9 ms·
1Gbps fiber for $70—in America? Yup.
- w1ntermute 15y ago> is a trial and will reach about 700 homes when complete Don't get your hopes up just yet.
- joezydeco 15y ago5 square miles down, 3,500,000 to go. Sounds like a plan to me.
- philthy 15y agoI saw a news bit about how breakout ISPs in the UK are selling 100mbps(I believe I might be wrong on the speed) for as low as 6.99 quid. American utility bubble? I think so. At this point I am positive the Verizons and the Comcasts could offer free service to everyone of there existing customers and still make positive returns from just new contracts. Can somebody please tell me exactly what you are paying for with 100Mbps for 199.99? Are they using solid gold equipment? There can't possibly be that much overheard, someone please set me straight.
- chopsueyar 15y agoFor 199.99, it has to be the best there is. Why else would it be the most expensive? Maybe they run dedicated coax from the head-end to your home's groundblock? Business Fios sustained 35Mbps up/35Mbps down w/ fixed IP is only $130/month.
- devicenull 15y agoI can't tell if you are serious enough.. there's no way Comcast is going to run a dedicated line for you for $200/mo. The only reason I can see for the increased price is it means they can fit less people per node, so they end up needing more.
- chopsueyar 15y agoI was joking. There is no rational explanation. Some people perceive the highest price as being the best. Relevant discussion here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2640685 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2640685
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- madmaze 15y agoI completely agree, when I moved to the US from Germany about 7 years ago, a large majority of the people I got to know were still running dialup. In Germany the years prior to my move, I cannot remember a single person not having at least DSL. Then the next major shock I got was when looking at ISP and Cellphone carrier prices! at the moment I am paying 60$/mo for 12down 2up (in boston). My Brother in a small town in southern Germany gets 2 unlimited phone lines, cable TV and 50down 12up for 40euros/mo so about 60$/mo. Im not sure how this difference in price can be explained, Especially because in boston my internet goes down every few days since all the lines are run overground.
- zwieback 15y agoSince you seem to have more up-to-date experience I'll ask this: what are the other fees Germans pay for telecom? Are there other taxes or fees that are payed separately? I moved away from Germany almost 20 years ago but at the time my parents were still paying "Anmeldungsgebuehr" for their TVs/radios, the basic phone service was really cheap but local calls were metered in 8min increments. I believe one of the big problems for the majority of Americans (myself certainly included) is the limbo created by poorly regulated local monopolies - I can choose between Qwest DSL and Comcast, neither are particularly good and both are expensive. There's not enough regulation to create a good minimum service level but there's enough regulation to prevent local players from really growing. One thing I have to say, though, the pictures of the Sonic guys installing fiber look really scary. I could never get away with a crappy wiring job like this at work yet around town you see the worst kind of spaghetti jobs, crooked masts chewed up by woodpeckers, home-made looking junction boxes, etc.
- kayoone 15y agoTelekom wasnt even a private company 20 years ago and they had a monopoly. Today you can choose between lots of ISPs/Telco companies. I get 64/5 Mbit with 2 unlimited phone lines and cable TV for about 50 EUR in a small german city. No one i know still has metered calls in germany. Prices fell and speeds have risen dramatically in the last 5-6 years.
- pbreit 15y ago
- rimantas 15y agoI've got 100Mbps fiber for less than $20. There is better plan: 300Mbps for $32. On the other hand my country is the leader in fiber-to-the-home. Benefits of being small.
- kierank 15y agoI saw a news bit about how breakout ISPs in the UK are selling 100mbps(I believe I might be wrong on the speed) for as low as 6.99 quid. If only.
- orijing 15y agoHere's the sad part (unless you bought into their shares early): You're paying for their dividends (i.e. payouts to shareholders). It's their fiduciary duty. However, companies like them need to realize that there are more stakeholders (like the community) than just shareholders.
- richcollins 15y agoIt's not a bubble if you have laws passed in your favor that prevent competition.
- chopsueyar 15y agoNice to see an effort being made. Bring on the FTTH providers!
- joezydeco 15y agoIt's an uphill battle. Local governments in the US sign franchise agreements with cable companies and telecom providers. Many of those agreements give the cable company exclusive geographical rights to the area in return for hooking up the entire town. So when another ISP shows up and wants to string cable all over the poles...guess what? They're turned away. Verizon FiOS found this out when trying to get into markets where AT&T had the telephone franchise. Call it a monopoly, call it anti-competition. But America is huge. There's no other way to get a company to invest in so much infrastructure to cover all of the land.
