Jump to content
iansltx

Google Fiber in Austin...and AT&T's response

Recommended Posts

It's official: Google Fiber is coming to Austin. AT&T has also said that, provided they get the same incentives that Google does, they'll run gigabit as well. I trust AT&T about as far as I can throw one of their VRADs, but we'll see what happens between now and when Google connects its first customer, over a year from now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd choose google over anything in the world lol.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This should be comical.

 

AT&T will offer 1Gbps for up to 100GB, then overages.

 

1Gbps will be download only, 1Mbit up, subject to availability.

 

1Gbps speeds may vary by market and location. Not all locations will be able to receive AT&T fiber but instead U-Verse+, an expanded U-Verse offering up to 30Mbit*.

 

AT&T fiber customers are required to sign a 5 year contract and must be an AT&T wireless subscriber.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

source link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More proof we could have nationwide gigabit (at least in major metro markets) if we didn't leave it in the dualopoly's hands.

 

Around here Verizon just has to flip a switch to turn on gigabit... Ensuring we'll never see it because who wants to compete? AT&T is easy pickings, with their antiquated DSL network.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, AT&T will have to do it if the push to Gigabit goes nationwide.

 

If they go gigabit nationwide it would just reduce their ludicrous profit margins somewhat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another "ME TOO!!!" PR cry, promising bunch of nothing. After trying to steal T-Mobile's HD Voice thunder, they're doing exactly the same with Google...

 

Can you tell that I despise AT&T? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google should now back out, see if AT&T actually do anything.

If you read into it, AT&T might not actually do anything anyway.

 

It'd be good if Google would target areas where people don't have any broadband at all, or where people don't have a choice and are stuck with terrible DSL providers like CenturyUnlink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In NYC, we have much of the infrastructure in place. There is tons of dark fiber from the late 90's. The mayor is serious about fiber too. He passed a bill to accelerate deployment of fiber by TWC, Cablevision, and Verizon. Verizon is the only out of the three that runs fiber into your home. The other two run fiber to the curb and then coaxial cables into your home. It would not cost much for them to run it into our home, if they ever decide to do that. And I think both TWC and Cablevision usage direct fiber to businesses that use their services.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yet another "ME TOO!!!" PR cry, promising bunch of nothing. After trying to steal T-Mobile's HD Voice thunder, they're doing exactly the same with Google...

 

Can you tell that I despise AT&T? lol

 

AT&T is the master of telecom vaporware. The sad part is that fiber wouldn't be that much of a deterrent to their short term profit. Over the long run, they'd put the hurt on the cable companies with a solid fiber to the home strategy.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wish Google Fiber was available here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wish Google Fiber was available here.

 

Don't you have a choice of both Fios and Cablevision?

I'd be happy with either of those myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Don't you have a choice of both Fios and Cablevision?

I'd be happy with either of those myself.

 

Not everywhere has FiOS in NYC, but Cablevision is plenty fast.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not everywhere has FiOS in NYC, but Cablevision is plenty fast.

buckeye cable I have is 110mb down... I'm good with the speed I guess but not with the price

 

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everywhere has FiOS in NYC, but Cablevision is plenty fast.

 

I personally HATE the cable companies for their pricing schemes and crappy services. Everyone I know who switched to cable internet hate it, random slowdowns, etc. I personally will gladly offer Verizon my hard earned money for FiOS, at least it always works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I personally HATE the cable companies for their pricing schemes and crappy services. Everyone I know who switched to cable internet hate it, random slowdowns, etc. I personally will gladly offer Verizon my hard earned money for FiOS, at least it always works.

 

FoOD isn't in my neighborhood provably due to zoning. It got classified as a historical district last year and now I can't even change my windows without going to the community board. Kind of annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FoOD isn't in my neighborhood provably due to zoning. It got classified as a historical district last year and now I can't even change my windows without going to the community board. Kind of annoying.

 

That's why I'm staying across the river in NJ my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FoOD isn't in my neighborhood provably due to zoning. It got classified as a historical district last year and now I can't even change my windows without going to the community board. Kind of annoying.

 

How close does the FoOD get? A few blocks away at the grocery store or bodega?

 

:P

 

AJ

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How close does the FoOD get? A few blocks away at the grocery store or bodega?

