Breaking news - buying a new home!

Bill and I went home shopping on Sunday, and decided on this:




Well, we haven’t quite decided to buy one yet – and the one we’re looking at is a couple of feet shorter than this one – only one axle. These are eco-rvs (http://www.eco-rv.com ); they are very, very light, so Bill’s car could tow one. And they are pretty cheap (about $16,000). They also seem to retain their value pretty well. They come complete with sink, cooker, microwave, refrigerator, toilet, shower, flat screen TV, AM/FM/CD sound system, air conditioning, heater - everything you need when camping out in the woods, or taking a trip to Burning Man. We want to get something like this in time for retirement!

We also took a look at a 42 foot RV (at $179,000) – slightly out of our price range! It had a full double bedroom, second bedroom, lounge, full kitchen with stove, microwave, double fridge, doube freezer, full bathroom with a high-end shower, air conditioning etc, plus FIVE flat screen TVs, including one that is built into the OUTSIDE wall, so that you can watch TV while sitting under the awning. Truly amazing. And it gets 6mpg… imagine the gas cost! It was literally a complete house on wheels. We won’t be getting one of those :-)

geek-speak: Internet speeds

Harvard researchers have published a review of broadband access, speed, and pricing in the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) - essentially, a broad basket of 30 developed countries. About access and pricing they have this to say:

"Our findings confirm the widespread perception that the United States is a middle-of-the-pack performer. On fixed broadband penetration the U.S. is in the third quintile in the OECD; on mobile broadband penetration, in the fourth quintile. In capacity the U.S. does better, mostly occupying the second quintile by measures of both advertised and actual speeds. In price the picture is mixed, showing good performance on prices for the very low speed offerings, and very high prices, relatively, as speeds increase. The U.S. does reasonably well for the lowest prices available for the slowest speeds, below 1.5Mbps. Prices rise significantly as the offerings become those that are more “current generation”: both in the 2-10Mbps category and the 10-32 Mbps high-speed category—where the US is 19th of 30 or 18th of the 28 that have high speed access, respectively. In prices for next generation speeds, the U.S. has the highest average prices from top-four providers in the OECD for speeds above 35Mbps, and is ranked 19th of 19 in that category. On those few measures where we have reasonably relevant historical data, it appears that the United States opened the first decade of the 21st centuries in the top quintile in penetration and prices, and has been surpassed by other countries over the course of the decade."

I'm sure the GOP believes we have the best Internet access in the world, just as they believe we have the best medical care system. But those statements would only be true by cherry-picking the good news. In fact, direct competitors to the US, such as Japan, have far higher access speeds at lower price points,even though their overall market penetration is low as a percentage of the population. The lack of competition in the US is the major reason for price disparity. Verizon for example, does not plan to offer its FiOS service in Albuquerque, because Comcast already has a strong cable market. Without direct competition at these higher speeds, Comcast and Qwest (DSL provider) have been able to settle into a cosy non-competition position on their pricing.

Google's plans to offer alternative networks might just shake up the system, but that will take years to build out. In the meantime, Comcast and other monopoly companies are starting to cry 'foul!', because Hulu and other online companies are weakening their strangle-hold on TV transmission. If Comcast and others provide cheaper Internet access, and larger pipes, then that trend will continue. If the Internet remains neutral, then the existing providers won't be able to charge a premium for access to high volume websites, forcing them into some realistic pricing decisions. In the next year or two, I think we'll see some significant changes both in the patterns of access, and the type and pricing of services provided.

The report is here: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/pubrelease/broadband/