net neutrality commercials?

[Jim]

Agreed Dan.  South Korea is much smaller than the U.S.  Less fiber is 
needed to provide access to all it's people.

Let's look at it this way.  You've got a high rise apartment building 
with a thousand people in it.  Also you've got a thousand people in 
single family homes equally distributed across a thousand  square miles.

Which instance will require more fiber to bring broadband to everyone in 
that group?  Which group will have more customers per mile?  Which group 
will be more profitable for the company that owns the fiber?

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries; people in high population 
density areas got electricity first.  People in rural areas got 
electricity last.  Out in the boonies somewhere, the power company might 
have one customer on a mile of wire.  In the big city, they might have a 
few hundred customers on a mile of wire.

The same goes for the phone company.  I used to live in a rural area 
about 40 miles from the phone company switching office.  The phone 
company had to lay and maintain 40 miles of cable for maybe 100 
customers.  They can serve a helluva lot more customers in Phoenix with 
40 miles of cable.

The same principle applies to cable tv.

Dan Lund wrote:
> My opinion on countries like South Korea and so forth having a better
> infrastructure is that it's easier to wire a closet than it is a
> server room.
> The size is so different that I don't even know why anyone uses it as
> anything more than anecdotal.