On Thu, 19 Dec 2024, Karl Auer wrote:
A friend was involved in a development project in a regional town. They specified conduits everywhere. When the network people showed up at some random later date, they mostly just had to pull stuff through existing conduits. Not sure of the details beyond that, but he reckoned it cost a lot less that doing it all later.
I'm not a real estate developer. I do not understand the reasoning. Its not a technical problem, its a business problem. The business incentives are messed up. One builder told me their margin on new houses is about 15%. They try to optimize out any costs not required. Spending money, so communication companies can save money later doesn't pay the developer's bills now. Some states have "dig once" rules requiring spare conduit or coordinated scheduling by utlities. But even "dig once" rules only apply to public roads, not private residential roads. Meanwhile wireless is free, from the developer's point of view. I know, folks outside the United States are shaking their heads. Other countries have very detailed requirements for public infrastructure serving new construction, including broadband access.
Cable 134.4 million households (82%) DSL 7 million households (4%) Fiber 74.9 million households(46%) Fixed wireless 77.3 million households (47%) Satellite 162.8 million households (99%)
What are the percentages?
Percentage of service addresses in USA ("passed" or "served") by each type of broadband technology, according to FCC data -- about 163 million address total. There are about 210 million addresses in the USA (including institutional, alias and virtual addresses) US Census count of housing units -- 147 M USPS count of delivery addresses -- 154 M residential, 12.6 M commercial