Google Fiber Launches In Provo — and Here's What It Feels Like 338
Velcroman1 writes "I've seen the future. It's called gigabit Internet by Google Fiber, and it just launched in my hometown of Provo, Utah, the second of three scheduled cities to get speeds that are 100 times faster than the rest of America. 'What good is really fast Internet if the content stays the same?' you may ask yourself. I certainly did, before testing the service. Besides, my "high speed" Internet from Comcast seemed fast enough, enabling my household to stream HD videos, load web pages quickly, and connect multiple devices as needed, largely without hiccup. I was wrong. Using gigabit Internet, even in its infancy, opened my eyes to speed and reminded me of why I love the Internet."
Throughput? Latency? Peerings? (Score:4, Insightful)
What was your throughput like? If they're providing GigE, you still won't see it on a single workstation. Did you measure the uplink speed?
What was your latency like? You could have GigE, but if it's 1000ms pings, that's going to be worthless for most of this audience.
Where are they peering? What did your traceroutes look like?
There are lots of ways we can quantify how good or bad a connection is. You missed the important parts.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's the Google network, than that would be one of the most peered with networks in the world you are connected to.
I think Google doesn't even buy transit. Just like a Tier 1 network.
So peering shouldn't be an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Google IS a tier 1 network. They own a significant amount of fiber on long term leases. Where they actually selling access (outside their test projects) they would be one of the larger international networks.
Re: (Score:2)
Peering is *always* an issue. Some companies do it well. Some do not.
At this point, no one has said who the carrier really is. It could be Google. It could be a locally source carrier. A few traceroutes would at have given us a hint.
Re:Throughput? Latency? Peerings? (Score:4, Informative)
He doesn't mention latency, but he does say he clocked 915 Mb/s both up and down.
You could try reading the article.
But to what? (Score:2)
Most people who love to post these high speedtest numbers are people who's provider runs a speedtest server. Ok, so you can get that speed to their central office. Big deal, I get those speeds to our speedtest server at work... because it is down the hall from me.
A real speed test involves going off network and a good distance away. I generally test to FastServ Networks in California because they have a solid network on their test server, it is off my ISP (at home and at work) and in a different state. If m
ISPs and Net Neutrality (Score:2)
I've been perusing the Google Fiber site trying to understand how it works. Is Google going to be the ISP? Are they just working with local ISPs to implement some of this?
And if I get Google fiber who is in charge of making sure I can't get all the content of the web at equal speeds?
Re:ISPs and Net Neutrality (Score:5, Informative)
Carrier Has Arrived (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny you should mention Net Neutrality, because this is what it's all about. And an example of how farsighted Google is compared to their opposition, always a step ahead in their strategic planning. If Net Neutrality continues to get rolled back, expect Internet companies to get squeezed hard by the big ISPs (I predict Netflix will be the most vulnerable example of this). "Nice Market you got there. Would be a shame if anything happened to it."
Google is anticipating such a development, and demonstrating to those providers that they are not quite untouchable as they think. They don't need to roll out Google Fiber everywhere (though that would be awesome), just do it enough times to demonstrate to ISPs that they can do it anywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
They don't need to roll out Google Fiber everywhere (though that would be awesome), just do it enough times to demonstrate to ISPs that they can do it anywhere.
they can do it anywhere, but not everywhere. not even google could afford to fiber enough of the US to even put a small dent in Big ISP's wallet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I run about 20gb/s. I have have higher connections elsewhere, and frankly I don't see a big difference most of the time as most web sites can
Re: (Score:2)
I would not run google as an ISP.
I try to avoid google; the last thing I'd want is to have them at the other endpoint of my link!
bandwidth be damned; privacy is worth more to me than that.
Really? (Score:2)
Even when I use the gigabit connection at work, I don't notice a huge difference between that and the 50mbit connection at home unless I'm doing a big download (but even so, I rarely get gigabit speeds unless I'm connecting to one of the servers on the other end of our gigabit pipe -- the internet and server on the other end tend to limit the speed).