- cheez 15y agoThat's what they said with the railroads. They should have said: fine, don't. But politicians are short-sighted.
- Nrsolis 15y agoFranchise agreements aren't exclusionary. They just lay out what a company will pay to the city for the right to use the public right of way. They also cover things like in-kind contributions for schools and libraries and minimum service levels (which set out that they can't cherry pick neighborhoods and must offer service to everyone in a geographic area). A second provider would have to agree to conditions at least equal to the first one. I worked for a city-owned electric utility that would regularly negotiate with outside entities to do pole-attachments. We did fiber loops around the city and started to offer Internet service. When it looked like we might actually make some meaningful progress, Bellsouth and Cox went to the state government and got a law passed that forbade ANY governmental organization or political subdivision from getting into the telecomm business. If we had the national political will to insist on a competitive telecommunications infrastructure, we'd have one. I'm happy to see that some ISPs are giving it a go. Unfortunately, the capital costs are so high that it's hard for an upstart to really gain traction. Our best bet for a truly competitive marketplace is for the CableCos to finally get into the business of doing SMB (small/medium biz) customer service that gives the ATT/Verizons a run for their money.
- hammock 15y agoJust curious, why would anyone need 1Gbps internet right now? And what %of the population is that which needs it?
- justinph 15y agoWhy would anyone need a car that goes over 65 miles per hour?
- GFischer 15y agoMine doesn't, and I don't miss it. Not everyone needs a car that goes over 65... I'd actually argue that in non-US cities, the vast majority don't need it 99% of the time (the 1% being when you're planning on doing a road trip). See also: Tata Nano or Maruti 800 (my car). OTOH, I'd really appreciate 1gbps internet :) . In a college in Germany they had 1gbps for all the students, and they enjoyed streaming HD movies and all that.
- seanmccann 15y agoIt's great for a large family or office where everybody is doing bandwidth intensive tasks. The percentage of households that need it is probably quite low but having it opens up new doors.
- jorgeortiz85 15y agoThe important question isn't whether you think you need it now or not, but rather, what can you do with it once you have it?
- hammock 15y agoThe PC is dying, I would rather see more advancements in wireless speeds rather than rolling out all this FTTH. A couple of the comments talk about speeds enabling cloud lifestyle, I would point out also that mainly hinges again on wireless. edit: why all the downvotes? have i said anything thats wrong? how does 1gbps help you watch stuff outside one room in your home without unplugging and re-plugging all your devices? is 100mbps sufficient for viewing HD video or do you need 1gbps? And for the record wireless is not just about mobile phones- as I said the PC is dying, it's about laptops, netbooks, ipads, tablets, internet-enabled TVs, gaming consoles, and the future IP devices (cars) etc all of which are now, today, usually connected wirelessly. And we are the better for it.
- kinofcain 15y agoSonic is the only ISP I've ever had that hasn't sucked. They're terrific. Their techs actually know what they're talking about and, as I'm sure others on HN can relate to from dealing with other ISPs, they don't treat you like an idiot when you call up. It was a great decision by google to have sonic act as the ISP for the Stanford deployment. I hope they're able to roll fiber out quickly.
- grandalf 15y agoPart of this is probably due to Sonic's small size. The people answering the phone are actually engineers. With a big company like Comcast, the people answering the phone are trained to follow a specific (and often frustrating to the customer) algorithm to solve your problem.
- epi0Bauqu 15y agoI was the first person in my township to get FIOS. At that time, their customer service was excellent and in-line with what you both are saying. But over the past 5 years it has steadily degraded. The service itself is great, but you no longer quickly get the technical help you need.
- acangiano 15y agoIt's like Techsavvy in Canada, except I effectively get 3Mbps, not 1Gbps, from them :(.
- ComputerGuru 15y agoI'm going to be moving back to Chicago soon, and I wonder if any fellow HNers have some advice as to who's the best ISP for quality, high-speed internet in the Chicagoland region for someone that lives their life online?
- slyn 15y agoAT&T DSL here, pretty good for latency (low jitter, sub 60 ms, in WoW, SC2, TF2, and others while on wifi as well), not so good for throughput (only goes up to 6 mbps in my area, we have 3 mbps I think).
- durin42 15y agoComcast Business Class. Not the consumer stuff, the good stuff. 20 mbps sustained download and 14ms ping to google.com. There's a different (and much better) tech support tree for businesses too. Pricey but easily the best internet I've ever had. Beats the pants of my old AT&T DSL.
- absconditus 15y agoSpeakeasy is probably the best ISP available. Unfortunately they are also expensive. AT&T U-verse is cheap, I have not had any problems so far (installed a couple months ago) and I have not heard any complaints from friends and coworkers who have it. Avoid Clear.
- pedrokost 15y agoI wonder why they don't put the wires and fibers underground. It is much safer and less prone to strong winds and other natural hazards. Is the cost of having underground wires that high?
- m_eiman 15y agoYes. Imagine the cost of getting autorization for and digging a long hole through mile upon mile of in-city streets, and then repairing said hole - all while taking care of all the disruptions you cause to traffic and more. Unless you can find and use existing pipes in the right places with spare capacity (you're not going to, don't worry).
- trafficlight 15y agoIn a lot of cases you can directional bore underneath the streets. It can really reduce the amount of above ground disruptions.
- Nrsolis 15y agoUh. Not really. Directional boring is one of the most expensive ways to lay cable. Just going underneath at standard two lane road in a residential neighborhood is something like $50-$100K. Undergrounding utilities (esp in a metro area) runs something like $250K to $1M/mile. There are many, many variables that affect cost. Underground cables are also much more susceptible to failure when compared with aerial cables. When they do fail, it's sometimes more costly to repair them if they are buried as opposed to attached to a pole.
- ww520 15y agoWhat's the upstream speed? Hope it's symmetric. High speed clusters are possible. Imagine a cluster of Beowulf...
- cowkingdeluxe 15y agoFor 700 homes.
- dhughes 15y agoThat's pretty good, the fastest I can get is 170Mbps/30Mbps for almost $300 plus taxes but capped at 250GB/month, $1 per GB going over 250GB, and torrents throttled.
- joelhaus 15y agoEveryone needs to make sure each candidate answers two questions during the upcoming election cycle: 1. Do you believe higher speed internet service will lead to a better jobs economy? 2. What policies will you pursue to so that more Americans have internet access comparable to our global counterparts? E.g. Germany where speeds are 10x's as fast at 2/3 the price?
- webXL 15y agoOn what rational basis are these two questions pertinent to managing the executive branch of the United States government?
- joelhaus 15y agoTo answer your question; because any federal law passed by congress in an effort to improve consumer choice in the ISP market would require the signature of the president without a supermajority. However, my call for answers to these questions applies equally to candidates for congressional, state and local offices too. Unless you feel the current regulatory structure has no responsibility for getting us in this situation, how are they not pertinent?
- webXL 15y agoYou use phrases like "improve consumer choice" and "regulatory structure" as if it was possible for your interests to be aligned with those of the regulators and politicians. Nevermind those being regulated are donating many, many times more to politicians than your interest group is, to either not be regulated or regulate their competitors out of the market.
- joelhaus 15y agoIt's called democracy. I'm sure there's an excellent civics course online somewhere.
- jerf 15y ago
- taylr 15y agoI didn't see any mention of bandwidth caps. I hope they don't cap it. I'm not sure people see the flip side of having an extremely fast connection with the current model of pricing for most telecommunication providers. The speeds keep going up but the caps don't. I live in a building that has fiber provided by Telus, capped at 50MBps. I'm hitting 1TB down per month on average, I'd be screwed if they started capping my bandwidth. It's interesting how as soon as companies implement bandwidth caps we start seeing speeds go up.. just another money grab.
- click170 15y agoHonestly, I'm tired of the way companies try to market Internet to the masses. Too many people/articles focus on "1Gbps, blazing download speeds". Yeah, for a day, maybe. With bandwidth caps, you can't actually use your connection at full potential all of the time, so I question the way they market it as "1Gbps". Call me when it's confirmed that the 1Gbps package comes with no bandwidth cap, that would be something to write home about.
- palish 15y ago"No bandwidth cap" doesn't actually work, though. The average user (and even the average programmer) wants to use the internet for 1) entertainment, and 2) information. Those tasks don't require sustained, maximum bandwidth usage. The only people who actually need that kind of bandwidth are either bittorrent... um.... addicts, for lack of a better word, or infected computers, and consist of about 1-2% of the customers. Their usage patterns degrade the service for everyone else.
- MatthewPhillips 15y agoNetflix is mainstream.
- fholm 15y agoGod I love sweden, 100/100 dedicated for 16$/month (~100 SEK)