Oh,I'm just a poor man,at my parents home I got just a 256kbps connection for 12.95 € a month. Luckily at my home I got 10Mbps broadband via fiber optics, for 75 € a month ,voice traffic and cable TV included. I recently read that internet conncetion in the US are actually decreasing . After having lost the mobile communication race,are you losing the broadband race too??
Apples and oranges. The US is more sparsely populated in Europe. In many parts of the country, it is not economical to use mobile phone technology because the distances are too far. I think many Europeans fail to grasp that there are large regions of the US that have less than 1 person per square kilometer and that fewer Americans live in urban and suburban environments than Europeans. Mobile phones cost about the same as regular phones in the US so there isn't an economic incentive, but a mobile phone doesn't do you much good if you live in the boonies or regularly travel into the boonies, and many Americans do. Unless the US becomes urbanized to the extent that Europe is, you'll never see mobile phone penetration that is equivalent.
Incidentally, people who live in the boonies prefer to use VHF/UHF and CB radio for communication. Much better coverage and range than mobile phones and its free. People choose the solution that works for their environment.
Oh,I'm just a poor man,at my parents home I got just a 256kbps connection for 12.95 ? a month. Luckily at my home I got 10Mbps broadband via fiber optics, for 75 ?
Similar prices here, and for symmetric bandwidth. I actually have gigabit fiber to the Internet, but I'm special. WiFi is very common in the US as well, and most of the next generation wireless networking gear (to replace WiFi) is being produced by American companies, with bandwidth and scalability that far exceeds anything being deployed in Europe.
Again, one thing you fail to understand is that the US is a sparsely populated and only moderately urbanized country compared to Europe. Broadband is very dependent on distances; since the average network miles for a city with a given population in the US is much larger than the network miles for a city with the same population in Europe, it is vastly more expensive to wire everything up in the US. Europe does not engender any type of superiority for having tiny countries and cramped living conditions. This is the same reason a US PRI is slower than a European PRI; the distances involved means US networks have to add echo cancelers which eat bandwidth.
All the cities in the US are heavily criss-crossed with fiber, but that doesn't help you deliver bandwidth to individual buildings when a lateral costs $10k due to basic construction costs. Europeans live packed like sardines, so they can amortize lateral costs across many people, unlike the US where people are more spread out. It doesn't really matter though. The new ultra-fast wireless canopy technologies that are starting to come out in metros should bridge that gap pretty fast. Wireless works better and cheaper in places like the US. Fiber bandwidth in the US is all but free currently and quite frankly better than the European fiber networks, but putting in laterals is unreasonably expensive in most places due to the distances involved.