Retrasado said:
The areas of the US that are near major cities DO have great internet access (with no download caps I might add) However, for the significant portion of the population that does NOT live near major cites, it is far more patchy. And btw, the US does have an excuse. as you can see in the following maps, the U.S's population is spread out much more than Australia's:
Notice how the vast majority of Australia's population is clustered near the southeastern coast with only a few other areas (notably Perth and Cairns-Townsville) having major population clusters. In contrast, nearly half of the US (<1,300,000 sq mi/3,300,000 km2) has a significant population concentration. This presents a far far greater challenge to building an adequate fiber network that Australia will ever have to deal with.
|
.08 times 300 million = 24 million
@OMG, Yes you are right, 8% of US is bigger, that is my point. Theoretically, it would be harder to organize this.
But in reality, not plans theoretical plans, the U.S. provides broadband internet to more square miles than any other country, it is affordable with no caps and almost no censorship.
Everyone wants to hate on the U.S. all the time for something. Hate the foreign policy, not everything else. (Don't hate the playa, hate game.)
Also, the states have a lot of Control over this stuff. Some mid-western state choose not to put upgrades into the budget and bring down the National average.
Higher max speeds are available in the U.S., but many people choose not to buy this service. I have 3mbps, I can get upto 10 for $10 extra. I don't need it though. This phenomena also brings down the national average.
I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.







