Google Fiber said on Monday that it plans to bring its gigabit Internet service to Huntsville, Alabama. But instead of laying its own fiber, Google will offer service over a network that is being built by the city-owned Huntsville Utilities. Huntsville will lease space on the network to Google so it can offer Internet service. But it's not an exclusive deal, so other Internet providers could offer broadband over the same fiber. Huntsville, a city of nearly 190,000 residents, has been planning the fiber build for more than a year.
City officials "see it as a low-risk investment, as compared to administering the gigabit Internet themselves, which would require a massive increase in personnel in an arena where they have limited expertise," local news station WHNT reported today. Google Fiber should be available to the first Huntsville customers by the middle of 2017, but it could take a few years to extend service throughout the city, the report said.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @02:09AM
It's actually funny how the cable and telephone companies are basically price gauging themselves out of business in America. Wireless-only will sink them completely while the executives walk away with their golden parachutes because they "maximized return on assets"
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @02:30AM
Do you actually live in the USA? Wireless ISPs are friggin expensive and have serious datacaps and BW limits. Not just LTE, but also Point to Point Microwave.
Satellite sucks there too.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @03:39AM
You only think wireless ISPs are frigging expensive, because you can't figure out how to stick a free SIM into a burner phone for unlimited tethering. You're the suck.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @07:11AM
That's actually the point.
1. ISPs don't care about wired network because wireless gives them more bang for the buck
2. Others, like Google, build out gigabit networks
3. Those gigabit networks support local hotspots
4. Ubiquitous hotspots in populated areas - traffic moves to them from Android and iOS
5. LTE and rest - traffic drops as people avoid expensive networks
6. telcos and cable wireless business goes down the tubes while they bitch how Google is unfair and doesn't have infrastructure - oh, snap.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @02:51AM
And so, Google will see everything and slurp up all, even when you try to avoid their services.
Soon, there will be no way to hide from the Big 6: GOOG, FB, MSFT, AMZN, CloudFlare, Akamai.
You'll either be using their internet service or touching their boxes (through their cloud or their CDN) whenever you visit any website.
Soon, baby... soon...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @03:19AM
Use a VPN
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @03:36AM
I hear the Google cloud is a great place to host a VPN.
Hint: a VPN has an endpoint somewhere, idiot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @02:29PM
> Hint: a VPN has an endpoint somewhere, idiot.
Hey genius! VPN services have multiple endpoints. I use one with 2,000+ different endpoints that I can switch between at will. In fact, I have configured my router to put up 10+ different tunnels with different endpoints, one for each device on my home network so there is no way to do IP-based correlation of their access patterns.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @03:40AM
Just like the current ISPs who no doubt sell all this data behind closed doors.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @03:42AM
GOOGELE FIBER!!!!!!
TEH BESTEST EVARRRRRRRRRR.
SO MUCH TORRREREENENTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @03:45AM
Nice subtle sarcasm, can you articulate how it is worse than other ISPs?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @04:03AM
Dickweeds simply won't shut the fuck up about it. The absolute love of Google Fiber is as sickening as the absolute hate of Comcast. Can we ever find a middle ground. Of course we fucking can't.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:01PM
So there is nothing wrong with Google Fiber and you are a hipster. Got it.
(Score: 0, Troll) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 24 2016, @04:10AM
Where I live, I can't get FTTH.
Verizon swore (when getting tax breaks, easements and other goodies) they'd bring fiber *past* everyone's home. Perhaps they did, but they didn't bring it *to* the home.
Now they don't do jack shit. Any ISP with faster than DSL speeds has abusive TOS in their user agreements and (unsurprisingly) rape them with the joy of real rent-seeking oligopolists.
So fuck Google Fiber. Until they (or municipal fiber, which is the right way to go) come to my town, fuck them in the ass with Verizon's telephone poles.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 24 2016, @04:55AM
I love how my comment was modded flamebait, given that the AC rantings above were ignored.
I guess somebody owns a lot of Verizon (or Google, or both) stock.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday February 24 2016, @05:10AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 24 2016, @05:21AM
Perhaps you're right.
At the same time, I tried to be as disparaging of both Google and Verizon as possible.
Not seeing how that's "absolute love for Google." Or absolute hate for Comcast -- given that I didn't even mention them. Heck, Comcast doesn't even service the area where I live.
I suppose if Google enjoys getting anally reamed with telephone poles, that could be considered giving them love.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday February 24 2016, @05:29AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 24 2016, @05:38AM
Well, I dunno what to tell you. My Time Warner connection quadrupled in speed partly because of Verizon and partly because of Google. In other words the competition made my existing ISP better. Honestly I might have modded you down mainly because I really don't understand your anger at Google. Frustration? Sure. Anger? No, not of the telephone-pole-insertion variety, anyway.
I won't use TWC because of their abusive TOS and outrageous charges. Verizon blows too, partly for those reasons and partly because they've abandoned their FTTH installations in my area.
Yes, I'm frustrated that Google hasn't come here. And I'm more frustrated that we don't have municipal fiber.
That I'm expressing that frustration at Google is, as the subject clearly states sour grapes! [wikipedia.org]. So Fuck Google! Fuck Verizon! Fuck Time Warner! Fuck my city council! Fuck anyone and everyone who is keeping me from getting symmetric 1gb/sec. FTTH up the ass with telephone poles! See. Sour grapes. :)
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 24 2016, @06:47AM
Why don't you run for that City Counsel. Or maybe the PUD if that is how things are done in your state.
