News FCC quadruples requirements for basic broadband service — 100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload are now the base standard

[JeffreyP55]

The FCC released a new report which sets the broadband benchmark from 100 Mbps download speed while emphasizing the slow internet deployment in villages and

FCC quadruples requirements for basic broadband service — 100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload are now the base standard : Read more

Are there any service providers left who support 25Mbps? Bottom line has been 100Mbps for a very longtime. FCC should of done this years ago. If you are a gamer or watch a lot of 4k video 100 is marginal. If you use multiple devices safer bet with the 500Mbps plan.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

3mbps is 375KB/s. 8mbps is 1MB/s and you’re correct with 20mbps.

My brain no think undyslexic after long work day.

 

[bill001g]

I have some rural property that I have had over 30 years and you can't even get DSL. There are some wireless carriers but they are expensive, slow and have data caps....or you pay by the gigbyte.

Just recently a company was coming around asking about signing up for gigabit fiber services. I suspect my property is on the way between the massive housing developments a mile or so north and south were they have build many 1000s of new houses.
Then again they ran a gas line through the front of my lot and refuse to offer service. There are people not even a 1000 feet away they are not going to offer fiber to.

 

[JamesJones44]

For the 2 of us here, the 100/100 is just fine. And I'm quite sure anyone reading this would consider me a "power user".

For two people that don't have a need for large file downloads 100/100 is more than enough (which in truth is most users). That's even if you do a lot of streaming. In testing it's rare you get a 4K stream above 25 Mbps (most seem to cap at 25 Mbps, some go higher but not much beyond 30 Mbps). 2 Streams of 25 Mbps leaves plenty left over for additional browsing.

If you are heavy downloader or have 4 people in the house streaming 4K at once that will likely not be though to live with, but a lot of people don't understand that a 5 Gbps connection isn't likely to make social feed load any faster or their online FPS games work any better and they get sucked into paying for something they don't need.

 

[Co BIY]

In Ireland, we have a National Broadband Plan. Providers and the Government dedicated to a nationwide rollout.

Last year, we got in SIRO, which is a system that provides broadband through the electricity cables going into your house. It works really well, and 500/50 down/up is available even in rural areas (like my town where I currently live).

Last week we switched to a Fibre to Home setup, which works on the older Fibre system. However, the older fibre system used to be maxed at about 90/20 down/up. They've added some tech to that old system, and now we are on the same 500/50 as before with SIRO.

Is it not possible to get similar tech in the US?

The US is 140 times larger than Ireland with 66 times more people. It adds complexity.

I laughed at the FCC hand wringing that 23% of people on "Native Lands" don't have broadband. 5% don't even have indoor plumbing.

I wouldn't be surprised if the terrestrial broadband numbers don't fall over time. With Cellular service/Cellular modems many choose to go without.

 

[SyCoREAPER]

The US is 140 times larger than Ireland with 66 times more people. It adds complexity.

I laughed at the FCC hand wringing that 23% of people on "Native Lands" don't have broadband. 5% don't even have indoor plumbing.

I wouldn't be surprised if the terrestrial broadband numbers don't fall over time. With Cellular service/Cellular modems many choose to go without.

Problem is while the US has good overall coverage, said coverage isn't always fast, let alone consistent. My house is 3 minutes from 'the main road'. I get 1 bar on a good day and around 25Mbps-75Mbps. If I go to that main road, I get full bars and around 1.2Gbps.

 

[williamcll]

I've been on bilateral unlimited fibre for years already. Honestly shocking a country like the US struggles to provide faster internet for the masses when there's clearly the resources to do it.

ISPs don't do it because all they care are profit margins and then they get lobbyists to politically sway the situation into their favor.

 

[toffty]

Longmont, Colorado has city-run fiber. Can't beat my rate of $50/month for 1gig up/down no cap. It's been far more reliable than Cox or Comcast could ever dream. It's been down maybe 2 or 3 times in five years and no outage was more than an hour.
I hope one day private ISPs can die so that fast, reliable, affordable internet is a right and not a privilege.

 

[Unolocogringo]

Where I live 50/2 is the best I can get. Actual 40/ 1.75
My second home which is 100yards down the road only gets 25/2, actual 25/1.5.
They are installing Fiber now so things should get better soon.
My friend only gets 14/1 so any increase is welcomed.
We have one service provider and others are not allowed in our area.
I also have 2 different power company poles on my property
But I am not allowed service from the cheaper company on my side of the street.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

The US has very odd laws and they vary from state to state. Like one ISP/Utility owning the utility poles vs the other. For a while there it was illegal for municipalities to put internet service in place on their own. When Google started rolling out internet service they had to fight in court often to get into places.

Since we have no truly unified government and most government efforts to increase general internet access and bandwidth basically ended up handing money to our telecom companies, we are kind of stuck with whatever. Greater distances mean greater costs to roll out a network. A lot of people are switching to mobile data plans for all uses because it is faster than hard wired connections that are available.

That's a shame.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

The US is 140 times larger than Ireland with 66 times more people. It adds complexity.