Pages don't seem to load any faster (which I assume is due to rendering time and time to wait on slow ad networks to spit out their javascript to let the page
Re: (Score:3)
I don't see a whole lot of use for the gigabit speed right now, you're right. The biggest thing I see is the symmetrical connection, and significantly lower prices than competitors at similar speeds. 1000/1000 may not be all that useful in the vast majority of cases unless you have a lot of people sharing the bandwidth, but 100/100 for the same price as the 15/1.5 I'm limited to now would be huge. Online backup would be nearly transparent (it took about 3 weeks on my connection, and that was only backing up
Re: (Score:2)
I have gigabit to my desk at work, though the pipe outside the company is maybe a gigabit per 100 of us. Besides the Linux-ISO-in-seconds thing, the best benefit is the complete lack of latency on random data hogs like Google maps panning, or how quickly I get the HD feed on streaming Netflix (at the company gym onto my iPad). Or really the ability to do all of the above simultaneously with the guy next to you, and not really notice anything. That just doesn't happen at home right now on a 40 MBPS AT
Re: (Score:2)
You're still using 8 megabits? (Score:5, Funny)
Chattanooga Too (Score:5, Interesting)
Chattanooga has symmetric 1gbps internet available to the entire city and suburbs for the same price as google fiber (but no "zero-cost" option for low speed). And, as a plus, it isn't google, it is the local electricity co-op.
https://epbfi.com/internet/ [epbfi.com]
Re:Chattanooga Too (Score:4, Funny)
But but but ... who's mining your browsing data then?
Re: (Score:2)
Chattanooga has symmetric 1gbps internet available to the entire city and suburbs for the same price as google fiber (but no "zero-cost" option for low speed). And, as a plus, it isn't google, it is the local electricity co-op.
Was the rollout spurred on by the news of Google Fiber? If so, then Google will call that a win for them.
Re: (Score:2)
No, they were deploying well ahead of google. They were upgrading their electricity command-and-control system to fiber and realized they could also be an ISP for only marginally more money since they were running fiber on all the electric poles anyway.
There pricing is directly inspired by google, the gig price used to be around $300/month until about 6 months ago. But they are probably making more money with the lower price level because practically no one paid for 1 gig anyway. Bringing the price down
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You say that like it's a bad thing...
Re: (Score:3)
> Chattanooga's fiber requires massive taxpayer subsidies as well as cross-subsidy from utility ratepayers.
That is incorrect. They took the federal stimulus for rural isp money in order to accelerate roll-out to rural areas, but they were on track to do it without the money at a slower rate. As for cross-subsidy, it is the other way, the ISP service is subsidizing the electric ratepayers by about 20 million a year. [timesfreepress.com]
not fast enough for this tiger (Score:2, Funny)
Is there a special Olympics for underestimating one's needy narcissism?
There are first world problems, and then there are 90210 problems, and then there is the unreliable gardener who once over-trimmed the bonsai tree beside the Arowana pond in the sunken garden of your private Luxembourg vacation vil
Re:not fast enough for this tiger (Score:4, Insightful)
Today, try doing anything other than text-only email over 56Kb dialup.
Broadband uptake enabled a new class of Internet sites and services. Google is betting that history will repeat itself by kicking speeds up by two orders of magnitude. It also has the beneficial side-effect of lighting a fire under AT&T's slothful ass.
Also keep in mind that GFiber offerings are symmetric. That means you get to upload your photos and videos at 1Gb/sec as well, and not through the 768Kb straw that DSL and cable providers decided was "good enough" for consumer-class Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Let this be the beginning of the end of centralized social networks like facebook and g+.
The biggest value they provided was photo hosting. Now you can do it at home on your own personal server. Its just going to take some smart decentralized (p2p?) software to handle it.
Re: (Score:3)
15 years ago, nobody "needed" broadband. Dialup was, "good enough."
