Options are Slim for Those without DSL or Cable
By James R. Hood
ConsumerAffairs.Com
Al Gore took a lot of heat for his slightly inflated version of his
role in the Internet's beginnings but, whatever else you may say about
it, the previous Administration at least appeared to be trying to
jump-start the Internet. The current masters of the universe seem to
think the "invisible hand of the marketplace" will cause broadband to
sprout like kudzu throughout the land, without (or in spite of)
needless interference from government.
The Federal Communications Commission, accordingly, stood aside as the
Bell companies devoured everything in sight, pausing between gulps to
say that new broadband networks would be coming soon. But while
high-speed Internet use by U.S. businesses and households rose 34
percent in 2004 to 37.9 million lines, according to FCC figures
released last week, the U.S. ranks 16th in broadband use among major
nations.
Digital subscriber line, or DSL, service increased 45 percent last
year to 13.8 million lines. Cable modem use climbed 30 percent to 21.4
million lines. Other Internet connections using wireless and satellite
increased by 50 percent to 500,000 last year, the FCC said, while use
of optical fiber and powerlines rose 16 percent to 700,000.
In a column published in Thursday's Wall Street Journal, FCC Chairman
Kevin Martin vows that broadband deployment is his "highest priority."
Perhaps, but that's not of much comfort to the millions of Americans
still without broadband service -- not all of them in Short Pump,
Virginia, or Happy, Texas. Some are in "undesirable" big-city
neighborhoods, others in affluent suburbs that for one reason or
another aren't wired for DSL or cable and some are just in-between,
traveling, vacationing or working outside the office.
The United States is a pretty big place, after all, and the natural
inclination of any businessperson is to concentrate his service where
it will reach the biggest number of potential customers with the
lowest possible delivery costs. These days, that generally means that
downtown areas and middle-class neighborhoods are the most likely to
have broadband service from either a cable company or the local
telephone company, or, as is often the case, both.
And everyone else? Well, they are mostly out of luck. There's no doubt
things are changing and new services are coming. Verizon and SBC are
digging up streets throughout the land to install fiber to the home so
that they can compete with cable system by delivering high-definition
video. Of course, almost all of this activity is in areas where cable
and the telcos already provide broadband. It does nothing for those in
unserved areas.
While there is no shortage of complaints about DSL and cable Internet
services, the situation is much worse for those who can't get
broadband at all.
"The Internet is increasingly designed to be used with a high speed
connection," said Mark Huffman, a ConsumerAffairs.Com contributing
editor who moved to a rural area on Chesapeake Bay a few years
ago. "Every site is loaded with rich media. If you are on dial-up, its
very hard to use the Internet. It becomes very frustrating."
Working with Huffman, we explored various methods of getting broadband
service where none now exists. Contrary to what broadband providers
might think, Huffman found a great deal of interest among residents of
his somewhat sleepy village.
"In my county there is no broadband available, other than satellite. I
can tell you that every business owner I talked to about trying to
bring in wireless was enthusiastic about the idea, and willing to pay
a premium price to get it, if they could," Huffman said.
Here are a few of the services we explored:
Verizon Wireless Broadband
We found this expensive ($80 per month) service to be virtually
useless, whether in the sticks or under the Capitol dome. We could not
get it to work in the Washington, D.C., New York or Los Angeles metro
areas. It didn't work in the St. Louis airport or at the beach in
Delaware, to pick a few other examples. Where does this thing work, we
wondered? Answer: we don't know. See A Test of Verizon Wireless
Broadband for all the gory details. Warning: Sprint has announced it
is deploying the same technology. _Buyer beware of Sprint and Verizon_.
Fixed Wireless
Unlike the Verizon wireless card, some wireless broadband providers
offer what's called "fixed wireless" -- meaning it's not mobile. This
involves line-of-sight microwave transmission. Translation: towers. If you
are lucky enough to have such a service in your area, it may be the answer
if you are in its primary coverage area and don't have trees, mountains or
other obstructions blocking the signal path. It can work well, we're told.
We were not able to find any services we could test but we heard from one
consumer who's quite happy with her experience.
"We had satellite-based Starband, but found it slow and stupid about
multiple users," said Catherine of Sparks, Nevada. "So we got wireless
broadband from Amigo and we are very happy with it."
"The thing is that we essentially have a personal ISP -- the guy who
runs our area for Amigo.net knows us, our tech needs and is very
responsive (unlike our prior DSL experience elsewhere with
Verizon). Reminds me of when we used to have our power from a rural
electric coop -- a much friendlier experience!"
T-1
A T-1 is old technology but very stable. It is provided over a double
pair of plain old copper telephone lines and is available literally
anywhere in the U.S., if you're willing to pay for it. Line-haul
charges are steep outside major urban areas. The speed is about the
same as an average cable connection. Installation takes months and a
long-term contract is required.
