"But New York City, now considered the epicenter of the virus in the U.S., saw download speeds drop by 24% last week, compared to the previous 10-week range. That said, NYC home network connections, which have a median speed of nearly 52 Mbps, are managing."
It took me a few times reading it to understand what this is trying to say. What they mean is that many of these cities that are showing slowdowns already had higher-than-average median speeds. Many of the cities that aren't seeing slowdowns were already pretty slow to begin with. E.g. Chicago has only slowed down 10% but its median speed is only 26.79 mbps.
If most of the fastest internet speeds are in offices, and people start working from home where slower speeds are located than average speed will decline.
If I want to download a particularly big file, I use tethering via my phone. Seriously, about 90Mbit/s download on the phone, that's faster than most places I've worked and also faster than my home connection.
It was so obviously better, that I switched home to be on 4G instead of ADSL, because the 4G was both cheaper and faster. It's working out well, but the phone still manages to be faster than the router.
I tether my iPad to my 4G phone because the latency/bandwidth is much higher than my home internet (40mbps).
I ran Speedtest on my phone vs my desktop with a wired connection to the router and learned that my 4G wireless connection was faster.
enterprise connections pay a premium, and smallish employers often don't want to spend money on monthly expenditures, so mostly ~50-200mbit shared between all people at the office
You can get 1g down, 50mbit up for less than a tenth of that with cable for example. We used that line heavily and I loved it, but I'm still unsure if I should rather have spent the money differently.
We've moved now to a WeWork Style Location ( Studio from Tishman Speyer ) and are down to 100/100, have put our vpn equipment in a datacenter for 70€/m and nobody complains.
They do know that consumer internet is asymmetrical and not practicable for real work.
FYI ELM (ethernet last mile) at 70Mbs in the UK costs about £70 pm
if your business relies on connectity, best to avoid it.
Also there is no need for the kind of language. It definitely isn't helping your argument so you might just as well drop it.
Office work does not require fast Internet access and does not require that your Youtube videos load instantly.
We did some research and it seems broadband Internet access does not improve productivity and may actually reduce it.
Any minuscule increase in productivity (I mean a total of 5 minutes of loading times per employee per day) is meaningless. People can't focus on their real work for 8 hours straight. When Internet works faster, people just use more of it and are less selective about how they use it. People also get quickly used to increased performance and will be complaining at almost any performance point.
Another research on build times showed that hugely increased build times don't improve productivity either. At first yes -- people get excited. But then, when build times are very short (say 5s compared to 10m) most (but not all) developers just stop staring constantly at their IDE and thinking about how to structure their code and instead reduce their iteration to a minimum (say couple of lines of code) and just restart to see if it works. This seems to actually reduce quality of produced code.
Milli-bit per second? Really?
And no matter how hard we try, half are below the median!
Not sure how 'net neutrality' would factor into that - a free-for-all would mean it might happen more, but a pay-as-you-go would eliminate a whole class of users. A hard problem.
Its a product of non-neutral nets, where by definition they do something by a rule (instead of randomly for instance).
And even randomly dropping (neutrality?) stresses certain subsets of network traffic more than other e.g. video can recover from dropped packets; TCP traffic not so much. Again stymying certain classes of activity more than others.
That being said, schools doing distance learning over low bandwidth dsl or fixed wireless is going to be interesting...
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Utilities_Service
Market solutions don't work for disadvantaged communities, we've learnt that lesson repeatedly.
Answering your presumption: no, that's not what I mean at all.
My uncle lives about 50 miles west of Minneapolis/St. Paul, and unless he wants to pay more than his entire (fixed) monthly income, his only option is dial-up. Cell data isn't even very good out there.
Lots of people in the US in rural areas are going to be entirely shut out of schools and businesses for the duration.
For your uncle- I know that both suburban and rural providers in my area are providing various "COVID19 lifeline" deals, including fixed wireless operators serving some super rural locations. Might be worth looking into.
And weird in a sense that the US actually has/had a chance to use other country's hindsight and is not doing it.
The US is 328 millions of people in a country 3.8 million square miles.
For different reasons, its playing out similarly?
"Netflix to cut streaming quality in Europe for 30 days" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-51968302
https://startyourownisp.com along with dsl reports and ubiquiti forums have info on planning small ISPs
The fact that they are oversubscribed to the point where it doesn’t work well in an emergency would not be such a big deal - except that they are granted a moat.
They can and should be held to a higher standard as a result. The term “critical infrastructure” comes to mind.
I am not sure what is happening. It is obvious WOW lifted caps on me and I am actually benefiting, but I am not sure how that is possible since everyone near me ia streaming something.
I wonder if the undersea cables have become overwhelmed in the past few days.
Living in less densely populated areas does have its advantages at times.