That really isn't true. Dialup was all we had but it certainly was slow as all fuck and EVERYBODY hated it. I had plenty of friends at the time that invested thousands of dollars to have ISDN to their house because dialup sucked that much.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank for informing us about Google fiber (Score:2)
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4709907&cid=46062875
I'm sure you could flesh it out more with your families in home experience, in regards to the various bandwidth related applications and device we use these days. It's great that it reminded you love the internet, but a little content on why could have helped. Google Fiber is a month or two away from
No local RSN's and the old Veracity had root (Score:2)
https://static.googleuserconte... [googleusercontent.com]
for 84601 you should get
http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/... [directv.com]
also they seem to be missing the BIG TEN overflow channels.
Veracity seemed to least have root sports.
http://residential.veracitynet... [veracitynetworks.com]
What google feels like? (Score:5, Insightful)
Google Fiber Launches In Provo — and Here's What It Feels Like
Why all the hate for Google?
Here in New Hampshire we have to choose between Fairpoint or Comcast.
Would you like to know what *that* feels like?
Re:What google feels like? (Score:5, Funny)
Choice between Fairpoint and Comcast - Like having sex with a porcupine.
Is that pretty close?
Sounds like this article was written by Google (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all Google Internet was not 100 times faster in Provo. Provo has had fiber that could go 1Gbps for almost 10 years now and everything he said he could was being done 10 years ago. The biggest difference is that Google now owns the $40M fiber network that they paid $1 for instead of Provo City. What makes it even better is the citizens still have to pay for the $40M bond that built the network. But wait, there's more. What they didn't tell you is Google is kicking all commercial customers off their network and now government agencies and schools have to pay for the network instead of getting it for free.
To sum it up, Provo gave up millions of dollars a year in revenue for the opportunity to have Google come to town and charge them for the same Internet that they already had for free while simultaneously offending all business owners by kicking them off the network and sticking them with the bill.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sounds like this article was written by Google (Score:5, Interesting)
To sum it up, Provo gave up millions of dollars a year in revenue for the opportunity to have Google come to town and charge them for the same Internet that they already had for free while simultaneously offending all business owners by kicking them off the network and sticking them with the bill.
Sure they did. According to this story [sltrib.com], Provo was paying over $3 million annually just in debt service on this fiber (called "iProvo") and losing money on the service even ignoring those bond payments. It might have had "millions of dollars a year in revenue", but it was a net loss.
Google now owns the $40M fiber network that they paid $1 for
Sounds like iProvo was such a money sink that Provo would have paid someone to take it on - even ignoring the bonds. That's not the sign of a $40 million asset, but of a considerable liability.
Re: (Score:3)
To sum it up, Provo gave up millions of dollars a year in revenue for the opportunity to have Google come to town and charge them for the same Internet that they already had for free while simultaneously offending all business owners by kicking them off the network and sticking them with the bill.
Provo was caught between two right wing ideals, being pro business/growth and being anti government. Provo knew that a fiber network in the city would make the city more appealing to businesses and residences. Enough people were excited about business and growth opportunities in it that they were able to get a bond passed to build the network. But, the only way to appease the anti-government folks was to not increase taxes on the population and only have customers pay back the bond. The anti-government folk
Re: (Score:3)
A wild competition appeared (Score:5, Interesting)
An interesting side effect of Google's fiber offering is the sudden competition it's putting in some places where it hardly existed before, and allowing us to examine the results.
I have a friend who lives in Provo (about 10 miles south of me) and will be eligible for Google Fiber when they open it up in his area this March. He has had Comcast Internet service for a couple of years now and is planning on switching to Google when he can. However, about a month ago a Comcast representative came directly to his home, unscheduled, to talk about a "new and improved" service level he was now eligible for.
This Comcast rep told my friend that, effective immediately (all he had to do was call Comcast), he could change his current ISP service to a package that offered 250 Mbps down / 150 Mbps up, no bandwidth cap, for $25 / month. To compare, he was currently getting 25 Mbps down and paying $75 / month. A couple of weeks ago he made the switch and has been very happy with the order of magnitude speed increase and 66% price drop.
