Why City Folks Must Fight For Rural Broadband - Comments Page 1

Category: Telephony



All Comments on: "Why City Folks Must Fight For Rural Broadband"

Comment Page: 1 |  2 

Posted by:

pdsterling
21 Sep 2018

funny you should write this today, when I did battle with Spectrum yesterday. they told me I was not even paying market for my tiny service, and that it will go up again. make note that the cable companies have convinced legislators that internet service is not a utility, its not needed for life, like electricity and water. I am so sick of their threats - they upped my Mom's cable television + internet to $79, so we cut the cable. they said in doing so, the internet only would zoom up to $64, so I told 'em to cancel both. Mom hasn't touched her iPad in time of recent memory, and if she wants to see pix of her great-grandson, she can come over and mooch off my wireless network. sheesh!

Posted by:

Jonathan
21 Sep 2018

Thank you for bringing this to the attention of your readers.

What you write about in the first two paragraphs of this story is our experience living in a rural locality.

I would add that cell phone service is also spotty at best in rural areas unless you are near a major freeway, regardless of provider.

Posted by:

Paul Friswold
21 Sep 2018

Interesting indeed. Our Missouri Senator just announced $255 million to expand broadband to rural Missouri; some 94,000 residents/businesses. My math says that's about $2,400 for each of those residents/businesses. Wouldn't satellite service be cheaper and much quicker than the time it will take to get that service rolling -- laying cable, installing new switches, etc. But then again Congress has never been known for taking the less expensive route - it's not their money.

Posted by:

clyde
21 Sep 2018

I live rural in Arizona have DSL is digital I run at 144.5 mbps upload and download

Posted by:

Nathan Reiber Jr
21 Sep 2018

I am fortunate enough to be serviced by Frontier Communications. I live in rural PA & can receive service only from Frontier. My service is 1.2 mbps on average. Yes, one---point---two mbps. On a good day or some part of a good day, I will receive up to 3.0 mbps. Many days I get less then then 1.2 mbps & quite often I receive no service at all.
Luckily for me, they raised my monthly "service" cost almost 1/3 this past billing period. I am now paying almost $50/mo for this almost useless service. They constantly lie to me telling me that within 2 years my service will be upgraded. They have been telling me that for about 10 years.

Posted by:

JP
21 Sep 2018

@clyde - Consider yourself extremely lucky! I live in Charlotte, NC and the TV commercials of my Internet provider claim they have starting speeds of 200 mbps download. I'm lucky if I get 65 mbps download and 10 mbps upload!

I used to live in a very rural location and my only Internet option was via dialup.

I use an HDTV indoor antenna and Amazon Prime Instant Video instead of paying an outrageous amount for either cable or satellite TV.

Posted by:

Louis Toscano
21 Sep 2018

I attend church in a rural area that affords people poor Internet service. Even in areas where it is available, there will be families who cannot take advantage of it because their homes are too "set into" their surroundings to have it. So, funding may not be the ultimate answer to the problem.

Posted by:

Mike
21 Sep 2018

I live in Grangeville, Idaho. The best choice here costs $80 a month for an average download speed of 7 to 8 mbps.

Posted by:

Pat
21 Sep 2018

I live in rural AZ. The only choice we have for television is Dish or Direct TV, which is way overpriced...I pay 130 a month. Internet service is provided by Hughes.net, which costs me 105 per month. Both plans are priced just one step from the bottom. The phone company here in this area does not offer internet service.

Posted by:

charles
21 Sep 2018

I live in Jefferson Co, Al, and I know what you are going thru. when I moved here 10 years ago my only choice was Hughes internet 5mb & Directv. with in the last year we finley got high speed internet from AT&T up to one gigabit. I am paying $50/mo for 100mb and getting 125mb up & down. They installed giga-fiber with in the last year we live in the lower income area and the installers said they we got the high speed before the rich side.

Posted by:

jr
21 Sep 2018

I live in rural AZ. The only choice Direct TV OR DISH. The phone company Century Link LINK offer in my
area internet service. Supposedly fiber optic is less than 1 mille away on East side. But West side it is at ¾ mille.
My service is 1.5 mbps on average. Fews time …4 mbps. Day 9 to 10 or sometime 2 to 3.30 p.m. I will receive up to 3.0 mbps. Many days I get less then then 0.70 mbps & quite often I receive no service at all.
Each year they not forget to raised my monthly internet service of 17 to 20 % cost almost anyway if I was signed for fast internet 5 years no increase guaranteed, now my monthly charge bill is $67.47 for internet and phone bill in extra $12.60 plus tax the total Phone bill and Internet is $ 86.17 monthly. The cable company are also a miles away so Century Link as monopolistic situation for almost 8 years state the service will be upgraded with optic fiber… This is continually a lying because we are trap in situation when the politician get pay to look the other side. Bob you right the joke of th FCC relies comes from Form 477 where the tricks superfine contortions they male a geographic point at the extreme part of the power transmission and state the global area, but if the service is available only a the first lucky customer to have it al the rural community is referred to be serviced.