 

:P

 

AJ

 

I need to stop typing on my phone while walking. This is the millionth time that this has happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In NYC, we have much of the infrastructure in place. There is tons of dark fiber from the late 90's. The mayor is serious about fiber too. He passed a bill to accelerate deployment of fiber by TWC, Cablevision, and Verizon. Verizon is the only out of the three that runs fiber into your home. The other two run fiber to the curb and then coaxial cables into your home. It would not cost much for them to run it into our home, if they ever decide to do that. And I think both TWC and Cablevision usage direct fiber to businesses that use their services.

It would cost a lot of money.  That is why Verizon stopped expanding in my state ran out of funds.  Last time I heard fiber was 3 or 4 something a foot.  I don't know how many pairs but lets say you have 200 foot run to your house.  Then inside fiber they need to run.  They do run fiber to business that require it and local companies run fiber for cell towers.  I know sprint is using local compies 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally HATE the cable companies for their pricing schemes and crappy services. Everyone I know who switched to cable internet hate it, random slowdowns, etc. I personally will gladly offer Verizon my hard earned money for FiOS, at least it always works.

Random slow downs are usually cause from ingress. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

most households will have no use for gigabit fiber.

 

BS. As everything moves to the cloud, everything you do that normally comes off your HDD will come over fiber. On the extreme end, to match my laptop's performance, I would need a 14Gb down/8Gb up connection, neglecting protocol overhead. Of course this will never be quite the necessary case because there will be judicious use of intelligent tiered local caching, predictive loading, and such. This isn't that far away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BS. As everything moves to the cloud, everything you do that normally comes off your HDD will come over fiber. On the extreme end, to match my laptop's performance, I would need a 14Gb down/8Gb up connection, neglecting protocol overhead. Of course this will never be quite the necessary case because there will be judicious use of intelligent tiered local caching, predictive loading, and such. This isn't that far away.

 

 

Isn't that far away? 

 

Gigabit is 10 years away from being available in MOST all the metropolitan areas. 

 

Only a small portion of internet users have any NEED for internet speeds greater than 50mbps. 

 

Of course in the future this will change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By legion125
      by Jeff Foster
      Sprint 4G Rollout Updates
      Friday, April 20, 2012 - 11:31 AM MDT
       
      Is there a "spectrum shortage?" Those two words send shivers down the spines of wireless industry executives. New services demand ever more spectrum, and, the story goes, there simply isn't enough spectrum available. An Internet search engine will easily find hundreds of thousands of links to the term "spectrum shortage." Many claim that it will be the downfall of America.
      The dwindling availability of a finite resource that can't be seen or touched threatens to possibly disrupt the mobile lifestyle that virtually every American has embraced. Dropped cellphone calls, delayed text messages and choppy video streams could become more frequent occurrences because the airwaves on which that data travel are nearing capacity at a time when mobile usage shows no signs of slowing.
      Federal regulators and industry players are searching for ways to fend off the supply-and-demand collision. Dish Network recently acquired a large block of vacant wireless spectrum that pending regulatory approval could be used for mobile broadband services.
       
      Short-Term Plan

      AT&T tried to merge with T-Mobile to solve its own capacity problem. It wanted to get its hands on T-Mobile spectrum. Still, that would have been only a temporary fix at best. Remember all the terrible stories about the quality of AT&T's wireless data network over the last few years? They say they simply don't have enough.
      The reason is that during the last few years, smartphones like the Apple iPhone and the many devices running Android emerged, and wireless data traffic grew like crazy. This problem jumped up and bit AT&T in the rear end. Suddenly, so many people were sucking so much data that the network could not handle it, due to spectrum shortage. Spectrum is like the size of the hose, and a wider hose is needed to carry more data for more customers.
      A couple good things are suddenly happening that may give carriers a little time to solve this increasing problem. Perhaps Verizon starting to sell the iPhone last spring has something to do with it. If so, then now with Sprint selling the iPhone, AT&T will have more breathing room, at least temporarily. That's the good news. However, that reprieve will only last a short while before the exploding smartphone and wireless data growth catches up. Then the other carriers will be faced with the same problem that's confronting AT&T.
      In the first quarter of 2011, the amount of data the average smartphone user consumed each month grew by 89 percent to 435 megabytes from 230 MB during the same quarter in 2010, according to Nielsen research. That's up from about 90 MB in 2009. For reference, the average size of an MP3 music file is about 4 MB.
      "Texting has always been traditionally viewed as a lightweight consumer of bandwidth, but if I start adding videos and pictures to my texts, that also starts consuming more bandwidth," said Tom Cullen, an executive vice president with Dish. But the primary growth driver will be video. Consumers can go through 5 gigabytes a month simply by streaming 10 minutes of standard definition video daily, he said.
       