I understand the concept behind competition and the magical invisible hand, but this sort of behavior sickens me. If Comcast can drop their prices and increase their service offerings so quickly in response to new competition, it just goes to show how badly they are screwing over most of their other customers. And, of course, when I called them to inquire about this amazing new Internet service they were offering, I was told it was a "not available" in my area and that different "geographical regions" have different prices.
There's a real argument here for municipal/state owned and funded fiber networks being leased out to various commercial (or otherwise) ISPs. If Google and Comcast can both offer this kind of bandwidth for these prices, the current state of affairs in most of the rest of the country is completely unjustified. I'm sick and tired of a few "elite" corporations getting an effective monopoly on Internet service offerings in vast areas, able to charge anything they please because people have no other option.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you may be incorrect on those speeds. Comcast speed tiers are 3/6/25/50/105/515(certain Northeast markets only) There may be regional offers on price but the actual speeds are uniform
Re: (Score:2)
I forgot one tier, some areas have a 305 package also
But it doesn't actually SAY what it feels like (Score:2)
So I can only assume it's like having sex with a supermodel on a flying unicorn.
zooming speed (Score:2)
So you can get your Advertisements and spam delivered even faster...
Cool (Score:2)
What's the data cap?
It Feels Like I Just Got Home (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]
Provo's nearest neighbor is the NSA! (Score:4, Insightful)
Browsing From Inside A Level3 Datacenter (Score:3, Interesting)
Until you experience the speed ... (Score:5, Interesting)
... I was a researcher in a very advance research facility. At that time we had a (supposedly) "big pipe" to the Net, a 100Mbps line. (That was several decades ago)
I was feeling kinda "proud" that I get to "play" with the "high speed link" to the world, that I, somehow, is on a higher pedestal than the rest of the peons ... until I visited South Korea.
In a friend's home, yes, private house, I experienced for the first time, what raw speed meant.
The 1Gbps speed just blew my fucking mind away, and imagine, they got that in their home, and I, a researcher, only get to play a supposedly "big 100Mbps pipe".
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:5, Interesting)
I brought up quite a few fresh GigE circuits in datacenters. For the first day or so, it was exclusively mine to use. Once I got bandwidth monitoring up, I got to see what the line could really do.
With plenty of sites, I couldn't pull more than 1Mb/s. Your throughput is still totally dependent on the throughput of every point from their disk to you.
My laptop couldn't saturate a GigE line. The same as the previous statement applies. If the laptop won't pass 1000Mb/s for any portion, you won't get the full speed. It could be the bus, disk, or just the software handling the connection.
To saturate the line, I'd bring up a few idle servers, and then have multiple large downloads going to multiple places. Like, downloading distro ISOs from various mirrors.
Sometimes the equipment you have in between is the bottleneck. I put GigE in at my house, because I have servers and my home LAN. The consumer router for the home LAN I was using did GigE on all ports. I couldn't pull more than 80Mb/s through it. I swapped it for a slightly better consumer router, which will pass about 400Mb/s.
Even with 400Mb/s between the two rooms, I can see the throughput suffer if a server is overloaded, or is doing something dumb.
Watching my uplink graphs, I see that I very occasionally pull 80Mb/s from the Internet. Actually last night was 85.3Mb/s. They are tiny spikes when intensive traffic hits. I believe, because of when it happens, that's a backup event from a remote site. Normal daily use is single digit Mb/s. Like, someone on the LAN as I'm writing this is playing a FPS online. Their latency is in the single digits. They're pulling a whopping 220Kb/s.
I guess if you had 5 or 6 torrent boxes running, you could saturate your GigE line. Normal use, most people won't be able to tell the difference between a 10Mb/s uplink and a 100Mb/s uplink.
Re: (Score:3)
Normal use, most people won't be able to tell the difference between a 10Mb/s uplink and a 100Mb/s uplink.
That's easier than you think for a normal person to see these days. Four separate people streaming four separate HD streams can run right up against the 10 megabit ceiling and wish for more.
