Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Fiber Targets Chicago and Los Angeles (blogspot.com)

Posted by Soulskill on from the they-don't-need-it,-come-to-my-home-town-instead dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Google announced that they have invited Chicago and Los Angeles to investigate whether the company's Fiber internet service would work there. If it works out, they would be the biggest cities to incorporate Google Fiber yet. Chicago is home to 2.7 million people, and Los Angeles has almost 4 million. Google hastens to add that this is an exploratory process, and they might not be able to bring Fiber to these cities for a number of reasons, but they're hopeful that expansion can proceed.

37 comments

  1. Chicago? by demonlapin · · Score: 1

    Better bring some serious bribes if you want to work in Chi-town.

    1. Re:Chicago? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and a Tommy gun too! You fucking moron.

    2. Re:Chicago? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better bring some serious bribes if you want to work in Chi-town.

      Never met a single person native to Chicago who ever calls it by that name. Is this like NYC being called "The Big Apple" in advertising and tourist guides but never by actual residents?

    3. Re:Chicago? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right. And if they want to work in LA they better bring lots of Tacos, Enchiladas and good Mariachi Bands!

    4. Re:Chicago? by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Never met a single person native to Chicago who ever calls it by that name.

      I've been known to use the term Chi-Town. OK, I was born in Houston, - but I moved to Chicago when I was 5, and lived in the city for 40 years and in its' suburbs for the 15 years since. Also, I've known other, actually native, Chicagoans to use the term, occasionally. Wouldn't be used in a serious conversation, though.

    5. Re: Chicago? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      No different than places like Dallas, Houston, new Orleans, Texas, Louisiana,Georgia, etc.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    6. Re:Chicago? by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      We have some seriously humor-deficient AC's these days, is all.

    7. Re: Chicago? by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      It is a little different - Chicago is the most corrupt city in the US by corruption convictions. Houston is getting up there, but Chicago is worse - and it's probably an underestimate since that's just the ranking by convictions.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
  2. In Chitown - piggyback off People's Gas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The public natural gas utility is on a multibillion pipeline replacement/upgrade project (converting from low to medium pressure in the process) for all the gas mains in the city.

    The irony is if your gas meter is in the house they'll run a new line to an outside relocation of the meter.

    This leaves the bare pipe running inside with no gas in it; perfect for a clean fiber run to a safe, dry location.

    Seems like a perfect opportunity to lay new fiber. Google should work with them to give customers a twofer.

    1. Re:In Chitown - piggyback off People's Gas by kilodelta · · Score: 1

      Nationa Grid in Rhode Island did the same. However older installs were grandfathered in and the meters are on the inside in most places. New constructions they're placed outside.

    2. Re:In Chitown - piggyback off People's Gas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's hardly the same, now is it?

    3. Re:In Chitown - piggyback off People's Gas by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Probably too late for that.

  3. Asking for permission to compete? by bazmail · · Score: 1

    " invited Chicago and Los Angeles to investigate whether the company's Fiber internet service would work there"

    Wow are we talking about the US or Cuba here? Why not just go ahead and compete in the market and stop asking permission?

    1. Re:Asking for permission to compete? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1, Informative

      You arguably have it backwards: given the amount of private property you need to obtain outright, or secure 'easements' to cross, in order to set up a wired network of municipal scale, building one in the context of property rights does involve asking nicely, convincing people of the benefits of allowing you the access you need, and so on.

      If you can just declare the People's Patriotic Fiber Plan and move in, then you don't have to do any of that.

      (That said, given the widespread existence of utility easements going back as far as water and sewer, and the abject awfulness of low-competition internet service markets, I'd be very, very, disappointed in any municipal or community organizations that don't do what they can to allow another entrant to share the various conduits and poles and such that are already in place for running utilities. Yes, the logistics are a pain; but being bled year after year by an incumbent monopolist is worse.)

