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

When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 121 posts

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#11

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

stephenr wrote: post #7
amf12 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it got other providers to get off their butts. Besides, it's relatively easy to switch providers anyway (where available). I don't understand why people are scared of using services that have relatively low switching barriers, because they may be shut down one day. I've used so many services over the years - big tech and from start ups that I've since moved form because they closed down or remained stagnant o…

> I don't understand why people are scared of using services that have relatively low switching barriers, because they may be shut down one day. This suggests there's alternative services available anyway, so why take the risk on Google at all?

What exactly do you think is the "risk" of going with Google in these situations as a consumer?

I know people who have Google Fiber, and love it - super fast Internet at reasonable prices. If it got turned off, they would just go with someone else. What exactly do you think the downside is? As a municipality, sure, as the article explains. But as an end consumer, what's the problem?

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#13

Post by aednichols »

bruce511 wrote: post #8
js2 wrote: post #3

Summary: Google tried to "nano"-trench Louisville, KY using 2" deep trenches (by comparison micro-trenching is typically 6" deep) then use epoxy to cover the trench. The epoxy didn't stand up to tires. Google tried to replace the epoxy with asphalt but that damaged the fiber. Google determined at that point that nano-trenching wouldn't work and didn't want to spend additional money to remedy the situation, so they ab…

I'm not in the US, but in my country the fibre-provider and the ISP are unrelated companies. There are multiple fibre companies (typically an area is served by one or another of them although my area has two) and of course a couple dozen ISPs that do the ISP part. This model works -really- well. ISPs compete on price, and service. Fibre folks do the physical stuff. Fibre companies are incentivised to get rolled out i…

Excuse my ignorance, but at that point what does the ISP actually do other than send bills to customers and pay invoices for fiber plant and upstream bandwidth?

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#14

Post by CogitoCogito »

bruce511 wrote: post #8
js2 wrote: post #3

Summary: Google tried to "nano"-trench Louisville, KY using 2" deep trenches (by comparison micro-trenching is typically 6" deep) then use epoxy to cover the trench. The epoxy didn't stand up to tires. Google tried to replace the epoxy with asphalt but that damaged the fiber. Google determined at that point that nano-trenching wouldn't work and didn't want to spend additional money to remedy the situation, so they ab…

I'm not in the US, but in my country the fibre-provider and the ISP are unrelated companies. There are multiple fibre companies (typically an area is served by one or another of them although my area has two) and of course a couple dozen ISPs that do the ISP part. This model works -really- well. ISPs compete on price, and service. Fibre folks do the physical stuff. Fibre companies are incentivised to get rolled out i…

Yeah everywhere I’ve lived outside the US does something similar and it always works much better than in the US.

> It's one of those (rare?) cases where good regulation, and a free market collide, and the result us that everyone has fibre.

I’d argue that good (and certainly not nonexistent) regulation is a necessity of a well-functioning, efficient market.

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#15

Post by amf12 »

stephenr wrote: post #7
amf12 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it got other providers to get off their butts. Besides, it's relatively easy to switch providers anyway (where available). I don't understand why people are scared of using services that have relatively low switching barriers, because they may be shut down one day. I've used so many services over the years - big tech and from start ups that I've since moved form because they closed down or remained stagnant o…

> I don't understand why people are scared of using services that have relatively low switching barriers, because they may be shut down one day. This suggests there's alternative services available anyway, so why take the risk on Google at all?

> This suggests there's alternative services available anyway, so why take the risk on Google at all?

Isn't that for people to decide for themselves? Few reasons I can think of: preference, trust, integrations, better features, don't want to support Comcast, etc.

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#16

Post by stephenr »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #11
stephenr wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand why people are scared of using services that have relatively low switching barriers, because they may be shut down one day. This suggests there's alternative services available anyway, so why take the risk on Google at all?

What exactly do you think is the "risk" of going with Google in these situations as a consumer? I know people who have Google Fiber, and love it - super fast Internet at reasonable prices. If it got turned off, they would just go with someone else. What exactly do you think the downside is? As a municipality, sure, as the article explains. But as an end consumer, what's the problem?

