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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google Networking The Internet

Google Fiber: Why Traditional ISPs Are Officially On Notice 408

MojoKid writes "A few years ago, when Google was determining which city to launch its pilot Google Fiber program, cities all over the country went all-out trying to persuade the search giant to bring all that fantastical bandwidth to their neck of the woods. And with good reason: Google Fiber offers gigabit Internet speeds and even TV service, all at prices that meet or beat the competition. In fact, the lowest tier of Google Fiber service (5Mbps down, 1Mbps up) is free, once users pay a $300 construction fee. If ISPs were concerned before, they should really start sweating it now. Although Google Fiber looked like it would whip traditional ISPs in every regard, with Time Warner Cable cutting prices and boosting speeds for users in Kansas City in a desperate attempt to keep them, surely other ISPs were hoping the pilot program would flame out. Now that Austin is happening, it's clear that it's only a matter of time before Google rolls out its service in many more cities. Further, this jump from legacy Internet speeds to gigabit-class service is not just about people wanting to download movies faster; it's a sea change in what the Internet is really capable of."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Fiber: Why Traditional ISPs Are Officially On Notice

Comments Filter:
  • Oy. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by greenguy ( 162630 ) <(estebandido) (at) (gmail.com)> on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:07PM (#43438181) Homepage Journal

    These are our choices: stick with a variety of crappy ISPs, or consolidate on one that's pretty decent, but whose business model consists of stripping us of our privacy and funneling our Internet experience through its pipes.

    This is not the 21st century I was told to expect.

  • by Aryeh Goretsky ( 129230 ) on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:11PM (#43438199) Homepage

    Hello,

    I think continuing the rollout of Google Fiber is a good move by Google, even if it does not extend to all locations, it forces the competition to upgrade in others to prevent the threat of wholesale abandonment if/when it does arrive. Having a broadband connection connection changes not just the amount of your Internet usage, but what you use the Internet for.

    I remember switching from dial-up to cable Internet access with a single-digit megabit speed back in the mid-1990s, and it opened up a whole new world of activities for me. Instead of buying retail packaged software, I could purchase and download it from the author's site. Starting a download of a video and waiting for it to complete became video streaming with services like YouTube.

    I really have no idea what sort of change a gigabit Internet connection will bring, but it's just as likely to open up all sorts of new services for consumers and opportunities for revenue for software developers and content providers that were unimaginable a few years ago.

    Regards,

    Aryeh Goretsky

  • Re:Oy. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:19PM (#43438241)

    You say that like the current variety of crappy ISPs don't already strip us of our privacy and funnel our internet experience through its pipes.

  • Re:Oy. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:19PM (#43438253)

    Read more Orwell and less Asimov. It will correct your perspective. Remember, your computer is a telescreen.

  • by schwit1 ( 797399 ) on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:23PM (#43438269)

    The ISP oligopoly is not going to sit still. They will get laws passed that put impediments in the way of Google.

  • Gigabit connection (Score:5, Insightful)

    by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:23PM (#43438271) Journal
    1 Gigabit connection for $70 a month?

    I understand why we don't get this on average across the US, because population density is low. But why don't we get it in the Bay Area? We have high population density, and surely there is demand. What is wrong with California?
  • Re:Oy. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:23PM (#43438273)

    You don't think your own isp mines the hell out of any data they can get about you in order to sell it to someone else? You're delusional.

    At least google is pretty up front about what they are doing.

    I'll drop comcast sooooo fast if google ever comes here. Just on price alone it blows the fuck out of comcast. Not to mention comcast being incompetent and clueless most of the time when you need service... And the price keeps going up but the quality does not. AND the invisible cap to our limited unlimited connection. AND all the other bullshit.

    Nobody would ever CHOOSE to use comcast if they had some real choices available. And google is a real choice in two places now. Lets hope they bring it to everyone.

    If i was a ceo of one of these large monopolies... I'd be really worried.. People are cutting their cable for tv in droves.. Soon they'll be cutting it for their connection too. Just because we're all so very very sick of their bullshit and tired of them beyond belief.

