Google Fiber Plans & Pricing • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#71

Post by _delirium » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:13 PM UTC

michaelhoffman wrote: post #16

Why start this in Kansas City? Is this like trying to produce a future Broadway show in New Haven or San Diego, so you can work out the kinks before you go to the big time?

They solicited proposals from cities (http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/think-big-with-gig-ou..., http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/next-steps-for-our-ex...), and ended up choosing Kansas City as the initial site (http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/ultra-high-speed-broa...).

It looks like they wanted a market with between 50,000 and 500,000 subscribers as the initial one, so not NYC or SF or LA. And, wanted strong local support to avoid regulatory problems.

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#72

Post by lsc » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:13 PM UTC

stephengillie wrote: post #46

Xcelerate wrote: post #25

When I was at Georgia Tech, I got 650 Mbps. You realize the bottleneck isn't your connection at that point -- it's everyone else's. Which means a lot of sites still download just as slow. Although the big sites have optimized data centers, so it was pretty cool downloading an entire OS in a few seconds (although I think my hard drive write speed limited that a bit too). My father works in the fiber optics industry an…

Would Dropbox, Google Drive, Skydrive, Amazon cloud storage, et al exist today if we could send data across the US at even just 650Mbps?

yes. They would have to dramatically decrease their bandwidth charges, and they'd have to lower their charges in general (just 'cause the barrier to entry for their competition would be lower) but if anything, having a fat pipe at home would make storing things remotely a lot more attractive.

Think about it; with that kind of a pipe, you could boot your desktop off of a drive in my datacenter, two cities away.

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#73

Post by methodin » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:13 PM UTC

babar wrote: post #10

The cable channel lineup looks limited (no ESPN? can you add HBO?), so I wonder if they will get much adoption there. Internet pricing looks fantastic.

One would think if this gets a decent adoption rate that they could/should offer such channels a more lucrative deal than what current providers offer. This all depends, of course, on how they can make money off this and how much.

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#74

Post by normalfaults » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:13 PM UTC

The rally concept is pretty neat. If your fiberhood gets enough registrations you will get the next install batch plus all schools, government buildings and other public establishments will get gigabit in your fiberhood.

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#75

Post by mmahemoff » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:14 PM UTC

danvideo wrote: post #51

topherjaynes wrote: post #11

Was so excited then saw it was just limited to Kansas City, what a tease, but glad to see they're 'shaking' things up.

Right, I would have preferred a quiet roll out, until large metro areas were ready to go live. It's going to be at least 2013 before most of us even have the option to use it. Sort of like hearing that the new Android upgrade is available, but only international phones for the next year, and your phone might not even support the new version.

They're offering it to an entire city, a public website was always going to be necessary.

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#76

Post by modoc » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:14 PM UTC

stephengillie wrote: post #46

Xcelerate wrote: post #25

When I was at Georgia Tech, I got 650 Mbps. You realize the bottleneck isn't your connection at that point -- it's everyone else's. Which means a lot of sites still download just as slow. Although the big sites have optimized data centers, so it was pretty cool downloading an entire OS in a few seconds (although I think my hard drive write speed limited that a bit too). My father works in the fiber optics industry an…

Would Dropbox, Google Drive, Skydrive, Amazon cloud storage, et al exist today if we could send data across the US at even just 650Mbps?

I'd use DropBox much MORE if I had more than 15 Mbit upstream. If I had 1 Gbit+ speeds, I'd use DropBox for EVERYTHING (5+ TB) and happily pay for it. As it stands now the upload would take far too long to be much use.

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#77

Post by romaniv » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:15 PM UTC

This would be awesome if it wasn't coming from Google. If they control the browser, a good chunk of websites/services and the delivery mechanism, there are just too many opportunities for abuse. Although, maybe this will force other telecom providers to stop sucking so much.

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#78

Post by will_work4tears » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:15 PM UTC

topherjaynes wrote: post #11

Was so excited then saw it was just limited to Kansas City, what a tease, but glad to see they're 'shaking' things up.

I would have signed up in a heartbeat. I grew up in KC but do not live anywhere near there now.

Come to Western Washington, Google!

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#79

Post by wickedchicken » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:16 PM UTC

stephengillie wrote: post #46

Xcelerate wrote: post #25

When I was at Georgia Tech, I got 650 Mbps. You realize the bottleneck isn't your connection at that point -- it's everyone else's. Which means a lot of sites still download just as slow. Although the big sites have optimized data centers, so it was pretty cool downloading an entire OS in a few seconds (although I think my hard drive write speed limited that a bit too). My father works in the fiber optics industry an…

Would Dropbox, Google Drive, Skydrive, Amazon cloud storage, et al exist today if we could send data across the US at even just 650Mbps?

Housefires happen regardless of internet connection speed, so yes.

Re: Google Fiber Plans & Pricing

#80

Post by jjcm » Thu, Jul 26, 2012, 5:16 PM UTC

azakai wrote: post #58

Does anyone know how they make money from the free option?

They don't, but I'm guessing since they're just entering the industry having more subscribers is their number one priority right now. Delivering a product at a loss is nothing new.