Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Project Fi by Google

fi.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 608 posts

Re: Project Fi by Google

#461

Post by whoopdedo »

modeless wrote: post #264
yellowapple wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consumers and websites have no incentive to fix any problem that causes them to use unnecessary data, clogging the network. Who says that my usage of data is a "problem" needing "solved"? 10GB (the highest Google offers on its Fi page) can be burned through pretty quickly just by watching videos on a road trip or somesuch. I'd much rather pay $80 for an unlimited plan from Sprint or T-Mobile than pay $120 (or more)…

> "Clogging the network" would be solved by carriers actually bothering to invest in their networks This is exactly my point. With unlimited data plans, carriers have little incentive to upgrade their networks. It increases costs without directly increasing revenue. With pay-per-GB, the incentive is clear: upgrading the network increases usage which directly increases revenue.

The real incentive is improving speeds makes shared-bandwidth networks more cost effective. You can serve the same number of customers for less cost. Each connection receives its data quicker then disconnects so someone else can use the air space.

Time is the more important measure of cellular network usage than bytes. I think it would be more convenient for customers to be billed per minute. At $10/GB if my average speed is 5 Mbps that's $0.30 a minute. Or $30 to watch a full-length movie in HD. Makes me wish Netflix still had mail delivery.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#462

Post by kamaal »

grecy wrote: post #60
pbiggar wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This looks to me like a pure "commoditize your complements" play. All of Google's products require great mobile internet everywhere. By getting involved in that market, they can help make it much more competitive (at the moment, cell reception is expensive and shit). It's like Google Code. Google didn't particularly want to be in that business, but Sourceforge was complete shit, and the open source ecosystem was key…

I agree, and I always figured that's why they built Chrome. They needed the other browsers to step up their game, especially js performance so they could offer the kinds of web applications they wanted to.

>>They needed the other browsers to step up their game, especially js performance so they could offer the kinds of web applications they wanted to.

The actual reason is they have to pay browser vendors like Firefox hundreds of millions of dollars for having Google search as their default search plugin. Plus, they are at the mercy of other companies if they decide to change the default search plugin. All this plus the mobile game, if you have a browser and that has a major market share you can be rest assured to send the traffic to your sites.

Same with android, as long as you have your stuff(OS, Browser) installed on other people devices, getting traffic from their is easier. Which is why they give it away for free. Have a big market share and you win by default.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#463

Post by Aloha »

paulsecwhatt wrote: post #450
unprepare wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A carrier in germany has to build 26 times less towers than a carrier in the US, because germany is more than 26 times smaller than the US. I would think the increased expenditure of 26 times more towers would increase the cost of plans. Europe also never had the culture of carrier subsidized phones, and so were never accustomed to paying more in monthly fees in exchange for low to no cost upgrades of hardware. Tethe…

Europeans never paid for speed, that's completely incorrect. There's no tradeoff - mobile phone usage in Europe is simply much, much cheaper because there's not the same quadrupoly that exists in the US (thanks to government intervention and much stricter competitivity laws). That's an interesting attempt to justify the price, but it completely fails to take into account that simply calculating area is nowhere near a…

Current stats show 205,000k[1] towers - not base stations, I'd estimate closer to 410,000-840,000 mobile base stations. Figure most of those are not all four carriers on each site, some are just one carrier, some are all four, and if I were to pick a single number, 585,000. Previously, I'd suggest that you can really only compare the US with Canada, Australia in terms of population density and spread.

[1] http://www.statisticbrain.com/cell-phone-tower-statistics/

Re: Project Fi by Google

#464

Post by grrowl »

rhino369 wrote: post #57
MBlume wrote: post #40

"We refund the data you don't use" is basically a way of saying "you pay by the megabyte for the data you do use" -- which is actually really great, I've been frustrated that everyone's settled on "all-you-can-eat" data as the standard, it doesn't align incentives well at all. And they really are refunding it: if you use 1.2GB per month, it doesn't matter whether you sign up for 2, 5, or 10GB, your bill comes out exa…

I just wish it had peak/non-peak pricing. Even something as basic as free nights.

In the context of the wider Net Neutrality conversation (Connectiveness Neutrality?), I'm glad it's so simple. $20 + $10/gb across the board is very sane, fair, and makes no assumptions about who you are, how you're using it, or what you're using it for.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#465

Post by brewdad »

zephyrthenoble wrote: post #395
tshtf wrote: post #376

With Cricket Wireless ( https://www.cricketwireless.com/cell-phone-plans ), I can use the vastly superior AT&T network and spend $60/month for 10GB of data, plus unlimited voice and text. This would cost $120/month on Project Fi, and I'd be forced to use T-Mobile and Sprint, both of which have inferior coverage in the US.

Do you use 10GB of data a month?

Cricket is still cheaper on their lowest plan $40 for unlimited talk and text and 2.5GB. Fi would be $45. Auto-pay on Cricket brings it down to $35

Re: Project Fi by Google

#466

Post by cthalupa »

Someone1234 wrote: post #270
vigneshv_psg wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, T-Mobile in the US already has the exact same offering [1]. Their plan has free texts and 2g data in 120+ countries. Calls cost 20 cents per minute. [1] http://www.t-mobile.com/optional-services/roaming.html

I am on T-Mobile and travelled outside the US late last year. First off, I just want to say, the "free tier" of international data is extremely appreciated for two important reasons: - Overage is literally impossible (i.e. no "bill shock"). - If you don't wish to pay, you get "something" for nothing. So, now, the "bad." The reality is that T-Mobile's free tier is incredibly slow like "my 56K modem was faster than thi…

I was in South Africa recently, and got a consistent 256kbps using the roaming data on t-mobile. It's not 4G, but it's significantly better than sub 56k.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#467

Post by modeless »

whoopdedo wrote: post #461
modeless wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Clogging the network" would be solved by carriers actually bothering to invest in their networks This is exactly my point. With unlimited data plans, carriers have little incentive to upgrade their networks. It increases costs without directly increasing revenue. With pay-per-GB, the incentive is clear: upgrading the network increases usage which directly increases revenue.

The real incentive is improving speeds makes shared-bandwidth networks more cost effective. You can serve the same number of customers for less cost. Each connection receives its data quicker then disconnects so someone else can use the air space. Time is the more important measure of cellular network usage than bytes. I think it would be more convenient for customers to be billed per minute. At $10/GB if my average…

> You can serve the same number of customers for less cost.

No, upgrading the network allows you to serve more customers at higher cost (the cost of the upgrades). If you have unlimited data plans, you can only recoup those upgrade costs by recruiting more customers because existing customers pay the same regardless of the speed. Recruiting more customers is also costly and affected by many more factors than just network quality. The connection between network upgrades and increased revenue is tenuous and indirect.

In contrast, with pay-per-GB, network upgrades increase usage and thus increase revenue from existing customers as well as new ones. The connection between network upgrades and increased revenue is direct and immediate.

I agree that $10/GB is far too expensive; I'm sure Google would love for it to be cheaper but the pricing isn't their choice to make. When carriers get some competition from Project Loon and/or Elon Musk's satellite thingy, hopefully prices will go down.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#468

Post by kijin »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #392
GigabyteCoin wrote: post #242

Two things I notice looking at the coverage map.[0] 1. Wow, it's available in Canada right off the bat. This must be a first for Google. 2. Does nobody in Montana own a cell phone? Alberta is probably equally empty as Montana, and yet almost their entire provice has coverage. [0] https://fi.google.com/coverage

Does all that region above Edmonton really have 2g coverage? How? Why?

Oil sands.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#469

Post by cthalupa »

nicpottier wrote: post #65

Whoa, their international rates are crazy good. Same $10/gb across 120 countries. Even limited to 256k/3G, that is still insane. Coverage list here: https://fi.google.com/about/rates/ That's enough of a perk that I'm considering moving to a Nexus 6.

Ouch. I didn't notice that it's limited to 256k/3G.

T-Mobile offers unlimited data internationally as part of their simple choice unlimited plan. It's limited to 256k speeds (Which in my experience, I have gotten basically exactly 256k when I've used it in the Netherlands and South Africa). You have the option of buying 4G speed bandwidth for a fairly reasonable price - though still a bit higher than the Google Fi data rates.

I didn't notice the rate limiting asterisk until your comment, and this kind of kills it for me. It was much more appealing when I thought I would be charged the same for data in the US and abroad.

Re: Project Fi by Google

#470

Post by desireco42 »

International rates are way too high, 12c for landline minute or 31 for cellphone in Serbia is ripoff.

They are doing Republic Wireless by Google. This is not bad and might make more competition. Maybe not many users will use it, but there will be perception of one more option.

Post reply on HN