  • Re:Oy. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:25PM (#43438289) Journal
    Then don't use Google services. Use their internet connection only.

    They don't actually look at your internet traffic, at least, they don't claim to. Maybe they are lying, but as with any internet service, if you care about privacy you better encrypt that stuff.
  • Re:Oy. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Culture20 ( 968837 ) on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:47PM (#43438399)

    What industry offers consumers a perfect combination of freedom of choice and customer service?

    Pretty much any that doesn't involve government-enforced monopolies. Just imagine how much worse buying gasoline would be if certain companies purchased rights to supply all gasoline to individual cities, locking out competition.

  • by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:47PM (#43438403)

    FTTH is between $1,500 and $3,000 in suburban markets which is recouped by annual customer commitments. The only way these costs are made affordable is through government subsidies.

    Pfft, those prices are right in line with the total price [about.com] for a two year contract on an iPhone, which I don't have but lots of people do. I've had Comcast cable Internet (@home initially) for 14 years now, which is somewhat over $15,000 in total. Customers are laying out enough money is being laid out to justify some re-investment now and then.

  • Re:Oy. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gagol ( 583737 ) on Friday April 12, 2013 @11:57PM (#43438449)
    This! Now Google, please run a trial somewhere in Canada, in the eastern part if possible. Our broadband choices are real crappy.
  • by TaoPhoenix ( 980487 ) <TaoPhoenix@yahoo.com> on Saturday April 13, 2013 @12:21AM (#43438549) Journal

    Lemme try reframing the REALLY sticky question:

    Which would you rather have, the ISP whose business model includes Six Strikes programs in league with the Govt, or Google that just might not, but at the cost of stripping your privacy?

  • by Secret Agent Man ( 915574 ) on Saturday April 13, 2013 @12:48AM (#43438657) Homepage
    And the beautiful thing is that Google has the assets to fight back.
  • Re:Oy. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cjsm ( 804001 ) on Saturday April 13, 2013 @12:57AM (#43438687)

    Pretty much any that doesn't involve government-enforced monopolies. Just imagine how much worse buying gasoline would be if certain companies purchased rights to supply all gasoline to individual cities, locking out competition.

    I agree with this, and I'd like that add the cause of this problem isn't just governments being corrupt, it's the businessmen and corporations corrupting governments.

  • Re:Oy. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Gerzel ( 240421 ) <brollyferret@nospAM.gmail.com> on Saturday April 13, 2013 @01:03AM (#43438709) Journal

    I read cyberpunk novels. Things are pretty much on course.

  • Re:Oy. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Gerzel ( 240421 ) <brollyferret@nospAM.gmail.com> on Saturday April 13, 2013 @01:04AM (#43438715) Journal

    Don't forget to read history and learn how worse it was when a single gas company supplied the whole nation.

  • by Above ( 100351 ) on Saturday April 13, 2013 @01:05AM (#43438723)

    Fiber To The Home (FTTH) is awesome, and how all of America should be connected. Just as the first half of the 20th century was spent wiring all of the homes for the telephone, the first half of the 21st century should be spent wiring for broadband. Gigabit (and higher, in the future) over fiber is what will enable the really interesting applications and increase the entire economic productivity of the nation.

    Google Fiber is not the answer. Worse, several replies in this thread have talked about other competitors, multiple people delivering Gigabit to every neighborhood. This is simply crazy. How many water pipes reach your house? How many sewer pipes? How many roads? How many phone lines? How many cable lines?

    ONE

    Building this sort of infrastructure is a HUGE cost. Much of it is reaching your neighborhood, once there getting to each home is relatively easy. Simply having two competitors comes close to doubling the cost, as the number of homes to bear the cost is cut in half. This is the reason there's no independent company with water pipes in your neighborhood competing for your business. It's also why we granted monopolies for telephone and cable in the past; rather than have government build it we "outsourced" to corporate entities for those services.

