Saying things like “up to 25 Mbps” is well and good, but it doesn’t fix the problem that ISPs don’t invest in ensuring the availability of sufficient network bandwidth for speeds to actually be what is promised, and doesn’t fix the problem that the definition of bandwidth should be well beyond 25 Mbps by this point, with a minimum upload speed of far beyond the laughable 3 Mbps minimum.
Yeah, definitions need to be updated to reflect modern standards. As it is currently, “broadband” is a very outdated term, with 100/20 DSL still included under the broadband umbrella. But many people would agree that 100Mbps DSL is far too slow to count as modern broadband, and companies shouldn’t be able to market it as such.
There are also big issues with companies marketing “fiber” service, but it’s really just a fiber trunk line to the neighborhood, with copper for the last quarter mile to each individual home. It means customers don’t get a true fiber experience, (like symmetrical up/down speeds) because they’re still bottlenecked by the copper run. It also means they still have issues with things like massive throttling during peak hours, because the aging copper infrastructure can’t support modern needs.
Didn’t realize the minimum broadband definition was finally increased last month, though I agree that even 100 Mbps, and especially 20 Mbps upload, is keeping standards a decade behind what they should be. With how essential internet access is in the modern economy, particularly for low-income and rural areas that internet providers won’t voluntarily serve to the best of their abilities, it should really be regulated at the same level as other utilities.
Saying things like “up to 25 Mbps” is well and good, but it doesn’t fix the problem that ISPs don’t invest in ensuring the availability of sufficient network bandwidth for speeds to actually be what is promised, and doesn’t fix the problem that the definition of bandwidth should be well beyond 25 Mbps by this point, with a minimum upload speed of far beyond the laughable 3 Mbps minimum.
Yeah, definitions need to be updated to reflect modern standards. As it is currently, “broadband” is a very outdated term, with 100/20 DSL still included under the broadband umbrella. But many people would agree that 100Mbps DSL is far too slow to count as modern broadband, and companies shouldn’t be able to market it as such.
There are also big issues with companies marketing “fiber” service, but it’s really just a fiber trunk line to the neighborhood, with copper for the last quarter mile to each individual home. It means customers don’t get a true fiber experience, (like symmetrical up/down speeds) because they’re still bottlenecked by the copper run. It also means they still have issues with things like massive throttling during peak hours, because the aging copper infrastructure can’t support modern needs.
Didn’t realize the minimum broadband definition was finally increased last month, though I agree that even 100 Mbps, and especially 20 Mbps upload, is keeping standards a decade behind what they should be. With how essential internet access is in the modern economy, particularly for low-income and rural areas that internet providers won’t voluntarily serve to the best of their abilities, it should really be regulated at the same level as other utilities.