Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Upgrades

Many Americans Still Don't Have Home Net Access 313

Weather Storm wrote in with a story about those who see no need for home net access. Surprisingly, it's not the cost that is a barrier to entry. Instead, most say they don't see the value of having a net connection at home. "A little under one-third of U.S. households have no Internet access and do not plan to get it, with most of the holdouts seeing little use for it in their lives, according to a new survey. Park Associates, a Dallas-based technology market research firm, said 29 percent of U.S. households, or 31 million homes, do not have Internet access and do not intend to subscribe to an Internet service over the next 12 months."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Many Americans Still Don't Have Home Net Access

Comments Filter:
  • I am not surprised (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bogaboga ( 793279 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @11:50AM (#18470883)
    You know why? Because young Americans are still geographically illiterate according to this article. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/05 02_060502_geography.html [nationalgeographic.com].

    It was also reported that about 23% of mature Americans cannot read a schedule! Further still, from one study, America's adults made no progress in their ability to read a newspaper, a book or any other prose arranged in sentences and paragraphs!

    This is amazing because this nation has had "free" education for a long time - education that would have prevented these appalling figures.

    With figures like these, why should anyone expect a different outcome when it comes to internet access? Populations like these cannot generate effective demand for services similar to those found on the internet.

  • by segfaultcoredump ( 226031 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @12:00PM (#18470963)
    They had internet access. First dial up, then a DLS line.

    After a year or so, my siblings were the only ones using it, usually to download spyware and such while hitting myspace.

    After walking my dad through reinstalling XP home on the computer to get rid of all of the crap, he gave up. The computer now sits in the corner of their home and is rarely used.

    When they need internet access, they go to the library. It is not a major part of their life.

    If I lived a bit closer, I would probably be able to put linux or lock down XP and make it a bit more secure on their system and set it up for them to use. Even then, the monthly cost of the dsl line was not worth it to them given the amount of use they would get out of it.

    All of that said, I do see a market for something like a SunRay @ home for users like my parents. Small terminal that actually runs everything remotely. With higher speed internet connections (A sunray only needs about 1Mbps for very acceptable performance with a 1280x1024) and almost no power draw, it is perfect for things like this (yes, you can setup a similar setup with a linux terminal, but the sunray is actually simpler. I've done both in my life)

    While such a setup would not be workable for most slashdoters, it would work fine for the rest of the world who dont care to become computer mechanics just to browse the web (think tivo users vs mythTV users)
  • TV (Score:2, Interesting)

    by QBasicer ( 781745 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @12:07PM (#18471011) Homepage Journal
    I wonder what the percentage of Americans have a TV? Many people have more than one TV, yet only have one computer. Cost may be a factor in that, but seeing as you can buy cheap computers from companies like Dell, I don't think that price is that big of an issue. Somehow people finding sitting infront of a computer for 2-3 hours bad, but sitting infront of the TV for an entire day fine. Is the general population afraid of computers? Or do they like to put their mind into coast mode and have content spoon fed to them.
  • by TomorrowPlusX ( 571956 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @12:09PM (#18471027)
    I don't have access at home, and I don't really care. When I need access on a weekend, I'm usually at a coffee shop ( like now ) anyway, and at least where I am -- DC -- there's quite a few free WAPs.

    I used to have DSL at my old apartment, and I spent too much time online. Frankly, I'd rather be writing code, or reading a book. I get "enough" internet access at work. If I know I'm going to need some offline documentation, I download it when I have access and keep it around.

    What it comes down to is this: When my girlfriend and I moved in together, we discussed whether internet & cable tv were worth the expense, and we decided it wasn't. It's a lot of money to -- essentially -- veg out. We'd rather spend time together, or read, or go exercise, or do something worthwhile.

    Now, that being said it's saturday and I'm on slashdot from a free WAP dowtown. So, I guess it's hard to take me seriously.
  • That's amazing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by swillden ( 191260 ) * <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Saturday March 24, 2007 @12:11PM (#18471037) Journal

    Over 70% penetration in a little more than a decade. That is unbelievably fast, and the best proof yet -- if you needed any -- that Internet access will become as much a commonplace utility as electricity, phone service or running water. Although it's obvious that it's the existing power, telephony and cable TV infrastructure that made the rapid adoption possible, it's still worth pointing out that that's more adoption, faster, than any other technology I can think of. Maybe VCRs became more common, faster? Not sure.

    It's going to be very interesting to see what the net looks like when the average 40 year-old has never known life without it.

  • Re:Does that include (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AuMatar ( 183847 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @12:42PM (#18471257)
    In some cases it actually is free you know- I keep my router open so anyone can use it, because I feel its the right thing to do. I have unused resources, why shouldn't someone else get them?
  • by alexschmidt ( 1026034 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @01:06PM (#18471423)
    My parents are retired and my father has never really trusted computers. My mother still pays her bills by check, they same way she has always done it. They have no compelling reason to change how they go about their business. I bought them internet access a few years ago, but sadly the dial-up service (Telus in Alberta) was just awful. It took forever to get logged in and it kicked people off for no reason. This soured the experience and they never want to do it again.
  • by FlyByPC ( 841016 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @01:28PM (#18471595) Homepage
    My grandparents, for one. We've tried a Mailstation (thinking it was the easiest way to at least get them email.) We tried a very simple Windows installation (Win98 is actually pretty reliable if you only use it with IE). For some reason, they just don't see the importance of the 'Net -- at least not for them personally. At least they live reasonably nearby, so it's easy to go see them once in a while. It would be nice to be able to send them pictures or the occasional YouTube link, though.