Of course, the cable company desperately wants to strangle that use case, and force all of their subscribers over to their ultimate walled garden of digital cable and On Demand(TM) streaming. It's just that normal people are resisting. Damn those normal people anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Well.. I have a 75/35 line, and I measure throughput at my firewall. Looking across today, most (like 99%) was below 10Mb/s. There were a few spikes, not nothing really amazing.
I've monitored offices with 30 to 50 users, and a 100Mb/s link was overkill for them.
One place I worked, they were perfectly satisfied with 300Mb/s for 3,000+ users. It was a quiet secret that the desks were locked down to 5Mb/s, and people still watched YouTube and Netflix from their desks. I won't say it was 3,000 users al
Re: (Score:2)
Normal use, most people won't be able to tell the difference between a 10Mb/s uplink and a 100Mb/s uplink.
Nonsense. I can tell the difference between the 10mb/s and the 30mb/s fios I'm using.
And for everyone who keeps moaning about how 1gb/s is not anything you can use, go back to your 8086.
Re: (Score:2)
It all depends on a lot of things besides the disks. Can the NIC actually provide full line speed? What's the bus speed?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I... [wikipedia.org]
It's called SI or The International System of Units.
Re: (Score:2)
In Best Korea we have 1000Gbps to all homes in the country. Even researchers.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, 1Gbps, that's like half an hour until you hit the monthly cap!
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's because in Korea, Star Craft is a professional sport and latency is not acceptable. When you live in a country where the population takes online video games seriously, there can be no lag.
Re: (Score:3)
Capacity != latency. you could have a 1Gb SAT link and still be driven near mad by the high latency :-(
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why "stream" things as Google advertises?
Because
Streaming is stupid technology
For the consumer. For a provider, it's a godsend. Grant access to your material in some obfuscatory wrapper and call it an "app", and now you control all access, assuming you scramble the encryption keys once a week and bake them deep enough into the wrapper when you update. If your connection speed is fast enough that an end user can't tell the difference between it and their hard drive, there goes a good half? three quarters? of the incentive for bored nerds to liberate your content.
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:4, Informative)
Why "stream" things as Google advertises?
Because
Streaming is stupid technology
For the consumer. For a provider, it's a godsend. Grant access to your material in some obfuscatory wrapper and call it an "app", and now you control all access, assuming you scramble the encryption keys once a week and bake them deep enough into the wrapper when you update.
It can be good consumers too -- I don't want to wait to download an entire movie before watching it, I want to click "play" and have it start playing immediately. And I don't necessarily want to store every movie or video clip I watch anyway - there are lots of things I watch only once and never want to see again. Streaming certainly can be bad for consumers, but it has its good points.
If your connection speed is fast enough that an end user can't tell the difference between it and their hard drive, there goes a good half? three quarters? of the incentive for bored nerds to liberate your content.
What does connection speed have to do with pirating content? I don't think anyone pirates a movie because it loads too slow from Netflix, given that bittorrenting a movie can take all night.
Re: (Score:2)
With a DVR I don't have to wait for the entire movie to download, I can start watching it immediately and then pause while it's still downloading. Then if I rewind or watch it later there is no need to redownload a second time.
Even better you can have these thngs downloaded already for you, if you manage to have self control instead of demanding instant gratification. Schedule a download for the middle of the night so that it's ready to go. Friends coming over for movie night means you can prepare for it
Re: (Score:2)
With a DVR I don't have to wait for the entire movie to download, I can start watching it immediately and then pause while it's still downloading. Then if I rewind or watch it later there is no need to redownload a second time.
Even better you can have these thngs downloaded already for you, if you manage to have self control instead of demanding instant gratification. Schedule a download for the middle of the night so that it's ready to go. Friends coming over for movie night means you can prepare for it instead of having them groan when the movie starts skipping or rebuffering.
I already have "plan ahead if you want to watch a movie" service, can get pretty much any movie I want, even those that aren't available in any streaming catalog, and I can have my movies "downloaded" to my home in 2 - 3 days with full Blu-ray quality. They arrive in the mail in a red envelope.
Re: (Score:2)
But how many things are ever watched more than once?
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Four words: Small children and Disney.
