Slashdot Mirror
Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption We Were Promised (vice.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Some eight years on and Google Fiber's ambitions are just a pale echo of the disruptive potential originally proclaimed by the company. While Google Fiber did make some impressive early headway in cities like Austin, the company ran into numerous deployment headaches. Fearing competition, incumbent ISPs like AT&T and Comcast began a concerted effort to block the company's access to essential utility poles, even going so far as to file lawsuits against cities like Nashville that tried to expedite the process. Even in launched markets, customer uptake wasn't quite what executives were expecting. Estimates peg Google Fiber TV subscribers at fewer than 100,000, thanks in large part to the cord cutting mindset embraced by early adopters. Broadband subscriber tallies (estimated as at least 500,000) were notably better, but still off from early company projections. Even without anti-competitive roadblocks, progress was slow. Digging up city streets and burying fiber was already a time-consuming and expensive process. And while Google has tried to accelerate these deployments via something called "microtrenching" (machines that bury fiber an inch below roadways), broadband deployment remains a rough business. It's a business made all the rougher by state and local regulators and lawmakers who've been in the pockets of entrenched providers like Comcast for the better part of a generation.
Slow to the news and just an echo of Digg.
Why can't we all just get along and all the companies get together to combine their funds to roll out 1 super fibre connection to every home etc between them then sell access to it that way they all get a cut.
Let comcast have its cities. I bet there's a million small towns out there that would kill to have dedicated fiber lines.
the problem with google fiber is its trying to fight big cable in the places its most entrenched. Maybe if they deployed to smaller areas where cable is already overpriced and shitty, they'd have a better reception.
As much as I like Fiber and the push to deploy it everywhere I can't help but point out many of Google's problems may in fact not exist had it been another company. Google, is EVIL. End of story. It would be like Microsoft or Facebook getting into the residential internet business.
This is something Google's well aware of given their plethora of shell companies they use to introduce products. The Google name itself is tarnished beyond repair and they know it.
Another Google project stuck in perpetual beta state along with their invasive data mining of their customers?
No thanks. I'll take Comcast over that.
But relaxing the existing rules to allow competition would be DE-REGULATION! Nobody wants that, right? It's not like regulatory capture is often used to stifle competition by existing markets or anything.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
Yeah, how did "Don't be evil" work out for you?
That’s what happens when you rely on a company that always half-asses things and due to its manic ADD it gets bored easily. They were never going to put in the full effort needed to take on Verizon, AT&T or Comcast.
If it's google, and too good to be true, it probably is.
Don't ever trust them to do anything but try to monetize you and your data/
If you buy hardware, expect it to die, with little or no updates, and no extended support.
If you allow them to become your Internet provider, prepare to be disappointed.
"broadband deployment remains a rough business. It's a business made all the rougher by state and local regulators and lawmakers who've been in the pockets of entrenched providers like Comcast for the better part of a generation.
Well, the last part of that statement almost summed up the real issue; "been in the pockets of entrenched providers" is the PC-friendly way of saying that fucking greed and corruption have destroyed competition.
If Google can't succeed, don't think for a fucking second ANY lesser company stands a chance. Not until the Broadband Mafia is deregulated.
There! now you got it more correctly. You are welcome.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Broadband distribution has enormous capital expenses, I was never sure why Google thought they could 'disrupt' their way around the laws of finance and physics, but this is the end result. The only areas where Google had any success were the cities where someone gifted them an existing fiber optic system already in place and they basically just had to light it up. This type of infrastructure is so expensive to build that the competitive free-market capitalist model just simply doesn't work. The minute you have to split revenue among more than a very small number of providers, nobody can make a profit on their massive investment anymore. The only reasonable solutions to this type of service is a regulated monopoly or complete government takeover. Otherwise you'll be complaining about all these shitty companies and their shitty service until the heat death of the universe.
At least all of us hopeful early adopters in the Research Triangle got cool T-shirts. Still waiting for Google Fiber.
The last few years we lived in Durham, until retiring to nearby Burlington over a year ago, Time-Warner (before the Spectrum takeover), AT&T, and even lowly Frontier, boosted internet access and speed dramatically in direct response to the Google initiative in our area. It was a mess with AT&T digging up stuff all over our neighborhood, but we wound up with more, and faster choices.