You seem to have banned just about all possible providers because one thing or another. It seems you can find a reason to ditch every possible provider, leaving you with nothing but your rage, or your faux rage as the case may be.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:28AM
Why don't you run for that City Counsel. Or maybe the PUD if that is how things are done in your state.
That's a good question. Perhaps I will.
A quick usage nazi comment, though. "Counsel" is, in common usage, a lawyer. In less common usage, it can also be an adviser or the advice given by an advisor. the City "Council" I referred to is an elected body which is the legislative branch of my local government.
You seem to have banned just about all possible providers because one thing or another. It seems you can find a reason to ditch every possible provider, leaving you with nothing but your rage, or your faux rage as the case may be.
I haven't "banned" anyone. I have an ISP who gives me a "dumb pipe" with no restrictions on servers, no port blocking, no throttling or data caps and no other abusive terms of service. Unfortunately (as I mentioned in my initial post), these guys only offer DSL. All of the cable companies who do offer higher speed service in my area implement all of those restrictions, and Verizon (after taking *my* tax dollars) reneged on their commitment (in exchange for those tax dollars) to provide FTTH in my area.
I think "rage" is a bit too strong a term. Annoyance would be a better term. As for the salty language, well just because I'm annoyed doesn't mean I can't have a little fun with it in an online forum, eh?
As such, and as I said, they can go fuck themselves.
Google Fiber is not in my area, nor is municipal fiber on the horizon. So I'm not getting my FTTH anytime soon. No faux rage, either. Annoyance and frustration, yes. So fuck Google and fuck everyone else who is keeping me from my FTTH.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:51PM
1) I save my best spelling for those that pay me.
2) Right of way leases through cities are often up for renewal periodically. You have to start digging through public records and stuff. Often you can do this with FOIA requests, but its sometimes easier to do it from the inside. Then if you wonder aloud why promises haven't been met, and start musing about lease renewal penalties and costs, and infrastructure condemnations, others can take interest. Maybe the good old boys who signed these leases aren't even around any more, or maybe they are, and will get word back to the carriers that some expansion projects should materialize soon or they could have their plant seized by the city.
A lot has changed over time, and sometimes you can hijack the process just by serving on boards and commissions.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Gravis on Wednesday February 24 2016, @07:38AM
your inflammatory post was modded as being inflammatory? OMG! (눈‸눈)
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:30AM
your inflammatory post was modded as being inflammatory? OMG! (눈‸눈)
I know. Isn't that just so wrong? :)
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 24 2016, @04:12AM
Isn't this the way municipal fiber is supposed to work?
The difference here will be that any other players will demand restrictions on google's speed, or drastically lower prices for their slower services. if it was Google's own fiber they could do as they wanted, but here the political pressure will bring the lowest common denominator.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 24 2016, @04:30AM
Or, they're doing it exactly as they should be.
Municipally owned fiber with, wait for it, competition among ISPs.
Competition will *improve* the quality of service, not reduce it. We need more competition, not less, in the ISP market.
Municipal fiber is, IMHO, a great way to get that.
Or do you think that the ISP business should have less competition, and as it is now, be dominated by a few gigantic players who fleece their customers because they have little other choice?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 24 2016, @06:34AM
Did my first sentence somehow escape your attention?
I'll wait right here while you go back and read it... Done yet?
The competition is great. If you can keep it.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:16AM
No. Nor did your second:
The difference here will be that any other players will demand restrictions on google's speed, or drastically lower prices for their slower services.
You make predictions which have no basis (unless you're privy to some information the rest of us are not) in fact, and your tone implies that you think this is a bad idea.
If I misunderstood you, you have my apologies. Please elucidate.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:40PM
If Google puts in their own fiber, they can set their own speeds.
If they ride on a public infrastructure, they are subject to the whims of some government body.
Since this was about google fiber coming to a town where they would NOT be on google fiber its does bear looking at as a separate case.
Now there are good points and bad points of Google owning the infrastructure.
And there are good points and bad points about Municipal infrastructure.
In this case, in my opinion (and clearly stated in my first sentence), the municipality is doing it right (providing a digital road way for all comers, rather than buying and paying for content and upstream themselves).
BUT:
1) you have to realize that fiber is not inexhaustible bandwidth. There will be conflict over time. The municipality may start limiting bandwidth to some maximum lobbied for by several smaller and less capable ISPs.
2) Just like road maintenance, municipal fiber plant maintenance is likely to operate as "good enough for government work" quality and schedule. This is also know as the Tragedy of the Commons.
3) Busybodies will apply pressure. They will insist that porn sites must not be carried on Public infrastructure. (This has already happened - I'm not making this up). Stuff gets band in libraries as well.
4) Government snooping, Probably no warrants needed, since you handed your traffic over to the government
5) insert random other municipality rules here....
.
.
So there ARE differences between a corporate owned end-to-end plant, and a Government owned plant, and being half and half might just end up being the worst possible combinations.
FTR, I think Municipal Broadband is a good idea, compared to the alternative of re-trenching through every neighborhood countless times to lay yet another fiber. But I'm not so naive, nor do I lack in cynicism, to believe it will all be sweetness and light if we can just somehow get to total government control.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @04:52PM
I remember the days when I had over a dozen ISPs to chose from rather than 2. It was not even 12 years ago.