This is simply insane and sickening at how much the US is being held back by the Faustian bargain between telecoms and the Bush Administration/Congress. . . . And I can barely imagine what it'd be like to use the Internet with 93 kbps!

Is this really what we ned to concern ourselves with?
First - it isn't the technology. It's what you do with it. I know a lot of guys with thousands invested in golf clubs who can't play for shit. Likewise, I know many excellent engineers and physisist who go quite fine with a slow DSL.

Second - if you gave everyone in the country a 93kbps connection, 90% of that broadband would go to porn and downloading pirated entertainment.

Broadband is too expensive, however, the download speeds aren't very troublesome. Nobody needs 90+ Mbps (or 10 for that matter) in their home. That's silly. I telecommute 2 days a week as a database administrator\developer. There's absolutely nothing I can't do with 4Mbps. I'd much rather the concentration be on making the technology more affordable than spending large amounts upgrading infrastructure simply to keep up with developed nations who have smaller populations.(Thereby using less bandwidth.) Once you get to a certain speed the law of diminishing return kicks in and you receive no benefit. How much porn does one need to download all at once anyway?

Just because the above two posters don't need fast Internet speeds doesn't mean that the rest of the population might not find a good use for them. And to claim that all fast Internet connections are used for is porn is disingenuous and subverting the argument.
Who knows what interesting applications might be created when everyone has fast (symmetrical) network connections that are not blocked, degraded and ruined by Telcos?
I would consider a 100Mb symmetrical connection baseline and 1Gbps ideal. This is for upload too, not just download. Static IP addresses, no blocked ports, no deep packet inspection, no ad injection, and the ability to run whatever service you wish should also be "baseline" service.

The telcos want to become the gatekeepers of the Internet, controlling what we see, what we post and how we communicate. Other countries actually allow true Internet connectivity - unlike the USA where corporations rule the roost.

I don't think America should start beating itself up about this - you've got a huge landmass and unless your a teenager downloading pirated videos and music the speed isn't going to make a big difference.

The average bandwitdh given for France is absurd.

The top bandwidth is 22Mbs in some of the biggest cities, but I doubt the average to be above 5Mbs. Probably more something like 2Mbs or so.

For info, I am French, and we do have an excellent broadband infrastructure.

To speak of the next president is an absurdity! I don't give a twit about broadband, broads yes! There will be no change with the next election. For anyone banking on it you lost! Two candidates from the same Oligarchy is what you are getting. They are both beholding to the shadow government that runs this country. You know that, I hope and if you don't take down this blog site!

The numbers are strange. I live in France, and I don't know of widely available broadband offers here for over 24 Mbps (article claims an average of 44).

For price, there are offers of 20 Mbps at 15 euros ($23), much lower than the $31 quoted for FI. We pay 30 euros for 24 Mbps + 100 channels of TV + unlimited phone service to 70 countries. Price and speed have been at this level for a few years now.

I'm also very surprised to see Germany rate so low, but I don't have any personal experience with their broadband market.

@dan: you lack imagination, 4 Mbps will soon seem as quaint as ISDN. But I agree with you that broadband should be much cheaper.

Wonder what Japan would think of the 900 bites per my Internet service provider generously provided me with the other night.......

900 *BITES*

Schmokin'..!

Yeah I have seen this stats before....I really would like to know why/how Japan has that kind of bandwidth

As a rural resident and self-employed netizen, I can say for a fact that just because two yoyos don't need broadband for anything but porn, doesn't mean that it's not a necessity for the rural small business person. I have actually lost contracts because of the slow (and still VERY expensive) satellite "broadband" that I can buy out here in the sticks. "Broadband" on quotes because it's HALF the speed of the not very fast cable internet we had in the city and costs TWICE as much. That's a value fact or of four times. Rural broadband is the rural electrification of the 21st century. It's NEVER going to be commercially viable to run cable out here, a mere 12 miles from a town of 22,000 and 30 minutes from a metro area of 1.5 MILLION. It's NEVER going to be something that a private company does unless liberally reimbursed by the government. And it damns HALF the population of the US to living with either cheap dial up or expensive satellite, neither of which are particularly fast or functional. If Information is the wave of the future and 40% of the population can't access it and can't participate in the information economy, then information isn't going to be much of an economy even if the haves slightly outnumber the have-nots.

For me, I am looking forward to my husband's pending military orders to Japan. I suspect I'll be better able to do business from half way across the world than I will be from across the county.

I notice that Japan is no longer one of the top 15 countries for broadband penetration. I don't think that broadband is as affordable in Japan as the author implies. When I lived in Japan, there were large installation fees, and the actual monthly cost was quite a bit more than that quoted in the article. I think that there are "fees" that are not included in the base cost.

Right now I live in South Korea. Installation fees are insignificant. However, internet is more expensive outside of the big cities which is explains South Korea's drop from first to eleventh.

This is hardly a reasonable issue to make your decision based on. Abortions are legal and we're worried about our internets not being fast enough. pathetic

Well, I happen to use the Internet more often than I have abortions.

It will be a shorter list if you rank us in all the catagories in which we are in the 1ST 3, from the top; for the last 8 years,i.e., Education, Technology, etc...

I think this comparison ignores something very important. America is much large country geographically and is much more spread out in its population. Wiring up rural and suburban neighborhoods is expensive.

As with telecom access, the cost per user in rural areas is not economical or it would be in place by now.

Rather than trying to hard wire the world for broadband service, those rural areas can be very easily serviced with cellular, cable, or satelite access.

We should have learned this with the railroads. Government forcing passenger service to unprofitable routes because someone, some time, some where might decide to go on a trip.
So what was their solution?

AMTRACK!

Now,someone has figured out that maybe the government can't do it better.

Same thing is happening in the Airline Industry.

If someone chooses to live in the rural areas, they have to give up some of those big city advantages and live the simpler life.

If we gave a motorized scooter to every handicaped person and provided free lemosine service, it would have been cheaper for both the private and public sectors than all of the retrofiting in existing structures. It is fine to have a plan with a target date but everyone doesn't have to receive services at the same moment in time. New construction needs to be regulated and infracture must be provided accordingly.

The wireless industry would welcome the opportunity to increase its customer base and probably increase the bandwith. Prices would go down and access increase.

How long before some other service will be the one everyone has to be provided?

Kind of a long way to get to the point.

DLG

I don't know where these numbers come from but I am downloading at 900 Kbps using Optonline in CT. I convert 10Kbps to be 1KBps (start and stop bits + 8).