6 ms·
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,
by JunkDNA 13y ago
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.
- psbp 13y agoYou live in Philadelphia, don't you?
- leviathant 13y agoI live in Philadelphia, where we have a subway station named after AT&T and the tallest building is the Comcast center (until they build their new Comcast building, which will be even taller), and if Verizon can't get fiber to my house (never mind that free wifi movement that sputtered out six or seven years ago) there's absolutely no hope for Google fiber happening here. Between old infrastructure and big players, decent fiber internet is just something I accept that I'm not going to get in this city. There's plenty of other reasons I like it here, but Comcast domination is not one of them.
- joekrill 13y agoWell Verizon was finally given approval in 2009 for FIOS in Philadelphia. but they suddenly stopped their FIOS rollout, coincidentally at the same exact time the cable companies gave Verizon a big chunk of their spectrum licenses. Of course everyone involved insists the two are completely unrelated, even though Verizon had been trying for years to get into Philadelphia.
- mey 13y agoVerizon had started selling off it's Fiber installs before 2009 (which I still scratch my head at). While they may not be directly related, I'm sure it didn't hurt the negotiation. Edit: See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPoint_Communications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPoint_Communications and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontier_Communications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontier_Communications
- tanzam75 13y ago> Verizon had started selling off it's Fiber installs before 2009 (which I still scratch my head at). Well, it's not like they were trying to get rid of fiber. Verizon sold off all its wireline operations in rural and non-core areas. Fiber simply went along for the ride. What Verizon was trying to get rid of was the copper. No company would be willing to buy the copper from Verizon and then compete against FiOS. Thus, the only way that Verizon could get any buyers was to bundle the copper together with the fiber. This would make it more difficult for Verizon to attempt a market entry at a later date, as it would have to start from a position of no infrastructure.
- cleverjake 13y agobuddy of mine in south philly (by the stadiums) has fios at their full speed.
- avlasov 13y agoI live in Philly and got FIOS fiber recently. Girard station area.
- leviathant 13y agoWhich Girard station? :) Are you in an apartment building? My house is at about 12th & Poplar, and a couple of years ago I saw a lot of Verizon activity on the numbered streets, but nothing ever coming down to house level.
- genghisjahn 13y agoI got FiOS in Germantown.
- JunkDNA 13y agoYes, but I'm one of the fortunate ones with really fast FIOS and an actual choice between Verizon and Comcast. I wasn't necessarily making this point from the perspective of someone who wants Google Fiber. I was more saying that if Google's aim is to get incumbents to change their behavior, there is value in doing that in your primary competitor's front lawn. I remember a Comcast exec a few years ago made the point that it was hard to do deals with Hollywood execs because the execs all lived in places in California that didn't have Comcast service, and couldn't really see the innovations Comcast was talking about.
- bertil 13y agoI've seen detailed cellphone signal quality map (sensorly.com) and I can only confirm: the block around the CEO’s houses have far better signal. Having acquaintances rejoice over the ten-fold improvement (and how crisp their grand-children are on Skype now!) at the Club House would indeed hurt.
- null_ptr 13y agoIt would not hurt one bit. You're assuming that billionaire execs care about and take pride in their business. The only thing they take pride in are their fortunes and place in high society - companies are just the means to get there and nothing more. Otherwise they would not allow such mediocrity as can be seen in every mammoth tech company.
- JonFish85 13y agoWell done sir, that may be the widest brush I've seen used to paint with today!
- _greim_ 13y agoIt 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.
- ohsnapman 13y agoThis 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?
- sparkman55 13y agoWe have Sonic DSL as well (with significantly better customer service and uptime than AT&T or Comcast). That said, I'd definitely be happy to 'cut the cable' with Google Fiber in Palo Alto. There's already a bunch of dark fiber spanning the city, Google Fiber is already active in adjacent Stanford property, the residents are (in general) willing to pay for quality service, and the city is not so large as to make the project untenable. Of course, Palo Alto has a long history of community / municipal connectivity projects with mixed success, and a notoriously-fractious decision making process, so nobody here is holding their breath...
- _greim_ 13y agoIt seems plausible that apathy would prevent people from agitating for faster internet speeds, when speeds are only slightly below the national average (http://www.speedtest.net/local/san-francisco-ca http://www.speedtest.net/local/san-francisco-ca). It seems implausible to claim that such apathy will remain absolute and unchanging if/when other cities started getting major upgrades (http://www.speedtest.net/local/kansas-city-mo http://www.speedtest.net/local/kansas-city-mo), and especially if the national average began pulling away. Plus, the CA regulatory environment is somewhat of an outlier in terms of its conduciveness to infrastructure progress, so it may not be the best litmus test.
- zacinbusiness 13y agoNo. They should roll out to insane hamlets like Climax, NC [1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climax%2C_North_Carolina https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climax%2C_North_Carolina no, I'm not from Climax...but it's an awesome name for a...settlement?
- nostrademons 13y agoKinda like Athol, Massachusetts?
- AutoCorrect 13y agoCumming, GA
- snake_plissken 13y agoHah "local politics certifiably insane": understatement of all time! Ahh Philadelphia politics. Also, Verizon just rolled out some FIoS infrastructure in south philly, maybe 2-3 months ago. It was really cool walking around and seeing unfinished junction boxes with these cables running into them with huge "FIBER OPTIC CABLES" orange warnings on them.
- 300bps 13y agono better place to wire than Philly...Start with a rollout of the Philly 'burbs As someone who lives in the Philadelphia suburbs, I'm not sure if Comcast has the stranglehold in our area that you think it does. I only know one person that has Comcast and the only reason that person has it is because they don't have access to Verizon FIOS. FIOS is faster, more stable and generally cheaper than Comcast Internet. Comcast constantly advertises how their Xfinity is faster for wireless, but they're basing that on the fact that Verizon gives you an 802.11g router while Comcast gives you an 802.11n router. With FIOS, I pay $74.99 per month for 75 Mbps downstream, 35 Mbps upstream Internet with their Prime TV package and unlimited landline phone (need for alarm system). It's rock- of-gibraltar stable, I consistently get the same exact speed on speed tests that is faster than what I pay for, and it's cheap as hell. With Comcast, it was ridiculously expensive, the speed was hit or miss and I generally had to reset the router and/or cable modem about once every few days. So it would be great to have Google Fiber as an option and I hope it happens in the Philly area but there are places that are hurting for good options far more than we are.
- JunkDNA 13y agoI agree, especially where I live I actually have a choice between Verizon and Comcast. I have FIOS and love it. Best internet service I've ever had. So fast you can almost hear the bits as they blast out of the pipe. But my point wasn't that Philadelphia isn't a competitive market. My point was that, as a Comcast executive, seeing Google fiber trucks all over your neighborhood and coffee shops is a bit of psychological warfare so to speak. Furthermore, you know Comcast has all sorts deals in place that help them maintain their monopoly. Google would bump into each of those head-on and make hay out of it in the local press and online. At a time when Philly is trying to increase its image in the national tech scene, this would be a very interesting place to shine some light.
- tracker1 13y agoI've been pretty happy with Cox Cable in Phoenix/Tempe... I generally get 105-120mbps up and 20-35mbps down in speed tests. I'm generally limited to however fast I can get something from the server at the other end.