![]() But it’s not unusual to find markets where a cable company claims gigabit speeds but doesn’t have any speed tests faster than 600 – 700 Mbps. I find some cable companies that are also delivering the top speed claimed in the FCC mapping. But the same is not always true for cable companies. When I look at fiber based ISPs there are invariably some speed tests that are near the gigabit speed claimed by the ISPs in the FCC map. It’s interesting to look at the fastest speed tests delivered for a given ISP. An FCC-sponsored speed test portal would allow the public to see how various ISPs perform in and around their neighborhood.ĭetailed speed test results also can tell us a lot about any given ISP. The FCC has ordered ISPs to create broadband labels – but those labels allow ISPs to report marketing speeds and will be no more useful to the public than the broadband maps. This is information that is not readily available to the public. These speed test results tests tell a great story about the local differences between technologies. But the overall performance of the various technologies is pretty typical. This is the only county where I’ve seen fiber have an identical average upload and download speed. There are counties where fixed wireless ISPs perform much better than in this particular county. There are some counties where DSL isn’t as fast as in this county. These results are similar to what I see in a lot of counties. The speeds shown for each technology are the overall average of all speed tests for each technology. These results reflect over a million speed tests. But the generic flaws of speed tests apply across the board to every broadband technology, meaning that speed tests are a great tool for comparing specific ISPs or technology.Ĭonsider the following chart that represents Ookla speed tests taken in a suburban county over the last year. The biggest reason is WiFi routers that don’t deliver the speed to a computer that is delivered to the home. There are slow speed tests recorded for every ISP for reasons out of the control of the ISP. I will be the first to say that speed tests aren’t perfect. The FCC spent a huge amount of money developing the new broadband mapping system, and after all of that money, the maps are largely useless for the general public. ![]() If a speed test comparison portal is made easy to use, it would be one of the best gifts the FCC can give the public. I think the FCC should buy the entire Ookla speed test database every month and make it available to the public in a portal where folks can see the speed tests actually reported for the ISPs working in their neighborhood. I’ve thought of a simple FCC tool that can accomplish that. Truth or fantasy won’t really matter, just like nobody cared about the maps just five years ago.īut I still think the FCC owes it to the public to provide a way to judge and compare the local ISPs. ![]() But when the maps stop being a tool for deciding who gets grant funding, most local and state governments will stop caring about the maps – and nobody is going to much care what ISPs report to the FCC. The FCC is always going to need some version of the maps to report to Congress each year on the state of broadband. If BEAD comes somewhat close to solving the rural broadband gap, the FCC maps will quickly lose relevance. Perhaps having accurate maps doesn’t matter all that much. Too many ISPs have reasons for reporting maps they know are inaccurate, and it’s hard to think that’s going to change. I don’t foresee the maps getting any better as long as ISPs can continue to decide what they want to report in terms of broadband coverage and speeds. It’s been easy to criticize the maps since they are still full of errors and fantasy. I’ve written a lot of blogs about FCC broadband mapping.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |