https://fiber.google.com/about/
Gigabit internet for $70 a month. :glare:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...;v=ffHLIZh0PHg
Printable View
https://fiber.google.com/about/
Gigabit internet for $70 a month. :glare:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...;v=ffHLIZh0PHg
Ditto
We despise you Kansas Cityians (I know that is not a word)
I pay $50 for not even over 10 meg
Up to one gigabit upload & download speed • Full channel TV lineup • 2 year contract • No data caps
Nexus 7 tablet • TV Box • Storage Box • Network Box • 1TB Google Drive • $120/mo + taxes and fees
No seriously Kansas City....a very large I dislike you.:fdown:
I just read the details too G. That is the TV + Internet package.
Sounds so lovely
Believe me guys, I hate it as well and I'm only 15 minutes South of their coverage area. I just hope like hell it's a big hit and they've made it easily expandable because I'd be all over that when and if I can.
I'm guessing 3 hours away is too far :fdown:
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
WOW. Time to get this shizzle to Houston.
You better hope they expand quicker than Verizon is with Fios.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Kernzy
Wow, first Bar B Q now this? :fp:
So... did I read/hear that right that other cities with pre-registered will be added next? Or, was it just talking about KC?
I think that's just talking about the KC area but not certain.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Yeah I couldn't tell. Oh well gave my address and e-mail to keep me up-to-date. I pay way more than that now than Google's "super" package.Quote:
Originally Posted by gschwendt
See, this shit REALLY pisses me off. Because of these fuckin' companies that have a god damn stranglehold on parts of the US, this shit will NEVER be what it should be. The US is a fuckin' third world country in the internet race compared to countries like Japan and Korea. It's REALLY god damn sad.
Id still rather live in the US though Mors lol
Yeah as a Country we are quite a bit behind.
I'd just love for my town to get Fios in my area
Hell, broadband internet has been made a constitutional RIGHT for all citizens, both natural and foreign, in Finland.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
Free market, baby!
This message has been brought to you by the Republican Party.
Careful! CLW will be along soon to tell you how this is all part of a liberal Democratic agenda. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2
Actually, as much as I'd love to blame this on the free market, it's been my opinion for a while that the problem is that we spent so much time/effort/resources on our existing infrastructure, that ripping up that infrastructure and replacing it with a new technology will be prohibitively expensive. Same problem with gas stations vs hydro/electric cars and trains vs high-speed rail.
Part of it is, we never invested in our own infrastructure like we should have been because we allow people with millions and billions of dollars to hire lobbyists who just look out for the people with all the money's interests instead of what's best for the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
We rely on crude oil because those companies are lining the pockets of pretty much everyone with a say in how shit works. We allow electrical companies to have monopolies because they're filling the right people's pockets. We are slaves to the monopolies in the US and there's really nothing that can be done about it. Capitalism has allowed that to be the case and the government has made it that much worse with the decision that a company's money is a form of freedom of speech. I swear it's getting close and close to Idiocracy. :smh:
It has electrolytes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
LOL are you really going to say that telcoms operate in a "free market". Hell until just recently they were monopolies. I don't think it was until the early 00s that I even had a choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelerfan
Competition is ALWAYS best. Google does this and that REQUIRES everyone else to respond or die.
I should note that Google's t.v. package is REALLY bad right now but I suspect they will get more channels as time goes on.
Looking at their current list, honestly, it's not that bad. The only channels that I don't see listed that I would miss would be AMC, TBS, TNT and ESPN/2/U/etc. Other than that, that thing has every other channel I watch regularly. For TBS, TNT and AMC, I could just watch the shows online. ESPN channels, I really don't even care about ESPN these days outside of college football. And for 1Gbps speeds, fuck, I could part with AMC, ESPN, TBS and TNT until they added them. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Google offers TV?
Well, not a "free" market. But the market is still the driver of our broadband penetration, and thus far the market hasn't responded here the way it has in other countries. I really meant "capitalism", but "free market" was what popped to mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
And yes, the fact that you didn't have a choice (and the vast majority of people still don't) is just part of the problem. I don't think Google is going to cause a response from the general industry. They will in Kansas City, but unless Google starts putting this into every major metropolitan area, and I mean yesterday, it's not going to initiate a response in the near-term.
The "market", being buyers in numbers great enough and willing to purchase a given product at a given price. Granted this industry in no way models a "free market" due to over government regulation, taxation, etc. I am curious as to what you think the "driver" should be on any given consumer product or service? Not sure if you equivocate on the word market?:dunno:Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Well... when government creates "false markets" as it has done with telcoms you cannot possibly blame "free market capitalism" for any problems in the industry. The issues you complain of fall exclusively at the hands of OVER regulation by government which allowed monopolies to develop and thus these companies can afford to be lazy and deliver a lesser product for a higher price b/c the government protects them from the free market. No smart company is going to "push the envelope" when they do not have to. A truly free market in the area would require it because of companies competing for consumers $.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Had there truly been a free market there would be multiple companies offering MUCH BETTER t.v./net services at lower prices all across the country (again assuming there is sufficient demand from the people of the area). Google has the $ and talent to totally change the game (the question is do they want to). Giving the "dominate" culture in the company I wouldn't be surprised to see them really spread this as fast as they smartly can (assuming it works well in KC). In fact, if I were a betting man I'd believe there are decent odds that Google will become the #1 ISP/TV services provider within the next 20 years.
Not an intentional equivocation. More just an attempt to get to my point while failing to use accurate terminology for this discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
The problem with this thought, in my head, is that the telecom industry has shown, time and again, that initiative is lacking. Is it regulation that prevents two cable companies from both offering services in a single area? Or that prevents a company from offering broadband service further down the street than they currently do? I don't know about the former; maybe it is, I'm not aware enough about regulation to say either way (I know there are franchise agreements, but don't have knowledge of the connection between the two). But the latter, I can't imagine that's regulation that's the problem. When a company already provides X service to a house, and either takes forever to provide X&Y, or simply declines to provide Y, that sounds like a business decision to me. And I'm not sure if I believe that, even with a "free" market, that decision would be any different.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Also, regarding your overall concept of Google competing ... I agree that they could, but I'll be surprised if they decide they want to. Verizon had a chance to be a game-changer, IMO, with FiOS, and they stopped expanding it two years ago.
Back to my original question, what do you think the "driver" should be on any given consumer product or service? And to expand, what or how do you think any business makes decisions?Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Oh, I know. If you go back to my original post (well, not the Republican Party original post, the one after that :D), I said that I currently believe that, at least part of, the problem is that our existing infrastructure is "good enough", and the cost of upgrading that infrastructure in order to put in broadband is prohibitively expensive. And, from a business standpoint, the cost is not going to outweigh the long-term income growth, especially in rural areas where the population density is absolute shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
That said, we need increased broadband penetration in this country. But no, I don't know how to get it.
As for the "driver", the driver of any service is supply and demand. The demand is there, but the supply, I assume, still isn't cheap enough to provide.
O.K.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
If the cost is prohibitive this means the end buyer won't pay thus the market for the good is not there. I think you mean the cost is too high for long term income growth? With you so far. We do not need increased broadband, many may want it but need, nah.
On supply and demand I agree in part. Demand drives a market and the price. I have a very limited supply of a very special type of cat turds yet I can't seem to sell them. Why? NO DEMAND.:dunno: If you were to tweak your second statement to say, the consumer wants broadband etc but not enough of us are willing to pay the cost then I would agree. Basically you get enough demand at a price that is profitable you will have your supply.
All of this being said, I hate comcast and at&t. Come on Verizon!!!
Yep, you and I are on the same page. There is not enough demand, at least in rural areas, to overcome the cost of upgrading the existing infrastructure. There are some other factors involved, of course, but from a business standpoint that is true. When only so many customers live on a given street, the cost of providing that street with broadband is not going to be overcome by the increased income.
But "we're not willing to pay enough" is not the sole answer for this question: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...korea-estonia/
Interesting article. Those are small countries however. There are no five star hotels or restaurants in the sticks either. I in no way support the government "funding" broadband expansion. That is what these companies want.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Touche.Quote:
Originally Posted by SCClassof93
Looks like 20% of KC has already met the signup goals in 4 days. That's pretty impressive
http://news.yahoo.com/google-fiber-a...210501163.html
Google Fiber: Triumph of the free market? (I say this only because the article does, not because anyone here believes Google Fiber is free market success) Maybe not.
At some point, Google will run our lives completely. :(
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2
+1
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk 2
After they buy Facebook.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelerfan
Though, it's worth saying, that people were saying practically the same thing about M$ a decade ago. Technology changes enough to open the door for new companies all the time.
As long as they give me cool shit to play with I don't give a shitQuote:
Originally Posted by steelerfan
I personally welcome our Google overlords.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelerfan