Google Fiber Drops Free Basic Service In Its Original City (engadget.com) 98
An anonymous reader writes: When Google Fiber first rolled out in Kansas City, it offered a free 5Mbps service if you were willing to pay a construction fee. As of recent, Google has quietly dropped that free tier in its first Fiber area, and has replaced it with a 100Mbps option that costs $50 per month. Anyone using the free tier has until May 19th to say they want to keep it. Note: Google will still offer the free service in low-income areas. Google Fiber customers in Austin and Provo still have the choice of the free internet option; Atlanta never had it to start with. Recode suggests this may reflect a broader change in strategy: Google has fiercer competition from incumbent carriers, so it may have to offer a fast-but-affordable selection to get those customers for whom the gigabit option is either too costly or sheer overkill.
Something something..... (Score:5, Funny)
'...pray I don't alter it further.'
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you Brennis.
Re: (Score:1)
was this before or after all the competition was driven out?
Hey! MS says "QUIT STEALING OUR PLAYS !!" (Score:1)
Google, I expected better of you!
(Not!)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, but you have to live in Japan, with constant fear of being attacked by the crazy Norks, or Chinese, or worse still, a lost battalion of US Marines from W W 2. No thanks.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As surprising as it might seem to some the Norks, Chinese and lost US battalions kill less Japs combined per decade than crazy gun people in the US kill every week.
I would say the fear is slightly unwarranted.
Re: (Score:2)
As surprising as it might seem to some the Norks, Chinese and lost US battalions kill less Japs combined per decade than crazy gun people in the US kill every week.
From the news we get over here, I get the impression that, in Japan, by far the biggest wedge of the "Cause of Death" pie is labeled "self".
Re: Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Hell, what about giant, radioactive dinosaurs??? Or anime villains???
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:4, Funny)
They have a large stable of miniskirt-wearing schoolgirls, constipated angry guys, giant mecha, and ninja to handle just those situations.
Hey you left out the biggest threat... (Score:2)
Hey you left out the biggest threat...Godzilla!
Re: (Score:2)
Until the Chinese quadruple their blue-water sealift capacity, I'm not too worried about them either.
I have nothing to fear from Marines....I AM a Marine.
My chances of being murdered by an unstable law enforcement officer are ~0.0% in Japan. Being a mi
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing is 3g/4g connections while cheap still have data caps which sucks.
Re: (Score:3)
I live in Finland and our Internet access speeds and fees are decent. ;) Done in perfect Finnish style.
How's that for a forceful retort?
Re: (Score:1)
When I installed WoW it downloaded the client at 100MB/s, 19GB went so fast I thought I already had it installed previously.
Obligatory: "I live in Australia - our ISP's cache (not pronounced "cash") too.
Re: (Score:2)
When I installed WoW it downloaded the client at 100MB/s, 19GB went so fast I thought I already had it installed previously.
Obligatory: "I live in Australia - our ISP's cache (not pronounced "cash") too.
So you're saying that in Australia the ISPs don't know the proper pronunciation of "cache" ?
Re: (Score:2)
Fraudband, enough said.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for Tony.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Japan is also much more densely populated than the United States.
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:4, Funny)
Japan is also much more densely populated than the United States.
I dunno, this election season has me thinking maybe we're the ones who're more dense.
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh bullshit. That excuse died when Google started providing Gigabit connections for $70/month which is quite comparable to the rates in Japan.
The defacto broadband monopolies have not only been refusing to upgrade their equipment (despite being given huge amounts of subsidies and tax breaks meant to let them do so), they've been degrading their service by throttling and adding caps in order to coerce their customers into paying for more expensive plans even in the most densely populated areas.
Re: (Score:2)
Without competition it would be like that. We need to understand how Japan managed to foster competition that kept its internet access prices low.
Re: (Score:1)
Citing dense population as a reason for inexpensive high speed internet is bullshit in any with a population over 50,000.
Better?
I get that high speed internet away from the backbones would be expensive.
Really, high speed internet should be like the interstate highway system. The federa government builds massive trunk lines to every state. County and City governments built out lines to their local areas. And then multiple cable companies compete based on price on those lines.
We are being ripped off. We k
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, its the standard argument. But densely populated areas in US like New York still don't seem to have the same Internet value as Japan.
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:4, Informative)
Do you have more than 1 or 2 options when it comes to your internet service?
Here in the US, we have normally 1 or 2 options for high-speed internet. One cable company offering cable internet, and one phone company offering DSL. Most in the cities will have both options, but some will only have one (outside of service area). Often these companies work together in agreeing to a data cap and price.
These Cable\Tel-Coms worked out a deal with the local government to be the sole supplier of their services... making them a legal monopoly. The lack of competition is my theory on why the prices and speeds are not up to par with the rest of the world. Back when I worked at a Dial-up ISP, we offered DSL as well but we had to rent the hardware (lines) from the Tel-Com, and our rental price as $5/mo cheaper than the Tel-Com's DSL price (We made $5/mo gross profit on DSL). Dial-up made use more money. The Tel-Com's lines sucked to boot. When it rained, the service would drop... and why fix it? If they leave use, they go straight to the Tel-Com and they make more money.
So I'd be real interested to know what options non US folks have for internet? Do you have 5 companies competing for your service?
Re: (Score:2)
[citation needed]
How is that not illegal price collusion?
(The rest is correct, and IMHO, not by definition a bad idea.. would you really want 5 different cables coming into your house from different Internet services? There WERE separate phone companies/lines and IIRC electric companies way back when, all duplicating wires for each separate company...)
Re: (Score:2)
Citation is my experience, and yes, YMMV, but back when I lived up north my options for internet was Comcast and Charter. Both offered similar service, and when I found Comcast throttling my speeds down to .5 kbps, I switched to Charter. Using both Comcast and Charter, I downloaded quite a bit, wouldn't shock me if it was over 1tb a month on each. I was never charged any overages for a datacap.
I later moved to the south. When looking at internet options, the choice was Charter and AT&T, and T's spee
Re: (Score:2)
You still have not shown ANYTHING about price collusion, which you directly stated was happening.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have more than 1 or 2 options when it comes to your internet service?
I think there is 1 cable modem company, 1 DSL, and maybe 2 fiber companies. I distinctly remember the options on-base were "shitty cable vs shittier DSL" (the Internet infrastructure on the military bases is crap, especially on Futenma, because no one wants to invest in a facility the Okinawans are aggressively trying to close). When I moved into my apartment off-base I was just told I could quickly activate the high-speed Internet for ~$30, so I didn't bother to shop around. For about 3 years it was ~100up
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's it. I'm moving to Japan even though I don't know Japanese! :P
Re: (Score:2)
For $80 I get cellphone service (from a different company): unlimited 4G LTE and unlimited voice minutes for ~$80/month. Great for tethering my tablet or laptop when out of the house (or phones of friends visiting from out of Japan).
That's what I pay for all that with T-Mobile. I couldn't find any other carrier in my area that had prices anywhere near that for what I wanted.
Re: (Score:2)
That's just depressing. I live in Japan and have Gigabit fiber (500 up/500down on Speedtest) for $30/month with no data cap. For $80 I get cellphone service (from a different company): unlimited 4G LTE and unlimited voice minutes for ~$80/month. Great for tethering my tablet or laptop when out of the house (or phones of friends visiting from out of Japan). America is raped by the service providers.
Ya figure? Each SMS costing money (and sometimes staggering amounts in bulk) when it's essentially part of the packet structure is the most amusing/sad service I can remember. Might as well charge you additional for the air you breathe on a flight.
What do you expect from a country nearly completely owned by corporations/wealthy?
Re: (Score:2)
What do you expect from a country nearly completely owned by corporations/wealthy?
Japan is owned by corporations too, and the Japanese get raped in other ways. Things like key money: you basically pay a fee equal to several months rent just to move into an apartment. That's not a security deposit (that's additional $$$), we are talking pure cash into the housing agency's pocket. Combined with the security deposit and processing fees, changing apartments can cost you thousands of dollars up front.
Cars are another one. Anything imported is priced higher than they are in the US, but even
Re: (Score:3)
It isn't free; the people had to pay a construction fee.
If I pay for a beer before I drink it, that doesn't make it free beer.
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is more analogous to paying for installation of a beer tap, but then having it dispense unlimited free beer (but at a slower rate than you might like). Google's saying that now you need to fork over $50/mo, but you'll get unlimited beer dispensed at 20x the rate. It's still a way better deal than anything the competitors are offering, especially considering how vital the beer is for getting any work done.
Re: (Score:1)
If some were content with 5Mb (read as you don't stream video) then this may not be a better offering than the competitors. There may or may not be an offering of low bandwidth for $10 from a competitor but finding service at all for $50/month is not difficult.
Take my town, If you can cable TV you can get 10Mb for $40/mo or if you have a land line you can get DSL for $30. (real rates not intro). So here, this would not be a better deal assuming I did not want 100Mb.
This is screwing over those that paid
Re: (Score:3)
In Atlanta, I get Comcast internet at $20/month for 3Mbps. Downloads are slow, but it's fast enough for Youtube, Netflix and gaming. Although gigabit is tempting, I would have liked to keep paying $20/month (or less!).
I'll still switch to Google the nanosecond it becomes available, obviously, but I wish the "free after installation" tier were still going to be available.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm about to cord cut and my cable company offers 30/5 for $25/month with a 1 year commitment, I'd consider that a significant upgrade over 3/? for $20/month (they do offer 8/1 for $15/month if you want to go really cheap and don't need to stream HD video)
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is more analogous to paying for installation of a beer tap, but then having it dispense unlimited free beer (but at a slower rate than you might like). Google's saying that now you need to fork over $50/mo, but you'll get unlimited beer dispensed at 20x the rate. It's still a way better deal than anything the competitors are offering, especially considering how vital the beer is for getting any work done.
Yes, but if I paid for the installation of a beer tap that promised to give me 3 beers a day indefinitely then I would be pissed if all of a sudden they said I had to pay $50/month for 60 beers for day. I have no desire to drink 60 beers a day. The extra beer is wasted on me. Even if they can no longer offer a free service, they need to respect their original agreement by refunding the construction fee or at the very least offer a similar low bandwidth option for $10/month. At $50/month anyone who was happy with 5M/s is likely going to move to something else. There are plenty of cheaper options under $50/month whether it is DSL or tethering that will net you 5M/s. The people on the 5M plans don't want 100M, if they did then they likely would have signed up for the 1G plan at only $20/month more.
Re: (Score:3)
This is more analogous to paying for installation of a beer tap, but then having it dispense unlimited free beer (but at a slower rate than you might like). Google's saying that now you need to fork over $50/mo, but you'll get unlimited beer dispensed at 20x the rate. It's still a way better deal than anything the competitors are offering, especially considering how vital the beer is for getting any work done.
Yes, but if I paid for the installation of a beer tap that promised to give me 3 beers a day indefinitely then I would be pissed if all of a sudden they said I had to pay $50/month for 60 beers for day. I have no desire to drink 60 beers a day. The extra beer is wasted on me. Even if they can no longer offer a free service, they need to respect their original agreement by refunding the construction fee or at the very least offer a similar low bandwidth option for $10/month. At $50/month anyone who was happy with 5M/s is likely going to move to something else. There are plenty of cheaper options under $50/month whether it is DSL or tethering that will net you 5M/s. The people on the 5M plans don't want 100M, if they did then they likely would have signed up for the 1G plan at only $20/month more.
Except that it wasn't indefinitely. The contract was for 7 years, which Google has said that they are going to honor. They are just not going to sign up any new customers for that plan.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that it wasn't indefinitely. The contract was for 7 years, which Google has said that they are going to honor. They are just not going to sign up any new customers for that plan.
