Google To Build Ultra-Fast, Consumer Broadband Networ

[Zoom-boing]

The announcement is not good news for the nation’s ISPs, which have long had a sour relationship with Google. Although Google interconnects with networks just as any other participant in the internet does, ISPs — including AT&T — have complained that Google properties such as Youtube should pay more to ride on their networks.

For its part, Google sees high ISP subscription fees and the U.S.’s slow connection speeds as hindrances to more profits. In the simplest equation, the more people who are online and the faster their connection, the more money Google makes from little text ads on the net. Any company who wants to make money anywhere between a user and an online ad has to fear that Google will try to drive the profits out of its business, whether that be a hardware vendor, a software company like Microsoft or an internet service provider.

Google is doing at least three things here:

1) It’s demonstrating to the public and to regulators that really fast broadband isn’t nearly as hard as companies like AT&T and Verizon pretend it is.

2) It’s sending a warning to large telecoms that they better start working to reduce prices and increase service or they might face a competitor they dont’ want to go up against, and

3) By partnering with municpalities, it’s learning/showing the nation how to bypass the current dominant telecom players by creating municipally-owned fiber infrastructure that can be rented to multiple service providers, who can then duke it out on price and service. If successful, that could create a model where Google uses its huge cash surplus to finance municipally-owned fiber optic networks, undermining its telecom rivals and speeding up the nation’s internet without ever having to run a consumer-grade network or learn how to do customer support.

If I were an executive at a large ISP, I’d be very unhappy with Google’s announcement. When Google enters a market, it usually destroys traditional ways of making money. ISPs want to find ways to measure internet traffic, and charge users by levels — even as their own upstream bandwidth costs continue to plummet. The rhetoric used to justify those decisions to consumer and lawmakers just won’t hold up if there’s an fairly priced, all-Fiber 1 Gbps connection just down the road.

Which is just the long way of saying that in a land where it costs “$35 a month to get an assymetric, slow DSL line that tops out at 1.5 Mbps, perhaps those traditional profits need to be destroyed.

Read More Google To Build Ultra-Fast, Consumer Broadband Networks in U.S. | Epicenter | Wired.com

 

[Ringel05]

When do we get started?!!

 

[waltky]

Using home wi-fi is more convenient than using the fixed line...

Home wi-fi '30% slower' than fixed broadband
10 March 2011 - People relying on home wi-fi are getting significantly slower speeds than from their fixed broadband connection, research suggests.

The study ran one million tests over 14,000 wi-fi connections in the UK, US, Spain and Italy. On average, the results showed a 30% drop-off compared to the speed coming into the home. However, the research also suggests that users tolerate slower speeds in exchange for the freedom wi-fi offers. "People are voting with their feet and trading speed for the benefits of mobility," said Iain Wood, from network measurement firm Epitiro, which carried-out the study.

He said that researchers were "surprised" by the amount of drop-off in speed but that for the majority of consumers the slower connection would not be noticed. "Most of us do e-mailing and web surfing and for these things there is precious little difference between the 50Mb/s services and an 8Mb/s service," he said. This is because web surfing uses up relatively small amounts of data. But for other services, such as downloading video or watching IPTV, the degradation of speed will become more noticeable.

Telephony services such as Skype could also be particularly affected, thinks Professor Andy Nix, a wireless expert at Bristol University. "If you have a poor quality router and you are using wi-fi at some distance away from it, you could struggle to have a decent Skype conversation," he said. But, he added, for those who invest in good quality wi-fi equipment and position it sensibly, the effects of the speed degradation would hardly be noticed.

Baby monitors

The study raises interesting questions for an industry obsessed with speed. "There seems to be a disconnect between the ISPs striving to deliver faster speeds and consumers who are happy to accept slower wi-fi speeds," said Mr Wood. For those unhappy with their home wi-fi, there are some simple measures that can be taken to improve their connections.

"Firstly people can change channels on their wi-fi router to reduce interference. If they live in flats or urban locations there are likely to be other routers operating on the same channel," said Mr Wood. Other devices in the home, such as baby monitors, TV remotes and cordless phones can also cause interference. And for those wanting to download video, the speed issue is resolved simply by plugging the laptop or other wireless device into the router, said Mr Wood.

BBC News - Home wi-fi '30% slower' than fixed broadband

 

[syrenn]

I cant wait!

 

[Zander]

But shouldn't Obama bail out the ISP's? AOL is too big to fail, right? Innocent people will lose their jobs!! Waaaaa Waaaaaaa Waaaaaaa!!!!!!!!

 

[waltky]

Granny says, How ya s'posed to surf the net if dey gonna put ya inna kiddie waves?...

AT&T starts capping broadband
May 3, 2011 -- The days of all-you-can-surf broadband are vanishing. AT&T this week began capping its Internet delivery service for broadband and DSL customers. The move comes 11 months after it placed similar caps on its mobile customers.

U-Verse -- AT&T's high-speed broadband, television and telephone network -- now limits customers to 250 gigabytes of Internet usage each month. DSL users are capped at 150 GB. Customers who exceed the limits will have to pay $10 for each additional 50 GB. AT&T moved in June to set pricing tiers for its mobile customers, offering light users a plan that maxes out at 200 megabytes. The company also sells a pricier 2 GB plan. AT&T remains the outlier among the three major wireless companies, though Sprint and Verizon Wireless are expected to follow suit with caps soon. But AT&T isn't alone in instituting restrictions on residential broadband usage.

