

NotHereNow

@verizon.net NotHereNow Anon I really love that old "satellite is competition" refrain. That's like saying the German autobahn is competition for I-95... if you live and work in New York (yep, once you get there, it's really fast).



No, Google Fiber may never get deployed everywhere that people want it (which would be everywhere), but think of it more like the Apollo missions--a lot of useful stuff came out of the space program that had excellent application in many other places. Google Fiber might discover better and cheaper ways to deploy connectivity. And if the one or two incumbent providers of Internet access in each locality have to "sweat it out" in the area of real competition... well, that's just a lucky bonus.

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04

Binghamton, NY Crookshanks Member Re: I really love that said by NotHereNow : old "satellite is competition" refrain. is competition for TV, and that's a product that's sold by Time Warner, Google Fiber, Comcast, Verizon, et. all. Itcompetition for TV, and that's a product that's sold by Time Warner, Google Fiber, Comcast, Verizon, et. all.



NotHereNow

@verizon.net NotHereNow Anon Re: I really love that And the fact that we're talking about 1gbps Internet access here has what--exactly--to do with TV?



OP

@sehamerica.com OP Anon Re: I really love that It has a TV package, just like cable. » fiber.google.com/about/



Salix

@cox.net Salix to Crookshanks

Anon to Crookshanks

This just made me notice - I've never known an individual in a city to choose satellite over cable for TV. In fact, the only time I've seen satellite used in this city was an apartment complex that clearly cared more about the cheapest service possible than actually being able to properly watch TV during a storm.



I guess satelitte TV still counts as competition, but just from my observations it looks like very meager competition.



KrK

Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy

Premium Member

join:2000-01-17

Tulsa, OK KrK Premium Member Re: I really love that What? You've never seen Dish or DirecTV dishes in cities?



Uh, yeah.

davidhoffman

Premium Member

join:2009-11-19

Warner Robins, GA davidhoffman to Salix

Premium Member to Salix

I drove around Atlanta going into the residential areas near hospitals several times. I saw DirecTV and Dish antennas mounted on single family houses, duplexes, and all sorts of walk up apartments. In the all areas I saw antenna mountings on roofs, exterior walls, and stand alone poles placed in the ground. If the installer can find a way to get a decent antenna alignment, it seems a lot of people in the big city would rather have satellite TV than cable TV. I saw the same thing in the Chicago area. I suspect this may be true for several reasons. Less price inflation for TV than cable. More international channels for those immigrants who want to have them. DishNetwork has a lot of those international channels. Live action sports. As far as disrupted signal due to weather, that can happen with cable also.



I live in an apartment complex consisting of about 25 each of 2 story 8 unit apartment buildings. About 200 apartments. We can get Cox Cable. There was a period of time several years ago when the manager let the satellite installers put up antennas on stand alone poles in the grass areas, flower beds, and shrubbery areas. This was beyond what the FCC regulations and federal law mandate be allowed. About 33% of the people who had not been able to use satellite TV previously, due to antenna placement issues, got satellite service in the first year the restrictions were lifted by the manager. About another 33% got it the next year. All had dropped Cox cable TV. The others were like me, buried so deep in an area of dense tall trees and high concrete retaining walls, that no decent antenna pole placement was possible.



Many people kept Cox for internet service due to its faster speeds than the available AT&T DSL, but they were glad to have choices in pay TV.



Sadly this did not last as the owners in Atlanta had been given a "bribe" deal by Cox in order to get low cost TV and HSI service for the offices and clubhouses of the apartment complexes they owned. Forbid satellites antennas placed on poles for renters and you get big discounts on Cox business services. Cox complained and the pole mounted antennas were banned again.

netwerp

join:2010-12-10

Evans, GA netwerp Member Re: I really love that



There is a Federal Law allowing the use of over-the-air reception of radio frequency (RF) signals from the "exclusive use area" of any owned or rented residence. An FCC dot gov page gives a statement of the Telecommunications Act enacted by Congress in 1996. The key page is /guides/over-air-reception-devices-rule.



You can find it by googling "Satellite Antenna Laws".



BUT why PAY for satellite reception when for a few hundred dollars, less than a year of commercial dish service, you can set up your own "Free-To-Air" dish and receiver? Maybe because you want it done for you and don't want to deal with the complexity choosing from dozens of equipment options and several hundred free channels in dozens of languages on a handful of different communications satellites.