Of course, you are stating the obvious. I guess the point I was trying to make is that some joined up thinking from Government and providers will bring both better services and cheaper prices. I guess the complexity you mentioned, is in how little Government can and often do in the US. Having a national plan and sticking with it can be sometimes difficult.

 

[coolitic]

In Ireland, we have a National Broadband Plan. Providers and the Government dedicated to a nationwide rollout.

Last year, we got in SIRO, which is a system that provides broadband through the electricity cables going into your house. It works really well, and 500/50 down/up is available even in rural areas (like my town where I currently live).

Last week we switched to a Fibre to Home setup, which works on the older Fibre system. However, the older fibre system used to be maxed at about 90/20 down/up. They've added some tech to that old system, and now we are on the same 500/50 as before with SIRO.

Is it not possible to get similar tech in the US?

Your entire country is the size of a single, medium-sized US state, so no.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

Your entire country is the size of a single, medium-sized US state, so no.

No, to what exactly? Size is irrelevant. As I mentioned above, one of the newer techs work through the power lines going into a house. So no Fibre needed. No satellite needed. Do most houses in the US have electricity? Yes, they do. If they do, then this system is an option. It's up to you guys to push for this with ISP's and local/state government or the FCC. I'm not too au fait with US laws/regulations, so not sure how you pursue it.

 

[Unolocogringo]

No, to what exactly? Size is irrelevant. As I mentioned above, one of the newer techs work through the power lines going into a house. So no Fibre needed. No satellite needed. Do most houses in the US have electricity? Yes, they do. If they do, then this system is an option. It's up to you guys to push for this with ISP's and local/state government or the FCC. I'm not too au fait with US laws/regulations, so not sure how you pursue it.

Here different states ,or even countys within states have different regulations,laws,service contracts etc.
The county I live in is served by 4 different electricity providers. Each has its regulated area. So one side of the street has one power provider and poles and the other side of the street has another provider in places
We have one home phone,cable,internet provider, there is no competition allowed. One provider for everything except satellite or cell phone service.
We are just now getting fiber.
What is this new fangled thing you speak of?
Oh here power companies are not Telecommunications providers, totally separate entities and what they are allowed to do.

 

[Co BIY]

Starlink is available worldwide for a pretty low cost ($120 a month ) with all other available providers coming in lower than that. I think that (in the US) most people who need or even want Broadband internet access have it.

But with Mobile and lots of lesser avenues of access many don't feel the need for a broadband connection into their home.

Seems like the .gov looking for a way to send money to their supporters by "fixing" the biggest problem of 15 years ago.

 

[hotaru251]

but are you in a state where Comcast is allowed to implement a data cap?

yes, but if you go over the 1.2TB frequently they do have a way to get actual unlimited data for like $30~ extra a month. (think its called xfi complete)
https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/data-usage-find-area shows all states that have the 1.2TB cap.

 

[SyCoREAPER]

yes, but if you go over the 1.2TB frequently they do have a way to get actual unlimited data for like $30~ extra a month. (think its called xfi complete)
https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/data-usage-find-area shows all states that have the 1.2TB cap.

Thanks, I am aware of the states excluded from it but wasn't sure if you were or not and what your experience has been.

1.2TB sounds like a lot but its really not these days. Might be worth petitioning with your state rep for changes.
If I were on a data cap and had to pay an extra for true unlimited ID be both pissed and terrified for my bill. I think it's utter horses* that they are allowed to do that.

 

[JeffreyP55]

Problem is while the US has good overall coverage, said coverage isn't always fast, let alone consistent. My house is 3 minutes from 'the main road'. I get 1 bar on a good day and around 25Mbps-75Mbps. If I go to that main road, I get full bars and around 1.2Gbps.

Worked for Stanford USA 34 years. We had fiber 1992. Welcome late comers.

 

[thestryker]

The problem in the US absolutely comes down to regulation and that's about it. A lot of the broadband problems stemmed from the government authorized cable monopolies as cable provided the first widespread high speed access (meaning post DSL being "good enough"). The monopolies stemmed from trying to get cable television access to the broadest number of people so competition was limited.

Municipal broadband has had a target on its back since Chattanooga became a huge success story. Several states immediately moved to limit the ability for municipalities to build their own networks. Tennessee's (Chattanooga is here) legislature moved quickly to prevent EPB (the power company operating the network) from expanding the network beyond the county they operated in.

Meanwhile federal funding has largely gone to the big ISPs to expand their footprint which most of the time has ended with them doing the bare minimum and finding a way to get out of the obligation. A lot of the problem here seems to stem from how the programs are operated and the contracting allowed. The success stories are mostly smaller/municipal run ISPs which are just providing service to a specific area.

The only other piece that immediately jumps to mind is that ISPs aren't required to maintain a minimum level of service. All across the US we've had stories of overselling markets (cable companies were notorious for this as they consolidated) or just not having enough backend bandwidth (cell companies have done this for a long time).