Comcast -- by far the largest broadband provider in the U.S. -- also has a 250 GB cap, and Time Warner Cable experimented with a tiered billing service in some markets in 2008. Though broadband caps are a relatively new phenomenon in the United States, variations on Internet cap structures are quite common in Canada, Asia and in European countries. AT&T's caps will affect just 2% of its customers, the company said. The restrictions are necessary, AT&T maintained, because those in the top 2% use up 20% of the network's bandwidth. The highest-traffic users download as much as 19 typical households, on average, which slows speeds for other users, AT&T said. "Our approach is based on customers' feedback," said Mark Siegel, spokesman for AT&T. "They told us that the people who use the most should pay more, and they also told us we should make it easy for them to track their usage. We think our approach addresses these concerns."

Siegel called the caps "generous," and said that AT&T's DSL customers use just 18 GB per month on average. The company didn't provide similar statistics for its U-Verse high-speed Internet customers. Globally, broadband customers typically use 15 GB per month, according to Cisco. The caps are fairly forgiving. DSL customers would need to watch 65 hours of high-definition videos on Netflix (NFLX) to reach the limit, and high-speed customers would need to watch 109 hours. Analysts see the move as a strategic one. AT&T, Comcast and many other broadband providers also sell cable TV service, which a growing number of customers are dropping in favor of video on-demand services like Netflix. "This probably isn't absolutely necessary," said Vince Vittore, broadband analyst at Yankee Group. "It's mostly a move to prevent customers from cutting off video services."

MORE

 

[Mr. H.]

Google is out to improve their bottom line. Period.

This nation is in dire need of rural fiber infrastructure.

 

[uscitizen]

Ahh yes google is pursuing the easy money in the high density areas.
Telcos cover the lower profit/density areas too.

Money telcos make in urban areas help to provide reasonable cost service in rural areas.

 

[Ringel05]

Google is out to improve their bottom line. Period.

This nation is in dire need of rural fiber infrastructure.

Chew on a wheat stalk.

 

[uscitizen]

Google is out to improve their bottom line. Period.

This nation is in dire need of rural fiber infrastructure.

Chew on a wheat stalk.

Good point, rural areas is where your food comes from. Remember that.

 

[Mr. H.]

Google is out to improve their bottom line. Period.

This nation is in dire need of rural fiber infrastructure.

Chew on a wheat stalk.

My bowels could use a good movement about now.

 

[Ringel05]

Google is out to improve their bottom line. Period.

This nation is in dire need of rural fiber infrastructure.

Chew on a wheat stalk.

My bowels could use a good movement about now.

 

[Mr. H.]

Are you a friend or an enema?

 

[uscitizen]

Granny says, How ya s'posed to surf the net if dey gonna put ya inna kiddie waves?...

AT&T starts capping broadband
May 3, 2011 -- The days of all-you-can-surf broadband are vanishing. AT&T this week began capping its Internet delivery service for broadband and DSL customers. The move comes 11 months after it placed similar caps on its mobile customers.

U-Verse -- AT&T's high-speed broadband, television and telephone network -- now limits customers to 250 gigabytes of Internet usage each month. DSL users are capped at 150 GB. Customers who exceed the limits will have to pay $10 for each additional 50 GB. AT&T moved in June to set pricing tiers for its mobile customers, offering light users a plan that maxes out at 200 megabytes. The company also sells a pricier 2 GB plan. AT&T remains the outlier among the three major wireless companies, though Sprint and Verizon Wireless are expected to follow suit with caps soon. But AT&T isn't alone in instituting restrictions on residential broadband usage.

Comcast -- by far the largest broadband provider in the U.S. -- also has a 250 GB cap, and Time Warner Cable experimented with a tiered billing service in some markets in 2008. Though broadband caps are a relatively new phenomenon in the United States, variations on Internet cap structures are quite common in Canada, Asia and in European countries. AT&T's caps will affect just 2% of its customers, the company said. The restrictions are necessary, AT&T maintained, because those in the top 2% use up 20% of the network's bandwidth. The highest-traffic users download as much as 19 typical households, on average, which slows speeds for other users, AT&T said. "Our approach is based on customers' feedback," said Mark Siegel, spokesman for AT&T. "They told us that the people who use the most should pay more, and they also told us we should make it easy for them to track their usage. We think our approach addresses these concerns."

Siegel called the caps "generous," and said that AT&T's DSL customers use just 18 GB per month on average. The company didn't provide similar statistics for its U-Verse high-speed Internet customers. Globally, broadband customers typically use 15 GB per month, according to Cisco. The caps are fairly forgiving. DSL customers would need to watch 65 hours of high-definition videos on Netflix (NFLX) to reach the limit, and high-speed customers would need to watch 109 hours. Analysts see the move as a strategic one. AT&T, Comcast and many other broadband providers also sell cable TV service, which a growing number of customers are dropping in favor of video on-demand services like Netflix. "This probably isn't absolutely necessary," said Vince Vittore, broadband analyst at Yankee Group. "It's mostly a move to prevent customers from cutting off video services."

MORE

Umm sprint has been capping their wireless broadband customers at 3 GB for several years.
Makes me wonder about the overall accuracy of the article.

 

[Dr.House]

Are you a friend or an enema?

A "frenema"?

 

[Mr. H.]

I've been involved with Rural Broadband advisory groups, and have seen first hand how pathetic of an effort it is to bring service to outlying communities. Dial-up is the primary option, satellite service is a joke, and DSL is a distant wish.

The burden initially falls to Rural Electric Co-ops whose funding is based on membership. They simply have no resources to make it happen. While most do offer satellite "DSL" it is sorely lacking - hardware is expensive and connection speeds fluctuate from bad to worse.

Funding options are based upon matching dollars (non-existent), and private companies can not justify the investment.

Google is sucking balls with this press release. Neither they nor any other com corp envisions the truly "next horizon" in DSL marketing which is Rural High Speed.

Small communities and outlying agricultural homesteads are ripe for the picking.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

This country needs an EMP and an end to DC.