We just stayed with TWC in anticipation of our move to Burlington, and saw speeds go from 50+ Mbps to nearly 200 in less than a year, with no change in plan/rates. That was after switching from Frontier's DSL of 3 Mbps (doubled to 6 by a savvy tech who, while fixing our landline failure, saw a switch in our pedestal that needed a simple "flip" to enable the increase - even though Frontier denied for the prior 2 year that our location could get anything faster than 3 - but too little/late at that point, although they started touting 20+ Mbps rates a few months later).
Now AT&T is shaking things up a bit in Burlington, and it seems to be having a similar effect on our Spectrum internet speeding up (50 Mbps a year ago, now approaching 100 when I test with DSLreports), and holding the prices down to pre-Spectrum rates with TWC if we are "grandfathered" with the older pricing of a year ago. This works fine for our OTT Playstation Vue TV.
Sometimes, (good) shhhtuff happens despite all the theoretical pessimism.
RO
I think Google is just a ideal company that unfortunately implements a lot of these badly. They fail to recognize with fiber the true nature of dealing with acquiring pole access, underground access, and how many want the service vs how many can actually afford the service. Its just like a decade or more ago that the phone companies if they had only installed fiber back then they could rule the broadband industry. These days its cable that claims most broadband service. Even Verizon's FIOS has not lived up to its hype and much like Google has failed at expanding coverage. The money just isn't there.
The only thing they are committed to is offshoring their profits. If somebody with real ambition ran Google, things would be much different.
It's gotten the entrenched providers to upgrade their systems across the country. In Dallas, I have no option for Google Fiber, but have 70 mb/s speeds from Spectrum.
It is so funny. I came to North America from country where I did not have cable TV :-)
So naturally I started to use internet video streaming services and who am I now?
I am cord cutter!
I've had Time-Warner and AT&T internet service, and Google Fiber is easily the best in terms of speed, uptime, and, importantly, customer service and the customer-facing website that you use to configure the service. As others have stated, Google Fiber has forced the other players in the area (Time-Warner, AT&T, and Grande) to lower their prices and improve their offerings. I've had Google Fiber gigabit Internet now for a couple of years and I haven't contacted tech support even once. So, yeah, Google may be rethinking their strategy, but the actual service is fantastic.
Mine said I ordered Google Fiber and all I got was this lousy t-shirt
...how much of the US was pretty much given on a silver plate to the current ISP monopolies, and how much ISPs are still paying politicians for things to remain that way... it's just sad.
For anyone thinking this is Google's fault, you really need to search around and read articles that explains it from the company's side.
To put it very simply, it was taxpayer money that paid the entire infrastructure to handle the Internet, rights to it was haphazardly given up to ISPs, now everytime Google needs to pass fiber through existing infrastructure (which sometimes is the only way), it needs to gently ask permission to the likes of AT&T and Comcast to do so, which of course will do everything not to let them, including suing Google when the local government tries to expedite the whole thing.
Google Fiber failed because the government gave US infrastructure on a silver platter to existing ISP monopolies. That's why. It's the same reason why the FCC is working the way it is right now. You guys have an effective telecommunications mafia up there and it's gonna stay that way.
It's why Google caved in and started working on the next high speed transmission technology instead of wasting time and money in something that won't work out. Don't take it from me though, just search around for the information.
I don't know how roads are in the U.S.A. but if you try to bury anything only one inch below roadways in Canada, you can kiss whatever you buried goodbye, it will only last a few months.
#DeleteFacebook
I'm posting this through my $60 100Mb/100Mb AT&T fiber connection from my small town. Should we not credit Google Fiber for rattling the cages of the giants ISPs through competition threat to get them to move forward on products like these? I do.
everybody knows ...free and honest competition don't really exist
in terms of big business, they are just a facade to shelter monopolistic corporations
Interesting. I live in an area where Google is doing the microtrenching, and it's now been in place through the winter. The trench is about 1 inch wide, 9 inches deep, filled with 12 ( perhaps 24) fiber pair, that run to each resident. The trench is then sealed with a black very flexible rubber caulk. The same kind of caulk used to seal bathtubs and tiles. It's been working fine, except in the high traffic streets, where during the winter, the caulk bulges out and pot holes developed where rubber pushed out and was constantly being run over. So if there is a flaw in microtrenching it's the sealant used to backfill the trench. Where I think this is going to really become an issue is when the road ways have to be resurfaced and they have an asphalt scraper run over that rubber. Once that problem gets taken care of, it should be sweet.
