Edhat
npr edvertisers
visitors movie times

Santa Barbara Weather: 85.5°F | Humidity: 46% | Pressure: 29.93in (Steady) | Conditions: Clear | Wind Direction: SE | Wind Speed: 2.2mph [see map]

Free Newsletter
Advertise
  login You create the news! Send your news item to ed@edhat.com
 
 
login
    15820 Subscribers
      686 Paid (4.3%)
     255 Comments
     149 Commenters
     76239 Page Views
 
 

 
Boxtales 20 Year Anniversary Festival
Boxtales 20 Year Anniversary Festival
 
The Winehound
The Winehound
 
Advertise on Edhat
Advertise on Edhat
 
News Events Referrals Deals Classifieds Comments About

more articles like this

Google Fiber
updated: Feb 05, 2013, 9:07 PM

By Edhat Subscriber

A friend of mine has something called "Google Fiber" an internet and TV service that they claim is faster (internet) and better (TV) and reasonably priced. Any chance we will see that in Santa Barbara?

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)

 COMMENT 371228P agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-05 09:28 PM

No chance anytime soon. It is only an experiment being built in the 2 Kansas Citys.

 

 PURPLERIDER agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 03:25 AM

228 is correct it is only in the Kansas City, KS/MO area for now. Unless Google can significantly speed up deployment to the rest of the US soon it may not get to SB for many years.

 

 COMMENT 371267 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 06:43 AM

It's only in one city and it's a total money losing venture for them. They've spent $20-30 billion on it so far and they're losing $800 per customer on it currently. Based on what they've spent, it would cost them over $500 billion to implement it nationwide. I imagine they'll expand into a few major cities, but obviously, they don't have nearly that kind of money to go nationwide. In short, we'll probably never see it in SB. Way too small of a market.

 

 COMMENT 371273 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 07:13 AM

Isn't Verizon doing the same? How much of the Internet is fiber today? I thought it was only the last mile that was left in most significant urban areas.

 

 COMMENT 371277 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 07:19 AM

Yeah it is all about profit. There is a fiber optic cable on the pole at the end of our street and we we are on old verizon phone lines...slooooow... Free high speed access to a completely free internet is healthy and economically beneficial to a community. That is why some cities try to provide it.

 

 COMMENT 371289 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 07:54 AM

My apologies if this sounds patronizing but I find it cute to hear folks only recently fledged from Mom&Dad's wanting free stuff that cost a fortune to build.

Of course it's beneficial to consumers for free stuff to be given away but never for the providers (take a moment to appreciate the unconditional love and generosity of parents). :-)

 

 COMMENT 371296 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 08:06 AM

There is no such thing as a free lunch. Free internet is good for the consumer, terrible for the supplier and a hinder to free enterprise.

 

 COMMENT 371299 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 08:12 AM

How is free Internet access a hinder to the enterprise? I'd like to see your justification for that one.

 

 COMMENT 371300 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 08:18 AM

The reason that Google chose Kansas City MO was that the city owned most of the infrastructure. There is no way that any entity can do this on a national scale (let alone in SB) due to the patch work of infrastructure ownership and rights. Too many companies, municipalities and private owners who all want too much money or other kickbacks to make this work anywhere... especially in CA.

The only hope for high speed universal access is via the various radio spectrum that are owned (but licensed) by the FCC. Personally I believe that internet access is a fundamental right for all humans and should be treated as such... some countries in the EU have declared it to be a right, but since we're ruled by profits more than principles, it will never happen here.

 

 COMMENT 371304 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 08:22 AM

Ours is a niche market. Verizon FIOS is a similar service and they stopped the rollout right on our doorstep because of Cox's government sanctioned monopoly.

 

 COMMENT 371310 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 08:39 AM

Google fiber is good for your health and should be apart of your daily diet.

 

 COMMENT 371315 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 08:45 AM

Typical DSL and cable internet, like Verizon and Cox, offer internet speeds in the 5 Mbps to 25 Mbps range.

There are two tiers for Google fiber. One tier gives you 5 Mbps internet for free after an initial installation fee. The paid tier gives you 1 Gbps internet (~1000 Mbps, although I've heard it's around 700-800Mbps, still really fast!).