    2. Re: Asking for permission to compete? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Most US places have a fascistic utility regime. Perhaps you're not from around here.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re: Asking for permission to compete? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > but being bled year after year by an incumbent monopolist is worse

      Only for the consumers. It's great for the rent-seekers and rent-grantors. But Google has little choice but to ask the rent-grantors. They're not stupid either - they're going to create a scene. Either they expand or they prove a point for their legislative efforts. Win-win. Google is doing social good here.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re: Asking for permission to compete? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      That is definitely true. The 'franchise agreements' need a very, very, serious kick in the ass(even if they weren't invidious in principle; it is [i]pitiful[/i] how cheaply municipalities have been bought off: "Ooh, CableCorp LLC said that they'll provide each school with a 'free' lowest-tier-of-'business class' internet connection in exchange for exclusive rights to suck our citizens dry. Amazing deal!"). I am extraordinarily pleased that Google has been working to scare the incumbents, at least in some markets, and to demonstrate how much of the high cost and low quality is purely a matter of lack of competitive pressure(even when they can't actually match gigabit service, because they are working with legacy coax, it's...interesting...how much cheaper and faster the competitor's offerings are in markets where Google is active, or sniffing around, than in markets where they aren't. You'd think that somebody would ask Comcast and friends about how that strange dissimilarity comes to be...

      My point was purely that, given the logistics of a network build-out, a society with theoretical adherence to private property rights is trickier than one where you can just steamroller whoever you like. This seems like a good reason to stop pretending that ISPs actually operate in under meaningfully 'free market' conditions; and either aggressively step up efforts to change this, or keep a closer eye on them as oligopolies; but it is the case.

    5. Re: Asking for permission to compete? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Google has little choice but to ask the rent-grantors. They're not stupid either - they're going to create a scene. Either they expand or they prove a point for their legislative efforts. Win-win. Google is doing social good here.

      Yeah, I guess so. Except that in Chicago Comcast doesn't have a monopoly on cable, AT&T doesn't have a monopoly on phone service and nobody has a monopoly on internet. The neighborhood I live in (in Chicago) has at least 5 different choices for internet service, including Comcast and AT&T. Our condo building went with a small local ISP that ran fiber to us and gives us 100mb symmetrical for $25/month or 500mb symmetrical for $70/month (the choice I made). The building next door to us went with WebPass, which puts a microwave antenna on the roof and creates a mesh network with its other subscriber buildings to provide high speeds at low prices. And when a particular area reaches a certain density, they run fiber to one of the buildings to augment the shared capacity. It's an interesting business model. We have other local options as well - it's not too hard to be a small startup ISP in an area with lots of residential buildings that have 300-500 units. It really cuts down the barriers to entry.

      I'd like Google to come to Chicago; it would probably spur our ISP to increase our service levels at no cost increase. But I really don't know what sort of "permission" Google needs to seek, and why they need the help of the public to get it.

  4. International efforts, please Google by Grench · · Score: 2

    I'd like to see Google Fiber coming to the UK - give BT Openreach some much-needed competition.

    Sure, there are plenty of ISPs in this country - but they are all entirely dependent on BT Openreach's fixed-line infrastructure, telephone exchange network, and street cabinets.

    End the monopoly!

    --
    He's Jesus, for Christ's sake.
    1. Re:International efforts, please Google by phil.swansborough · · Score: 1

      I agree, though our broadband seems to be generally better than USA's, I despise Openreach and would like to see someone come in and eat their lunch.

    2. Re:International efforts, please Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Virgin?

    3. Re:International efforts, please Google by Grench · · Score: 1

      Virgin were deploying cable internet here years before BT spun off their infrastructure into what is now known as Openreach, let alone began their FTTC rollout

      However, they've still not got cable anywhere near me, so they're not an option.

      BT Openreach upgraded my telephone exchange to allow FTTC connections more than 2 years ago. However, they only got around to enabling my cabinet back in June. I can therefore get a FTTC internet connection from any number of providers - but my estimated maximum download speed is between 8 and 11 Mbit/sec, regardless which provider I ask. I currently get anywhere between 6 and 9 Mbit/sec on ADSL (but mostly nearer 6). There's almost no point in upgrading. I am guessing my cabinet is a fair distance away (I have absolutely no idea where it is).

