Bear Bibeault wrote:I'm not a big fan of Google -- but I'm most definitely not a fan of Time Warner either. It's gonna be interesting.
Of course, as far as I know this is still just a rumor. I hope it is true, however. Competition is good.
In total agreement. Just because a company is fighting a monopoly, doesn't mean that it doesn't have monopolistic tendencies. By my parts, New York City, we have Verizon FIOS against Time Warner Cable. Time Warner has the monopoly, and Verizon wants the monopoly. I am no fan of either, except the competition itself -- starting to see better deals, and higher bandwidth (which implies that Time Warner is finally upgrading the equipment).
Henry Wong wrote:Just because a company is fighting a monopoly, doesn't mean that it doesn't have monopolistic tendencies.
I'm pretty sure that Google makes no claims that its aims to be anything other than the #1 source of advertising on the planet, so far ahead of #2 that it doesn't matter.
I don't believe that they really want to be an ISP, but none of the incumbents are willing to change the business model, and we are cursed with speeds that are a tiny fraction of what is common in places such as Korea.
Bear Bibeault wrote: the reason for the Provo rollout is that Provo already has fiber in place that Google will be taking over.
I'm sure that there were many reasons. Clearly the existing fiber ISP in Provo gives Google a leg up. No need to argue with the city politicians, etc. The strong tech business community there (home of Novel and WordPerfect in the olden-days) means that there are lots of geeks with jobs who will want to pay for the service. Said geeks will also be willing to push the politicians to license the services, etc.
I have read that Google bought the existing Fiber ISP for $1, but I don't have solid sources on that.
Austin and San Antonio are the only areas in Texas that I could survive in. I did some work in Dallas/FW and that area has a big impedance mismatch with my personality.
I'm moving to the Philly suburbs next month, and have ordered Verizon FIOS. It will be over $250 a month, and nowhere near gigabit speeds. In SE PA, the choices are FIOS or Comcast, and Comcast's price was not much cheaper, but it sure was lower speed.
We need real competition in broadband. Bring it on.
The static/fixed IP addresses really drive the price up. It forces the account to be a "business" even though it will just be a server in the basement of my house. And business accounts can't use any of the "tripple play" marketing deals that can cut the price in half. But without the fixed IP, I'd have to go find a hosting service for my domains and that would push the price back up.
I want to just rent a dumb fat pipe, but the vendors don't want to sell that.
Bear Bibeault wrote:The TWC service is pretty awful.
It's expensive, and when it works, it's fast (or at least faster than anything else I can get right now), but it has been horribly unreliable for me.
Every day, throughout the day, my connection to the internet would drop. Just for maybe 10-30 seconds, but it was very disruptive. I couldn't have a Skype call, I was constantly getting booted out of VPN and off machines I was logged into. After several rounds with tech support where they assured me that my modem was fine and my cable was fine, they finally said they'd put my modem on their watch list, so if anything went pear-shaped, they'd know about it. If there was a problem, they'd let me know, and fix it or replace the modem.
Two weeks, same problem, no word from them. Finally I just took my modem down to their office and asked for a replacement. That was a couple days ago, and so far, so good. If it works great, but it still irks me that for what I'm paying, they weren't more proactive about fixing my problem. You'd think when a customer calls half a dozen times with the same complaint, you'd just give him a new modem, even if nothing looks like it's wrong from your end.