Still Little To Do About a Bad ISP 178
theY4Kman writes "The Washington Post reinforces the grim situation on Net Neutrality and limited ISP choices faced by Americans: 'The FCC's research shows that 78 percent of American households have access to only two land-based broadband providers and that 13 percent have one. Don't expect that to improve. Many competing DSL services have left the market, spurred by the end of line-sharing in 2005 and other corporate consolidations. A few months ago, for instance, AT&T elected to close its WorldNet DSL service. Meanwhile, technologies that were once promoted as alternatives to phone and cable-based services have flopped. City-wide WiFi access ... turned out to be a business bust. The power-line broadband that then-FCC Chairman Michael Powell lauded as having "great promise" in 2004 fared no better: Last week, Manassas voted to unplug its pioneering service. ... We have a situation full of lawyerly jargon, with risks that can't be dramatized by putting a sick kid on a stage. I hope you like your Internet provider, because you may be stuck with it for a while.'"
Satellite (Score:4, Informative)
Flashy HTML (Score:4, Informative)
If everyone used pure H.T.M.L. and not this flasyh stuff
Pure HTML and flashiness aren't mutually exclusive. It's possible to make animations comparable to what is seen in SWFs with the <canvas>, <audio>, and <video> elements in HTML5.
Re:Of course (Score:5, Informative)
Regulation of a market only works if the regulation is free from the influence of those operating in the market; in this case, as with the Banking sector, regulation doesn't solve anything because any corporations with something to lose will simply lobby to shape the regulation to their liking.
Broadband regulation has, on the whole, worked pretty well in Europe - here in the UK, forcing BT into LLU [wikipedia.org] has led to an extremely competitive broadband market and so far, every time BT have looked to take advantage of the situation, OFCOM [ofcom.org.uk] have smacked them down. If the government hadn't stepped in, we'd be in pretty much the same situation that the US is in; Cable via Virgin Media (where available) or ADSL via BT.
Re:Of course (Score:5, Informative)
It's not even confined to the federal level.
In one case, a city tried to implement its own network, and then got sued by the local ISP just long enough for them to beat the city to the punch.
In another case, an ISP threw such a tantrum about competition that it went to the state capital and whined the lawmakers into outlawing municipal networks.
Re:Of course... corruption (Score:4, Informative)
Again it all comes back to lobbying and campaign financing.
Doesn't sound like regulation to me, that sounds like America suffers from government corruption.
Really, a large corporation should not be paying Congress to lobby so they can kill their competition. This is the type of thing you expect from Russia and China, not the USA.
Re:Of course (Score:4, Informative)
Well, as a resident of lovely Boston I can attest that we have the same two poor offerings here (DSL or Cable).
Re:Of course (Score:1, Informative)
Population density has nothing to do with that. Back in the days you had the choice between two providers: the one that provided DSL-services (KPN), and the one that provided cable internet services (UPC, @Home, Casema depending on the region you live in). Regulation forced KPN to open up their network to competitors, and therefore gave us (I am Dutch) more choice that only the telephone & the cable guy. If i recall correctly there are 2 nationwide networks from which the DSL-providers get their network capacity (KPN and BBNED, Tiscali's network is not nationwide), and these two provide 20+ ISP's with the connections needed. At this very moment there is an investigation whether the cable companies should also open up their networks to competitors, and slowly fiber gains ground (bringing a third option of providing the internets to our homes).
Broadband over Powerline (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What about other services? (Score:1, Informative)
> If you don't like your electricity ... local telephone ... gas company ... water supply
In the UK the answer to all those questions is YES. Supply is decoupled from infrastructure and that's why websites such as uswitch.com exist.
Fix your country.
Re:3G (Score:3, Informative)
Satellite is little better than 3G with the amount of monthly transfer you get for the price
Actually, 3G is better than satellite, because your satellite data transfer rate plunges to near-zero during heavy rain or snow.
Re:Of course (Score:3, Informative)
It would never get built because the local telco and/or cableco would sue them into submission.
Another option (Score:2, Informative)
There is another broadband-like tech out there that gives a lot better than dialup, and isn't tied to real laggy and limited transfer satellite or cellphone telcos, and that is motorola canopy wireless tech. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_Canopy [wikipedia.org]
I am using it from a local mom and pop ISP outfit and it works OK, and is cheaper than a landline and dialup account. And man, I am grateful too, there was no way that the cable company or the local wired phone monopoly would ever bring broadband here. And it's different from wifi, you can be many miles away easily (I am around seven or eight miles from the main broadcast antenna) and still get service, you just need your home antenna aimed correctly. It's not blazing cable fast or anything, but it is a huge step up from dialup, and because no cables or wires are needed, doesn't have the same sort of giant huge upfront costs for deployment for the ISPs.
Re:looks to be $75 to $100 per month (Score:3, Informative)
Keep in mind the US's "First past the post" system gives a huge advantage to the major parties.