Try googling "free to air". FTA won't replace your internet connection but it can get you to a wealth of video culture and a bit of technical knowledge as well. For What It's Worth (FWIW): Any apartment complex which bans antennas could find themselves in a courtroom, and it's the satellite company which might fund the suit if a renter is willing to file. The key phrase is "exclusive use area". I'm not a lawyer, I'm just saying.There is a Federal Law allowing the use of over-the-air reception of radio frequency (RF) signals from the "exclusive use area" of any owned or rented residence. An FCC dot gov page gives a statement of the Telecommunications Act enacted by Congress in 1996. The key page is /guides/over-air-reception-devices-rule.You can find it by googling "Satellite Antenna Laws".BUT why PAY for satellite reception when for a few hundred dollars, less than a year of commercial dish service, you can set up your own "Free-To-Air" dish and receiver? Maybe because you want it done for you and don't want to deal with the complexity choosing from dozens of equipment options and several hundred free channels in dozens of languages on a handful of different communications satellites.Try googling "free to air". FTA won't replace your internet connection but it can get you to a wealth of video culture and a bit of technical knowledge as well.

Happydude32

Premium Member

join:2005-07-16 Happydude32 Premium Member Re: I really love that said by netwerp

BUT why PAY for satellite reception when for a few hundred dollars, less than a year of commercial dish service, you can set up your own "Free-To-Air" dish and receiver? Maybe because you want it done for you and don't want to deal with the complexity choosing from dozens of equipment options and several hundred free channels in dozens of languages on a handful of different communications satellites.



Try googling "free to air". FTA won't replace your internet connection but it can get you to a wealth of video culture and a bit of technical knowledge as well. :



As a former satellite nut and hobbyist, I was always interested in toying with FTA, until it hit me, what you can actually get with FTA. Religious channels, foreign channels, crap channels like RTV that show nothing but TV shows from a hundred years ago and the same lame boring snoozefest artsy fartsy public interest channels DirecTV and Dish are required by the FCC to allocate 4% of their total bandwidth for. The only thing that looks the least bit entertaining are the sports wilds feeds which have been disappearing over the years and are now far and few in-between from what I understand. And besides, I havent kept up with it, but I have no idea how much of the FTA programming is broadcast in HD with a Dolby Digital audio track, but from what I gather very little. Im sorry, I did not spend thousands of dollars on audio and video gear to watch some talking head, some boing lecture hall, some preacher, some lame black and white show from 1952 or someone babbling in a language that I dont understand or care to learn in crappy 480i and in a either mono or stereo at best audio feed.



FTA satellite TV is in the same category as OTA network TV. Shitty content. Although at least with network TV, there is some more mainstream content and a decent amount of sports. Wake me up when you can set up a FTA set up and get Game of Thrones, The Americans, Bates Motel and other top tier cable content. Really, free to air satellite???As a former satellite nut and hobbyist, I was always interested in toying with FTA, until it hit me, what you can actually get with FTA. Religious channels, foreign channels, crap channels like RTV that show nothing but TV shows from a hundred years ago and the same lame boring snoozefest artsy fartsy public interest channels DirecTV and Dish are required by the FCC to allocate 4% of their total bandwidth for. The only thing that looks the least bit entertaining are the sports wilds feeds which have been disappearing over the years and are now far and few in-between from what I understand. And besides, I havent kept up with it, but I have no idea how much of the FTA programming is broadcast in HD with a Dolby Digital audio track, but from what I gather very little. Im sorry, I did not spend thousands of dollars on audio and video gear to watch some talking head, some boing lecture hall, some preacher, some lame black and white show from 1952 or someone babbling in a language that I dont understand or care to learn in crappy 480i and in a either mono or stereo at best audio feed.FTA satellite TV is in the same category as OTA network TV. Shitty content. Although at least with network TV, there is some more mainstream content and a decent amount of sports. Wake me up when you can set up a FTA set up and get Game of Thrones, The Americans, Bates Motel and other top tier cable content.

davidhoffman

Premium Member

join:2009-11-19

Warner Robins, GA davidhoffman to netwerp

Premium Member to netwerp





I have looked at FTA or BUD(Big Ultimate Dish) It is great if you have the land to support the installation of multiple 2+ meter diameter dishes each with motorized azimuth and elevation systems. When I visit some very rural areas I see a few houses with both the older style BUDs and the newer smaller DBS antennas. It is not practical for apartment dwellers.



It would also help if the owners would allow professional exterior wall installation of OTA antennas similar in size to the DBS antennas. Those can actually put less stress on the mounting wall, even in high winds, due to the lack of a solid wind catching dish. The exclusive use areas of the apartments can still get satellite TV antenna placement, as per the law you referenced, but the placement in the non exclusive use areas is back to being banned. Enlightened apartment owners who understand how safely satellite antennas can be installed, and who are not taking bribes from cable companies, allow installers to put antennas up on exterior walls using high wind, fatigue , and corrosion resistant mountings. Using proper grommets and weather sealing techniques and materials, you get a safe long lasting mounting.I have looked at FTA or BUD(Big Ultimate Dish)It is great if you have the land to support the installation of multiple 2+ meter diameter dishes each with motorized azimuth and elevation systems. When I visit some very rural areas I see a few houses with both the older style BUDs and the newer smaller DBS antennas. It is not practical for apartment dwellers.It would also help if the owners would allow professional exterior wall installation of OTA antennas similar in size to the DBS antennas. Those can actually put less stress on the mounting wall, even in high winds, due to the lack of a solid wind catching dish.



Zaren

@sbcglobal.net Zaren to Salix

Anon to Salix

said by Salix : This just made me notice - I've never known an individual in a city to choose satellite over cable for TV. In fact, the only time I've seen satellite used in this city was an apartment complex that clearly cared more about the cheapest service possible than actually being able to properly watch TV during a storm.



* Yes, we've lost signal once or twice for a few seconds thanks to lousy weather, but when we had cable, we were losing service every week for minutes - if not hours - at a time. We switched from cable to Dish at our house years ago, and it was one of the best decisions we made. Cheaper, more reliable*, customer service that actually gives a damn... the receiver / dvr died on us, and it was replaced for free the next day. Then *that* receiver started acting up a few days later, and it got replaced the next day... with a bigger HD at no additional charge.* Yes, we've lost signal once or twice for a few seconds thanks to lousy weather, but when we had cable, we were losing service every week for minutes - if not hours - at a time.



Layne

@mchsi.com Layne to Salix

Anon to Salix

Just want to say we live in a city, and recently moved to satellite. Haven't had the tv go out but once in a tornado-esque storm. While it did we had all of our free DVR'd shows to watch. Let me just mention that with our other cable company our service has gone out and been out multiple times, not for a storm, but just because, so then we'd be out of TV and internet for a day.



Basically our breakdown was something like, more TV stations, cheaper price, better hardware, more options, and better service, not to mention free installation. Switching from cable to satellite was really a no brainer, and I'm not trying to sell it. I jut want to make it known that in some markets they are extremely competitive and sometimes (especially in our case) much better.



Bob in LA

@rr.com Bob in LA to Salix

Anon to Salix

DirectTV has a much more attractive package than TWC in Los Angeles.



wowsers

@siue.edu wowsers to Salix

Anon to Salix

If properly aimed, satellite works fine in heavy storms.



Jake

@qwest.net Jake to Crookshanks

Anon to Crookshanks

I think he was referring to satellite internet, which is pretty terrible, and not TV service. Time Warner is counting satellite internet providers as competition, when really they aren't. The only people who subscribe to it are people too ignorant to shop around and people who have no other choice, because while satellite internet is terrible...you can get it anywhere (read: places Time Warner isn't).



regulated

@comcast.net regulated to Crookshanks

Anon to Crookshanks

It must be shocking for these poor cable companies and MaBell spin-offs have such an unpredictable future. Usually, they're operating in their self-regulated cocoon of safety - I empathize with their plight.



DocDrew

Try Everything!

Premium Member

join:2009-01-28

SoCal 93.2 20.1

Ubee E31U2V1

Technicolor TC4400

ARRIS TG1672

DocDrew Premium Member Long term viability of Google Fiber? What is the long term financial viability of Google Fiber? Are they making enough to pay for what they've installed? Are they making enough to keep up with ongoing maintenance for what they've installed? Are they making enough to keep upgrading to support the demand of it's existing customers? Can they afford expanding?



Sure cheap and fast is great, but where will it be in 2 years?



Karl Bode

News Guy

join:2000-03-02 1 recommendation Karl Bode News Guy Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? My guess is four cities, three or four years, then a sale. They're going to turn from disruption to turf protection a la Microsoft eventually, and when that happens high-cost projects like this will be the very first to go.



djrobx

Premium Member

join:2000-05-31

Valencia, CA djrobx to DocDrew

Premium Member to DocDrew

said by DocDrew: What is the long term financial viability of Google Fiber? Are they making enough to pay for what they've installed? Are they making enough to keep up with ongoing maintenance for what they've installed? Are they making enough to keep upgrading to support the demand of it's existing customers? Can they afford expanding?



Sure cheap and fast is great, but where will it be in 2 years?





On the other hand, if the areas where its deployed turn out to be healthy business, Google will have raised the bar, and made it harder for the incumbents to make excuses for their poor service. That's the key question, and there is a lot riding on it. If it proves unprofitable, we're going to be in a world of hurt. The incubents will point at it, laugh, and say, "See? We need 20GB caps in order to stay profitable!".On the other hand, if the areas where its deployed turn out to be healthy business, Google will have raised the bar, and made it harder for the incumbents to make excuses for their poor service.



michieru

Premium Member

join:2009-07-25

Denver, CO michieru Premium Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? From a consumer perspective I can see it as unprofitable. However if they were to cater to business at a higher price with Google Apps or private line installations I can see them recover installation costs and give local business and government more opportunities from given bandwidth.



From a consumer perspective it's cool however if I don't use services that utilize the connection a few months down the road the excitement ends and I am left with a fast car that can only go 70mph on the highway.

BosstonesOwn

join:2002-12-15

Wakefield, MA BosstonesOwn Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? It has already been proven viable, they are breaking even already on the "venture" hence why they are expanding it.



They have already said the tv chunk is not really profitable for them due to pricing.



DocDrew

Try Everything!

Premium Member

join:2009-01-28

SoCal 93.2 20.1

Ubee E31U2V1

Technicolor TC4400

ARRIS TG1672

DocDrew Premium Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? said by BosstonesOwn: It has already been proven viable, they are breaking even already on the "venture" hence why they are expanding it.

Can you post any actual links to back that up? That Google Fiber is breaking even already... that would've been big news that Google would've trumpeted and everyone would've been all a twitter over.

BosstonesOwn

join:2002-12-15

Wakefield, MA BosstonesOwn Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? check the quarterly numbers. They are being released soon, they are making money on the usage patterns. Im sure that they will be making more on their advertising soon as well.



michieru

Premium Member

join:2009-07-25

Denver, CO michieru to BosstonesOwn

Premium Member to BosstonesOwn

If so then were are the numbers?



alchav

join:2002-05-17

Saint George, UT alchav to DocDrew

Member to DocDrew

Google needs 100% Buy In, or you are correct they will be in trouble down the road. This is what hurt Verizon, and that is why they stopped deployment. People want Fast, Cheap Internet, but bottom line when they get it, it's not Cheap enough. So Google, Verizon, or any Company that wants to deploy Fiber needs 100% Buy In!



bobjohnson

Premium Member

join:2007-02-03

Spartanburg, SC bobjohnson Premium Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? said by alchav: Google needs 100% Buy In, or you are correct they will be in trouble down the road. This is what hurt Verizon, and that is why they stopped deployment. People want Fast, Cheap Internet, but bottom line when they get it, it's not Cheap enough. So Google, Verizon, or any Company that wants to deploy Fiber needs 100% Buy In!

We see it on this site all the time "Yes, I want gig symmetrical internet but no, I'm not paying $70 for it." and unfortunately this group of people are the type of people that will make Google fiber or any other similar service viable and competitive. Joe Schmoe in the suburbs is just fine with their bundled 10/1 from TWC and could care less about the competition. Unfortunately, I believe TWC is correct in their logic on this.

Core0000

Premium Member

join:2008-05-04

Somerset, KY Core0000 Premium Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? Just saying... but I pay 70+ dollars for TimeWarners fastest available connection where I live... (I don't even get my down speed like it supposed to be) I'd gladly pay 70 for a google gig.



bobjohnson

Premium Member

join:2007-02-03

Spartanburg, SC bobjohnson Premium Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? That's who I was referring to. I would as well but I wasn't speaking for or about everyone. You see the guys that post here wanting a 10g connection for $7 a monthThat's who I was referring to.

Core0000

Premium Member

join:2008-05-04

Somerset, KY Core0000 Premium Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber?



*Forever alone humor* Yeah, I understand that. That's why I didn't fling mud your way. I was just joining the talk.*Forever alone humor*



jdyesss

@rr.com jdyesss to bobjohnson

Anon to bobjohnson

not sure if you understand what I'm paying for TWC in Austin. 70 a month for internet only. 20/2, if I'm lucky. no competitors in my location, right in the middle of the city. Google will kill here, or make TWC compete, at least.



MmOaOnN

@optonline.net MmOaOnN Anon Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? This is what Google wants; Americans consuming its services using bandwidth on par with today's reality. They're setting the precedent.



UnGoogled

@rr.com UnGoogled to jdyesss

Anon to jdyesss

I'm quite sure google will bring in a 1g connection to all those nieborhoods that request it...collectively, but where does it go from there. Google is a click-through company, if the revenue isn't there, guess who's stuck w/o service down the road if the clicks aren't paying for the construction costs?



namenamename

@rr.com namenamename to bobjohnson

Anon to bobjohnson

$70 a month is way cheaper than TWC's base package in my area since you can't get internet without getting a cable package and a bunch of other random things no one wants.



Good_Luck

@qwest.net Good_Luck to bobjohnson

Anon to bobjohnson

yup except 5/1 with google fiber costs 300 dollars for 7 years, as opposed to the "19.99" a month with TWC. So total savings is: 1379.16 over 7 years. The only thing i'll give TWC when it comes to google fiber is that, yes, competition is a great thing. Good luck.



Frank

Premium Member

join:2000-11-03

somewhere Frank to bobjohnson

Premium Member to bobjohnson

said by bobjohnson: said by alchav: Google needs 100% Buy In, or you are correct they will be in trouble down the road. This is what hurt Verizon, and that is why they stopped deployment. People want Fast, Cheap Internet, but bottom line when they get it, it's not Cheap enough. So Google, Verizon, or any Company that wants to deploy Fiber needs 100% Buy In!



We see it on this site all the time "Yes, I want gig symmetrical internet but no, I'm not paying $70 for it." and unfortunately this group of people are the type of people that will make Google fiber or any other similar service viable and competitive. Joe Schmoe in the suburbs is just fine with their bundled 10/1 from TWC and could care less about the competition. Unfortunately, I believe TWC is correct in their logic on this.



google's double play costs $120 and includes a multiroom dvr.



same package with a multiroom dvr and much much slower speeds (maybe 10mbps) costs can cost between $100-$120 in most markets.



on top of that they let you buy your own cable boxes for $120. I know tons of people who would switch for that alone.



source: » you're looking at it wrong.google's double play costs $120 and includes a multiroom dvr.same package with a multiroom dvr and much much slower speeds (maybe 10mbps) costs can cost between $100-$120 in most markets.on top of that they let you buy your own cable boxes for $120. I know tons of people who would switch for that alone.source: » support.google.com/fiber ··· 18?hl=en

tmc8080

join:2004-04-24

Brooklyn, NY tmc8080 to DocDrew

Member to DocDrew

Facility subsidy isn't anything to shake a stick at.. given the cost projections long term it is viable IF you take into consideration that the ISP would be entering the VOICE & VIDEO businesses once there is a clear long term path to profits in those markets. ATM google offers VOICE service for free. Obviously an upgraded service would/could be something they charge MORE for. Video is also another avenue to profits with a-la-carte video service-- something companies are finally warming up to at least where broadband is killing uptake rates of cable-tv subscriptions (cord/service cutting).



Fix

@charter.com Fix to DocDrew

Anon to DocDrew





»fiber.google.com/legal/p ··· acy.html Don't forget about the Google Fiber privacy policy - giving them permission to log everything you watch and browse on their network. Google has already proven that logging personal data is their top priority.



Skan

@telus.com Skan Anon Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? You're deluding yourself if you don't realize all ISPs do this anyways.



Yes I know

@qwest.net Yes I know to Fix

Anon to Fix

It's just so they will be able to make a star trek computer someday :P give em a break.



Know it all

@comcast.net Know it all to DocDrew

Anon to DocDrew

I ran the numbers behind Google's Gbit play, and the ROI is something in the range of 7-8 years. That's an INCREDIBLY good investment in today's marketplace. In today's economy, anything north of 5% is good, and anything north of 10% is almost unbelievable.