What has amazed me is how fast they can install and wire whole neighborhoods in fiber. Jobs that would take years on poles (even without the ISP blowback) can be done in months with a very small crew. Its good stuff and I love how Google hasn't had to even touch a pole yet. It's a real "in your face AT&T" move.
Start vast projects with half vast ideas...
Google is HTML indexing company. HTML does not need Fiber.
Google is not going to undermine his own dominance.
The city is largely bending over backwards to try to help Google Fiber. The problem is our state legislature, which is flaming red and never misses an opportunity to fellate AT&T for more bribes, sorry, "campaign contributions". Our legislature has never seen a broadband bill favoring AT&T that they didn't like, nor a broadband bill helping Google or municipalities/utilities that they wouldn't go out of their way to squash.
The people living in cities are being held political hostage by the people in rural areas who voted (R) without thinking. I'd imagine Kansas is in a similar predicament.
The wires in the ground are mostly owned by the former Telecoms monopoly, but it has to allow ISPs to have boxes in its exchanges, as well as having to allow access to the network. The result is many ISPs competing effectively on price and service.
Thanks to airline deregulation computers got faster and cheaper also. Is there nothing that magic of airline deregulation couldn't do.
I'm in a Google Fiber city, and I can't fucking get it. And in addition it looks like I'm never going to be able to get it.
A service that isn't available can't make an impact.
Pretty much everything is a "try".
And past some arbitrary point, they just stop trying...
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
My local ILEC implemented fiber 18 months ago, and while those that wanted it are really happy, other people ask "Why do I want it?/What is it for?". It has been really difficult to explain to people why they would want 1Gbps speeds or how it would impact them. That is where the problem lies for Google Fiber, and other who are trying to get into the Gig Game. Education of consumers about what the normal home user can do with those speeds, what the upsides are to both the consumer and the company. When companies were convincing people to move from Dial-up to DSL or Cable the touted being able do have more people online at once, being able to watch movies, play games etc. There isn't yet a "Killer App" for consumer fiber, and until there is, I doubt there will be that great of adoption, even at lower price points.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/google-fiber-continues-awful-isp-tradition-banning-servers
Note well that less than 48 hours after a Utah family with small children held up picket signs GoogleFiber relaxed their home server prohibition to allow "non-commercial" servers. Talk about your interstate commerce roadblock tactics...
There is no Google Fiber offering where I live, but just the thought of them persuading a city 130 miles away forced local ISPs to step up their game. I'm now on symetrical gigabit fiber from CenturyLink because of what Google pushed. Google wasn't about overtaking ISPs nation wide, they were all about showing that gigiabit internet could be provided and still profitable. They succeeded in this, and forced the hands of ISPs who were lying all along about the cost of doing business. Overall, they did indeed change the market landscape for the better!
If Google wants to drive the adoption of high speed fiber Internet then why don't they develop an application that requires it? You don't need gigabit speeds to stream Netflix.
I guess chasing away all the people who were actually developing products in favor of SJWs is beginning to backfire.
Weird how the whole Google Fiber project died around the same time that Net Neutrality passed isn't it?
The free market was solving the problem of ISP monopoly but why bother with all of that when you can get the same result by hobbling the ISPs to do what you want through legislature?
Huge physical infra is hard and has rules.
Google isn't good at playing by the rules. Often, people get out of the way due to good-will that google has earned over the years, but govt contracts don't care. They want companies to follow the rules more than anything else.
Plus the google-hype engine can't make cable permits happen any faster.
And they never came to my neighborhood, so Comcast is offering GigE fibre for $399/month here + $800 setup fees.
Don't the FCC rules that deregulate the ISP industry also mean that the incumbent networks lose their common carrier status? Under the new rules, Google should be able to hang fiber from any pole that it wants.
They like to offer big deals to people as the network is being built if they will agree to being locked into long term contract. They did that in the city I live in as well.
"GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
I live in Austin, and I do have to say that microtrenching is kind of nasty -- it's all over my neighborhood.
