9 Comments

Summary:

Two-thirds of U.S. homes subscribe to broadband today, up from one-fifth five years ago, according to data released today by the Leichtman Research Group. The firm found that the more money a household has, the more likely it is to have a computer and broadband access […]

Two-thirds of U.S. homes subscribe to broadband today, up from one-fifth five years ago, according to data released today by the Leichtman Research Group. The firm found that the more money a household has, the more likely it is to have a computer and broadband access (see chart). The study also revealed that only 4 percent of subscribers were unsatisfied with their broadband service, and about 29 percent would be interested in faster services. However, 37 percent didn’t feel a need to boost their speeds. In line with other surveys, Leichtman found that 3 percent of Internet subscribers say broadband is not available in their area. So in addition to policies encouraging the buildout of broadband infrastructure, the government should also be thinking about getting computers to lower-income homes and teaching folks the advantages that come with using broadband.

income

  1. watching trends at my small computer shop that caterings overwhelmingly to the financially strapped I bet that the major bulk of those without broadband now will be getting it in the form of mobile broadband. these user do not now and have no intention in the fuiture to get either a landline or cable TV. they also tend to live in a transient nature that just means mobile broadband makes a lot more sense than wired; this even despit the downsides of speed and bandwidth caps.

    Share
  2. i am looking at the stats and wonding if have a service like criket(or other cellular) broadband is qualified as being a broadband subscriber.

    Share
  3. > So in addition to policies encouraging the buildout of broadband infrastructure,

    With 97% coverage, the remaining folks are intentionally off the grid. Why should we spend money on them?

    > the government should also be thinking about getting computers to lower-income homes and teaching folks the advantages that come with using broadband.

    Bzzt. You’re assuming that they’d be better off if only they had access to valleywag and free porn.

    Share
    1. Stacey Higginbotham Wednesday, June 10, 2009

      Andy, i can search for better deals on major purchases online, track my spending, learn about medical diagnoses, pay my auto registration and parking tickets without going to the courts and a host of other things that save me time and money. I do think everyone is better off with access to those types of services. Plus it’s not saying there’s 97 percent coverage, the survey says 3 percent who want broadband can’t get it. It’s possible there are more people who don’t have access who don’t want it.

      Share
      1. Katja Armitanis Friday, July 10, 2009

        As one of those 3% who would LOVE having broadband access that can’t get it, I can sympathize. The ONLY option available in my area is satellite and that’s more expensive than I could ever feasibly squeeze into my budget. We subsist on dial-up, but I constantly have to go to a friends’ house or the library to access information and websites for schoolwork and for everyday chores that other people take for granted.

        I’d love to be able to pay my bills online and save on postage. I’d love to be able to buy things online and save myself on gas and time.

        Assuming people with low income only want broadband for “valleywag and porn” is a snobby and superior statement. What’s so wrong with us wanting the same advantages as the rest of the country that has access to broadband?

        Share
  4. [...] brag about their symmetrical fiber connections and ultra-band service from Comcast or Cablevision, millions of people are still languishing on DSL, satellite or even [...]

    Share
  5. So there are 100,000,000 people to do business with!

    America, here I come ;)

    Share
  6. Both of my houses in rural upstate SC don’t have broadband available. The house near Greenwood can get cellular internet, but the house in northern Geeenville country is in a valley that doesn’t have cellphone coverage (or broadcast TV coverage ever since it went digital). No DSL or cable in either locations.

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post