Posted by:

Ray
21 Sep 2018

Here in rural Wayne County, Ohio we finally moved up from dial-up to DSL on copper from something Edison personally used I think. We cruise along @ 10 Mbps routinely. I viewed the internet buildout maps of Ohio and it shows us at 25 Mbps? I think that proves Bob's point.

We dropped our Century Link provider package (sole provider or phone/internet) and use internet only, a big $10 savings at $55/month. Repair staff told me the copper in the box is horrible and needs replacing. Good luck on that one. I also read that CL can abandon sections in a provision of some new law. Can't say that is fact but have no expectation of any upgrade of this system in my lifetime.

When my wife retires and we move back home to PA part of our choice of residence will hinge on internet service, again as Bob notes above. Spot on Bob, kudos to you, this article hit the mark with me.

Posted by:

Sarah L
21 Sep 2018

Hey, Nathan, your rural situation was exactly like my very urban situation using DSL from AT&T, as to speed and prices over copper wires. Now, after over a year of waiting for it, I have Internet 100 at the same price. It required new infrastructure, being all fiber optic cable, with new wiring (cabling?) installed in every unit of the building in which I live. The building was then connected to the nearest fiber optic "box". I think it is a special program to get high speed broadband to apartment buildings (mine is a condo building, but looks just like an apartment building ;-)) in this large metro area. Competition is spotty across the area, and never more than two providers. For now, the price is the same as the old DSL service, $50 a month to see 100 to 120 Mbps show up on a speed test.
Do we need another Works Progress Administration to get broadband nationwide, in mountainous areas as well flat ones, rural and very urban? Just a thought, as the quasi private sector is not seeing this in a way useful to the whole nation.

Posted by:

Ken H
21 Sep 2018

Thanks for addressing an issue I have been bitching about for at least 12 years. When we moved here (rural WA) there was ADSL or satellite. The supposed competition was between (now) Century Link and "local" Gorge net (same lines same crappy service, just a mostly useless local complaint department.) Top speed was 1.5MBPS. While that speed occasionally was reached it was more often below 0.5MBPS and as the years passed it sunk below dialup speeds daily.....several times a day!
My present recourse is HughesNet, satellite service that may reach 15MBPS, but the data limit soon reached resets that to about 0.5MBPS, but rarely below that. Fast enough (usaually.....barely) to stream SD content.
America deserves better IMNSHO
@Paul F- how many yeas will those lines be used? A one time cost is not in the least reflective of the value of a product or service.

Posted by:

Gary Groves
21 Sep 2018

Charter/Spectrum - Believe it or not, I have excellent Internet Service from them in the Hiawatha National Forest. With my Amplifi router, I have consistently been getting speeds of 115 meg. I understand there will be competition coming in the form of 5G. Forget sattelite.

Posted by:

JJ
21 Sep 2018

"These people demand not only broadband but also housing, roads, electricity, sewer systems, supermarkets and restaurants, and all the other amenities that you compete to buy. When many people concentrate in a limited geographic area, their concentrated demand drives up prices for everything." --> Concentrated demand drives down prices due to efficiency of scale. Lower costs of supplying services where the infrastructure is already built, and a greater concentration of customers reduces resources to deliver the services.

"With ubiquitous high-speed Internet, people would not concentrate in urban areas and demand would subside to a new equilibrium point. Prices of everything from gas to houses would come down. So says traditional free market theory, anyway." --> It costs more to run gas, Internet, etc. to rural areas, not less.

"...city folk take for granted (until a sunspot causes a temporary Internet outage. Then city slickers run in circles crying, “The sky is falling, aliens have landed!”)" --> This statement belies an animosity toward 'city folk.' If you want better access for rural folks, just say so. But don't pretend that it will lower costs for anyone. It is very expensive to deliver those services, and you are just wanting urban people to subsidize those costs in their rates. Just tell it like it is without the spin.

And, you conveniently left out the fact that all rural folks have access to satellite Internet service (and that's probably why your article limited its discussion to 25mbps or higher).


Posted by:

Kenneth Heikkila
21 Sep 2018

??? @Gary Groves: You think we have cable in the woods of rural WA??? Hilarious! Like I would be on satellite if I had the choice of cable or any wired service besides non-existant, nearly worthless ADSL.

Posted by:

dennis werth
21 Sep 2018

Clyde - 144.5 mbps UPLOAD?
I question that speed.

Posted by:

NB
21 Sep 2018

It seems that the introduction of autonomous vehicles will make high-speed wireless ubiquitous.

Posted by:

Jon S
21 Sep 2018

Thank you Bob. Well said. The implications of it all are quite scary.

Comment Page: 1 |  2 

Read the article that everyone's commenting on.

To post a comment on "Why City Folks Must Fight For Rural Broadband"
please return to that article.

Send this article to a friend. Jump to the Comments section. Buy Bob a Snickers. Or check out other articles in this category:





Need More Help? Try the AskBobRankin Updates Newsletter. It's Free!

Prev Article:
Use Google Apps Without a Gmail Address?
Send this article to a friend
The Top Twenty
Next Article:
[ALERT] Freeze Your Credit Files For Free

Link to this article from your site or blog. Just copy and paste from this box:



Free Tech Support -- Ask Bob Rankin
Subscribe to AskBobRankin Updates: Free Newsletter


Privacy Policy     RSS/XML