In the applications I wrote earlier this month for BIP (Rural Utilities Services, USDA) and BTOP (NTIA, non-rural) infrastructure, for Maine's 2nd, I was keenly aware that broadband hasn't taken off as a pervasive, if not universal service in rural areas of the US. I don't think the speed metric is the metric that will make non-adoption in sparce clustered demographics distinguishable from adoption in denser demographics. I suspect that issues like symmetry of state signaling, latency, jitter, ... metrics that resemble what I looked for from MPI runs when benchmarking parallel systems, will characterize applications that may be distinguishable from the adoption, market penetration, renewal criteria from the applications that for reasons I can only conjecture, the standard "triple play" killer apps, which simply aren't driving broadband (whatever that is) adoption in rural areas. And no, I don't know what those better-than-triple-play-killer-apps-in-suburbia are. My meta-point is that I suspect there are two "broadbands", one where triple-play sells recurring subscriber drops, and one where it doesn't, and for the later a better definition would be more useful than a definition that reads (in fine print) "not available here". Eric Luke Marrott wrote:
I read an article on DSL Reports the other day ( http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/FCC-Please-Define-Broadband-104056), in which the FCC has a document requesting feedback on the definition of Broadband.
What are your thoughts on what the definition of Broadband should be going forward? I would assume this will be the standard definition for a number of years to come.
Thanks.