25Mbps is the new 'broadband', as FCC votes in favor of defining new minimum speed

[Poke]

Sounds good to me..

http://www.neowin.net/news/25mbps-i...-votes-in-favor-of-defining-new-minimum-speed

 

[Ilya]

That's a very good decision! And a rather unexpected one.
So now, under the new definition, if you have Broadband - you should be able to stream 4K!

 

[Foxbat]

Well, suddenly I no longer have "broadband" service. My AT&T U-verse maxes out at 20 Mbps!

 

[thomasjk]

My Time Warner is also not broadband by that definition.

 

[Ilya]

Well, at least you have Internet!

 

[thomasjk]

Yes. Expensive at 54.99/mo. for 20Mbps.

 

[osu1991]

Yes. Expensive at 54.99/mo. for 20Mbps.

Shoot that's cheap. I pay $55 a month for 6mb DSL from windstream at my lake house, $75 total for Phone and DSL.

 

[navychop]

50/50 FiOS here, plus land line. Don't ask.

 

[StanDarsh]

so...what's this gonna do for people like me...in rural, backwoods alabama where they pipe in sunlight....we have...*cough*DSL....
But it's 6meg down, half a meg upload...
I don't foresee AT&T scrambling to fix anything about their pitiful speeds in rural areas, but I could be wrong....
I think, like always, they will run crying to their lobbyists in DC with the "it's not fair" speech in-hand, and manage to get around any sort of requirement of them...
Or they'll do like they wanted a couple years ago, and sell their last mile copper POTS and DSL to some struggling company with barely enough capital to survive...essentially dumping their problem in someone else's lap.
But I bet they keep their fiber loops....just so they can charge access fees to the company that falls victim to buying their last-mile stuff.

I shouldn't have to buy 2 DSL lines, with 2 modems, separate networks, and divide up my broadband-hungry devices among the two DSL lines just to have a somewhat enjoyable time with my streaming devices.
And there are very few people who can afford to be extorted twice a month for the same service ...so they are stuck with even less than what I got.

 

[Ilya]

As I understand, there is no requirement to up the speeds to 25 mbps. Phone companies can continue offering slower Internet, DSL and such. They just can't call it "Broadband" anymore.
But because this will make them look bad, companies will be pressured to up the speeds.

 

[Ronnie-]

As I understand, there is no requirement to up the speed to 25 mbps. Phone companies can continue offering slower Internet, DSL and such. They just can't call it "Broadband" anymore.

Which is why I do not see why this would be considered big news really. It likely will not change a thing for most people.

 

[Ilya]

I am sure it will. Shareholders will not like seeing the Broadband subscriber numbers going down.

 

[klang]

But who is going to pay for these increased speeds?

Don't want to step into politics but I'll bet this is a prelude to everyone having a 'right' to broadband internet access.

 

[osu1991]

They are already arguing that the Universal Service Fee needs to be raised now, because of this new broadband definition.

http://www.multichannel.com/news/fcc/fcc-25-mbps-decision-draws-diverse-crowd/387460

NTCA: The Rural Broadband Association was cautiously supportive, but used the move to push for more Universal Service Funding to keep pace. Those are the subsidies to help provide service in uneconomical-to-build areas, mostly rural

 

[StanDarsh]

It'll be years before anything will be forced upon them in a rural scenario. I'm sitting on a fiber loop and still, because of the equipment that fiber runs into, I can only get 6 meg / .5 meg.
If I could just get 15/5, or even 12/4, I'd be grateful. And at $57/month (was $54 until this month when they sent me their "$3 increase" reasons.) Multiply that by 2...I still, even with two lines, don't get to a 20 meg total...And that nets me a total upload of .84meg, real world speeds.