Cox Promises National Gigabit Rollout; Starting With Phoenix, Las Vegas, Omaha 129
As reported by the (variably paywalled) Wall Street Journal, Cox Communications is joining AT&T (and, of course, Google) in building out more gigabit connections to U.S. households. The company "became the biggest U.S. cable operator to commit to rolling out a gigabit-speed broadband offering to all its residential customers, starting this year, the latest sign that the push for ultrafast broadband speeds sparked by Google Inc. is gaining traction throughout the industry. ... [Cox president Pat Esser] said Cox's plan isn't contingent on whether towns and cities offer any sweeteners to Cox to make the rollout easier. Two years ago, Google's ability to get discounted and free services from Kansas City as it constructed its fiber service raised the hackles of local incumbent operators, including Time Warner Cable and AT&T. AT&T has indicated it is interested in getting similar concessions from towns as it rolls out its gigabit speeds." After the three Western and Mid-Western initial cities (Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Omaha) next year, other cities served by Cox should start getting the speed upgrades in 2016. (Similar but briefer story at Light Reading.)
Re:In addition to rolling out... (Score:2, Insightful)
... google fiber's gigabit speeds, Cox should also commit to rolling out google fiber's reasonable prices.
They can't. I get sick of posting this but:
The cost to provide you internet is directly proportional to the density of the population where you live. Google is only installing fiber in very dense areas. As a result it's very very cheap for them to do this. Cable and telco companies have to provide service to a wider array of customers. Cable companies do so in somewhat less dense areas and telcos provide it in fairly remote areas. It costs you about the same to install a remote and provide service when theres 100 houses in the area as it does when there's 5. The difference is how many people are paying you when you're done. Googles only installing in areas where their equipment can serve thousands of people.
What you're really asking for here is tiered services. Those that live outside of city centers should pay for living there. And you, living in an urban area should get very fast service and low rates. To get what you want, rural folks... people in older neighborhoods, are going to pay more for much slower speeds... if they can get internet at all. I personally think we'll all be worse off if that happened.