digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

40% of Americans to use dial-up by year-end 2005

nytimes.com — 6 mln American homes, or 52% of all households with Internet access, used dial-up services in 2004, according to SG Cowen. The number will drop to 40% at the end of 2005. Cable and phone companies are expected to add 8 mln broadband subscribers in 2005, bringing their total to 38.7 mln.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jun 23, 2005

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

18 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • TKDWILSON, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I thought it was a lot higher. So many people use the Internet just for fun at home and don't use it for anything...um...useful. Like $9 for dial up a month $50 for my 3 MBPS connection. A lot of places broad band is still not available. It was only available at my home a month of so ago. Our neighbor got a dish for it but he paid over 100 a month and had to buy the dish. I live only about 35 minutes from St. Louis too.

    Eric Wilson
  • infra172, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0People who live in urban areas vastly underestimate the size of the country. Unless you live in a city, your only options are satellite or dialup. And since most people won't pay $100 / month for internet, they go with dialup. I only got cable internet in my area last year and I live within the city limits of one of the largest cities in the United States.

    Companies need to get off their ass and offer highspeed internet access to everybody. Its insulting to watch commercials for it on television and not have it offered where you live.
  • tangerine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I am guilty of not being able to keep milk in my fridge, but gladly spend $60 a month on 12mbps. I remember seeing a report 6 months ago stating for the first time, broadband users outweighed dialup users. I was thrilled. It's just going to get faster and faster until one day we can just fling our bodies into the monitor and enter the net as a 3D object with all 5 senses and the ability to interact.
  • ,,|,_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Damnit, there goes my bandwidth...
  • KdoggMDF, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree guardian653. IN Korea, pretty much anyone who has a computer has a High Speed connection with between 6-12mbps download rates and 1-3mbps upload rates. The US needs to up the ante and optimize our networks to compete with a country like that. I mean, in terms of economic success, they are far behind us and yet they have technology that surpasses our own. I want a 12mbit/2mbit connection for $60 a month!!!!!!!!! :-D
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0internet service in america sucks.. to much for so little
  • Coheed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+052 % seems like a huge amount of people still on dial-up.

    I thought it was alot smaller
  • cthulhu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My only broadband option is satellite-for about $1000 setup and $75 a month.

    So ridiculously over-priced.
  • FunkyGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0WiMax comes to the rescue!!!!
  • TKDWILSON, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Mike AOL is a dirty word. If it is dial up it is not faster than cable. I have a 3 mb cable connection and 250 KB upload. I doubt it is faster than someone's DSL I know who gets 900 KB download speed. It is not faster than anything and it still keeps internet download the same speed.

    ERic Wison
  • edwarwl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The main reason that broadband isn't readily offered in the majority of rural areas is simply because the service has a distance limitation compared with regular telephone lines. There has to be a central office or some sort of repeater within a certain distance of every broadband terminal.

    So will they ever get broadband out to the rural areas? Maybe, but not anytime soon. The telephone company equipment it takes to get service out that far is *expensive*. The cost of providing broadband capability in those areas is higher than the returns (because of the low number of customers). People in rural areas and areas of low population may just be outta luck for a while.
  • whackaxe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0distance is a problem in all countries. fortunatly, there are a number of emerging broadband technologies which will up bandwith speeds and bring bandwidth to seculded areas. France has tested running 1mbps connections through power lines in a small town which wasn't connected to any broadband service
  • gatorsrule21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0if 6 mln =52% then that means there are 12 million ppl total, and if 38.7mln ppl are supposed to have high speed by next year, doesn't that mean that next year 300% of the ppl will have high speed?
  • irie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A lot of people still it - post time: 9pm
  • bontux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Is it really too expensive for these companies to expand into certain rural areas? I live in a rural area in the province of Manitoba, Canada, and I get dsl. In fact 83% of the residents in Manitoba can get dsl. The phone company even offers digital TV in the city of Winnipeg through the telephone lines. So I don't think it is that much of a cost issue.
  • mikeaorlando, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Why doesn't everyone just get AOL's topspeed technology? I mean it's open source, and it is soooo much faster than cable, but not dsl. You can even host websites with it!
  • indiraider2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Thats because Americans are retarded bitchs. "Hey MA get me my GEETAR up heer and let me play this flashes game on the internets. With the AOL doit mabobber". Well most Americans other than the ones that post on digg. (I am doing this so my new screen name doesnt get banned because you people are touchy fags.
  • sonicboy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0http://www.Freemillenium-falcon.com/?r=17674943

    http://www.Freebatmobile.com/?r=96896347

    http://www.Freeaircraft-carrier.com/?r=96896347

    http://www.Freestar-destroyer.com/?r=96896347

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...