    We're about to try giving them a DVD player. Bets, anyone? (Hey, we *did* get them off the 8-track back in the late '90s!)

    Fortunately, my parents are now so totally hooked that they're at the other end -- they buy cool new shiny gadgets before (or despite) checking whether they'll cause configuration headaches. And I can't remember how many times I've given them the "I-can't-fix-your-ping-time-because-you're-on-a-sa tellite-connection" lecture...
  • Re:Does that include (Score:3, Interesting)

    by stephanruby ( 542433 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @02:00PM (#18471881)
    "Cool. Can I use your connection to download kiddie porn and discuss the planning of, um, an "event" with my friend Osama? Sure, you'll be legally responsible and a prime suspect, but it's all about sharing, right? "

    In the case of kiddie porn and homeland security, the authorities would come knocking on his door at 5 am -- they'd image his hard drive(s), they'd mess up his place, and they may even put him in hand cuffs, but that'd be the end of it. It's really the RIAA he would have to worry about, but then again -- if he downloads movies and music himself -- that may be his best defense.

    On a side-note, my DSL provider Speakeasy.net, allows for me to share my wireless internet connection with my neighbors -- so I do not know what you guys are talking about.
  • Re:And? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by VENONA ( 902751 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @02:02PM (#18471893)
    "download music/movies/TV shows" doesn't matter to some people. I, for instance, believe in respecting the rights of content creators. I'm phrasing it that way to avoid the usual arg about whether downloading that sort of thing, in a manner that's contrary to the wishes of the creator, constitutes theft. As a rule, I don't believe in infringing their rights, save where they try to infringe mine--for instance, I'll rip CDs to disk, or make backups of electronic downloads. So long as I don't distribute, that's Fair Use, so far as I'm concerned.

    "no ability to download software" is completely wrong. There were several mechanisms, such as FTP.

    "no online banking or bill-paying" many of which are completely broken, which leads to much fraud, identity theft, etc. The masses just want stuff, now. Corporations build it, often very poorly, while shifting as much of the financial load (recovering from identity theft, etc.) onto the masses as possible.

    "no Wikipedia or Google" I have problems with Wikipedia, in that I've found them wrong too many times, and I've neither the time nor the desire for the Games of Wikifiddlers. Nor do I think Google is some unalloyed Good Thing. Raising either of these points on Slashdot leads to flamage, but the points are still valid.

    It's curious that you refer to Google's revenue as "obscene," yet still seem to think that they're a completely Good Thing, as in "Take away the scale up and you lose Google." Without the scale, we wouldn't *need* Google, at least in a search context. Plus, even Google admits that as much as 20% of their index is garbage generated by spamdexers and robots.

    I'm *not* saying Wikipedia or Google are evil, useless things. I use both, all the time. But always hearing that they're the greatest things since sliced bread is *so* stale.

    This is all moot: the internet is going to do pretty much nothing but grow. Economics and Metcalfe's Law are going to drive it. To me, that's pretty much a no-brainer. But it's become much more of a sewer of spam, malware, automated attacks, astroturfing, consensus reality, privacy invasions, etc. I can see how people who were early users might be a bit nostalgic.

    In it's early days, the Internet was an amazing thing. Now, it's *still* an amazing thing. I get a bit nostalgic, too, at times. But it still presents so much scope for interesting work. While I think Sturgeon, like Murphy, was an optimist, there are some total jewels out there, in terms of Web sites, development tools, security tools, pretty much name your own category, in fact. I pretty much regard Wikipedia and Google as jewels in the rough, BTW.

    Almost *nothing* in life is a proven, unalloyed good. Not Google, not Wikipedia, not the introduction of the masses to the Internet. On a pessimistic day, I'd strike the 'almost'.
  • Re:In other news.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JimBobJoe ( 2758 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @02:13PM (#18471975)
    29 percent of American households consist of "really old people".

    I was at a nursing home the other day, getting a tour, and the manager pointed me to a computer with an internet connection. She said that it was "very popular with some of our residents...particularly those over the age of 90."

    Over the age of 90? I asked her what she attributed that to:

    "It's a trick you see. People who get to be 90 have a natural predisposition to wanting to live longer, and as part of living longer, they want to stay as involved in and be a part of society as much as possible, and the internet is a major part of society today."
  • by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @02:17PM (#18471999)
    It's not that hard to believe after watching an episode of "Are you smarter than a 5th Grader" [fox.com]. It's hard to imagine how dumb people can be before you actually see it. People who can't subtract 5 from 12 without using their fingers and taking 30 seconds to figure it out. People who think that all the continents are countries. ( Even after being able to name them all). Or people who can't do simple math like, "If y=3x and 3x=12 then what does y equal?" Seriously, the lack of intelligence in some people is amazing.
  • Re:And? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by westlake ( 615356 ) on Saturday March 24, 2007 @02:24PM (#18472051)
    There was a time when almost nobody had internet access. Back then, the internet was a beautiful place.

    where the loudest voice to be heard was the Geek on Campus and CompuServe still charged you by the hour.

    fifteen years reading posts like these has left me wondering if the true Geek ever loses his adolescent sense of entitlement: that the Internet - by rights - should be his private playground and everything to be found there his for the taking.

"No matter where you go, there you are..." -- Buckaroo Banzai

Working...