Then that's fair enough but don't expect many of the ultracheap customers to remain customers if you only offer them the choice between a high price plan and an ultra high price plan. The fact that they are relatively cheap compared to other ultra fast connections is most likely irrelevant to people happy with 5M and will likely be able to find other plans under $50 from a different provider to switch to. Myself, I'm perfectly happy with my 1M connection although I wish I could get faster upload.
Re:Can't have everything for free forever. (Score:4, Interesting)
Then that's fair enough but don't expect many of the ultracheap customers to remain customers if you only offer them the choice between a high price plan and an ultra high price plan. The fact that they are relatively cheap compared to other ultra fast connections is most likely irrelevant to people happy with 5M and will likely be able to find other plans under $50 from a different provider to switch to. Myself, I'm perfectly happy with my 1M connection although I wish I could get faster upload.
True, but there may not be any value in keeping them by offering a lower tier plan. I mean, they are paying $0 right now, so it's not like Google will lose any revenue from them departing for a cheaper ISP. It's possible based on the number of subscribers that are on that tier now that it wouldn't be worth it to offer a lower tier. I'm sure Google has done the math on this already before they decided how to proceed.
Alwys said there was a gaping hole in their plans (Score:2)
You had free, 70 dollar nirvana, and nothing in-between.
About time they start listening to people like me. I choose to use my FIOS 50/50 instead of 75 or 100 because I don't need it, and it costs $20 extra.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They should simply split the speeds into tiers. They went from free 5Mbps to $50 for 100Mbps. The price increase is too high and they land in the same price range as the alternatives, although offering a much higher speed.
How about $10 per 20Mbps, $12.50 per 25Mbps or at the very least $25 per 50Mbps? That would give them multiple prices to accommodate people who can't afford more.
Re: (Score:2)
And how do they pay for the optical line they run to your front door? Just do it for charity?
There's a reason even Google charges $300 for the "free" line install: because people rarely keep the "cheap" service plans long enough for the company to break-even.
Let's try $40 for 50 Mbit, and you're getting warmer!
Re: (Score:2)
How about the prices I mentioned but with a contract duration allowing Google to break-even on the installation cost with early termination fees that requires to pay whatever cost is left from that $300?
Re: (Score:2)
Let's try $40 for 50 Mbit, and you're getting warmer!
My cable company offers 30/5 for $25/month, much more reasonable IMHO (which is why I'm not doing 60/5 for $40/month).
Re: (Score:2)
That was the quoted price, but didn't they actually waive that fee, at least for a period of time?
come to Seattle Google! (Score:2)
Your own employees and the thousands of amazombies will pay the top rate for BW and it will cover us poor and disabled easily.
googles leading (Score:1)
http://seotik.net/blog
Laughable (Score:2)
Google will still offer the free service in low-income areas. That's a kiss-up statement by Google and nothing more.
What the hell is a low-income area? A zip code? A low-income apartment building with poor senior citizens? A house with a poor family?
There is a 15% share of poverty in extremely wealthy places like Greenwich, Connecticut. Will Google refuse to support those low-income people, encouraging them to move to poverty-stricken places like Bridgeport, Connecticut which has 70%+ poverty?
This is
Government defined. Including Greenwich, CT (Score:5, Informative)
Google Fiber offers free service to "affordable housing" developments, which is a government defined term, and "public housing", which means housing which subsidized by the taxpayers. Greenwich Connecticut has both.
Re: (Score:3)
What about single-family homes? My neighborhood has a significant number of old people with paid-off houses who get much less than $30K/year and can barely afford property tax, let alone Internet (or their grandchildren's bail and lawyers, but I digress). But it also has a significant number of $70K/year+ yuppies/hipsters, so the average household income might be more like $50K.
Both categories include single-family. As to old p (Score:2)
> What about single-family homes?
Both categories include single-family homes. "Affordable housing" more so than "public housing".
> My neighborhood has a significant number of old people with paid-off houses
Regarding the old people, Prodigy and AL don't offer similar free service, as far as I know. :)
Too bad. (Score:2)
Re: Disappointed (Score:1)