Well for one thing, I value my time. Dealing with getting a new service provider because the last one just decided to stop doing business is pretty low on the list of things I'd like to do with my time.

For another, Google has a ridiculous reputation for customer service. Even saying that is being generous, because most Google services just don't have customer service, at all.

I keep hearing "just go with someone else if they shut down" - so there clearly are alternative services available, presumably ones for whom providing a fibre service to customers is actually a core part of their business and revenue, rather than a side-gig of questionable long-term value to the corporation.

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#17

Post by johnbatch »

js2 wrote: post #3

Summary: Google tried to "nano"-trench Louisville, KY using 2" deep trenches (by comparison micro-trenching is typically 6" deep) then use epoxy to cover the trench. The epoxy didn't stand up to tires. Google tried to replace the epoxy with asphalt but that damaged the fiber. Google determined at that point that nano-trenching wouldn't work and didn't want to spend additional money to remedy the situation, so they ab…

I’m also in Raleigh. I remember

Aug 2015: Free T-shirt

May 2017: ATT dug up my yard (Everyone was hopping it was google)

Nov 2017: ATT fiber Installed (At least it’s not spectrum cable anymore)

Dec 2021: Google Fiber dug up my yard.

May 2022: Google Fiber installed.

It’s a shame they re-trenched everything 4 years after ATT did.

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#18

Post by monocasa »

aednichols wrote: post #13
bruce511 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not in the US, but in my country the fibre-provider and the ISP are unrelated companies. There are multiple fibre companies (typically an area is served by one or another of them although my area has two) and of course a couple dozen ISPs that do the ISP part. This model works -really- well. ISPs compete on price, and service. Fibre folks do the physical stuff. Fibre companies are incentivised to get rolled out i…

Excuse my ignorance, but at that point what does the ISP actually do other than send bills to customers and pay invoices for fiber plant and upstream bandwidth?

Peer in the internet.

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#19

Post by watson »

aednichols wrote: post #13
bruce511 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not in the US, but in my country the fibre-provider and the ISP are unrelated companies. There are multiple fibre companies (typically an area is served by one or another of them although my area has two) and of course a couple dozen ISPs that do the ISP part. This model works -really- well. ISPs compete on price, and service. Fibre folks do the physical stuff. Fibre companies are incentivised to get rolled out i…

Excuse my ignorance, but at that point what does the ISP actually do other than send bills to customers and pay invoices for fiber plant and upstream bandwidth?

The ISP sets up rack-cabinets full of equipment in central buildings where the “last mile” fiber terminates, close to the neighborhoods that they service. Each ISP that provides service to the area needs to have their own equipment there. This is how they differentiate and how one ISP can do 1Gbps while another might be able to do 2Gbps. Simply because they have installed different equipment. The fiber itself can of course support much more

Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)

#20

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

stephenr wrote: post #16
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly do you think is the "risk" of going with Google in these situations as a consumer? I know people who have Google Fiber, and love it - super fast Internet at reasonable prices. If it got turned off, they would just go with someone else. What exactly do you think the downside is? As a municipality, sure, as the article explains. But as an end consumer, what's the problem?

Well for one thing, I value my time. Dealing with getting a new service provider because the last one just decided to stop doing business is pretty low on the list of things I'd like to do with my time. For another, Google has a ridiculous reputation for customer service. Even saying that is being generous, because most Google services just don't have customer service, at all. I keep hearing "just go with someone els…

People go with Google Fiber because it's a better product: speeds are faster and prices are lower. Literally every single person I know who has Google Fiber is a huge fan.

"For another, Google has a ridiculous reputation for customer service." Uhh, yeah, because Comcast and AT&T are famous for their stellar customer service.

Give it a rest, man. I get annoyed as much as anyone with Google's "shiny object" penchants, but this isn't one of those cases.

Post reply on HN