Verizon also has fiber optic internet service called FIOS, which offers speeds in the range of 50 Mbps - 300 Mbps. Sadly this is not available in SB. Cox has somewhat of a monopoly in our area, and our choices here suck.

Those who decry that internet access is a human right believe in positive rights. Doing so means that this service should be provided for using Government coercion or force. Thus, they are content with holding a gun over the heads of ISP's to get their free internet (the ultimate teeth in all government regulations). I believe in negative rights and voluntary association. Google it.

 

 COMMENT 371330 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 09:19 AM

A minor detail, but I believe the latest DOCSIS 3.0 cable modems will allow channel bonding. This will provide you with the opportunity to pay Cox even more for bandwidth above 25 Mbps.

I think of internet access as a conduit to knowledge. In that sense, the more people who have it, the better.

 

 COMMENT 371332 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 09:24 AM

I remember my 14.4k modem and you paid by the minute

Took like an hour to download a naughty picture, and it was a line at a time and painstaking.

Right now even the mid range cox up to 20mb download is more than enough for anyone streaming video, surfing the net, playing games online.

Although 700-800mb would be fun, not sure I would actively try and get it. Unless its already here, like Kansas.

I believe the internet should be available to more people, cheaper

 

 COMMENT 371351 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 09:49 AM

The City of Santa Barbara filled in the form to get in line for Google Fiber... The local ownership of the infrastructure is complicated. Nothing to prevent the city from building its own fiber network if enough folks would sign up to use it. How many people would pay, say, 75$ a month for 500mb internet as opposed to $45 for 3-5mb Cox? I know I would. gigabitsantabarbara has been working on this for some time now.

 

 COMMENT 371355 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 09:55 AM

Your friend must live in Kansas City, MO. They are testing it there, and I know several people who have it and love it. There's a very small chance it will come out here, and if it does it will probably take years. The cable companies have too tight of control on the monopolies they have in most of the country to give it up without a giant fight. We could easily convert to this over much of the country and improve our infrastructure at the same time, but it's probably not in the cards.

 

 COMMENT 371358 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-06 09:59 AM

In 2013 Cox will move away from active streaming you currently get at your set top box. Now, all channels are immediately accessable and therefore instantaneous. Change a channel? Next one pops up immediately. (See DirectTV for how long it takes a satelite to access channel changes) Cox plans to move away from total stream and offer the free'd up bandwidth for sale.

 

 COMMENT 371794 agree helpful negative off topic

2013-02-07 10:00 AM

Organisms can only grow in size and complexity as they improve communication and functionality. Humanity stands at a terrifying crossroads: The same technology that may permit us to support the population we now have (let alone what could come very soon) in the wrong hands could allow the kinds of sociopaths and megalomaniacs who have caused humanity such misery could bend these new capacities to hellish ends. The only way to maintain our civilization, and the potential for a future worth living, is to keep the control of these technologies securely in public hands, and subject to public oversight. Privatizing technology, so that wealth and power flows to dark places to serve greed and paranoia, is the kiss of death. Just my opinion.

 

11% of comments on this page were made by Edhat Community Members.

 

*** One comment was removed from this thread by the Edhat Board Nanny for violating Edhat Comments Board policy. Click Here to see it.

 

Add Your Comments

Edhat Username

Password

Comment

Don't have an Account?

Don't know if you have an account?

Don't remember your account info?

CLICK HERE


ENJOY HAPPY HOUR! ... Between 4:00pm & 5:00pm only happy comment are allowed on the Edhat Comments Board.

If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all.

 
Hide Your Handle, but show paid status (paid subscribers only)
NEW - use verified name and picture (contact ed@edhat.com to be verified)
Find out About Becoming A Paid Subscriber
NOTE: We are testing a new Comment Preview Page. You must hit OK on the next page to have your comment go live. Send Feedback to ed@edhat.com.
 

get a handle   |  lost handle

 

EDHAT COMMENTS POLICY

 

  See more articles like this

# # # #

 

Send To a Friend
Your Email
Friend's Email

Top of Page | Old News Archives | Printer-Friendly Page

  Home Subscribe FAQ Jobs Contact copyright © 2003-2014  
Edhat, Inc.