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

The future of Fiber

fiber.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 288 posts

Re: The future of Fiber

#151

Post by jcomis »

simmons wrote: post #111
seanalltogether wrote: post #66

The Denver-Boulder corridor is going to start losing it's place as one of the top tech startup areas in the country if it doesn't get itself on this list of potential fiber installs.

As a resident of greater Denver-Boulder, I, too, was disappointed to see the big empty space on the map around Colorado. At least one ISP here is experimenting with residential gigabit, though -- I'm hoping that maybe someday I can get it in my neighborhood: http://fiber.forethought.net/

interesting. Their website is a bit lacking in info. Do they offer residential service at all right now? Looks like they are just servicing larger multi-tenant buildings, I'm guessing where everyone needs to sign up to get them to come and install.

Re: The future of Fiber

#152

Post by jmharvey »

When I saw the headline, I cringed. At this point, whenever I see a Google article titled, "The future of [google product]," I assume it's an announcement that the product is being phased out. Needless to say, I'm glad that's not what's happening here, but I'm still not holding my breath that Google Fiber is going to take over the world.

Re: The future of Fiber

#153

Post by HelloMcFly »

rufugee wrote: post #56

It always surprises me how excited people get about Google Fiber, yet how up-in-arms they get about GMail, Google+ and other Google services which tend to invade and/or expose your privacy. Do you really think that using a advertising company's fiber as your gateway to the internet is going to offer a private experience? Don't you see how much easier it will make it for them to gather your personal details and habits…

When the reference point is Comcast one has a high probability of being applauded.

Re: The future of Fiber

#154

Post by AutoCorrect »

nostrademons wrote: post #95
zacinbusiness wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. They should roll out to insane hamlets like Climax, NC [1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climax%2C_North_Carolina no, I'm not from Climax...but it's an awesome name for a...settlement?

Kinda like Athol, Massachusetts?

Cumming, GA

Re: The future of Fiber

#155

Post by thedufer »

tijs wrote: post #140
thedufer wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vacancies in NYC are incredibly low, so a landlord doesn't gain much by being able to advertise fiber internet. This, added to the expense of wiring the old buildings, means that its not a worthwhile investment.

In sweden this sort of thing is done by the city/state not 'the market' which makes for a different set of arguments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises_by_count...

What about the actual building wiring? It doesn't matter whether there's fiber to the building if cable has enough bandwidth to fill the copper between the cable box and the apartments.

Re: The future of Fiber

#156

Post by rayiner »

foobarqux wrote: post #144
rayiner wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing to me how many people here on HN complain on one hand about companies not wanting to make massive capital investments to build out faster internet service while simultaneously espousing regulating such services into low-margin dumb pipes.

Many other countries have built high speed consumer fiber networks, some of them heavily regulated. Something isn't working in the United States.

The U.S. is ranked #8 in average broadband connection speed in Akamai's most recent State of the Internet. That puts it ahead of most of Europe: http://www.akamai.com/dl/documents/akamai_soti_q213.pdf?WT.m... (page 13). If you look at more densely populated coastal states, the U.S. looks even better. Yeah, South Korea has widespread fiber internet. More than half the country lives in the Seoul metro area. You can't compare.

Re: The future of Fiber

#157

Post by mje__ »

It seems one of the biggest costs of fiber is installation; i.e. trenching. Why is it not hung from poles? It must be much cheaper and quicker, surely?

Re: The future of Fiber

#158

Post by mead5432 »

wmf wrote: post #81
27182818284 wrote: post #35

I'm really, really glad they chose Kansas City as the pilot city despite not living there. If they had just gone and chosen San Francisco, Chicago or New York, it would have been no more of an experiment than offering more cable channels to the big cities in the 1990s—It just is completely uninteresting. On a side note, If you haven't been to KC's Startup Village, the climate is electric! It feels like something real…

I see it the opposite way: Deploying fiber is easy if the city gives you carte blanche as KC did. Doing something easy proves nothing. If Google Fiber wants to prove that their model is replicable they need to deploy it at a profit in a politically hostile environment.

Maybe... but it's probably better to work out the kinks first in some place that is easier so that you don't fail miserably in Philly.

Re: The future of Fiber

#159

Post by shmerl »

heartbreak wrote: post #114
shmerl wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then it's not an issue and Google is not scared of digging the earth. On the other hand they write they want to reuse existing conduits, rather than perform new construction.

I don't understand your point. Just because Atlanta isn't as densely developed as New York City doesn't make it "rural".

As I said, if Google is not scared to dig - good for them. But they seem to want to avoid it. See their FAQ.

Re: The future of Fiber

#160

Post by ohsnapman »

_greim_ wrote: post #90
JunkDNA wrote: post #41

I know it would be painful, and the local politics certifiably insane, but if Google wanted draw attention to the dysfunctional monopoly of the cable industry, there would be no better place to wire than Philly. Take the competition right into Comcast's back yard. Start with a rollout of the Philly 'burbs where the Comcast execs live and work inward toward the city from there.

It would go against their strategy. By wiring up all the GF-friendly cities first, people living in GF-unfriendly cities start asking "why can't we have that, too?" Thus ratcheting up pressure on the local political systems.

This is something that works in theory, but not real life. Internet is becoming a utility, and most people only ever have experienced one utility in their life. People in the SF Bay Area choose between AT&T DSL and Comcast cable internet - two of the WORST providers, ever. Verizon FiOS eats both their lunches, yet, nobody rabble rouses to ask for fiber in that area. If people in Silicon Valley won't even pressure their politicians (there are FAR more urgent issues), why would people in other areas with far more pressing economic concerns?
Post reply on HN