It "scars" the roads and leaves bumps that are getting worse over time as whatever it is that they used to fill them in gets pushed in more. It's not so noticeable in a car, but on a bicycle it is.
And I fear what might happen when they resurface the roads (which they do periodically.) If the fiber really is only an inch or two down, when they scrape off the top of the road it might tear up the fiber too? That would be a huge mess! That said, if it doesn't damage the fiber, resurfacing should fix the "bumpy/ugly" issue completely.
That said, disruptive or not ... I *love* my Google Fiber. Fast, reliable and even the TV service and hardware is good.
The service is excellent. Google's uptime has been flawless, the original install appointments went smoothly and were kept, the equipment is high quality, and the gigabit service does actually deliver a full gigabit of bandwidth up *and* down in tests. And all for $70/month, which includes 1TB online storage via Google Drive.
Just as cool, you can simply log into fiber.google.com and downgrade to 100mbps ($50/mo.) or 5mbps (free) at will. You can upgrade and downgrade, click, click, click, and it will pro-rate costs for you automatically. Basically, it's a flawless service in every way.
One of the things that I'm convinced hurt Google in this area is that there was already entrenched competition from the usual suspects in national broadband brands.
For decades, it had been 5mbps-10mbps down and a fifth of that upstream as the maximum service tier at every major provider. And for that you paid $50-$70 monthly. As soon as Google Fiber deployed, suddenly *every provider* offered Gigabit for less than $100/mo. plus value adds and promos. I mean, it took weeks max, once Google Fiber started scheduling installations. Just like that. And a lot of people stuck with the devil they already know, particularly if they were already getting TV and/or landline service through them, and particularly if Google had install times a week or two out but their current provider could bump them up within a day or two.
Google broke the market wide open here, but at the same time ended up with scraps in the end. Most of the people that I know stuck with their previous provider and ended up with gigabit speeds anyway at or near their previous subscription cost once Google entered the local market. I worry that if Google were to pull out of the market for some reason, suddenly "market realities" would reduce the offerings of the other providers once again to $70/mo. for 5mbps, as it had previously been.
So I hope Google stays.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Everyone wants Google Fiber, but they can't get it, because Google only installed it for people who signed up two years in advance (as it turned out in Austin), and then, only installed for those homes during a brief period before moving on to another region. It's Google's fault for making such a complicated process.
I had a Google Fiber fan blog to get the word out and spread the news. I heard from SO MANY people who pish-poshed the signup and deposit requirement and told me confidently that they would simply wait to hear from their neighbors who got it and then they would order. I SCREAMED that then it would be too late, but they just smirked at silly ole me and told me I was wrong.
Google's Fault Period.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_deregulation
Industry consolidation and reduction in competition between carriers
After airline deregulation, many airlines in the United States are purchased by other airlines and merged into fewer airlines "after thirty five years and hundreds of new startup airlines, hundreds of bankruptcies, liquidations, reorganizations, and mergers", wrote Richard Finger equities trader and finance business analyst at Forbes.com.[23] This has resulted in four major airlines (United Airlines, American Airlines with its recently acquired US Airways, Delta Air Lines, and Southwest Airlines) controlling a near-monopoly at certain regional airports in the United States and controlling 90% of domestic airline flights at those airports in the United States.[23] In particular, Finger notes that United Airlines (with its recently purchased Continental Airlines) now controls over 90 percent of domestic travel in and out of Houston Intercontinental Airport.[23] Finger states that "many flights have been consolidated so travelers have fewer choices", resulting in increased fares.[23] Finger argues that the current situation in the airline industry benefits the airlines and corrupt top union officials, by decreasing competition among airlines, increasing fares for airline passengers, decreasing airline employee pay and benefits (especially pensions), and creating an oligopoly of only four major airlines that was never intended (unintended consequences) by the framers of airline deregulation act.[23]
That was always half the point: to provide a convenient lightning rod for customer anger, should the incumbent's lay a heavy hand on their escalating coefficient of customer rape.
Because Google fiber merely exists, incumbents must boil their frogs in the slow lane, everywhere in America, or watch out.
I despise Google and everything it stands for. However, while Google is a pretentious, do-goodie, social justice warfare company, Comcast and Century Link are pure, unadulterated evil.
Would you please bring Fiber to Seattle? Pretty please. With sugar on top.
how is it NOT a monopoly?????