      Data use is skyrocketing
      Data from the FCC indicate that more Americans are looking at their phones rather than talking on them. In 2009, 67 percent of available spectrum was utilized for voice and 33 percent for Internet data. Those percentages are now at 75 percent for data and 25 percent for voice. With each new iPhone release, data consumption grows. The iPhone 4S eats up twice as much data as the iPhone 4 and three times as much as the iPhone 3G, according to a study by network services firm Arieso. The new iPhone features Siri, a bandwidth-heavy voice recognition feature.
      The FCC estimates the U.S. will face a spectrum deficit of 90 MHz in 2013 and 275 MHz in 2014. To address the crunch, the federal government hopes to unleash 500 MHz of spectrum currently used for other purposes for wireless broadband by 2020. To put that figure in perspective, there is currently 547 MHz of spectrum allocated for mobile services, and AT&T and Verizon each own about 90 MHz.
      The government plans to hold so-called incentive auctions, which will try to lure spectrum owners such as TV broadcasters to sell their licenses. Verizon Wireless has agreed to purchase spectrum from a group of cable-TV companies. Sprint has expressed interest in working with Dish, which acquired the bulk of its 45 MHz of spectrum through two deals for bankrupt satellite technology companies. Dish chairman Charlie Ergen has said that the satellite-TV provider would prefer to partner with an existing wireless carrier on a high speed, 4G network. In response to recent comments by Sprint Chief Financial Officer Joe Euteneuer about the company's interest in working with Dish, Cullen said other wireless carriers are in the same situation. After failing to acquire T-Mobile, analysts expect AT&T to make a play for Dish, a long-rumored merger partner.
      As for T-Mobile, perhaps the most logical buyer is CenturyLink. T-Mobile's German-based parent company has indicated that it might exit the U.S. market. CenturyLink, which acquired Denver-based Qwest last year, is the third-largest landline phone company but does not own a wireless service, unlike the top two, AT&T and Verizon.
      Carriers are trying to offload as much traffic as they can to Wi-Fi networks, which ride on unlicensed spectrum. In some areas, they're installing picocells, which are smaller cell sites that can help boost capacity in dense areas.
      Finally, they're spending billions of dollars on LTE networks that use the airwaves more efficiently. Verizon and AT&T already have 4G LTE networks in place, and Sprint is moving to the technology. Dish says it hopes to enter the mobile broadband market with advanced LTE technology by late 2014 or early 2015. If Dish were to also offer voice service, it would come through VoLTE, which is similar to Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VOIP) phone services. Dish still needs the FCC to drop a condition tied to its spectrum that requires devices to have the ability to communicate with satellites, not just ground-based cell sites. The rule-making process that will likely remove the requirement is underway and could be completed by summer's end.
       
      Is there really a shortage problem?
      The problem, analysts argue, is that the operators that control the greatest amount of unused spectrum may be under-capitalized or unwilling to build out networks to use the spectrum. "We do not believe the U.S. faces a spectrum shortage," Jason Bazinet and Michael Rollins wrote in their Citigroup report. "Too much spectrum is controlled by companies that are not planning on rolling out services or face business and financial challenges. And of the spectrum that is being used, 90 percent of it has been allocated to existing 2G, 3G, and 3.5G wireless services by larger wireless carriers, such as AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel, and T-Mobile USA.
      In total, U.S. operators have licenses for about 538MHz of wireless spectrum. Only about 192MHz of that spectrum is currently being used. Most of the unused wireless spectrum is owned by companies such as Clearwire, LightSquared, and Dish Network. But so far, LightSquared has been stopped and the other companies have been slow to build networks using their available spectrum.
      "There is definitely a mismatch when it comes to spectrum in the wireless industry," said Paul Gallant, an analyst with MF Global in Washington, D.C. "There are some companies that have spectrum, but they're struggling financially. Or they aren't quite sure what to do with the spectrum. And others that have the money and business model, but need the spectrum." The move to 4G is very important for these operators because it offers them a more efficient way to deliver service. 4G LTE uses the available spectrum roughly 700 percent more efficiently than the 3G wireless technology EV-DO. Carriers will soon be refarming 3G spectrum to 4G LTE in several years.
      A key factor in encouraging efficient use of spectrum has been largely overlooked in carrier boardroom discussions. Wireless providers can add capacity, without obtaining more spectrum, by adding more and more cell sites. Additional cell sites in spectrum constrained areas allow the same spectrum to be used by even more consumers, as well as adding picocells and microcells to denser population areas. So far, the carriers have not expressed too much interest in this method due to additional capital expenditures and overhead. Their strategy is like what Microsoft, Apple and Google have used. It's just cheaper to buy what you need than to invest the time and energy to do the actual work.
      So what can the wireless companies do? To some extent, re-farming their existing networks will help. But so will finding ways to use other spectrum. For example, only T-Mobile lets users make phone calls using Wi-Fi, yet most of the mobile devices available from carriers have this capability; the carriers just don't enable it.
      Allowing Wi-Fi calling could unload millions of voice and data users on to alternative networks and ease the spectrum crunch, at least to some extent. Encouraging VoIP use would also help for two reasons. VoIP doesn't require a lot of bandwidth, and it means that the phone in question uses only the data spectrum, not both voice and data while this is going on.
      These points illustrate that the carriers do have options beyond just buying up spectrum. They can offload more wireless traffic than they do now, build more cell sites into their networks and they can allow the use of other types of communications. While the spectrum crunch isn't going away, that doesn't mean that the process can't be slowed.
       