    There are really two choices moving forward. We will either end up with FTTH providers with government granted monopolies similar to telephone and cable, or with "municipal fiber" where government provides the fiber infrastructure (similar to water, sewer and roads). There is no other viable end game. In that sense Google is a play in the first camp, becoming a monopoly FTTH provider.

    Over time I suspect this will be no better than our current monopoly providers. Eventually complacency sets in, and the service degrades. There's no long term incentive for a monopoly provider to be cutting edge.

    Unlike water, sewer, and other traditional government services, Government could provide the "pipes" without supplying the "service". Government could operate a Layer 1 or Layer 2 broadband FTTH network, and allow any Layer 3+ provider to connect. Consumers would pay once for the infrastructure (a huge win), and have competition for the service (a huge win). Telephone and cable have no analog. Electricity comes close, where some places let you select the electricity provider; but even there it's fungible asset. Broadband is the only one that provides the layering needed such that the infrastructure can be fully divorced from the service.

    In short, is the Google model better than the current telecom and cable monopolies? Yes. Does it compare with municipal broadband with multiple choices of providers? No, not even close. We should all be demanding much, much more.

  • Re:Oy. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dryeo ( 100693 ) on Saturday April 13, 2013 @01:08AM (#43438733)

    Just imagine how much worse buying gasoline would be if certain companies purchased rights to supply all gasoline to individual cities, locking out competition.

    Probably be an improvement as the cities might compete. Currently here there are 6 companies competing here to sell gasoline. They all put the prices up exactly the same amount at the same time. Most of the time when the price goes up, the only apparent reason (experts agree) is that they can. They follow the fine line of how much they can charge and get away with it. I'm paying the same for a litre of gasoline now as when it was US$150 a barrel and the American dollar was worth 30% more. As business will tend to do, they're happy to split a larger profit then compete for a small profit.
    More on topic, my government has actually been pushing for competition but the new players are all going broke trying to develop the infrastructure and are currently putting themselves up for sale (with the incompetents being the only interested buyers) as they just don't have a huge advertising firm willing to bankroll them. Natural monopolies are very hard to displace even with the government helping (while trying not to be socialist).
    Even AT&T got their original monopoly honestly (with the help of patents) and the government traded them official status as a monopoly in trade for interoperability.

  • Is this a troll? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Saturday April 13, 2013 @01:33AM (#43438805)
    Opec anyone? You know, the gas station you buy at doesn't make anything off the gas, right?

    I do agree on the gov't monopolies suck though. It's really just the gov't paying for the infrastructure and then handing it over to a private citizen for free. If we're gonna have socialism just keep is social. Internet is so useful and essential to better living it should be a public utility. Hell, there was just a story on cnn about how the worst crop yields of the last 10 years are better than the best of the last 50; and it was partially attributed to sharing better farming techniques. Communication is good.
  • Re:Oy. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tmosley ( 996283 ) on Saturday April 13, 2013 @07:00AM (#43439571)
    Yeah, having the price drop by 90% over the course of their monopoly, which was enforced only by the superiority of their product and the efficiency of their business practices (else their competition, which had 10% of the market share, would have taken over).

    Honestly, it's like these kids go to high school and just accept whatever crap is fed to them as fact.
  • Re:Oy. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Gonoff ( 88518 ) on Saturday April 13, 2013 @08:49AM (#43439849)

    What industry offers consumers a perfect combination of freedom of choice and customer service?

    Pretty much any that doesn't involve government-enforced monopolies.

    That was a very politically limited statement. "Limited how?" people might wonder. So I will expand. It is first limited to the USA which contains 4% of the human race. Inside the USA, it is limited to a subset of opinion.

    Among the 96%, there are some people who feel that corporations are the only things that give you free choice. The people are not only conservatives the but they are also foolish and uninformed too. Corporations are the opposite of free choice. They are big and successful because they sell a lot of the same thing. Your choice is take it or leave it.

    State regulation is what keeps corporations honest. It prevents fraud, and cartels for a start. Just imagine what the banking industry would get up to if some idiots deregulated everything...

Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

Working...