed for my nations not being able to keep up with neighbours, where provider offer internet connections up to 1 Gbps for much cheaper cost (around 20-25 dollars a month)

I myself could not even imagine having under 25 MBits internet. Currently using 300/300 internet (costs 33 euros (42,5 dollars a monht). Just thought to test it out, slower internet (around 200/100) would be around 10 dollars (7 euros) cheaper.

I can not get the US corporate policies. The prices are much higher for much slower connections. I guess the current providers are happy with their positions in the market and that rules out the need to expand/advance their network. As long as the profits are sky-high and people pay, there is no need in their eyes.

$60 AUD for about 10mbps down and 1mbps up, capped at 150gb per month, which includes uploads and downloads. After I go over (if I go over) then Im rate limited to 256kbps.

Tell me again how bad it is !!!

I only get 10mbps because Im 2.6km away from the closest exchange. it should be 21mbps, IF I lived right on top of it. Still using copper wire here. no NBN planned for me.

Wow - your internet is pretty damn slow. Here in Austria you can get 10 mbp/s + Television for 30$ per month. For 90$ per month you can get 250mbp/s + 160 channels which I don't even know.

How come the internet in the USA is so damn slow?

a reply to: Danowski

Good question. I think it's mainly because of lack of competition. All the big providers have carved out areas and have agreed not to compete with each other so they get to charge whatever they want and everybody's stuck with what they offer.

So, moneybags isn't happy with the rate that the humans receive information and would like to restrict it.

Correct me if I'm wrong............

i would be ecstatic with 10mb i get 750kb down and 100 kb up and im limited to 10 gigs a month for 80 dollars and its 10 dollars a gig if i go over

So I guess that saying now goes "the customer USED to be always right, but isn't anymore"

a reply to: thov420

Hm, yeah that sounds like what companies would do. Fortunately Austria isn't that big and there are enough internet providers I can choose from.

If I'd call my provider and tell them I'm not satisfied or I'm about to switch, they would do everything to keep you. More tv channels, faster internet or a cheaper contract.

a reply to: Danowski

Here is America we are close to that. Instead of getting offered a bunch of anything worth it, the companies just send out a firing squad.

Jokes aside, I live in an area where Comcast and Verizon DO compete (a little?) with each other and no one else. So the offer from both stands around $80.00 for 25mb ul/dl, $110.00 for 50 ul/dl. It's still completely overpriced but what can I do but keep switching to who ever offers cheaper. I do that about once every year or two.


Just waiting on that google fiber.

I just got a free upgrade with Virgin media here in the UK.
They just rang me up and asked If I want my speed doubled...100mb per sec lol.
Sometimes it rocks to be in the UK lol.

One question which popped into my head, is there a maximum of Gigabytes you can download per month? I remember, like ten years ago, when I watched A LOT of Lost in a week, we recieved an email which said we should stop downloading that excessive - that was it. Nowadays you can download how much you want.

I think you Europeans forget how big the USA is. The amount of distance from one coast to the other is kind of staggering. Then add in population density.
We prolly have more unpaved roads than most of your countries have paved roads. Infrastructure take time and money.


I looked it up and the United Kingdom is slightly small than the state of Oregon. That's just an perspective builder.

a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

Yeah that what I was thinking too. Austria is pretty damn small compared to the US - also most of the American people won't know where Austria is tor even know what it is. "You mean Australia?!"

originally posted by: Danowski
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

Yeah that what I was thinking too. Austria is pretty damn small compared to the US - also most of the American people won't know where Austria is tor even know what it is. "You mean Australia?!"

I know where it is. Didn't Hitler pay you guys a visit a few years back?

First they have a 21st century book burning by making everything digital and editable.

I guess the next step in our de-evolution would be to make it harder to receive or transfer that data.

CONTROL, CONTROL, CONTROL

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
I think you Europeans forget how big the USA is. The amount of distance from one coast to the other is kind of staggering. Then add in population density.
We prolly have more unpaved roads than most of your countries have paved roads. Infrastructure take time and money.


I looked it up and the United Kingdom is slightly small than the state of Oregon. That's just an perspective builder.

size of the US has just a little to do with it. The real reason is lack of competion. Look at how att verizon and comcast oligopoly magically over night doubled everyone speed in areas where google fiber announced they would be deploying.

Also the nobody needs more than 4mb download is bs. Try watching netflix in 2 different rooms voip calls and web surfing with that. They have properly assumassumeded that consumers are not to bright and they can manipulate them to thinking they dont need that speed.