Japanese Internet vs. North American Internet (work, ISP, network, access)

[Dude111]

This is a SPEED TEST comparison between an ISP in canada and one in Japan

http://giveupinternet.com/2008/12/23...e-internet-pic

The one in japan IS FREE and is blazing fast!!


Whats wrong with this picture?

[thecoalman]

Nothing is free, they are paying for it somewhere like with taxes, higher costs for other consumer goods or something else. If you wanted to make a fair comparison you would need an equation that divides it by the area someone could expect service like that. In the article they are pointing out both are from a city location suggesting the population density is not an issue, that is false because Canada is most likely spending a large amount of funds to serve more rural areas, those funds can't be utilized for faster service in more densely populated areas.

[NJBest]

This makes sense to me... what do you feel is wrong?

[KaaBoom]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Nothing is free, they are paying for it somewhere like with taxes, higher costs for other consumer goods or something else. If you wanted to make a fair comparison you would need an equation that divides it by the area someone could expect service like that. In the article they are pointing out both are from a city location suggesting the population density is not an issue, that is false because Canada is most likely spending a large amount of funds to serve more rural areas, those funds can't be utilized for faster service in more densely populated areas.

Thats is not the point. They are comparing Tokyo to Toronto. Which both have a pretty comparable population density. About a 3 to 2 difference. Tokyo - Density 5,847/km2 vs Toronto 3,972/km2. Yet broadband speed is 10 x faster in Tokyo.

The excuse that broadband is slower in North America, because of the vast wilderness areas, is also not relevant. Because the major telecommunications companies that serve major metro areas like Toronto don't provide service in the wilderness. There is no high-speed internet on the tundra in Northern Canada, so it doesn't count.

Internet service to rural areas of North America is still typically provided by dial-up. If broadband service exists at all in rural areas, its mobile broadband, satellite broadband, or provided by independent companies/coops.

The major telecommunications wouldn't touch rural areas with a ten foot pole. At the same time, in the areas they do serve. They refuse to provide service comparable to what Asians, or Europeans receive in areas with similar population density. They just continue to maximize their profits by charging more, for less, and investing little in their infrastructure.

[Peregrine]

Originally Posted by KaaBoom

Thats is not the point. They are comparing Tokyo to Toronto. Which both have a pretty comparable population density. About a 3 to 2 difference. Tokyo - Density 5,847/km2 vs Toronto 3,972/km2. Yet broadband speed is 10 x faster in Tokyo.

2 THOUSAND people MORE in Tokyo per square km??
I wouldn't call that even remotely comparable.

[Xanathos]

Population density doesn't matter. If anything, it works against Japan. A more dense population means more saturation of the pipe and a need to spread bandwidth thinner. Yet they have no problems. Meanwhile up here, we've got our ISP's telling us that they have to charge us $140 a month for half of the speed you get in Japan because they're just so strained. When I lived in Portland, my Fios service was actually rolling out 100 meg service. Cost an arm and a leg though. The actual cost to Frontier to increase my bandwidth from 15 to 100? About 3 cents a month. What they were going to charge me? An extra $100 a month. It's a scam.

[KaaBoom]

Originally Posted by Peregrine

2 THOUSAND people MORE in Tokyo per square km??
I wouldn't call that even remotely comparable.

Yes, six thousand vs four thousand. So how do you rationalize 50% more density, justifying 1000% faster internet, at lower cost? Anyway I'm pretty sure that many parts of Toronto are actually more dense then Tokyo. A lot, if not most people in Toronto live in high-rise buildings. Tokyo is very densely built with very small homes and low to mid-rise buildings. There are a lot more potential customers in a 40 story apartment building then six story one, even if the units are smaller in Tokyo. It doesn't matter though, the people in a Toronto high-rise still pay more for less, then people in Tokyo. And the landmass of Canada has nothing to do with it.

[Bo]

Internet access in Asia is faster because the infrastructure in most countries there was built initially as a fiber-optic network. The US still relies on slower copper to move signals around in large percentages of the country. In addition, the government subsidies are much lower in the US..

[KaaBoom]

Originally Posted by Bo

Internet access in Asia is faster because the infrastructure in most countries there was built initially as a fiber-optic network. The US still relies on slower copper to move signals around in large percentages of the country. In addition, the government subsidies are much lower in the US..

Nice try but that is simply not correct. Fiber-optic networks are a relatively new technology, developed in the last forty years. The telecommunications system in Asia, like all developed countries predates that. They were build with copper wire in the early 1900s. The companies in Asia have just been faster to replace copper with fiber, and that has happened almost entirely in the last ten years.

* US-Japan Development of Broadband Access

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Xanathos

Population density doesn't matter.

Sure it does, for example I live in an area where you might have 1 house every 10 to 20 acres. These areas have cable, certainly this type of semi rural area is going to cost much more per household to service.

As I originally posted if you wanted to make fair comparison you would have to account for the areas like this. You're going to have many more people in the US in areas like this with service driving the costs up. For example:

Tunkhannock, PA - Google Maps

That area has cable, if you follow any of the major routes in any direction you'll have cable access. It isn't until you get way off the beaten path you might not have access. Pretty much the entire northeast looks similar to this. Ceetainly all of the land shouldn't fall into this but certainly you need to account for rural and semi rural areas that do have access.

I have access to cable here:

Tunkhannock, PA - Google Maps


Nothing but farms and forest around the area.