51–60 of 382 posts
GF has been tearing up our neighborhood this week and last laying cable (I'm in Chapel Hill). AT&T did the same about 6 months back. I was holding out for Google, but this makes me think even when they get it up and running, the support will be nonexistent. So maybe better to go with the devil we know (we already have AT&T U-Verse, just not gigabit). At least they lasted long enough to force AT&T's hand...
That sucks for citizens of the US. I think the Swedish (Nordic?) model for bringing internet connectivity to it's citizens is superior. The municipalities own (most of) the networks and all the fiber cables, letting companies use them for a small(ish) fee. These companies later sell it to customers. This help people to get the best deals and ensure that the networks are continually upgraded. For example, I have 250/1…
As an example, here in Italy we have a separate company ran by a utility provider (which is used to handle infrastructure at a scale and can leverage existing assets) taking care of deploying fiber in the cities and then they make it available to multiple ISPs (bitstream).
In this way you have an entity who is solely focused on building and managing the infrastructure, which is able to make investments that single ISPs would not be able to do (while trying to still be profitable).
The end result for the consumers is that here in Milan, as an example, multiple operators started offering 1 Gb/s FTTH connections for around 30 EUR/month.
Such fees are only possible if you do not have to try to be profitable while having to absorb the hit from deploying your own infrastructure.
That sucks for citizens of the US. I think the Swedish (Nordic?) model for bringing internet connectivity to it's citizens is superior. The municipalities own (most of) the networks and all the fiber cables, letting companies use them for a small(ish) fee. These companies later sell it to customers. This help people to get the best deals and ensure that the networks are continually upgraded. For example, I have 250/1…
Sweden: 11.4 DSL, 6.6 cable, 17.5 fiber.
U.S. 8.2 DSL, 18.5 cable, 3.4 fiber.
U.K. 30.6 DSL, 7.2 cable, 0.0 fiber.
Germany: 28.9 DSL, 8.1 cable, 0.6 fiber.
France: 33.3 DSL, 4.5 cable, 2.1 fiber.
Spain: 16.5 DSL, 5.5 cable, 6.8 fiber.
Italy: 21.1 DSL, 0.0 cable, 0.6 fiber.
The U.S. does better than every big European country, whose residents are by and large stuck on DSL.
That sucks for citizens of the US. I think the Swedish (Nordic?) model for bringing internet connectivity to it's citizens is superior. The municipalities own (most of) the networks and all the fiber cables, letting companies use them for a small(ish) fee. These companies later sell it to customers. This help people to get the best deals and ensure that the networks are continually upgraded. For example, I have 250/1…
Of course, we just get private industry setting up monopolies or duopolies instead, often with the help of local laws prohibiting competition. This is worse, but somehow more acceptable to the American electorate.
That sucks for citizens of the US. I think the Swedish (Nordic?) model for bringing internet connectivity to it's citizens is superior. The municipalities own (most of) the networks and all the fiber cables, letting companies use them for a small(ish) fee. These companies later sell it to customers. This help people to get the best deals and ensure that the networks are continually upgraded. For example, I have 250/1…
>That sucks for citizens of the US. This seems a little hyperbolic. Where I live I can get gigabit either via Comcast or AT&T here in Chicago. The rollout to gigabit is slow, but its coming. Sweden has 9.5m people. We have 320m and a huge landmass. Infrastructure upgrades simply take longer considering our size and population and a variety of other issues. Its not exactly Google or bust. Its clear Google doesn't have…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Project Fi doesn't involve nearly the amount of staff though--they're using someone else's network. As Google has found out, digging holes and getting permits doesn't get cheaper with better software.
They could build a robot that digs the holes. Maybe with Boston Dynamics robots. Oh...
Their title: "Advancing our amazing bet"
Point being that our ISPs right now need some disruption and I think a lot of people were hoping this Google Fiber would catch on. A lot of folks assumed Google would eat whatever losses to make this a hit. Apperatnly not, apperantly some short term profits trump anything else.
That sucks for citizens of the US. I think the Swedish (Nordic?) model for bringing internet connectivity to it's citizens is superior. The municipalities own (most of) the networks and all the fiber cables, letting companies use them for a small(ish) fee. These companies later sell it to customers. This help people to get the best deals and ensure that the networks are continually upgraded. For example, I have 250/1…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>That sucks for citizens of the US. This seems a little hyperbolic. Where I live I can get gigabit either via Comcast or AT&T here in Chicago. The rollout to gigabit is slow, but its coming. Sweden has 9.5m people. We have 320m and a huge landmass. Infrastructure upgrades simply take longer considering our size and population and a variety of other issues. Its not exactly Google or bust. Its clear Google doesn't have…
Where I live I can get Comcast. Slow Comcast. At the price they set. I pay for TV channels and don't own a TV. I asked if I could stop paying for parts of the service I cannot use, and they told me "No." As they are the only ISP in my area, I'd really, really like public involvement in Internet infrastructure, even if just to provide a single competitor. Seeing as I live a few blocks from Tim Berners-Lee's office, it…
That sucks for citizens of the US. I think the Swedish (Nordic?) model for bringing internet connectivity to it's citizens is superior. The municipalities own (most of) the networks and all the fiber cables, letting companies use them for a small(ish) fee. These companies later sell it to customers. This help people to get the best deals and ensure that the networks are continually upgraded. For example, I have 250/1…
Where does the capital come from to do this and how do you serve remote areas outside of towns.
Works well especially when the company receiving such funds is only focusing on building the infrastructure to then rent it back to the ISPs that will leverage it to provide services to the customers...
A similar model is also used here in Italy to provide mobile network coverage in certain areas: the mobile operators "teamed up" and deployed "shared" infrastructure instead of having to deploy and mantain each one its own. This is the way in which they cover remote (less profitable) areas or special areas like the entire subway lines.