Note, that this number is on its face, raw subscription prices vs cost of delivery and does not include the host of related services Google would surely offer with the Gbit Internet as a platform. (Back up your computers? Sure! TV? Sure? Phone service? Sure! Advertising? Sure! etc..... )



atxpyro

@rr.com atxpyro to DocDrew

Anon to DocDrew

Who cares where it will be in two years. If it tanks, I'll switch back to TWC. I live in Austin. I can't wait to dump TWC and switch to Google Fiber.



DocDrew

Try Everything!

Premium Member

join:2009-01-28

SoCal DocDrew Premium Member Re: Long term viability of Google Fiber? If you live in Austin you won't even seen an active google fiber customer in at least 2 years, so you may never see it if it can't make it that long.



humanfilth

join:2013-02-14

cyber gutter humanfilth Member numbers and descriptions



Most articles tend to avoid saying that the 'fiber will most probably go to the node' and not the home.

Or fiber goes to the basement in an older institution but its still some type of wire to the rest of the building.

fiber to 'each node' is a good upgrade from what is currently there.



Coming soon to your town 'FIBER Internet via satellite!!!'.

Satellite Internet has Fiber too. To that place with all the 12 foot satellite dishes doing the down/up links.

Satellite users get fiberless fiber. Ooooooo. Ahhhhhhhhh.



Users in Canada are pretty well aware of Bell 'FIBE' with that silent E. So it spells FIB as in false, lie, bs, screw you dumbass, not responsible for what the call agent or door to door agent said. Fiber to the node/dslam/pedestal.



This is what happens when there is no government regulations for protection of peoples services in an apartment dwelling.

»forums.redflagdeals.com/ ··· 16609217

The pictures are of a Rogers exclusive building and someone(Rogers?) cut all the cat6 cables in the risers to the units. Instant monopoly.



FTTN FTTH FTTB

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fi ··· to_the_x I so do find it interesting for the cablco to say that they are going(maybe) to run Gbps fiber.Most articles tend to avoid saying that the 'fiber will most probably go to the node' and not the home.Or fiber goes to the basement in an older institution but its still some type of wire to the rest of the building.fiber to 'each node' is a good upgrade from what is currently there.Coming soon to your town 'FIBER Internet via satellite!!!'.Satellite Internet has Fiber too. To that place with all the 12 foot satellite dishes doing the down/up links.Satellite users get fiberless fiber. Ooooooo. Ahhhhhhhhh.Users in Canada are pretty well aware of Bell 'FIBE' with that silent E. So it spells FIB as in false, lie, bs, screw you dumbass, not responsible for what the call agent or door to door agent said. Fiber to the node/dslam/pedestal.This is what happens when there is no government regulations for protection of peoples services in an apartment dwelling.The pictures are of a Rogers exclusive building and someone(Rogers?) cut all the cat6 cables in the risers to the units. Instant monopoly.FTTN FTTH FTTB



chip89

Premium Member

join:2012-07-05

Columbia Station, OH chip89 Premium Member Re: numbers and descriptions AT&T does the same thing to people that bell does it's called u - verse!

Core0000

Premium Member

join:2008-05-04

Somerset, KY Core0000 to humanfilth

Premium Member to humanfilth

I'd say crap like this is what happens when government picks winners and losers, and companies are basically able to buy monopolies...



I have competition when it comes to the dumb tube. Ie, satellite or TV.. but Internet.. so far really its cable or slow ass dsl.



IowaCowboy

Supermarket Hero

Premium Member

join:2010-10-16

Springfield, MA ARRIS SB6183

Netgear R8000

IowaCowboy Premium Member Comcast needs competition I'd rather have Time Warner in town.



What would be real competition would be a requirement that Comcast and other cable companies lease bandwidth (QAM channels) at cost to competing ISPs like the phone companies had to after the Bell divestiture.



Hopefully Comcast will someday be forced to divest their content business and allow competitors access to their lines. AT&T/Bell System did not survive antitrust litigation and neither should Comcast.



CAST SUCKS

@comcastbusiness.net CAST SUCKS Anon They need to push WE HAVE HBO and MAX as well MLB EI and the They need to push WE HAVE HBO and MAX as well MLB EI and the other sports packs.

onthecake

join:2003-08-08

Kansas City, MO onthecake Member Were not scared of the google We are just bumping your speed from 50 to 100 mbps for shits and giggles.



