U.S. Internet needs upgrade
America was the birthplace of the Internet, but it has fallen behind when it comes to getting its citizens hooked up. More competition, and possibly Federal Communications Commission intervention, is needed to bring the United States into the 21st century.
Anyone who has ever signed up for broadband Internet knows the options are fairly limited. Here in Westwood there are only two major broadband providers – Verizon DSL and Adelphia High Speed Internet.
The situation is fairly similar across the United States. In many rural areas, there may be only one provider of broadband – and in some cases, none at all. Most services are limited to a small range of speed options, between 1 and 10 Mbps.
But when it comes to choices and speed, these offerings compare poorly to a number of other developed countries. For one thing, 1 Mbps (and even 10 Mbps) speeds are not enough for many situations.
Take the average apartment of four roommates – someone is downloading a game demo, another is browsing the Web and a third person is playing a game. The result will often be a fairly fast download, but slow loading times for the Web browser and lag for the gamer.
Moreover, the download speed is only half the equation – Verizon and Adelphia upload speeds are capped between 128 kbps and 512 kbps, depending on the specific package.
A couple online games or a big e-mail can easily max out such a small pipe. And upload speed can also affect download speeds.
By contrast, over 43 percent of households in Japan have access to 100 Mbps fiber optic lines. That’s more than 25 times faster than anything we can get in Westwood.
And it’s dirt-cheap in Japan – average costs per 1 Mbps were about $1.57 in May 2003. Compare that to about $29.43 here for the same 1 Mbps.
In the United States, the FCC just changed how it regulates fiber optics, and telecommunications companies no longer have the excuse that regulation is slowing the spread of fiber optic cabling, a super-fast form of Internet service.
Verizon announced on Oct. 21 that it would expand its new fiber optic trials to nine states, reaching roughly 1 million customers, or 0.3 percent of the U.S. population, this year. SBC, which generally does not overlap with Verizon areas, has also promised its competing Project Lightspeed will bring fiber to 18 million customers within the next three years.
No one knows when these services will be widely available, but it will probably be some years, and it will spread like a patchwork.
As fiber slowly spreads, wireless Internet may become its main competitor. There are a couple of long-range wireless protocols being developed, including some that could potentially blanket entire cities. Officials in a small Massachusetts city called Newton announced Sunday they want to cover the entire town with wireless transmitters and charge residents about $10 a month to connect.
Similarly, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom promised on Oct. 21: “We will not stop until every San Franciscan has access to free wireless Internet service.” That sounds great, but what exactly is “free wireless Internet service”? I know San Francisco is a utopia rivaled only by heaven itself, but nothing is truly free on earth.
Wireless Internet for all sounds great, but these officials may be jumping the gun. Again, it will be costly. There are also potential legal questions – does the city want all the liability issues associated with being an Internet service provider? As someone who’s set up a fair share of wireless networks, I can safely say they do not often work as advertised.
Back in Japan, researchers just tested a prototype cell phone which can download at over 130 Mbps. I wonder how long before that shows up here ...
Lazzaro is a fourth-year political science and psychology student and editorial development director for the Daily Bruin. E-mail him at dlazzaro@media.ucla.edu.
advertise
contact us
top of page