 

[NatalieEGH]

Maybe because I live alone, but I always found 5Mbps fast enough. It works for all the games I play. It is good enough for 1080p 30fps (which is television standard resolution).

The only way 4K is better is if you have a large screen and are sitting VERY close to the screen. I can with a magnifying glass at 1080p on a 55 inch screen see the individual pixels. That really is good enough.

Going past 30fps your brain automatically smooths out all movement. When you go to a cinema, the movie projector shows the movie at 30fps. I do not hear a lot of people complaining about how horrible the images are. After about 60fps the brain can no longer process more data. The fastest games in the world with say 120fps provide no more than an 60fps. Further the games with the highest fps rates do not download the entire screen. They download just enough information for your computer to generate the graphics. Most of the games including the multiplayer 1st person shoot them up games are transmitting data actually at rates less than 1 Mbps in both directions with upload being the slower number.

Further how many homes are uploading even 10Mbps except when doing an internet speedtest.

Assuming a household of 4 people each running a different 4K video based on Netflix rate for 4K at 15Mbps that is 60Mbps. During those videos the user is uploading data in probably in the 16Kbps range.

Please note I find the idea of everyone watching a separate movie very isolating. It is bad for family cohesion. It is bad for friendships. Everyone in their own tiny world with no interactions between each other outside of texting. And yes, I have seen people in the same room texting each other instead of looking at each other and just talking.

I absolutely can see no reason for 20Mbps upload. Even assuming Alexa is listening to everything said, vocal communication takes place at frequencies less than 10,000 Hz much much lower resolution than a digital song on a CD. What does the government expect us to start uploading?

Do I have high speed, yes. 300Mbps download and up to 10Mbps (normally less than 5Mbps) upload. Why? My other choice is ATT and I am so far from the node that when I had it, my speed was usually less than 128Kbps. My games played fine including WOW, DDO, Star Trek, and Guild Wars. Netflix however went download for 5-10 minutes, play for 5 minutes then download again for 5-10 minutes, rinse repeat. Updates for my games did take over a day depending on which game. I would actually go to a friends house and copy his game to BluRay and then copy the BluRay onto my system. That was the only reason I have ever needed speeds in excess of 10Mbps (movie and surfing at the same time). Oh, I cannot stream 4K movies. I run everything through my computer. Because it is possible to have capture devices (I do not), Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and Disney do not allow 4K for media rights reasons. So all my streamed movies are at 1080P.

i7-4770K
ASRock Z87-Extreme 4
32GB DDR3
297 TB main storage (8x16TB HDD in RAID 10 with 8x16TB HDD (1 logical drive) + 4x6TB HDD + 2x4TB HDD+ 1x1TB HDD with rest Samsung SSDs)
ASMedia 24 port SATA III card
4xStartech 4U HDD docking station
2xStartech 2U HDD docking station
Hauppauge quad tuner card
Sound Blaster AE-7
EVGA NVidia Geforce GTX 1660Ti.
I know a lot of old parts but they work well. All the storage is for recorded television plus DVDs I have loaded 12000+ DVD/BluRay movies (the 128TB drive) and 1000+ music CDs loaded into storage. I tend to purchase if I think I would like to rewatch a movie.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

Here different states ,or even countys within states have different regulations,laws,service contracts etc.
The county I live in is served by 4 different electricity providers. Each has its regulated area. So one side of the street has one power provider and poles and the other side of the street has another provider in places
We have one home phone,cable,internet provider, there is no competition allowed. One provider for everything except satellite or cell phone service.
We are just now getting fiber.
What is this new fangled thing you speak of?
Oh here power companies are not Telecommunications providers, totally separate entities and what they are allowed to do.

Jeez, it sounds very complicated alright. I didn't realise the extent of how suppliers get whole areas to themselves with no competition. No wonder they are slow to move or upgrade, or provide better services.

 

[bill001g]

Worked for Stanford USA 34 years. We had fiber 1992. Welcome late comers.

Back in the days when the internet was actually only universities and government. The company I worked for paid to have a T1 line run to the local university for internet services. Back in the days when 1.5mbps was so fast compared to a dialup modem.
We even got a whole class B ip block that the company still hoards.

 

[SyCoREAPER]

Worked for Stanford USA 34 years. We had fiber 1992. Welcome late comers.

Did you quote me in error?

Not sure where you're going with that. The post I responded to was talking about cell networks replacing land internet and my response was about cell networks.

Where does fiber come in?

 

[SyCoREAPER]

Jeez, it sounds very complicated alright. I didn't realise the extent of how suppliers get whole areas to themselves with no competition. No wonder they are slow to move or upgrade, or provide better services.

Unfortunately as such also no incentive to improve things unless the 'other guy' does too.

 

[Unolocogringo]

from my digging they received part of the government infrastructure funding package.
At least soon i will be able to stream without buffering when 2 or more folding work units upload slowing the network download to a crawl. Have to use their bonded pair modem with 2 phone lines to get 40/1.5 connection.
forget about anything with high upload needs. 1.5mbps max on a good day.