Shaabot

@gatech.edu Shaabot Anon I had cable in Austin 20 years ago... This was long before broadband (Mosaic was invented the last year I lived there), but the local phone monopoly (AT&T) and cable company (don't remember what their brand name was back then) both suck-diddley-ucked, Flanders! I can readily believe they're still garbage.



Only really fun part about moving away from Austin was canceling both of them...

Wilsdom

join:2009-08-06 Wilsdom Member Pricing If only a "small fraction" of subscribers pay for the upgraded product, it's a sign that the cost is too high. $80 for 5mb/s upload is just a poor value.

SunnyD

join:2009-03-20

Madison, AL SunnyD Member Change you can count on. quote: Change can be scary, but its ultimately a good thing. Henry Ford once said that the car was bad for the buggywhip business. Ultimately, competition is good for us. Its going to make us evolve, change, grow in ways that keep us at the cutting edge. And really, the biggest winner out of all of this will be the consumer. More choice and more options are better for everyone. Yup... they will evolve newer and more efficient ways to lobby governments and screw customers I'm sure. Yup... they will evolve newer and more efficient ways to lobby governments and screw customers I'm sure.



partirishman

@fuse.net partirishman Anon What else is TW expected to say? Twenty years ago people were asking why would they need anything faster than a 56k connection. People also were asking why they would every need storage that was more than 250mb. Remember Zip Drives? Time Warner is acting like we are living the early 1990's by saying there is no demand for 1Gb internet. Of course there isn't. No one has it on the residential side except for the lucky people in KC.



I work in the fiber optic to the home industry and whenever we offer new services to areas served by TW, we get on avg 80% penetration. People yearn for an alt to TW. Cheaper, faster, and more reliable. For TW to blog anything other than that garbage would be a surprise.



Phppro

@comcast.net Phppro Anon Re: What else is TW expected to say? Actually, you can get it in many places where I live (the Netherlands). There have been cable companies that offer it here for a few years.



America isn't the only country in the world. From all accounts, I hear your guys' cable companies are absolute garbage.



fizuck

@charter.com fizuck Anon Re: What else is TW expected to say? Are you trying to fight smug with smug? Context is everything.



ddmcd

@comcast.net ddmcd Anon It Ain't Just About Speed, Folks... ... it's also about SERVICE. See ""Comcast Must Die" (» www.ddmcd.com/die.html ) for a bit of why there needs to be more competition.

elray

join:2000-12-16

Santa Monica, CA elray Member TWC is quite competitive In our neck of the woods, $70/month usually gets you both cable modem and basic pay-tv, taxes included, on a 12-month promotion. Now that basic 15/1 service that delivers 30/1 isn't Gbit, but 98% of the public really doesn't care about uber-speed, they care about the cost.



While I expect Google to counter TWC offerings, and eventually roll out a $50 tier and/or bundle pay-tv with the "free" tier, you can rest assured, TWC can meet and beat them.



Burderp

@charter.com Burderp Anon BS Listen, I help run a fairly large colocation. I know very well how the bandwidth game works when you're a carrier.



Time-Warner's position on pricing and tiering has nothing to do with customer demand and everything to do with extracting the maximum amount of money for each subscriber whilst providing the least amount of service they can do without getting beat by the limited competition.



How do I know this? Because we hand out colocation with GigE connections de-facto to each customer we colocate. Do some people use it? Sure. But maybe 1 in a 1000 customers.



If that's true for people collocating servers, it's going to be true for household subscribers--and probably even more so.



Time Warner could've easily provide GigE connections to the home, but they didn't.



They didn't because until Google Fiber was around, they could continue ratcheting the price up in "tiers" in outrages amounts.



And here's the kicker: THEY ALREADY HAVE THE BANDWIDTH AND PAY FOR IT. They've had it all along. That's how it works when you're a carrier. You buy a huge circuit and pay for that circuit whether it's used or not.



They just don't want to give it away for nothing, and they're sore in the rear because Google came to the table and changed the game entirely on them.



err k

@rr.com err k Anon Re: BS you are talking about different ends of the cmts - run a tracert - you will find ge and ae connection on your network out to the internet. putting fiber to home is a different story. are you saying you company give free fiber to home build outs?