      --
      He's Jesus, for Christ's sake.
    4. Re:International efforts, please Google by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      It's a shame BT blocked NEC's plan for a national fibre network. They were offering to take the money that the government set aside for full broadband coverage and build a high speed fibre-to-the-home network. It would be open to all ISPs, and run by a non-profit.

      Instead BT told their friends in the government that they wanted the money and would spend it on rural broadband, honest. Of course they didn't and we are now stuck with their crappy FTTC network that is being rolled out as slowly as possible. Why bother with upgrades when there is no competition?

      We could have had one of the best networks in Europe, instead we have a terrible one run by a monopoly. Worse than what other countries had over a decade ago.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:International efforts, please Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've only checked BT and Virgin's websites, but they don't appear to be tremendously better than what I'm getting. Virgin provides 100 Mbps for about $53 a month and that's what I pay for 115 Mbps from Comcast (unlimited usage). BT seems to have lower speeds. A gigabit service is in the area.

      The problem is that not every part of the country has access to similar speeds. Some are stuck on DSL. Others are stuck with data caps.

      The problem is we got royally fucked due the existence of cable companies. Telephone lines were regulated, cable lines not so much (given that television is a luxury). Cable infrastructure provided faster speeds initially and exceeded DSL for quite some time (telephone companies were loathe to upgrade equipment). When Internet Television threatened their business, cable companies introduced data caps. Telephone companies have started deploying fiber, but now they don't want to be regulated and want to act like cable companies!

  5. campaign contributions = bribes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt.

  6. LA/Chi Don't hold your breath by stabiesoft · · Score: 1

    I am in Austin and am still waiting for google. They tend to deploy in the easy spots (poles) and skip the areas with underground to avoid trenching. Its all about PR, I've been very disappointed with the rollout here. I don't even remember how many years ago it was with great fanfare city council announced the partnership with google. I'm still waiting for the luvfest to generate a fiber connection at my house in what is central austin.

    1. Re: LA/Chi Don't hold your breath by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      It was announced in Dec 2, 2014. IOW, it was just last year. If you are not able to remember that, I suspect that you do not realize that live in Houston, not Austin. You Texans have very selective memory.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re: LA/Chi Don't hold your breath by WindBourne · · Score: 2

      here is an article in which they announced that starting in 2015, they would hit the south and southeast and move forward. Also , if you want it, get your neighbors involved. That article gives clear direction as to what is going on, and what someone that really lives in Austin needs to do.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re: LA/Chi Don't hold your breath by stabiesoft · · Score: 1

      According to wikipedia, it was april 2013, so will be 3 years this april, and I still have not received any sort of indication my area is any time soon. Color me a skeptic, but 3 years in the tech world is vaporware.

  7. Gigabit to the home in Lincoln, Neb. by andyring · · Score: 2

    Tsk Tsk...

    Lincoln, Neb., is getting gigabit fiber to every home and business in the next four years. It's a wet dream for anyone in the tech world. No install fees, no modem rentals, GUARANTEED MINIMUM of 100 mbit, no throttling, etc. It'll provide phone and TV as well. I've read the entire franchise agreement and it's a very good arrangement for the city. Interestingly enough, it's largely possible because back in the 1970s, a public works guy had the brilliant idea to install conduit to all the city's traffic signals. So there's more than 300 miles of conduit already installed and leasable.

    A local company, Nelnet, bought a western Nebraska company, Allo Communications apparently because the top Nelnet guy couldn't get fiber to his home very easily. So he figured, heck, I'll just buy the whole company and get fiber to the whole city.

  8. Re:show us what we're made of? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did that make sense in your head?

  9. L.A. already has FiOS, but it never maxxed out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So maybe Google is looking to fill the (admittedly large) gaps left by Verizon?

    To be fair, I've had FiOS (in Mar Vista) for over 10 years and it's always been rock solid, plus they offered a basically free upgrade to 50/50 a couple of years ago.
    Price is OK, but I suppose that's another area Google could beat Verizon.