Slashdot Mirror


Google Fiber To Acquire Gigabit Internet Provider Webpass (techcrunch.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Google Fiber has announced a deal to acquire high-speed internet service provider Webpass. Webpass is a 13-year-old company that provides high-speed internet, including gigabit service, for businesses and residential customers across parts of the U.S.. Webpass is most widely known in California, with service running in San Fransisco, Oakland, Emeryville, Berkeley and San Diego. It also has service in Miami, Miami Beach, Coral Gables, Chicago, and Boston. The President of Webpass, Charles Barr, said in a blog post: "Joining Google Fiber will be a great development for our users because the companies share the same vision of the future and commitment to the customer," he said. "Google Fiber's resources will enable Webpass to grow faster and reach many more customers than we could as a standalone company." The acquisition should help Google Fiber with its plans to grow to more than 20 U.S. cities in the near future, helping connect to business and residential markets.

59 comments

  1. And nothing for rest of America. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not everyone lives in big cities. Those who live in Rural areas who need high speed internet (sometimes even more than city folks) are still left out because such areas are unprofitable.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's right, it's area is tiny compared to that of Phoenix or Jacksonville, FL. It's population though is ranked 13th in the US as a city on it's own. Along with the rest of the bay-area it's 5th in the US. So I guess it's not a big city.

    2. Re: And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, the population of the Bay Area is about 7 million. That makes it the second biggest city in the US - just behind NYC.

    3. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by cjjjer · · Score: 2

      Yeah but it's Google's playground...

    4. Re: And nothing for rest of America. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Actually, the population of the Bay Area is about 7 million. That makes it the second biggest city in the US

      The Bay Area is not a city. It's barely even a geographical region — it's big enough to have multiple climates.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Not to be a jerk about it but... so what? Why is it that people want to live in the sticks and cry that they don't have everything that places that have more than 10,000 people per square mile have? I'm a suburbanite and I'm grateful for what I have (Comcast that tests at about 30megs a second). There are places less than 5 miles from my house where that isn't possible. Sure, I'd like a bit more of the rural life but I realize that this is one of the places I'd have to accept that country living is what they make it seem on HGTV. I'll give it a few years. Maybe by the time I retire I can actually live someplace with a population density under 20/sqm and get good internet service but I'm not going to fool myself that it makes good business sense to do it today.

    6. Re: And nothing for rest of America. by stephencrane · · Score: 1

      You're comparing the population of the San Fran MSA to the 2005 population of NYC proper. Complete apple vs orange scenario. The NYC MSA is around 19 million.

    7. Re: And nothing for rest of America. by stephencrane · · Score: 1

      Seems like more in the realm of a want than a need if someone continues to live rurally and doesn't have a high speed service offering available.

    8. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not profitable because rural customers won't pay enough?

    9. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      Why do you expect private firms to roll fiber in rural areas which you know it is unprofitable? Do you just like whining about impossible things not happening? You could have your town council or your county pay for the infrastructure and lease it to the ISPs.

    10. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Move. We do not need people in rural areas.

    11. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

      Not everyone lives in big cities. Those who live in Rural areas who need high speed internet (sometimes even more than city folks) are still left out because such areas are unprofitable.

      It's not just rural areas that are left out. I'm on the south-side of Chicago and my only realistic option is Comcast; they bill me over $100/mo for 25 Mb service.

      I so want to switch providers, but it's the same story every time:

      Webpass is building specific and is currently not available in your building. Please fill out this form to bring Webpass to your building!

    12. Re: And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1. NY
      2. LA
      3. D/FW

    13. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Internet connectivity has become a core service that we to function in modern society. Much like how landlines were in the past generation. Or Electricity and Plumbing the generation before.

      The Rural people actually have a bigger need for internet as they don't have ready access to many other services so they use the internet to communicate with people in the distances for their needs. It isn't a short drive to your local post office or government officials to fill out paperwork. Or to try to do a quick stop by at an office during business hours. Or wait hours on the phone for basic service.

      When the cities get gigabit internet website grow larger and more complex to offer features that are now available to the faster speeds, leaving the rural population unable to use their slower speed connections.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    14. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Go ahead and try to force that on America. You will see a Gun pointed at any official that tries. And that will be in solid Blue states!

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    15. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1

      I live in a city with under 45,000 people, and it is one of the biggest in the area.

      The biggest city in my state is around 850,000 people. So, for me, San Francisco is a big city at around the same population.

      It is also the densest city in the country after NYC, most dense in California, and 4th most populous in California.

      If that isn't a big city, what is in the USA outside of Chicago, NYC and LA?

      --
      Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    16. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      No one is forcing anyone here. No one is forcing you to move, you can move by choice and get fiber if you want. No one is forcing ISPs to lay fiber at unprofitable places either. I am sure ISPs even in blue states will bring guns, and point it at any official that tries to force them to lay fiber.