Khalsa Kaur

@108.244.114.x Khalsa Kaur Anon We need 600Gig fiber!!! Really 1 Gig is not enough, maybe for now but not for long.

I can do allot with I Gig Google Fibre now!



I love low compression 1080P 120 frames per secong video, its rare now, but can be more common.



I want to watch 3D low compression 4K video, so yes Gig is not all that great.



20 years from now 1Gig will be a joke, but only if Google fiber gets all nation up to speed, then new innovation to Terra gig speeds will come



anon51

@charter.com anon51 Anon Wow People here are paying about $50 for only 15mbs? is this an east coast thing? Here in Nevada we have Charter, who gives us 30mbs for $50 and thats the lowest tier you can buy. Not saying Charters any better than Time Warner or Comcast but damn, 15mbps is terrible. I can barely multitask as is. My brother plays his Xbox on multiplayer, I'm streaming Hulu from my PS3 and my mom is using internet phone service or using the computer, so there is much to be said for faster internet, its not that any one single thing will use the 1gig speed, but it allows multiple users to stream and connect without hiccups. And if PS4 wants to offer streaming games, woooh! That going to require major internet speeds.

trthomps

join:2011-06-06

Mountain View, CA Ubiquiti Unifi Security Gateway

ARRIS SB8200

Ubiquiti UniFi UAP-AC-PRO

trthomps Member Re: Wow I moved from a Charter serviced area and I was actually pretty happy with them. If only Google would stop ignoring their back yard! Try paying $50/month for 5/1 DSL because your only alternative is Comsuck or U-suck and at least the independent DSL provider lets my connection run as fast as it can go and gives me unlimited bandwidth (I still manage to use ~1TB/month). Though I really miss having faster internetI moved from a Charter serviced area and I was actually pretty happy with them. If only Google would stop ignoring their back yard!



Seronis

@rr.com Seronis to anon51

Anon to anon51

said by anon51 : People here are paying about $50 for only 15mbs? And in other places (like mine) 70$ for only 10mbps. TWC charges the most they can get when there are no other options, and sadly where I live there are no other options.



dvd536

as Mr. Pink as they come

Premium Member

join:2001-04-27

Phoenix, AZ dvd536 Premium Member Why not just offer it same old slow speeds and blame it on the internet.



Kerrville TW

@verizon.net Kerrville TW Anon time warner? gimme a break! I live in Kerrville, in the Austin Time Warner market. What a bunch of incompetents. It took seven ... really, seven, trips for them to get basic services at my house. They changed the deal that I subscribed for, took away performance, added cost, eliminated signing premiums. They sent people to install who absolutely knew nothing about their trade. These guys are protected by hubris and lack of meaningful competition.



eeehhh

@fuse.net eeehhh Anon The stupid... It burnssss us! It burnssss us!



Cronos51101

@rr.com Cronos51101 Anon Buy that in a heartbeat... $70 for 1 gig symmetrical? If it's (reasonably) stable I'll take it. Hell, I'd be fine with my crappy TWC speeds/price if it didn't cut out all the time. Works fine on weekdays in the early evening, but on the weekend or at night I might as well unplug the modem and save myself the frustration. What's unstable at 1 gig speeds? 150 megs? I'd still buy that... Back at my parent's place they run Armstrong at something like 500K, but at least it's 500K 24/7.



mrkrj

@76.221.244.x mrkrj Anon lol. What's funny is there are plenty of people like me who are paying just as much as Time Warner customers, and we don't have the option of getting cable internet. We get 100KB/s download rates, 50KB/s download rates, and we can do nothing about it because we don't live in an area deemed profitable enough for laying cable, or fiber optics, or ANYTHING that isn't a tiny improvement over dialup.



I think every single day about how many accumulated hours of my life have been washed down the drain waiting for a ideo to buffer, or a file to download. I often feel like my online education wasn't worth it, because my ISP decides to shut down their connection on a regular basis and it's a fucking chore to even try.



They ignore complaints, and seem to understand that the service they offer is significantly slower than they advertise. They know they have a monopoly, and they couldn't be happier.



"FreedomNet" has become my primary source of depression, and will likely be included in my suicide note.

Terabit

join:2008-12-19 Terabit Member Re: lol. Or you could just move and save yourself the huge headaches. The Midwest region is done anyway, so the jobs are now located where there is also fast internet.