You have no idea.
Re: (Score:2)
But how many things are ever watched more than once?
Come to my house and see how my daughter loves to watch the same romance movies over and over.
Re: (Score:2)
What, people watch things only once? We're now in an official snapchat alternate universe?
All those people who buy DVDs, they spend $20 just to see a movie one time only? What about rewinding in case someone missed something while they were off making a sandwich? Or the kids shouting over and over "I wanna see Finding Nemo AGAIN!" I know I rewatch TV shows with a clif hanger just before a new season of someting starts so I can get caught up again, or to untangle some threads (ie, Dr Who, Lost, etc).
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Gotta improve the UI too. A 15 year old DVR has a better experience than streaming this stuff. Rewind 5 seconds to catch something that was missed and the streaming video wants to pause and rebuffer.
Then there's the content: streaming usually won't let you skip past ads, and closed captioning and alternate audio channels are rare even with the big boys of streaming even though these are considered must-have features for traditional media.
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, why "stream" things as Google advertises? Streaming is stupid technology...
Not everything can or should be downloaded in advance. One thing I hate about our Internet is that we have almost no upload bandwidth. VoIP is stuttery. Complete off-site backups via the Internet are impractical. HD video calls are an unattainable dream.
It even has OpSec implications. I want to host a Tor exit node, so I can generate plausible deniability. I can't afford the upload bandwidth.
I hate the traditional carriers, and I can't wait for the Google vision for the Internet to be realized.
Re: Until you experience the speed ... (Score:3)
Re:I don't see need for 1Gps either (Score:4)
Maybe a few years ago. I just did a quick google check and everything seems to point to around 1.2 to 1.3MB. On a 1mb/s connection, that's about 10 seconds to load a webpage. I'm sure popular websites like Facebook and Twitter (with large images and photo galleries) are significantly higher.
You also need to keep in mind all of the things we currently cannot do because of these restrictions. I'm a scout leader and often take lots of photos at our meetings and outtings. For privacy reasons we aren't comfortable posting them on social websites. I would love to be able to put them on my home server and let parents download them directly (possibly with a password or something), but our shit upload speeds (2.5Mb/s is about the max around here) make that VERY difficult. Throw in some videos and the simple act of sharing media with parents has saturated my internet connection to the point where I can't even receive emails.
Even something as simple as uploading a high definition video to youtube can literally take overnight for the vast majority of North Americans.
Re:I don't see need for 1Gps either (Score:4, Insightful)
First of all, we shouldn't have to rely on offsite hosting, we should be able to do this ourselves. Second of all, some of us like to keep control of our files ourselves, particularly when it comes to banking files, personal photos, tax forms, etc. Third of all, syncing with services like Google Drive can be a P.I.T.A. to set up and can be very disruptive when these services are modified or closed down.
If we had proper (bi-directional) home internet connections we wouldn't need large storage devices with us and could simply remotely access our files from home whenever we want to listen to music or transfer a report we've been working on for work/school/etc.
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:5, Informative)
While it's true that the US has much few people per square mile, that's because most people live in cities. There's absolutely no reason that our major cities (at least) can't match the internet speeds of any other similarly sized place in the world.
New Yor City has 27,532 people per square mile. Vegas isn't even that dense and has nearly 4300 people per square mile.
Slow connection speeds in US cities have nothing at all to do with population density.
Re: (Score:3)
New Yor City has 27,532 people per square mile.
FWIW, Seoul and Hong Kong are probably the two cities with the cheapest high-speed internet. I recall seeing something on the order of 1gbps for the rough equivalent of $25/month in those cities in news articles past.
Seoul's population density is 45,000 per sq mile [asleepatheavensgate.com]
Hong Kong is 67,000 per sq mile [wikipedia.org]
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:4, Insightful)
What they have is governments committed to technological progress instead of telecom profits.
Re: (Score:2)
This is also a red-herring. Go ask Verizon how "easy" it is/was to get fiber everywhere in NYC. Red tape out the wazzo from the city itself. And then an independent fight with every major property owner. And then the city has to put it's nose in there again. (damned extensive grounding requirements for a f'ing glass fiber connectivity device.)