    17. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by houghi · · Score: 2

      So get me up to speed here (see what I did there?) You decide to live in a place where you know that essentials (need) are not available? Perhaps the choice of where you live was not that well made.

      "But I was born here and things changed and when I bought it, I did not have that need". Well, either you do not actually need it as you are able to exist without it, or you DO need it and then you NEED to move to a place where what is essential for you is available.

      This goes not only for fast Internet, this also goes for things like water, electricity or roads or the lack of them or whatever your needs are.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    18. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like most things. It takes things longer to arrive in the country- but most things find their way out to the lower populated areas eventually. You may just have extra grey hairs when fiber reaches you.

      There are advantages and disadvantages to both rural and urban life.

    19. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If ISPs start carrying guns and threatening people then the NRA has lost because once Comcast has guns everyone will want to ban guns.

    20. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're in luck. Google has been working on wireless high-speed solutions on the 3.5GHz band.

      It's fairly short-range, so they'd have to run something out to each podunk town, but one installation on a center-of-town maypole could service the entire area, depending on size (and really, depending on the results of their tests)

    21. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 2

      Not to be a jerk about it but... so what? Why is it that people want to live in the sticks and cry that they don't have everything that places that have more than 10,000 people per square mile have?... Maybe by the time I retire I can actually live someplace with a population density under 20/sqm and get good internet service but I'm not going to fool myself that it makes good business sense to do it today.

      People have been saying that for 20 years now. What we've learned in those decades is that it will probably never make more business sense to build infrastructure in the country when you can make more money maintaining and/or rebuilding that infrastructure in a city instead.

      The real problem, in my view, is that we only have two or three telecoms companies in the United States. They have no interest in serving the few (hundred million) people who choose to live in the middle of nowhere, so they don't. That would theoretically be okay, because in a free market, some smaller, more local companies would pick up the slack and build out to those underserved area. But the big companies won't let that happen. They bribe state and federal legislators to make laws that make competing with them effectively illegal, even in places where they don't actually compete.

    22. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is not one.

    23. Re: And nothing for rest of America. by rocket97 · · Score: 1

      D/FW is not a city, it is a geographical area comprised of multiple cities. Just in the name itself D/FW (Dallas/Fort Worth) each of those are cities, plus you have Arlington between them. Those are just the major cities in that area.

      --
      "The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
    24. Re: And nothing for rest of America. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really, cause if you are saying "area" then NYC also includes the "area" around it, as does Los Angeles. That definition is essentially a megacity, in which case NYC is 23 Million and Los Angeles is 18.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megacity

    25. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by stdarg · · Score: 1

      You could.. except in places where towns build their own networks there is generally a push by telecoms/cable to ban it or make it more difficult to do. It happened here in NC after one town built their own fiber network for residential use.

      Not to mention, if the taxpayers pay for it and then lease it to a company that charges them their full regular price (honestly can't imagine otherwise), they're getting double billed.

    26. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by stdarg · · Score: 1

      Water, electricity, roads? Come on man I don't want to live in a 3rd world country where that stuff stops existing or functioning properly when you get out of the major cities.

      Installing fiber lines has gotten a lot cheaper in the last decade and will continue to do so as more companies are doing last-mile fiber installs. It's already cheap enough that I think it should be done on an as-efficiently-doable basis... like if a road is being torn up, or power lines are being replaced, or whatever, there should be conduit and fiber going in as well. Even in rural areas.

    27. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      They have no interest in serving the few (hundred million) people who choose to live in the middle of nowhere, so they don't.

      As of 2014, there are 318 million people in the US. I highly doubt that 1/3 of the US population lives in the middle of nowhere. Perhaps 10s of millions, but unlikely 100 million.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    28. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      We don't? What do you intend to eat when no one raises your meat or grows your vegis?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    29. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Water comes from the ground, often farms build their own roads, and electricity lines are often run by the farmer. Next?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    30. Re:And nothing for rest of America. by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 1

      As of 2014, there are 318 million people in the US. I highly doubt that 1/3 of the US population lives in the middle of nowhere. Perhaps 10s of millions, but unlikely 100 million.

      You are of course correct. According to Wikipedia, the population of the US is currently 323,341,000, and 81% of them live in cities or suburbs. That works out to 61.4 million people living in rural areas. Rhetorical excesses aside, my point was that that's kind of a lot of people for the monopolists to be willfully depriving of decent internet connectivity.

  2. Well, time to find a new provider... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck Google.

  3. So will their existing customers get hit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... with forced binding arbitration clauses too?

    1. Re:So will their existing customers get hit... by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      No. They can opt out by disconnecting their service.

  4. Re:Ban all guns in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    U jelous?

  5. What internet should be by lfp98 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Took a look at their home page https://webpass.net/residentia... Compared to Verizon or Comcast, it's heaven on earth. A flat $550 a year, no asterisks, no teaser rates, no setup charges, no equipment rentals, no bundled content nobody wants, and free installation. I can't even tell what I'd have to pay Verizon to get the same service but I know it's at least twice that.