A few years ago, driven nearly mad by Cox Communications' extremely
sporadic service and unable to get DSL in our neighborhood, we had a
T-1 installed at our home by a D.C. telecommunications provider who
asks not to be named (hey, we have enemies). The cost: $600 per
month. This may sound like an extravagance but we work at home quite a
bit of the time and reliability is essential.
Obviously, a T-1 is impractical for consumers and, in many cases, even
for technology-dependent businesses, as we learned when we tried to
price out a T-1 for Huffman.
We shopped around for a T-1 and found nothing under about $800 per
month. We were dubious of that quote since every other provider wanted
about $1,200. This obviously isn't a practical solution for most
individuals or small businesses.
Satellite
Still trying to get Huffman up and running, we surfed over to DirecTV
and found them offering a variety of consumer- and business-grade
packages under their DirecWay brand. This is not the old satellite
Internet that used a satellite for the downleg and a telephone
connection for the upleg -- some pretty cool spread-spectrum
technology handles the upleg. The business-grade package we bought
delivers speeds comparable to DSL. There was a $1,000 installation
charge and the monthly charge is about $99. For a business, this is
cheap. Consumer-grade packages start at around $50.
Don't say we told you this but you can buy the consumer package and
get a geekish friend to put up a Wi-Fi connection that your neighbors
can use. Maybe you can get them to chip in on the installation and
monthly tariff.
At the moment, DirecTV has the market pretty well to itself although
there is a new player that hopes to make some noise later this year,
we're told.
In the past, we have received some really bitter complaints from
consumers who found various satellite Internet services
annoying. There's no question that wireless communications will almost
always be somewhat less stable than wired; it's the nature of the
beast. Satellite transmissions are in the Ku band -- very high
frequency and thus more prone to interference from rain and
snow. Until the laws of physics are changed, you can expect service
degradation during bad weather.
Then there's the little matter of the speed of light. The
communications satellites are 26,000 miles out in space. A signal has
to go up from your dish to the bird and the downleg signal has to come
back down. That's 52,000 miles round trip. Look up the speed of light
and you can do the math; it works out to a noticeable split-second
delay between the time you click your mouse and the time the signal
hits the router on the bird. Is this a problem? We'd say that once you
understand what's happening, you can make a mental adjustment to allow
for it.
We have been around satellite communications a long time and respect
it greatly. It is amazingly effective and has the lowest environmental
overhead you can imagine -- no wires, no digging, no towers, very
slight power consumption. OK, some might find the dishes ugly but
that's an aesthetics argument. Personally, we find utility poles about
as ugly as anything. Dangerous, too. We spent an afternoon using the
DirecWay feed and found it as good if not better than the T-1's we use
at our office and at home.
Of course, not every DirecWay customer agrees, including Gary of
Lincoln, Missouri. "Service is very crappy. Slow, sometimes as bad as
dialup if not worse. I buy and sell on ebay so if the internet doesn't
work I lose big," Gary said.
Gary's complaint is similar to those often leveled at DSL and cable
providers as well. In many of these cases, the fault lies elsewhere --
slow servers, bogged-down DNS and, not infrequently, balkiness in the
user's PC. Inadequate memory, spyware, viruses, file fragmentation,
all can slow the display of Web pages.
Power Lines
It's a little puzzling why broadband Internet via electrical lines
hasn't taken off. The copper wires that deliver electricity to homes
and offices are capable of moving a lot of data at very low cost but
the technology just hasn't gotten the attention it would seem to
deserve.
That may be changing, though. A Maryland company that provides
high-speed Internet access over electrical power lines last week
received a major investment from Google Inc., the Hearst Corp. and
Goldman Sachs. Current Communications Group declined to disclose
financial terms of the investment though the Wall Street Journal
reported that it approached $100 million.
If the FCC stays out of the picture, maybe this will go somewhere.
Dial-Up
There's no question: dial-up just doesn't get it anymore. Even if you
never download audio or video files, most Web sites now have such fat
pages that it's a very frustrating proposition to be stuck on a
dial-up connection. The experience just isn't the same.
That being said, we would have to admit we sometimes get more done on
the rare occasions when we must rely on dial-up connections. We find
ourselves spending more time writing and editing, even thinking, less
time reading the latest inflammatory e-mails.
Then there's the matter of cost: dial-up is cheap, assuming you don't
fall for the high-priced brands like AOL, MSN and Earthlink. We seldom
issue outright recommendations but here are two dial-up ISP providers
we have used with great success when stuck in nowheresville:
localnet.com and highstream.net. Both have plans under $10 per month
that will provide dial-up access from most parts of the country. As
always, you must be sure to select a dial-up number that is within
your local calling area.
So?
So, what to do if you're living in an area without cable or DSL
broadband? We'd say satellite is the best option, at least for
now. For road warriors and those on temporary assignments, we don't
have a good answer, other than an inexpensive dial-up plan, a list of
hotel chains that offer free high-speed access and a willingness to
hang around Internet cafes. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. At
least for now.
Copyright 2003-2005 ConsumerAffairs.Com Inc.
NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.
James R. Hood (consumeraffairs@telecom-digest.org)