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:4, Interesting)
This is why Google is rolling out to KC, Provo and Austin. I know in KC, the city agreed to streamline and cut a deal on government costs on rolling out the hardware - less giving "big business" a break, and more taking the course of action that's best for it's citizens, really. I believe Provo and Austin have done similar, and if I recall, Provo even had a small, existing fiber rollout in place to start from.
Re: (Score:2)
This is also a red-herring. Go ask Verizon how "easy" it is/was to get fiber everywhere in NYC. Red tape out the wazzo from the city itself. And then an independent fight with every major property owner. And then the city has to put it's nose in there again. (damned extensive grounding requirements for a f'ing glass fiber connectivity device.)
Why wouldn't you ground it?
Is the fiber not armored? Does it not have a metal shield?
It could be rather unpleasant dicking around with your unplugged router and getting 110 zap because you bone headed neighbor decided it was ok to run his fiber thru his toaster of something.
Re: (Score:3)
Depends what they are using. The fibre used by our local telecom has no metal shield, there's no reason for it. The metal shield on copper is to limit RF interference. glass doesn't have that problem.
(and before you say the metal is to protect from physical damage, actually look at the cables used by telcos. the metal is paper thin and wouldn't protect against anything, it's the plastic sheath that offers the physical protection, not the metal.)
Re: (Score:2)
All the fiber I've dealt with (and yes, son, I've dealt with a lot of it) is armored, for direct burial.
Re: (Score:2)
NYC, Chicago, LA, and other major metros have a long history of getting burned (literally) by utility providers. They enacted local city codes to try to stop the tragedies from repeating in their city again - maybe not always efficient or helpful to cutting edge tech, but given their histories, they're ready to let other cities "try things out" first.
Re:Until you experience the speed ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, but do you really want to live in a country where there are on average 1200 people per square mile, vs the USA where there is on average 84 people per square mile? http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/... [infoplease.com] my source.
People keep blaming lackluster USA broadband options on density, but when I lived in a USA city with a density of 17,000 people per square mile, my broadband choices were Comcast with up to 15mbit (12mbit was more typical, except for when it was worse or down), or AT&T DSL (not U-Verse) which could offer "up to" 1.5mbit due to my distance from the central office. When you look at my entire metropolitan area [wikipedia.org], it encompasses 7000 square miles (about half the size of The Netherlands) and has a density of 1000 people per square mile.
So yeah, if I lived in a field in the middle of Nebraska, I probably shouldn't complain when I have limited options, but if I live in a city, why do my poor broadband choices get blamed on population density?
Re: (Score:2)
Where in the SF Bay area do you live? I ask because I had crappy DSL (and it doesn't matter who your ISP was, speed is the same; I had DSLExtreme for years) cause I lived 10k+ feet from the office and switched to Comcast and I get 50mbit+ now.
BTW, I'm in CV.
Re: (Score:2)
Where in the SF Bay area do you live? I ask because I had crappy DSL (and it doesn't matter who your ISP was, speed is the same; I had DSLExtreme for years) cause I lived 10k+ feet from the office and switched to Comcast and I get 50mbit+ now.
BTW, I'm in CV.
That was when I lived in the Sunset district of SF -- I've moved out of the city since then and now have Sonic.Net [sonic.net] Fusion DSL. 15mbit (5500 feet from the CO) plus a free phone line for $39/month (taxes + equipment rental make it closer to $55) -- great deal, great service. I still have a Comcast 50Mbit connection, but will drop that as soon as my 12 month term is up -- when it works, it works well, but once or twice a week, packet loss and latency go through the roof, and the line becomes unusable for 30 -
Re: (Score:2)
If you're in the Bay Area, then you had more choices than just the big two, but you have to do your homework via web searches &asking on forums like DSLReports, rather than rely on ads to know about them. Just to name the most well-known ones that I know are available all over the Bay: Sonic.net & DSLExtreme both have DSL and Fusion (if you're not too far from the central office), plus Sonic.net has fiber in a couple of cities now.
