ASG11 said:
I disagree. While
ADSL commands a major share in US, it has equal competition from Cable. That alone is enough to drive ADSL service providers to ramp up the speeds. Check the link below.Out of Top 10 service providers, 5 are on cable and 2 out of top 3 are on cable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_the_United_States#Leading_broadband_providers Having said that, its a matter of policy as well. While countries in developed world(eg US again) have a Internet/Broadband policy to drive growth with specific targets, the developing world has other important issues to take care of first.
Despite what it might try to tell you, "the world" doesn't mean "the USA". The share in the US is about 55% cable 45% DSL (give or take) but this is not true almost anywhere else on the planet, where the statistics from last years Broadband World Forum said the share of ADSL is in the high 80s (percentage wise). Again, worldwide.Secondly, the situation in the US is pretty poor - I can pretty safely say that because I'm writing this post
from the US.
Like in India, access to a given provider depends on where you live. If you live in AT&T territory, good luck getting Comcast. If you live in Time Warner territory, good luck getting Verizon. Etc. There are very few places where actual competition exists and so providers are absolutely *not* driven to increase their speeds. The DSL providers especially - for the most part - simply *CAN NOT* increase their speeds.
For some of those providers (*cough* AT&T), in most areas it's due to aging infrastructure which will only support a maximum of 6mbit/s. I've heard reports that they're just letting it die in some areas then ripping it out and not bothering to replace it, let alone upgrade it - not even to ADSL2+ - and forget about VDSL or better! Yes, AT&T does have it's VDSL U-verse product but it is *not* widely available and as a result, a significant percentage of it's customers are on sub 3mbit/s connections because that's all they can get.
Additionally, not all services are available in all markets. If you're in, say, Chicago, yes, Comcast might have a 105mbit/s plan for you (actually I think they go higher now) but if you live in some other smaller town, then maybe not.
IMO, broadbandmap.gov would be a better resource than Wikipedia to determine what the situation is like on the ground, even if it is not completely accurate.
And it's not exactly similar in Canada but it's not great either. I was there in July and observed that most of the DSL providers are Bell or Telus resellers (depending on which side of Canada you're on) but then it pretty much boils down to "what Bell says, goes".
I've said it before and I'll say it again: North America is a pretty poor yardstick to measure Internet services by, and an awful target to aim for.
It should also be noted that many countries outside of the developed world have broadband plans with specific targets - India included. I am personally highly critical of the NBP. The fact that, unlike many countries, the NBP is not enforced - which is a big problem. And, a lot of the thinking is wrong or illogical or the reverse of what it should be - which is also a big problem. But then based on what it does contain, it's really no different than any other piece of paper that's been through a government committee anywhere else in the world.