    1. Re:What internet should be by Etcetera · · Score: 1

      I'm lucky enough to live in an on-net building with them in San Diego (I've also worked at several locally San Diego ISPs in the past that did similar things for the point-to-point wireless market for businesses). Aside from a few hiccups, I've been very happy with them.

      Unfortunately, I don't think I trust Alphabet to be running my direct uplink and to NOT mine every little bit of traffic to deduce even more about my life than they've already figured out.

      I'll probably revert to using Cox Cable for my normal uplink and only do huge downloads (or PS/XBox and streaming stuff) through Google Fiber. A shame, because I've really liked Webpass and, as you mentioned, the price is amazing.

    2. Re:What internet should be by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I pay $90/mo for 75/75, the maximum service offered by VZ is 500/500 for $215/mo according to my customer page (Central Maryland).

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    3. Re:What internet should be by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Also, it looks like the rate being quoted is for 100 MB on the Webpass site, I don't see how much it is for Gig.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    4. Re:What internet should be by Agripa · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I don't think I trust Alphabet to be running my direct uplink and to NOT mine every little bit of traffic to deduce even more about my life than they've already figured out.

      I'll probably revert to using Cox Cable for my normal uplink and only do huge downloads (or PS/XBox and streaming stuff) through Google Fiber.

      You don't think Cox Cable uses DPI for the same reason?

  6. What was the stated point of Google Fiber again? by chihowa · · Score: 1

    I seem to remember that the point of Google launching this Fiber ISP was to introduce competition to stagnant markets and bring gigabit internet to markets that lacked it, with the ultimate goal of putting more people in a position to use their services. Or was that from when "Don't be evil" was still in effect? Acquisitions are anti-competitive and consolidation of the ISP industry is what is driving stagnation.

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  7. Re:What was the stated point of Google Fiber again by pak9rabid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm guessing this is the only way that they can get into their home turf.

  8. Re:What was the stated point of Google Fiber again by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    Call me when Google acquires Comcast. FYI Webpass has 20,000 customers.

    What drives stagnation is Verizon's decision to stop rolling out fiber. Verizon has decided to not compete in the Fiber market. How about complaining about that.

    Or AT&T trying to make it harder for Google to compete in the markets AT&T operates. Now that's anti-competitive

  9. NBN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well. In theory Google could extend their fiber presence by buying the NBN. Pity. They can't. The NBN is only 1/3 fiber. Thanks, Australian Liberal Party for building the internet network today that we paid Telstra to build in the 90s using the same technology from that era.

  10. Trump 2016 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want a good internet connection like they have in Romania and other "third world shitholes".

  11. Re: What was the stated point of Google Fiber agai by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    Huh? Acquiring small companies is not an issue. Mergers of large ones is. And Google is the smallest in the gig arena.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  12. Welcome to tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    google-analytics.com, gstatic.com, etc

  13. Re:Ban all guns in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds good. We'll send drones with tear gas bombs inside your house, wait for the fires and let you decide if you want to come out or not. You'll never see the face of your enemies, even as you die! Enjoy your second amendment, Rambo!

  14. Re:Ban all guns in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are you guys shooting Muslims anyways? I thought your love of 8 year old wives and shooting innocents would have bound Texas and ISIS for sure!

  15. Still by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 2

    Google, at the end of the day, is still an advertising agency (read: you and your information are a commodity to be sold).

    TANSTAAFL

  16. Re:What was the stated point of Google Fiber again by chihowa · · Score: 1

    Both of the examples you listed are also undesirable and I have specifically complained about them in the past. They are also both directly driven by the lack of competition, due largely to consolidation through acquisitions. Why does Google get a pass on this (a pass on people even complaining about it, as you seem to want)? Anyway, it's consolidation and a general lack of competition that's causing stagnation, not just Verizon and AT&T, as the market I live in is stagnant and neither one of those companies operate here.

    Google is a big entity with the money to make big waves in any industry they decide to dip their toes into. Seeing them start heading down this road should cause concern, even if they aren't currently the worst player in that regard. I think that fanaticism and loyalty to corporations is stupid, so forgive me if I'm picking on your BFF or something.

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  17. Very unfortunate by imbusy · · Score: 1

    That's an unfortunate turn of events since it will reduce competition even more. I've been using Webpass for almost two years now, but even their rates are more than double than what you'd get in European cities.

  18. Re:Still (WAIT IT'S A SPY AGENCY ASK ERIC SCHMIDT) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Search for Eric Schmidt gets a job at the Pentagon. It was an older story before the CIA even started monitoring Slashdot.

  19. Re:Ban all guns in the US by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    How about if we take your internet away first, after all guns are guaranteed by the constitution to every US citizen (the people), but internet is a luxury.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?