Regarding DSL, you can also have shitty speeds because of how old yo
Re: (Score:2)
If you're in the Bay Area, then you had more choices than just the big two, but you have to do your homework via web searches &asking on forums like DSLReports, rather than rely on ads to know about them. Just to name the most well-known ones that I know are available all over the Bay: Sonic.net & DSLExtreme both have DSL and Fusion (if you're not too far from the central office), plus Sonic.net has fiber in a couple of cities now.
No, I really didn't. Or rather I did have some DSL options, but they all ran over the same AT&T copper, so all gave equivalent speeds -- Sonic's Fusion product wasn't available in my CO at that time, but they could have given me ADSL at the same speed that AT&T offered.
Re: (Score:2)
It's all that desert, man, like, sucking the energy out of the glass fiber to feed the crystals in Taos, oh - and the sand - like, have you ever seen the white sands in New Mexico? And, then, you can go North to the mountains, where it's colder, but you can still get baked, legally.
So, yeah, like no surprise that density of the population is causing a problem with getting your data faster, ya know?
Re: (Score:2)
EMI, shorts, corrosion, moisture and so on.
Hmm not exactly. You still run copper alongside fiber - you need it mainly to power the repeaters, but on some fiber runs you also want it to encase the fiber line in a copper shielding to protect it while still being a little bit flexible. And copper does carry all of those drawbacks no matter what (though EMI is much easier to correct for.) In addition to that, in urban settings, you're more likely to run into people digging holes in seemingly arbitrary spots to say...put up a mailbox, fence post, etc. Di
Re: (Score:2)
The population density of my county is 2455 people per square mile. I prefer the urban bits of my surroundings-- the suburban sprawl of the less dense parts sometimes does little for walkability.
Re:Obligatory car analogy (Score:4, Insightful)
What bitrate are those "1080p" videos at? Oh, I thought so.
Imagine having that 1Gb connection. Imagine that you can't use it all but that you can do anything you want with it. do you think maybe you might sit down and ponder, that you might try to imagine better ways to use it? Cloud backup service is obvious and done. Video is done and being done. Keep going. Just sit and use your imagination and I suspect that you will eventually think of something new that cannot be done now with existing normal bandwidth. Maybe it's something silly, maybe it's something crazy, maybe it turns out to be something life changing.
THAT is why we need to have bandwidth well over and above what we have now. We need to have enough that people sit down and think up new ways to use, innovate, maybe find a way to save a life or help another. We've done this with CPU and GPU for a long time, disk space too. My first HDD was 40MEG and nearly the size of a shoebox. Suppose way back then someone had spoken as you have and decided that we would never need more and was listened to. We need to bring fuel for dreams and imagination - right now we're WELL behind the curve for that...
Re: (Score:3)
and yet we apparently have dark fiber all over the place. Aren't we squeezing ever more capacity out of existing fiber? Is bandwidth somehow getting more expensive? That would be odd now wouldn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
The content is in the first link.
It could have been identified better, but it is there.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe click the first link in the story ?
Nah, that would never work.
Re:But... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps this will kick the other ISP's into actually competing again
not when comcast et al. are lining the pockets of local governments to keep out competition.
third or fourth, not first (Score:2)
> but it seems curious to me that Provo in Utah County is the first city to get this service from Google
Does it seem less curious when you realize Provo is NOT the city? Kansas City, Kansas got it, then Kansas City, Missouri. Before either of those, a neighbourhood in California. So there were two and a half other cities before Provo.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe my tin foil hat is too tight but it seems curious to me that Provo in Utah County is the first city to get this service from Google when just a little way up I-15, at the point of the mountain, is the largest NSA facility in the country. Just sounds like a match made in heaven.
Google is a front for the NSA. Can't believe there are people who still don't know this.
Google Pwnz the NSA, or was it vice versa... Can't believe there are people who still don't know that one of those is true.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who's going to cry when the local Comcast or Time Warner is boarded up?