      Sensational graphic extolling the dire spectrum crisis. Maybe a tad exaggerated???
       
       
      Images courtesy: Spectrum Bridge, iqmetrix.com
       
      Source: FierceWireless.com, Denver Post, Ecommercetimes.com, CNET
    • By danlodish345
      I just saw a news article that the United States government is investigating AT&T and Verizon for wireless collusion. I'm going to post a link below. Let's please keep this discussion on track.
       
      https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1HR2Z8
    • By Paynefanbro
      Yikes! T-Mobile shouldn't have spoken so soon about deploying 5G nationwide before VZW and AT&T. It'll only be a dozen cities by year end but nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised if AT&T fast-tracked this roll out just to spite T-Mobile. I'm expecting a similar announcement from VZW very soon.
      Source: AT&T announces plans to start rolling out a true 5G network by the end of 2018
    • By xmx1024
      Hate to bring up another carrier on here, but I am on AT&T right now and do plan to switch to sprint as soon as my contract is up. is there a forum similar to this but relating to the AT&T network?
    • By Nrbelex
      The rumor mill has fully geared up, so it seems time for a thread in which the potential HTC-made 2016 Nexus phones can be discussed.
       
      Rumors suggest two phones: a 5" device codenamed Sailfish, and a larger device codenamed Marlin. Both are thought to be produced by HTC. [There's also a report that Google is making its own phone, without an OEM partner--along the lines of a Pixel phone--but that report has been largely discounted.]
       
      Android Police has claimed it knows with 8/10 certainty some specs of the smaller device--Sailfish:
      Manufactured by HTC 5" 1080p display (~440PPI) Quad-core 2.0GHz 64-bit processor (model unknown) 4GB RAM 2770mAh battery 32GB storage (unknown if multiple models will be available, or even if this is the base storage level) 12MP rear camera, 8MP front Rear-mounted fingerprint scanner USB-C port (bottom) Bottom-firing speaker or speakers (unknown if dual) Top-mounted headphone jack Bluetooth 4.2 Any thoughts on these devices? The last several Nexus devices have been Sprint compatible; is there any reason to think these won't be? Any hints in regulatory filings? How is HTC's radio performance, generally? Will Sprint sell them directly, and even if they do, will it still be preferable to buy directly from Google?
  • Posts

    • That very same crane from the previous page was used this past two days in Bloomington at a site off of 94th and Penn that has a Sprint site but the antenna on top of it is not (I thought it was T-Mobile), something horrible must have happened because they took the old antenna completely off the top of the mast and set it on the tarmac at the base of the antenna, replaced the RRUs, the cabinet was opened and literally everything inside it appeared to be replaced, then the antenna at the top was replaced by Monday morning and they were literally working all day sunday on it.  The nearest I can think is the site above the Sprint antennas must have sustained lightning damage.  I have never seen such extensive work on a cell site taking place on a sunday literally going from before 8 in the morning until well after 8 at night.  I have extensive pictures.   It appears the Sprint site was tangentially involved because there is still equipment and additional guy wiring in place and cabling going to parts of the site including the Sprint cabinets.  Most curious to say the least.  It almost looks like power was prevented from going to the site.
    • Agree a 100% I'm tired of the uncertainty Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
    • As a trader the market chatter is that an announcement could come as soon as tomorrow if not by then by end of week. 
    • USCC should count as same coverage as being on Sprint, the R is for roaming into 1X not LTE. Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...