« In which your author, seeking a remedy for good cheer, ingests a lethal dose of the Wall Street Journal | bluemeanie's Blog | Note to David Frum: if you can't solo, stick with the chorus »
NetZero Equals Net ... Zero
NetZero is running ads for its $9.95 monthly internet service. The pitch? You can save hundreds of dollars per year by trading down from broadband to dialup.
I'm not knocking NetZero for trying to capitalize on an opportunity to pick up market share. However, this might be an object lesson in why trusting our infrastructure to the private sector -- or neglecting it altogether, take your pick -- is turning the United States into a second-tier economic power.
Broadband shouldn't be the Cadillac of internet transportation. It should be the Corolla. If you can get online for 10 bucks, maybe we should be asking why it costs five times that for cable or DSL.
Advertisement
Competition can be good.
January 11, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Competition is necessary. But broadband connectivity is table stakes in a 21st century economy. Make the pipeline available to all and then encourage robust competition for internet services.
January 11, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want access for all. I know that is your point.
That a nobody like myself can have access to all this information and then be able to have my voice heard, even by two or three readers, is a godsend.
More and more there are walls going up; NYT and Wash Post are in trouble. If you do not send in money, you cannot read much. Roll call will not let me read anything.
At any rate, I understand their reasoning. But I do not like to see anything interfering with this magic carpet for the masses.
January 11, 2009 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
And while we listen to things like this NetZero promo, most other nations in the world have broadband that makes our higher end cable or DSL packages look creaky and antiquated by comparison.
It's the same debate in many sectors. We, who claim to be the nation of innovation, are letting what we have, use, and need remain stagnant, while across the world, others are leapfrogging past us in many ways. Broadband communications, energy efficiencies, public transport, and "the social contract" to name three.
Sure, NetZero, let's have a very few profit while the rest of everything falls apart. That's progress, isn't it?
From which direction will the Visigoths come?
January 11, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
They'll probably be coming through the internet. But don't worry. At 56k you'll have plenty of time to get ready.
You are absolutely right. For the past decade, our "innovators" have been focused on trying to make money out of money. You see how well that turned out.
January 11, 2009 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
On a good day, I connect at 26k. Does that mean the Visigoths will get me last?
Seriously though, after reading the comments on this blog, the thought occurred to me that bringing broadband to all of us could bring a new opportunity to not only the ISP's but to NYT, WaPo, and the other paper mediums finding themselves in trouble.
I would be willing to pony up an extra dollar on my internet bill for the ability to read the NYT or any other paper, maybe a few magazines as well, ones I could select from a list or something. I'd give my $1 to the ISP, the ISP would negotiate with the print media with our collected $'s, the print media could pay the reporters and columnists and make their money with the same advertising they do now only on the web pages instead of paper pages.
We'd get to read the news online and everybody would be happy (or almost everybody...I reckon there would be some irate out of work printers). Follow how satellite tv does their thing.
Just thinking out loud here.
Just as a completely useless and random note....in 2003 I asked my ISP when they were going to come through with broadband for me. 2008, I was told. I waited 5 years. It's 2009. Still no broadband. I think they might have forgotten about me. I thought the middle of nowhere, where I currently reside, was getting closer to somewhere all the time. It seems I was mistaken.
January 11, 2009 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is an excellent point. I was thinking (while typing the comment below) that broadband providers could do well to sell a lower-tier of service for users who don't do as much.
A big problem is that it costs quite a bit for the infrastructure upgrade to provide internet. The cable companies are not putting up the money until they see enough business to recoup their investment. The industrial west areas of Las Vegas didn't have service back in '02 (and maybe still don't) because they didn't think they could sell enough service for the investment to pencil within 10 years. I had to buy a *^$% T1 to get the service class I needed.
For your larger idea, the cable company wouldn't even need to negotiate with the print media. The media sites are already globally accessible. They would really need to program limits (by site in your scenario) somewhere along the line between the modem and the central router. Ideally, the media companies are making money by advertising to you once you arrive at their site - and might even pay the service providers for being put on the list.
January 11, 2009 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
My point exactly. Thanks for your comment.
January 11, 2009 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
NetZero isn't actually investing in dialup infrastructure. They are selling into the UUNET dialup backbone (by whatever name Verizon gives it these days) that has existed since the 80s - and that I imagine has quite a bit of excess capacity at this point. Their pitch makes sense. For low volume users who check their email every couple of days and maybe look at pictures of the grandkids every couple of weeks, paying for a 1.5+Mbps always-on connection is really wasting money.
But there are huge technological differences between a user-owned line dialing in to a modem sitting at the LEC and a coax line being stretched from the service provider's POP to the individual user's location. It is difficult to look at the one technology and say "since this is so cheap - this other completely different thing should be also".
I don't know what the breakdown is these days. But a couple of years ago, we generally paid less for a broadband connection than they did in the UK. America is a continental country. France or the UK are not our equivalent. If we are comparing, the assessment needs to be made between the capacity/cost/availability of ALL EU countries compared to the capacity/cost/availability of ALL states. Or likewise you can break down with a state vs. country comparison between the US and the EU regions.
In my mind, 56K- dialup is the Yugo, DSL/ISDN is the Corolla, Coax broadband is the Cadillac while carrier grade services (T1+) are the delivery trucks/tractor-trailers. What technology are you proposing as the new Cadillac?
January 11, 2009 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
No question our infrastructure requirements are more extensive than any single European country. And if you're expecting carriers to build and maintain your pipeline, it will go down exactly as you've said. Less densely populated areas go unserved until there is enough critical mass to justify the investment. Flowerchild waits, and waits, and waits some more.
To your second point. I accept your extension of my vehicle analogy, except I swear that on a good day my broadband cable outperforms the T1 line at work. As for Cadillac, how about fiber optic?
January 11, 2009 9:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about a Corvette?
http://www.satellite-internet.cc/index.asp
This is the option I am looking at. Five years ago when I first learned about this, the initial cost was in the thousand dollar range because the satellite dish and all particulars had to be purchased outright. Plus a $90 monthly fee. The cost has lowered considerably and it looks more attractive all the time.
January 11, 2009 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink