People forget Google is a tech company. Google effectively forced their partners (ISP's) to upgrade their infrastructure for them. Since slow internet speeds was hurting google's brand.
@@nasis18 I would assume that is because we implemented that very early on, and later implementers had access to better tech? And replacing slow but working infrastructure is something that the US might be choosing not to do?
Considering how big America is, the fiber rollout for each state/major population took priority first before going for smaller areas. They offered better speeds and allowed monopolies over internet to be bypassed because google had been increasing their search for suitable places to connect.
I also feel like you left a really crucial detail, in that one of the other reasons why Google Fiber became a thing (even knowing that they won't be economically successful) is due to the whole net-neutrality scandals. The ISP's started targeting video streaming services such as Netflix & Hulu, and even TH-cam ended up getting caught under the crossfire of having to pay the ISP's massive amounts of "fees" for how much 'demand' they were placing on the ISPs. Google being the only tech company that had the power to create their own ISP to make a statement unlike the other companies who essentially never owned their own infrastructure and were all hosted on AWS, decided to do just that: Tell the ISPs that if they don't change their practices on how they treat the streaming services, Google will create their own ISP infrastructure and take out the middle man. Their success with Google Fiber, showed the ISP's that this wasn't just Google talking the talking, but that they could actually deliver on their threats.
Glad to see some explanation that makes sense to me, because the ones in the video didn't seem great. Am I the only one? maybe I'm slow lol. They didn't attempt stadia until several years after fiber was rolled out, but at the time I don't think they care about gamer ping or fast Steam downloads. Hangouts is a social media platform, do they really need 4K for that? Classroom doesn't seem intended to make money, though I can see how it might use a lot of bandwidth. I guess I'd like to know some specific stuff that uses bandwidth that's so high that it requires fiber, cuz it doesn't seem like the average home consumer needs it, and I'm not sure what Google planned on offering that definitely needed all these competitor-built fiber connections.
Part of the problem was government failure across several administrations. The government didn't want to build a fiber infrastructure. Instead, they allowed the telecoms companies to charge their customers to fund this rollout. Surprise: they didn't. The companies were caught pocketing the money. They then were allowed to charge customers yet again to fund the rollout. And guess what? Again they just pocketed the money. And as you correctly point out, Google understood the negative impact this would have on their business growth serving web based services.
why would the government build a fiber infrastructure for big corporation? I say that is not a failure, they just know they shouldn't. if they do, shame on them for doing it instead of spending the money for other important things, and if they don't? shame on them coz the corporation is now charging it to the people? . . . typical grumblers.
@@ChibiKeruchan Private corporations didn't build the nation's highways: the government funded that. You gonna complain about that too and ask why the government bothered to do it? Do you enjoy getting it up the ass by corporations? Do they pay you for that or do you just let them do it for free?
@@ChibiKeruchan the government set aside billions for fiber and gave it companies. That money just somehow disappeared no one has answers, I would do some research onto it if you have the time. Also the govt. is what made electrification across the country possible. Without govt. support that would not have happened. Govt. has subsidized what it deems necessary equipment in the past and it should also do so for the internet for rural America.
Google are actually pretty smart. They threatened the traditional ISPs forcing them to upgrade their stuff so they wouldnt become irrelevant. End result is now much faster internet is in many more homes. Which Google now benefits greatly from increased access to their services and of course the ability to show many more ads. All at what im sure is actually pretty minimal cost to Google
In India, I started my internet journey in Cyber Cafes having Dial-Up connections. Later DSL based broadband was introduced in early 2000s with speeds over 256 Kbps and upto 2 Mbps. Later on in mid 2010s DSL was getting speeds around 40 Mbps. In past 5 years Fiber internet has spread like anything with speeds upto 1 Gbps in less than $50.
It's funny how the US is sooo behind Europe when it comes to the internet. 500MB, 700MB and 1GB are very common now. Here In Romania, where I live now, the minimum is 500MB with some exceptions of only 100MB in case of an outdated infrastructure that is getting updated. I'm paying 7 USD per month and just got updated for free from 300 to 500MB with an upload of 250. My provider does not offer the slower 300 anymore. And there is no data limit. I did download sometimes up to 2TB a month next to my streaming and that's totally okay. And we didn't need a Google to come and disrupt the market.
It's funny how former Soviet countries have better internet than Germany today, because there was no existing infrastructure for the ISPs to piggyback on, so they pretty much had to build out _something_ if they wanted any customers at all, and if they build infrastructure, then hey, it might as well be fiber
COVID and all the shift to WFH ironically showed that there is plenty of capacity to handle all that traffic that was no longer internal to the office, meaning ISPs really were holding back and seeking rent off of retail customers.
I just got NEW Google Fiber in San Antonio. They are expanding - laid the optics about 4 months ago, got it connected last week. It is $20 cheaper than Spectrum cable Internet (also gigabit, but not synchronous and 20 to 30 times the latency) and so I switched. I’m going to be on a few vacations soon and still need my home infrastructure switched to 2.5GbE but eventually, I’ll have 2Gbit/s from Google for $100/month.
I still hope that the fiber revolution will still grow. and maybe Google fiber can still become a greater success? I want to see the whole internet reinforced to be stronger for all. More highways and such.
The rollout of fiber has stagnated here over the last years, since Google doesn't pose a threat anymore. AT&T fiber just serves some gated communities around here, cares less about the rest of the city. They probably only serve these gated communities in order to beat a local broadband provider, which is specialized in offering fiber only to privately owned communities. Our cable provider, who serves the rest of the city, has increased the download speed to an acceptable level, but the upload speed is still not comparable with fiber Prices are high and the customer treatment is very bad, also. The root of the problem is that the cable providers just sliced-up the map and serve different areas. So, they can practically do whatever they want. 5G home internet seems to be available in some parts of the city, but there are probably major speed and reliability issues, when the festival is in town. As far as I know, 5G home customers have to yield for the carriers mobile customers. It's a big mess, which can only be solved with real competition or government involvement. There is no Google kicking the ISPs butts around here.
Fiber Rollout in my area (Northern Indiana) is massively kicking up. From less then 10% coverage to 85% of the county covered by fiber, from 100Mb to 2Gig with 5gig coming next summer. With three different providers AT&T, a local telecom company, and the local REMC, with Rumors of more competition in the coming year. Covid drove the need home and the Local telecoms here at least are working hard to meet the demand before someone else undercuts them and steals the customer.
Google Fiber didn’t light a fire under the ISP’s, there have been plenty of other independent fiber providers. Additionally Verizon moved into the CLEC space to compete with other RBOCs on their own turf with 5G wireless home internet. Then along came Starlink. Broadband is more competitive than ever and Google doesn’t have the legacy CBA’s to make it stick around. Of course they’re done.
I used to work in the residential ISP world. A BIG holdback to speed increases was due to govt regulations. Analog TV and cable cards ate up a HUGE chunk of the available spectrum on coax. Now those mandates are gone and we're seeing the speed increases. I recently saw a video (antenna guy maybe) saying Spectrum is about to roll out a big upgrade in upload speeds due to no longer being mandated to support cable cards.
The story is different here in Canada. Here the major telecom and cable companies were funded through government initiatives both provincial and federal to deploy fiber in their core networks and the cellular services needed the fiber speeds. We didn't have a disrupter like google fibre here. It was more of a public private partnership. The major cable company in Ontario has a program called Connected for Success that provides 25Mb/s for just $11 a month. I believe it is subsidized through government assistance and it is also tied with a Cable TV offering that is optionally available to that TV/IP becomes reality and the existing coaxial cable plant can be replaced with fiber throughout their network and eventually to the home. This biggest issue is high income places like condo buildings, very high income neighbourhoods, and luxury apartment buildings get the fiber to the residence and the social housing is left with the coaxial cable and poor service with frequent outages and long repair times. There was a federal program that extends this model to other providers as well. if VR takes off it will follow this same deployment leaving a significant portion of the population left behind and without the ability to participate in the benefits of VR for half a century or more.
"This biggest issue is high income places like condo buildings, very high income neighbourhoods, and luxury apartment buildings get the fiber to the residence and the social housing is left with the coaxial cable and poor service with frequent outages and long repair times." Where. Every new construction since 2013 has fibre to the home. Every coax building and address that doesn't get fibre right away is getting 1.2ghz nodes and segmented. 1.2 ghz nodes can run a traditional return path with a 42mhz wide return with more efficient modulation, or an 85mhz return with the same. The same units will do 208mhz return which is almost 5 X the current bandwidth and then layer on the more efficient carriers. Currently a coaxial 1.2ghz node can run up to 10gigabit in the downstream and around 500mbit in the upstream still running both old and new modulation techniques. A 1.2ghz node at full bore in full duplex runs 10gigabit symmetrical. Social housing is usually high density and little buildings have as many as four 1.2ghz nodes with 15 units per segment, which is nothing for a customer load. The wiring is as old as the late 1970s. There would be no reason to have "more frequent outages" either. Either a cable is cut or it isn't. Either a fibre is cut or it isn't. Repair times are even longer on fibre systems that are fully buried and permanently spliced because there are no test points available and no place to take a temporary connection from. You need much more expensive equipment and skill to troubleshoot and repair a fibre system. Techs are terrified of them.
@@Todd.T I am in a social housing unit in the East end of Toronto. It was built in 1974. It has a copper RG-6. We have 4 - 6 outages per month totaling an hour or more from the cable company. This include both TV and internet. Bell Canada will not run fiber to the building. I know I have tried to get it. The best speed we can get is 25Mbés meanwhile the new condominium across the street has a sixteen fibre pullover to serve sixty-four units. It is less than one hundred meters away. I know someone who lives in that building and he has had no outages since he moved in two years ago. He also has Gigabit fiber in his condominium. There are twenty-seven social housing buildings totaling over 1500 in a 4 square kilometer area walking distance to my building and they all have similar limitations and service levels. The service at our building was so bad they had to re-cable half of the building to get minimum service levels. Most of the cable that was there before the re-cable was from the early 1980's. We also have a huge issue with cable theft. People just climb across the balconies and remove the copper cable and then sell it for scrap. One person died a few years ago when he missed the grab in swinging between balconies using the dividing partition. It gave way and a couple of bolts sheared and he fell nine stories with a fatal result. If they installed fiber the theft also would not occur since the thieves would quickly learn they don't get paid for fiber cable.
@@PWingert1966 All of the optical nodes and amps from 2004 and up support gigabit speeds. I am using an RG6 drop from 1999 on a coax network from the late 70s and it’s all been updated merely by changing the node and the connection points and the amps. Everybody’s still using decades old RG6 drops at 1.2ghz and there are people with 1850/170 packages throughout. There are also 300 people on a single leg because it wasn’t redesigned, just updated with new amps, and connection points. Outages are not caused because you have copper wiring. Your limitation you say you have is not limited by copper wiring either otherwise I would have outages.We’ve had one outage because when the work was done someone left a weather sealed port open on the network and water got in it and caused a short.
@@Todd.T Regardless of the technical cause our building is getting substandard service and part of the cause is that it is not viewed as a priority due to it being a low-income building. we have over 400 apartments in the building but less then half use the cable company or the telecom company. So they are not making a lot of income fro the building either.
@@PWingert1966 Fibre isn’t just about selling faster services, it’s about operating costs too. If big blue comes into the building, the government forces them to let third party companies access the network. Once you factor in how many people you will get as a competitor in the building, the ROI on the build doesn’t look good so they don’t want to come. Vandalism is vandalism and you can’t blame a network outage on that. The police should handle that. In Scarborough they started putting police stations in the building and security cameras with 24hr monitoring. People don’t touch anything anymore. The slowest single channel modem using 2004 tech will still run 38mbs. I bought one and used it for years.
"They were putting legacy players to shame..." 🤣🤣🤣 Yes, they totally were. I lived in Provo, UT when it came, and I absolutely loved Google Fiber internet. Internet was consistently fast. I only wish I could have been apart of their team.
If Google wanted to really be a big player in the ISP space, they could have used their massive ad-powered war chest to expand to many more urban areas. But they really just wanted to light a fire under the actual ISPs to make them improve offerings. Which ultimately ended up good for us anyway!
Not necessarily. It depends on how it's used in the time it takes for the miles of button pushers to know how to see this set of floating little screens.
I remember being so excited about Google Fiber. I even petitioned my local government to look into bringing them into my city. Then AT&T dropped their Fiber cables all over the city and they became the biggest players until Spectrum finally started adding 1G. Now it's all about where you live in the city and who you owe currently. Spectrum is currently pushing AT&T out
I'd double check those speeds. Remember that with the internet there are two different speeds : The download and the upload. Charter manages to get faster download by using both channels for the download and leaving around a megabit for download. Charter doesn't advertise this fact, but upload speeds are needed for uploading videos, high quality conference calling, running game servers, hosting multilayer matches on video game consoles, etc. In my city Charter is the only option and while I can get an "up to" 1 gigabit download bandwidth (which is really closer to half that) the upload bandwidth is low. Meanwhile a friend just a short drive away has AT&T in his area and he gets a gigabit on the download and the upload. But because Charter has the monopoly here I don't get any of that.
Plus charter or spectrum they charge low first and them jump prices super high I have now QuantumFiber at my house for 65$ for live that includes taxes 1Gb up and down
@@itluis2009 AT&T is the same way and their price per tier is higher than google fiber, GF is $55 a month for 500MB which is no longer offered but existing customers get to keep it, 1 gig is $70, 2 gig is $100 and 5 gig is $125, that's including taxes and fees, ATT is $55 for 300, 65 for 500, 80 for 1gig, 110 for 2gig and 180 for 5 gig, but that's before taxes and fees, which push those prices to 80, 120, 140, 210, then couple the inconsistency of their services which is what I hear most about when installing service to customers that were switching form ATT
@@almostJDM All these companies are inherently evil. That's why competition is important and why it's a problem that any one company is permitted exclusive access to the publicly owned telephone pole system. Here's how it should work : Every company that wants to use the telephone pole system must be allowed access, but must also pay a proportional share of maintenance costs. If that was the system in place both every company would offer services everywhere. And not just the big ones either. There would be actual locally owned competition. That would keep speeds high and prices low. Instead we have a system where a single company owns your block like they are a wild animal that successfully peed on your house and somehow that gives them the right to a monopoly over your house. It's a sickening system that requires new competitors try digging trenches or using radiowaves to compete, and 5G hasn't lived up to the hype enough to replace even cable let alone be a replacement for fiber.
This was actually a very smart move.... I couldn't imagine being stuck to 50-60Mbps even in today's state of the internet. Recently my ISP (Spectrum) Bumped my speeds up to 350Mbps from 200 free of charge. I have been seeing quite the uplift even here, in the middle of nowhere. But sadly, no fiber exists here
Well, I'm in Los Angeles, like a mile from Universal Studios... still no fiber on my area either. My speed has also increased with Spectrum as well (yay!) but maybe the ISPs need another kick in the pants to keep installing fiber.
Be glad you don't live in Germany. I live in a very rural area, we literally cannot get more then 100mbps. I have 60mbps and have to pay like 50€ per month. Internet is just awful here.
Eh, 350Mbps is more than most households need. However, the benefit of fiber is you generally get a matching upload to go with your download. I have Cox fiber and get 250/250 and it is pretty awesome.
What's funny is ISP stagnation was only a thing on the consumer side. However, on the datacenter side, speeds are going up and up and costs are dropping by roughly 20% year-on-year since bandwidth and internet speeds are a big cost center for businesses they are constantly trying to optimize and there are many players competing for their business. Consumer ISPs were just able to get away with shitty service because of a lack of competition.
It’s not because of lack of competition, it’s because all involved parties have decided to screw the consumer unanimously…. This has been a growing problem in many industries. The constant hatred and distain towards the “entitled consumer” is getting worse and worse. Same thing is happening in the work place too. Higher ups hate the employees below them and all… It’s terrible
There's monopoly in the "Tier 1 ISP" market too, BUT, yes, at the end, the Business having transit has very good cost. The negotiation that happens between providers too exist here, and they slash prices by a huge %age too if you find something similar from a different provider, and economies of scale applies here too so if your transit requirements are like many Tbit from many provider, you pay really cheap per Mbit. and not to mention, those big players have more direct ways of reaching their destination with stuff like "Peering, IXP", etc. They anyways try to avoid Transit as much as they can, but it's not purely possible.
The cost to an ISP for providing business internet is lower because the businesses provide the internal infrastucture to their users. Also one customer with one bill for a contract is easier than 100 customers with month to month service who create the same amount of network traffic.
Well, it's also at least in part because there are 10,000 customer wires to be run for every business wire to be run. If I want to connect two data centers, I can pay to have a bundle of fibers run between them for way less than a separate fiber for every house. That's exactly why phone lines and cable tv lines were the primary means of delivering internet. That last little bit from the corner of the block to each house on the block is (or was) very expensive.
Man I wish. By the time next year rolls around, charter will be charging me $75 for a fraction of that (300 Down/10 up) I experienced my first bump in price a few months ago to $65 from $50…… T-T
@Alucard oh my goodness. I had spectrum before and it was the same thing with price hikes and a harassment level of advertisements through the mail, phone calls, and texts. I think I even paid more for the pleasure than I currently do. Then when I tried to discontinue my service they ask why, I told them, and they said that was the industry standard. I was pissed. Never looked back.
Google Fiber has been in Irvine CA for years, but AFAIK it's only available in certain large apartment and condo complexes. I guess it wasn't cost-effective for Google to run fiber to individual homes (or even to the curb).
This doesn't make sense to me as a cell site technician. We use a lot of fiber optics because it is A LOT cheaper than copper on runs over a few dozen feet. The expensive bits are the SFPs on either end of the fiber to connect to the switches and routers. I could see only running fiber to the road and copper to houses. Despite the cable being more expensive, terminating fiber is labor expensive and you don't want it where the customer could mess it up.
This has to do with how it came to Irvine. The Irvine Company made a deal with Google directly(2016) to bring Google Fiber to its properties, and not a deal with the City. I don't know if there is an exclusivity deal, but I imagine there is. Most of Irvine was built/upgraded with underground conduit making it a lot easier to deploy fiber if they want to. SCE is actually using the conduit to give business' 100gig fiber lines.
Something similar occurred in Nashville. Google Fiber basically only exists in a few highrises downtown. Comcast and AT&T blocked them from being able to access their phone poles to run fiber to other parts of the city. Which would have been more cost effective than digging and burying a bunch of fiber. So the rollout didn't get very far. But when AT&T Fiber rolled out they matched Google's price of $70 a month for two years and then extended that another year or two before raising the price. By that time Comcast started rolling out their gig speed offering. Hat tip to Google for finally spurring fiber expansion in this area. I enjoyed FIOS in Philly but was forced back into the slow lane when we moved back to TN 10 years ago. We were the first house in our neighborhood to have fiber run to it.
If that's the case then I'm surprised that they don't offer FTTC (Fibre-To-The-Cabinet) which is offered in the UK by Openreach whereby fibre-optic cables only run to a cabinet on the street with datastreams converted over to a pre-existing copper cable but I suppose Google doesn't already have that infrastructure in place and making deals with the likes of AT&T likely wouldn't help them...
I remember when Google Fiber was first out, I was struggling with 2 MBps, which was the best they offered. I desperately wished for google fiber in my area and I hated how slow internet was across America, especially compared to other countries. Nowadays, I am routinely offered Gigabit, and even though they're still wiley with the "up to", I can typically rely on at least 40MBps, which is amazing compared to a decade ago. So if this really was intentional, I thank Google for managing to improve the broken ISPs
@@heloxiii8894 definitions of measurements don't change. The length of a meter hasn't changed in 20 years. Neither has the size of a bit, a byte a megabit or a megabyte.
Google fiber is seriously the best thing to happen to my internet. I purposely moved to an area with it because I was sick of Xfinity, century link, etc. They are actually expanding quite rapidly in my area. Constantly seeing neighborhoods having them come through and install the infrastructure. If you have them as an option, DO IT.
I have it and LOVE IT 🤣 $70 1gig up/down. Was down once in 2 years....some kids messed with the main box down the road. It was fixed within 4 hours 👍🏾👍🏾👍🏾
I had dial-up way back in 94. Had a whopping 14 kbps. It would take several hours just to connect. Kids these days will never know what actual slow internet is.
This is similar to how Google buying Motorola was also a huge success story, they paid a low price to stop a lot of patent trolling which would have hurt Android massively. (And even in a very rural part of Denmark, I'm having 1 Gbit fiber internet)
@@tonycrabtree3416 good for you buddy. Glad you're enjoying your fisher price phone that you paid over a hundred Ben Franklins for. I'll stay in my lane and keep enjoying my 600 dollar android phone.
@@SeanGonzalezMDHEXT Google didn't update my RAZR MAXX HD after 1 year of ownership and basically forced me to buy another phone in 3 short years, so all my apps would work properly. How's that cheaper than owning a 700 dollar phone for years that works perfectly? Anyway, this isn't android v. iOS...it's google doing something shitty in regards to a phone brand. Motorola was the king of cell phones and now? Hot garbage. Anyway, stay triggered!
Perfect strategy when you think about it the higher speeds people have the more internet they will use and in turn, a lot of google services will be used more.
I remember when they switched to fiber in my area. We went from 25mbps speeds to 200mbps for the same price. I used to wait entire days to download games that now take a few hours
In a rural area where fiber isn't available, the best option has been Verizon's 4G cell network. 50 mb/s currently compared to the max 25 mb/s spectrum provided despite advertised 100 mb/s. They can advertise what ever but they never delivered. Plus the cost saving was huge. Anything for more competition I am in favor of.
I live in an area where fibre is not available and recently got starlink and regularly get 100mb/s download and a decent amount of the time I get over 100mb/s and the upload speeds are between 10-20 mb/s some up to 30
@@cmdr1911 yes the down side of starlink is it expensive to get into and it is more expensive per month them most other ISPs Where I live we could only get 25 download and 0.5-1 up and for me it only $20 more so it was definitely worth it for me I wander now with starlink If ISPs will expand fibre to at least some of the rural communities
@@dogcat823 Unless subsidized under the 2022 infrastructure law, I don’t see fiber optic connections being expanded to rural areas. I also think that 5G connections will make it unnecessary. I live in NYC and switched to a 5G provider and for $50 a month I am getting gigabit up and down (practically like with all gig services lower when it goes through Wi-Fi to my devices). In my building, I can get gigabit FIOS, and two cable companies with down load speeds in the gig range but I chose and love this simple 5G solution.
When QWest had a monopoly in the area I live in, it cost $120 (once you include all the fees) for 20 mbps and that was the fastest you could get. Then a competitor showed up and prices dropped while speeds soared. That’s why I find the consolidation of so many of these corporations concerning. It’s gives them disproportionate power over the market, which ultimately screws over consumers.
I've had google fiber for the last year and it's easily the best internet I've had with very little hassle. Also the superior up time of the service is absolutely fantastic!
I have Google Fiber in the Research Triangle region of North Carolina and it's been great. It may have pushed AT&T and Spectrum to up their game, but unlike AT&T I have nearly 100% uptime, and consistently high speeds both ways (something Spectrum couldn't match). So at least it works here.
A lot of what stalled google was construction due to securing and rewriting easements and permits for either aerial installs or using directional drilling that was expensive, disruptive, time consuming and caused a lot of damage. Once they switched to microtunneling it’s solved a lot of their issues. When the power lines were buried here, it took just over a year start to finish mostly due to planning and legal, with the bulk of the construction lasting about six invasive and disruptive months tearing up both my front and back yards. Google microtunneled at the same time and had the whole neighborhood finished and my home switched over in just a couple weeks, with just one noisy day for construction on the street only. ATT only offered 40/5mbps and spectrum was 400/20mbps, or 900/50 for $200+/m with a $600 install fee. Now at 1000/1000mbps for $70/m, no install fee, they’ve been easy to deal with, good support, reliable and had been waiting years to ditch spectrum.
Indeed, Google refused to do things the way they had been proven to work for decades. They don't know how to do 90% of the stupid things they try to do. Being an ISP is just one more on the list. Microtrenching doesn't work. Literally everyone in the industry knows this, yet Google had to be different. When all their fiber popped out of the street, they simply wrote it off and walked away. (that's KY, btw.) One Touch Make Ready(tm)? Universally bad idea. In the few places where they got their way, they screamed bloody murder when other ISPs used the rule, and touched Google's infrastructure. Here, AT&T's installation took *a day!* They didn't make a mess. They didn't break anything. If you didn't see them working that Friday, you'd never know they had ever been here. Google, on the other hand, took a dozen contractors *6 days* to do the same work. They were loud and disruptive. They cut holes in the pavement. They made a mess of the grass. They left massive mud holes. AND they cut the cable hard line, outside their permitted and marked area. There's no way anyone could miss Google Fiber being installed.
Google was always upfront about their concept with Google Fiber. The notion was always to be the halo product offering to prove the viability of 1 gbps fiber at that time. now, here in Canada anyway, Bell Canada is offering 8 Gbps for a bit over $100 USD and things keep getting faster all the time.. Google really invigorated the speed race in connectivity.
Use to work at a major ISP and this is so true. One of our former CEOs went on record saying "...customers don't want faster internet speeds." It was also widely spread info that gigabit speeds were impossible on a cable network. Present day, that same cable network supports gigabit speeds and customers have been taking advantage of it.
They know they're lieing out their asses, they just don't want to spend the money to upgrade their network. They can say whatever the hell they want when they're the only ones with the power to collect the money.
Att just upped their offering of max 1 Gbps to 5Gbps just because a start up fiber provider in central Florida sent mail out to a bunch of people saying they'd offer 10Gbps. So att had it in them the whole time but never cared to offer.
True, even in Austin they're offering 10gbps residential fiber, but AT&T has data caps while Google Fiber is truly unlimited Edit: they don't have data caps for fiber plans. Might try them lol
@@LogicallyAnswered Yeah, but it seems like that's 'their plan all along' when they get all ambitious about changing the world in some way that is usually something nobody wants and is disconnected with reality. Like really, who's gonna adopt a new google 'game changer' at this point, the people who got suckered by Bitconnect back in the day and are now all salty at Logan Paul? It'd take that level of stupid to believe a thing Google says. And yeah, i'm still part of the 25% of Americans stuck at 1mbps on a good day, but usually more like 500kbps for our only service. One day i got 2mbps down from the arch repo, i think the data had a tailwind that day. Today the wind is blasting and videos are buffering at 360p.
If I remember correctly some of this was common carrier issues and threats of charging tech companies for traffic on networks. Google Netflix and others were battling a the telcos even though most of the backbones were paid for by tax payers. They were calling telcos bluff
well, it gets quite pricey on the bandwindths going on between likes of google and ISPs :) where fridge size equipment is only one of the connections in between and serves only that connection
I was lucky enough to live in one of the first neighborhoods in the 2nd city that actually got google fiber rolled out (and before their micortrenching debacle). But even in the cities that "have" google fiber, only a small percentage of the city can actually get it.
This video didn't mention the elephant in the room. That governments blocked the roll out of Google fiber as they were favoring the established companies. It's so tough to go thru the city, state, etc regulations and authorities and the bureaucracies just to establish home internet. Plus some apartments are not allowing Google to install fiber as they have exclusivity contracts with the established companies.
Its going to be intresting in my Area. Google Fiber has the Green light to come here and they are promising 10 gig speeds in my market. So it will be interesting to see what Cox communications will try to pull to compete with the speeds.
The city I lived in paid for all houses to have it, been enjoying it for a few years now. I pay for 100mbps but they mistakenly left 1 port at 1000, I hooked that one to my computer, not complaining......
I was always jealous of the USA for having 1gbps speeds! However we got fibre in 2009 connected to our home and it was 100/100, now we have 1gbps as well, so in a way I had glass fibre since day 1 basically but didnt get the major speed till years later
lol dude. The USA lags way behind most other developed countries when it comes to internet speed. I can personally guarantee you that the vast majority of the USA does not have access to fiber internet for x y z reason. There are areas with really great internet and you can go a few streets down and have absolutely atrocious internet speeds. There's a neighborhood not too far from my old high school where they (the school) has a 10 Gbps fiber circuit through AT&T. That nearby neighborhood can get an incomprehensibly fast 0.7 Mbps down and 0.5 Mbps up with AT&T with a 1 year contract. Here in the US, everything is about money. Money talks. Internet providers will do whatever legal or illegal thing they can do to maintain their infrastructure the least amount as possible and to expand or upgrade their foot print the least amount as possible all while providing terrible customer service support. There are exceptions of course, but in general, the largest telecommunications companies: AT&T, Comcast, Charter/Spectrum, Frontier, etc are considered to be absolutely terrible in various forms. In a lot of places, the incumbent internet provider bribes, I mean lobbies, local politicians so that they (ISP) are the only provider in town and/or make it extremely difficult for other providers to attempt to come into town.
@@JJFlores197 tell me about it. A local fiber optic ISP just laid lines up the street and stopped at the edge of my court. My area was in a buildable area and then they changed it last minute, such bs.
@Javier Flores oh I didnt know that haha, we've had fibers since 2009 in my town. However they are still connecting other cities in my country, but most places here have fiber.
This video is extremely misleading. It says AT&T is cheaper, but that's just flat-out untrue. AT&T will not even price match GF's price, much less BEAT it where I live. Also, they left Louisville because they were trying a different approach to laying the fiber in very shallow cuts in roads, filled in by a new substance that was supposed to protect the wire. That substance failed and was just breaking down, so Google had to give up. Also, Google's real issues with the service right now are just in relation to the TV offering, which is the same issue hitting every cable company. For those who just want an ISP, Google is doing extremely well. You're correct that Google Fiber achieved what they wanted to do, but I don't think they're going anywhere.
I live in the K.C. area, Google wont even cover all of K.C.. Big suburbs like independence, and blue springs can't get the service, and this was their flagship market. Even though some areas are less than 3 miles away from fiber enabled areas. Google has no plans to finish their rollout. How do I know? I worked for them on the fiber project.
lol satellite internet absolutely "took off", it just only "took off" in rural areas where DSL is unreasonable due to distance and cable is just unavailable. There's plenty of satellite internet companies out there; Hughesnet, Viasat, now Starlink is getting bigger and bigger... The problem with satellite is even if you get reasonable down speeds (usually about as good as an average DSL down speed) your upload was **miserable**, made worse by an outrageous ping for a double gut punch to gaming on sat.
I am using google fiber to post this. I have had both att and google fiber in my area and have enjoyed them both. I have lost trust in your content. This makes no sense. They are still expanding and it’s certainly not dead. love atts fiber product as well but you painted a very ignorant view of reality at best, at worst you are generating misleading content. You gave literally zero evidence to suggest it’s failing
Don't know about Google fiber, but remember the Google airplane that wants to send wireless internet to everyone, don't know what happened to this project?
I think I figured this out before the ISPs did. I used to sell fiber optic service and there were areas where it was installed already for years but we couldn't sell it yet because of dealing with municipalities and all the cable companies. I thought there's no way Google is gonna go through the pain and expense of making this a real thing. But they sure scared the industry for a second.
Didn’t Amazon have an even bigger incentive for a faster network speeds, considering AWS and Alexa? Also crediting google with the ISP monopolies increasing their speeds thinking google is a threat, I would imagine these billion dollar companies can run through more in depth analysis to realize the same thing you did but in real time.
I wish they would expand in the cities they're already in. Here in Atlanta, two streets down they have Google Fiber while on my street it's either 600mbps or 1gbps Xfinity or 5mbps AT&T....yes that's right, FIVE mbps.
Idk from what I can tell, anyone who has accessibility to Google Fiber prefers it over any other ISP. You pay $70 every month, that's it, no hidden fees or payment increases. Can't say the same for other ISPs. I love my google fiber (gigabit up and down).
I'm getting an average of 720mbs/down 700mbs/up at $70 with Google Fiber. Can't really complain. This is however on a high capacity ethernet connection.
I live in Louisville Kentucky and everyone was anticipating the new fiber product from Google One of the problems was the contractors they hired to install the fiber there was five or coming up out of the trench es they installed they didn't dig deep enough so when winter hit all the sealant would start coming up in the streets degregating the service.. but you're right about AT&t they started rolling out fiber everywhere but as soon as Google fiber pulled out of Louisville all the expansion stopped lol so we still effectively only have two genuine ISPs in a city the size of about 750,000
1:20 $140 billion isn't enough, they need to make a law where everyone gets access to cable or fiber internet cause it's annoying not even getting 1mbps on dsl. But I finally got cable internet because I got spectrum to spend $80,000.
In the words of a one of my favourite tech tubers “competition is good”. Even if Google was only doing it as a bluff, they forced the companies in that space to step up.
Meanwhile, in Greece we have 3 isp (which in reality is only one but alas) that make bold statements like "fiber to all houses by 2027" or "average speeds of 100mbps or more" yet they never upgrade their infrastructure, they just started giving out fiber and gbit connections and if you're in an area that is "taken" by the other 2 isps you are screwed cause they have no money to create a fiber network, yet they still took the area with the promise that they will. I'm in 2023, with an adsl connection in the middle of the capital with 16mbps(thank god its not 8) and 1mbps upload. Most sites straight up cancel uploads cause they take so long. My internet connection gets disconnected every 30 mins. I wish I knew things would be like this cause I could probably build my own isp with the amount of money ive wasted leaving my pc open to download games
Google Fiber announced 6 or 7 years ago, they were coming to Charlotte. WHAT A JOKE! After all of this time Google Fiber is in a VERY small part of Charlotte, primarily in the downtown area as well as a few select apartment complexes. HEY Google- stop lying about " expanding in Charlotte”! You have been here for 6 or 7 years, and you are a complete joke.
This is a totally inaccurate history. In 1996, GTE (a telecom that became Verizon) laid fiber in Tampa, Florida, which was the precursor to Verizon FIOS. When VZ was created in 2000, FIOS itself was rolled out to multiple cities by 2005, with symmetrical speeds up to 1 GB. This was 7 years before Google ever rolled out fiber to Kansas City - it’s first location. And by the time Google Fiber was being rolled out the world had long moved on from dialup and DSL. Most cable companies were offering relatively high speeds, albeit the nature of cable will always make asynchronous (more down than up). So I’m not sure where your pulling this false narrative that Google fiber entered in a dial up, DSL and slow cable world. It’s not true.
If only companies actually offered this kind of internet now. Gotta be in the city for anything more than 13mbps though. Any remotely rural-ish area gets trash internet. Just sucks. Internet has become garbage again. Gotta use 5g for slightly reliable service that's not charter, spectrum, or comcast. At least google got it in the cities. Just wish the US gave a crap about anything other than money. Gotta charge 100 dollars a month for 200mbps that constantly has outages every week, has horrible upload speeds, and uses only their routers lest you loose features you're paying for.
Sadly, the upload bandwidth hasn't improved alongside the download bandwidth. AT&T certainly has, but companies like Charter fiber doesn't. I tried to get Fiber in my area to host a server. Charter was the only option. They advertised 1 gigabit speeds and when I asked if this included upload they said yes, but that was a lie. After getting it installed I learned that while the download speed was around 600 megabits per second (just over half what they promised) the upload speed was just under 1 Megabit! My cell phone had a better upload rate than that! So it appears that most of these companies just invested in the download infrastructure and put no effort into upload except for those who were directly challenging Google like AT&T. The worst part is that because of the monopolies in place there's no way for anyone to compete. What if, instead of giving the telephone lines to a single company in a given area, the cities maintained them and all companies who wanted to use the lines could do so and had to share in the cost of maintenance. Then you wouldn't have to bury fiber because you could use the telephone polls and anyone could start their own ISP like used to be the case in the 90's. We'd see healthy competition pushing prices down and features up.
I had a 300/300 fiber connection just outside of downtown Vancouver through Telus who installed fiber into our 1994 artist studio condo a few years ago and it had true upstream bandwidth but the dirty bastards block port 80 and 443 on the domestic connections so you can’t serve standard web services without paying for the commercial service, unlike the cable co with their 15mbps upstream (300 down) which they left wide open. I could have gotten 1gbps down but the upstream was still physically maxed at about 300mbps due to the type of fiber used within our unit (more durable but not as high bandwidth) so I felt like paying more wouldn’t be worth it just for a bit more potential downstream speed, which I really didn’t need since I had no 4K TVs at all.
@@SchwaAlien You could potentially get around that by using an encrypted VPN connection. At least in that case, since they couldn't inspect the traffic, they'd have no excuse to throttle you.
@@Elliandr presumably most VPNs won’t let you forward port 80 and 443 into your server without quite a bit of money. The one I was using allowed one port that was assigned randomly to be forwarded, so not terribly useful even though it was a paid service.
@@SchwaAlien Depends on the VPN service. I use ProtonVPN. I paid ahead for 3 years and no such restriction appears to exist, but then my upload bandwidth isn't high enough to test your use case. You could ask them ahead of time of course. For servers I'll likely pay a friend to leave it plugged in at his house a short drive away. Seems to me that there should be businesses whose sole model is to have a place to plug a box into the internet that the customers fully owns and manages.
I’m in Kansas City, and google actually offers 5 gig for $125/month. Right now I don’t need those types of speed and am getting by with 1 gig for $70, but a 5x speed increase for a 56% price increase is damn good for the money if I ever had the need
Google Fiber bought Webpass in 2015 (I think). I wish they would have went full in with Webpass technology once the ISP's and local municipalities got in their way in particular states/cities
I thought consumer ISPs were crap here but I must confess the US takes the cake..It is just crazy seeing youtubers doing nice full network setups with great hardware..that end pluggin a DSL line 😵💫 WTF. Here consumer ISPs have been on a speed race for decades recently reaching up to 10gbps. (No I am not buying beyond gigabit yet because there isn't a domestic usecase yet)
I was so happy when some people started a local ISP a few years after Google fiber decided not to enter our market. I particularly hate the cable company and I dislike the phone company. I had to buy internet from the cable company because I had no other choice. In a one-year time span 22% of the time the internet was not working. no they wouldn't give me a discount or cared when I told them it was interrupting work. This is one of many situations of why I hate them. The local ISP caused the cable company to lower their highest internet plan by ~$100 a month and increase its advertised speed by over 900 megabits per second and there's still more expensive. The real speed is closer to 700mbps and the ping is about twice as high as our local ISP. In my opinion still one of the best examples of competitive intrusion. Every time they expand to a new neighborhood they get about 60% to 80% of the customers in that area. Not to mention initially as you can see above they were probably about order of magnitude cheaper/better. Just recently they doubled or more all of their speeds for their plans leaving their competitors in the dust again. you actually get 100% the speed you pay for too assuming the other side can support it. At about 1 gbps or more you might not see full speed when downloading. This may or may not be because of your ISP or the website you're connecting to just doesn't have more bandwidth to spare then that. If you get a download server with 10 gbps of connectivity. Well at the 1 gbps isp plan that server could support approximately 10 people at full speed. How often do you think you're going to only have 10 people on that server. That's not an unreasonable example for a lot of smaller websites.(or worse but they're generally not sending lots of large files or have a CDN between them)
I may have the option of a gigabit cable internet package through Spectrum (Charter) but that is NOT equivalent to fiber gigabit internet. What is TRULY game changing about a real-deal symmetric fiber internet connection is having access to gigabit upload speeds. Being able to download AND upload at such speeds from home is what is truly groundbreaking. The ability to communicate with other machines/services over the internet as if they were connected to your home LAN enables practices that were previously unthinkable. However, for most of us, that ability still remains an unattainable dream that will likely go unfulfilled for a very long time to come.
Lord. This video made me realize why TH-cam creators can be problematic: you (a channel I tend to like) just talked of a topic I am specialized in, in a very misleading way. Now I wonder if you take similar shortcuts on other topics. Basically, it’s not because Google consumes a lot of bandwidth that they work automatically be good at providing the bandwidth to others.
Where I live, the only 2 options are Comcast, and att. Att only has 50mbps dsl so Comcast is the only good option. T-Mobile 5G home internet recently became available so maybe Comcast can face some competition now.
I'm in the same situation in my town. I tried T-Mobile's 5g thing and it was terribly slow. I tried in 2021 and most recently in late 2022. It seems worse the 2nd time. I can't get more than 35 Mbps no matter where I place the gateway in my house. Most of the time, its slower than 10 Mbps. I'm going to be cancelling it soon.
If they want fiber to be successful they need to get it in more cities, thats the whole reason I haven’t gotten it, literally just because it’s not available where I live
People forget Google is a tech company. Google effectively forced their partners (ISP's) to upgrade their infrastructure for them. Since slow internet speeds was hurting google's brand.
Yep exactly
Makes sense. The USA has some of the slowest broadband speeds in the world.
Literally every person in the world forgets Google's a tech company, damn so true.
@@nasis18 I would assume that is because we implemented that very early on, and later implementers had access to better tech? And replacing slow but working infrastructure is something that the US might be choosing not to do?
Considering how big America is, the fiber rollout for each state/major population took priority first before going for smaller areas. They offered better speeds and allowed monopolies over internet to be bypassed because google had been increasing their search for suitable places to connect.
I also feel like you left a really crucial detail, in that one of the other reasons why Google Fiber became a thing (even knowing that they won't be economically successful) is due to the whole net-neutrality scandals. The ISP's started targeting video streaming services such as Netflix & Hulu, and even TH-cam ended up getting caught under the crossfire of having to pay the ISP's massive amounts of "fees" for how much 'demand' they were placing on the ISPs. Google being the only tech company that had the power to create their own ISP to make a statement unlike the other companies who essentially never owned their own infrastructure and were all hosted on AWS, decided to do just that: Tell the ISPs that if they don't change their practices on how they treat the streaming services, Google will create their own ISP infrastructure and take out the middle man. Their success with Google Fiber, showed the ISP's that this wasn't just Google talking the talking, but that they could actually deliver on their threats.
I think other streaming platforms should thank Google for it lol.
Glad to see some explanation that makes sense to me, because the ones in the video didn't seem great. Am I the only one? maybe I'm slow lol. They didn't attempt stadia until several years after fiber was rolled out, but at the time I don't think they care about gamer ping or fast Steam downloads. Hangouts is a social media platform, do they really need 4K for that? Classroom doesn't seem intended to make money, though I can see how it might use a lot of bandwidth. I guess I'd like to know some specific stuff that uses bandwidth that's so high that it requires fiber, cuz it doesn't seem like the average home consumer needs it, and I'm not sure what Google planned on offering that definitely needed all these competitor-built fiber connections.
Part of the problem was government failure across several administrations. The government didn't want to build a fiber infrastructure. Instead, they allowed the telecoms companies to charge their customers to fund this rollout. Surprise: they didn't. The companies were caught pocketing the money. They then were allowed to charge customers yet again to fund the rollout. And guess what? Again they just pocketed the money.
And as you correctly point out, Google understood the negative impact this would have on their business growth serving web based services.
why would the government build a fiber infrastructure for big corporation? I say that is not a failure, they just know they shouldn't.
if they do, shame on them for doing it instead of spending the money for other important things, and if they don't? shame on them coz the corporation is now charging it to the people? . . . typical grumblers.
@@ChibiKeruchan Private corporations didn't build the nation's highways: the government funded that. You gonna complain about that too and ask why the government bothered to do it? Do you enjoy getting it up the ass by corporations? Do they pay you for that or do you just let them do it for free?
@@ChibiKeruchan There are many state own services in Europe. Shocking to an American, I know.
@@ChibiKeruchan the government set aside billions for fiber and gave it companies. That money just somehow disappeared no one has answers, I would do some research onto it if you have the time. Also the govt. is what made electrification across the country possible. Without govt. support that would not have happened. Govt. has subsidized what it deems necessary equipment in the past and it should also do so for the internet for rural America.
Yea I don’t get how you are paid billions and just lose it, like no accountability whatsoever
Google are actually pretty smart. They threatened the traditional ISPs forcing them to upgrade their stuff so they wouldnt become irrelevant. End result is now much faster internet is in many more homes. Which Google now benefits greatly from increased access to their services and of course the ability to show many more ads. All at what im sure is actually pretty minimal cost to Google
In India, I started my internet journey in Cyber Cafes having Dial-Up connections. Later DSL based broadband was introduced in early 2000s with speeds over 256 Kbps and upto 2 Mbps. Later on in mid 2010s DSL was getting speeds around 40 Mbps. In past 5 years Fiber internet has spread like anything with speeds upto 1 Gbps in less than $50.
It's funny how the US is sooo behind Europe when it comes to the internet. 500MB, 700MB and 1GB are very common now. Here In Romania, where I live now, the minimum is 500MB with some exceptions of only 100MB in case of an outdated infrastructure that is getting updated. I'm paying 7 USD per month and just got updated for free from 300 to 500MB with an upload of 250. My provider does not offer the slower 300 anymore. And there is no data limit. I did download sometimes up to 2TB a month next to my streaming and that's totally okay. And we didn't need a Google to come and disrupt the market.
It's funny how former Soviet countries have better internet than Germany today, because there was no existing infrastructure for the ISPs to piggyback on, so they pretty much had to build out _something_ if they wanted any customers at all, and if they build infrastructure, then hey, it might as well be fiber
This video needs to be updated.. Gfiber is thriving and opening in multiple new markets now a days
US fiber is way too expensive. We have 1GB for $15 and 10 GB for $25 here in Spain.
1GB of data for $15 is a terrible deal, not something you should brag about.
COVID and all the shift to WFH ironically showed that there is plenty of capacity to handle all that traffic that was no longer internal to the office, meaning ISPs really were holding back and seeking rent off of retail customers.
4k in 2012 was monstrously expensive
You got to be kidding me saying 4k was dirt cheap back in 2010-11-12
They had the cables in the ground right by my house in 2019, but it never was active around my city!
maybe one day Google will become a non-profit when it expands to Mars
Hahaha
I just got NEW Google Fiber in San Antonio. They are expanding - laid the optics about 4 months ago, got it connected last week. It is $20 cheaper than Spectrum cable Internet (also gigabit, but not synchronous and 20 to 30 times the latency) and so I switched.
I’m going to be on a few vacations soon and still need my home infrastructure switched to 2.5GbE but eventually, I’ll have 2Gbit/s from Google for $100/month.
Yet still there's so many neighborhoods in the cities that do not have any fiber available.
I still hope that the fiber revolution will still grow. and maybe Google fiber can still become a greater success? I want to see the whole internet reinforced to be stronger for all. More highways and such.
So, to summarize the entire video: task failed successfully...
right!
i wish this still existed, i only have max of 3.1 megabytes a sec and a minimum of .5
The rollout of fiber has stagnated here over the last years, since Google doesn't pose a threat anymore. AT&T fiber just serves some gated communities around here, cares less about the rest of the city. They probably only serve these gated communities in order to beat a local broadband provider, which is specialized in offering fiber only to privately owned communities. Our cable provider, who serves the rest of the city, has increased the download speed to an acceptable level, but the upload speed is still not comparable with fiber Prices are high and the customer treatment is very bad, also. The root of the problem is that the cable providers just sliced-up the map and serve different areas. So, they can practically do whatever they want. 5G home internet seems to be available in some parts of the city, but there are probably major speed and reliability issues, when the festival is in town. As far as I know, 5G home customers have to yield for the carriers mobile customers. It's a big mess, which can only be solved with real competition or government involvement. There is no Google kicking the ISPs butts around here.
Fiber Rollout in my area (Northern Indiana) is massively kicking up. From less then 10% coverage to 85% of the county covered by fiber, from 100Mb to 2Gig with 5gig coming next summer. With three different providers AT&T, a local telecom company, and the local REMC, with Rumors of more competition in the coming year. Covid drove the need home and the Local telecoms here at least are working hard to meet the demand before someone else undercuts them and steals the customer.
Google Fiber didn’t light a fire under the ISP’s, there have been plenty of other independent fiber providers. Additionally Verizon moved into the CLEC space to compete with other RBOCs on their own turf with 5G wireless home internet. Then along came Starlink. Broadband is more competitive than ever and Google doesn’t have the legacy CBA’s to make it stick around. Of course they’re done.
satellite Internet is absolutely ridiculous
It is 2023 in Brussels, and still no fibre no sight of it
I just read an ad saying Google fiber was coming to Chicago so they must still be expanding.
Google gigabit is cheaper than AT&T’s fiber in Kansas City, but AT&T’s fiber Wi-Fi connection is way better than the Wi-Fi on googles little pucks.
I remember wanting Google fibre so bad in 2011 I was stuck at 25 mbs for years until I moved out recently
I used to work in the residential ISP world. A BIG holdback to speed increases was due to govt regulations. Analog TV and cable cards ate up a HUGE chunk of the available spectrum on coax. Now those mandates are gone and we're seeing the speed increases. I recently saw a video (antenna guy maybe) saying Spectrum is about to roll out a big upgrade in upload speeds due to no longer being mandated to support cable cards.
Remarkable for this video to fail to make any mention of Verizon FIOS.
The story is different here in Canada. Here the major telecom and cable companies were funded through government initiatives both provincial and federal to deploy fiber in their core networks and the cellular services needed the fiber speeds. We didn't have a disrupter like google fibre here. It was more of a public private partnership. The major cable company in Ontario has a program called Connected for Success that provides 25Mb/s for just $11 a month. I believe it is subsidized through government assistance and it is also tied with a Cable TV offering that is optionally available to that TV/IP becomes reality and the existing coaxial cable plant can be replaced with fiber throughout their network and eventually to the home. This biggest issue is high income places like condo buildings, very high income neighbourhoods, and luxury apartment buildings get the fiber to the residence and the social housing is left with the coaxial cable and poor service with frequent outages and long repair times. There was a federal program that extends this model to other providers as well. if VR takes off it will follow this same deployment leaving a significant portion of the population left behind and without the ability to participate in the benefits of VR for half a century or more.
"This biggest issue is high income places like condo buildings, very high income neighbourhoods, and luxury apartment buildings get the fiber to the residence and the social housing is left with the coaxial cable and poor service with frequent outages and long repair times."
Where. Every new construction since 2013 has fibre to the home. Every coax building and address that doesn't get fibre right away is getting 1.2ghz nodes and segmented. 1.2 ghz nodes can run a traditional return path with a 42mhz wide return with more efficient modulation, or an 85mhz return with the same. The same units will do 208mhz return which is almost 5 X the current bandwidth and then layer on the more efficient carriers.
Currently a coaxial 1.2ghz node can run up to 10gigabit in the downstream and around 500mbit in the upstream still running both old and new modulation techniques. A 1.2ghz node at full bore in full duplex runs 10gigabit symmetrical.
Social housing is usually high density and little buildings have as many as four 1.2ghz nodes with 15 units per segment, which is nothing for a customer load. The wiring is as old as the late 1970s. There would be no reason to have "more frequent outages" either. Either a cable is cut or it isn't. Either a fibre is cut or it isn't.
Repair times are even longer on fibre systems that are fully buried and permanently spliced because there are no test points available and no place to take a temporary connection from. You need much more expensive equipment and skill to troubleshoot and repair a fibre system. Techs are terrified of them.
@@Todd.T I am in a social housing unit in the East end of Toronto. It was built in 1974. It has a copper RG-6. We have 4 - 6 outages per month totaling an hour or more from the cable company. This include both TV and internet. Bell Canada will not run fiber to the building. I know I have tried to get it. The best speed we can get is 25Mbés meanwhile the new condominium across the street has a sixteen fibre pullover to serve sixty-four units. It is less than one hundred meters away. I know someone who lives in that building and he has had no outages since he moved in two years ago. He also has Gigabit fiber in his condominium. There are twenty-seven social housing buildings totaling over 1500 in a 4 square kilometer area walking distance to my building and they all have similar limitations and service levels. The service at our building was so bad they had to re-cable half of the building to get minimum service levels. Most of the cable that was there before the re-cable was from the early 1980's. We also have a huge issue with cable theft. People just climb across the balconies and remove the copper cable and then sell it for scrap. One person died a few years ago when he missed the grab in swinging between balconies using the dividing partition. It gave way and a couple of bolts sheared and he fell nine stories with a fatal result. If they installed fiber the theft also would not occur since the thieves would quickly learn they don't get paid for fiber cable.
@@PWingert1966 All of the optical nodes and amps from 2004 and up support gigabit speeds. I am using an RG6 drop from 1999 on a coax network from the late 70s and it’s all been updated merely by changing the node and the connection points and the amps. Everybody’s still using decades old RG6 drops at 1.2ghz and there are people with 1850/170 packages throughout. There are also 300 people on a single leg because it wasn’t redesigned, just updated with new amps, and connection points. Outages are not caused because you have copper wiring. Your limitation you say you have is not limited by copper wiring either otherwise I would have outages.We’ve had one outage because when the work was done someone left a weather sealed port open on the network and water got in it and caused a short.
@@Todd.T Regardless of the technical cause our building is getting substandard service and part of the cause is that it is not viewed as a priority due to it being a low-income building. we have over 400 apartments in the building but less then half use the cable company or the telecom company. So they are not making a lot of income fro the building either.
@@PWingert1966 Fibre isn’t just about selling faster services, it’s about operating costs too. If big blue comes into the building, the government forces them to let third party companies access the network. Once you factor in how many people you will get as a competitor in the building, the ROI on the build doesn’t look good so they don’t want to come. Vandalism is vandalism and you can’t blame a network outage on that. The police should handle that. In Scarborough they started putting police stations in the building and security cameras with 24hr monitoring. People don’t touch anything anymore. The slowest single channel modem using 2004 tech will still run 38mbs. I bought one and used it for years.
"They were putting legacy players to shame..." 🤣🤣🤣 Yes, they totally were. I lived in Provo, UT when it came, and I absolutely loved Google Fiber internet. Internet was consistently fast.
I only wish I could have been apart of their team.
Romania already had that speed at that time..
Google fiber isn't dead... they are still expanding whateven is this
Probably a video put up by their competition.
It would be nice if Google would expand in northern California.
Leave it up to Google and they will tear your heart out
If Google wanted to really be a big player in the ISP space, they could have used their massive ad-powered war chest to expand to many more urban areas.
But they really just wanted to light a fire under the actual ISPs to make them improve offerings. Which ultimately ended up good for us anyway!
Its just sad that all these "new tech" is just a regurgitated version of the 1960s.
"capitalism is the best system it'll sort itself out the superior companies will survive"
At 1:20 making a prediction that it was to make internet providers create a faster network, so people will use Google more.
Google just finished construction in my neighborhood
Not necessarily. It depends on how it's used in the time it takes for the miles of button pushers to know how to see this set of floating little screens.
I remember being so excited about Google Fiber. I even petitioned my local government to look into bringing them into my city.
Then AT&T dropped their Fiber cables all over the city and they became the biggest players until Spectrum finally started adding 1G. Now it's all about where you live in the city and who you owe currently. Spectrum is currently pushing AT&T out
I'd double check those speeds. Remember that with the internet there are two different speeds : The download and the upload. Charter manages to get faster download by using both channels for the download and leaving around a megabit for download. Charter doesn't advertise this fact, but upload speeds are needed for uploading videos, high quality conference calling, running game servers, hosting multilayer matches on video game consoles, etc.
In my city Charter is the only option and while I can get an "up to" 1 gigabit download bandwidth (which is really closer to half that) the upload bandwidth is low.
Meanwhile a friend just a short drive away has AT&T in his area and he gets a gigabit on the download and the upload. But because Charter has the monopoly here I don't get any of that.
Plus charter or spectrum they charge low first and them jump prices super high
I have now QuantumFiber at my house for 65$ for live that includes taxes 1Gb up and down
@@itluis2009 AT&T is the same way and their price per tier is higher than google fiber, GF is $55 a month for 500MB which is no longer offered but existing customers get to keep it, 1 gig is $70, 2 gig is $100 and 5 gig is $125, that's including taxes and fees, ATT is $55 for 300, 65 for 500, 80 for 1gig, 110 for 2gig and 180 for 5 gig, but that's before taxes and fees, which push those prices to 80, 120, 140, 210, then couple the inconsistency of their services which is what I hear most about when installing service to customers that were switching form ATT
@@almostJDM All these companies are inherently evil. That's why competition is important and why it's a problem that any one company is permitted exclusive access to the publicly owned telephone pole system.
Here's how it should work : Every company that wants to use the telephone pole system must be allowed access, but must also pay a proportional share of maintenance costs.
If that was the system in place both every company would offer services everywhere. And not just the big ones either. There would be actual locally owned competition. That would keep speeds high and prices low.
Instead we have a system where a single company owns your block like they are a wild animal that successfully peed on your house and somehow that gives them the right to a monopoly over your house. It's a sickening system that requires new competitors try digging trenches or using radiowaves to compete, and 5G hasn't lived up to the hype enough to replace even cable let alone be a replacement for fiber.
I have AT&T fiber, it's great
This was actually a very smart move.... I couldn't imagine being stuck to 50-60Mbps even in today's state of the internet. Recently my ISP (Spectrum) Bumped my speeds up to 350Mbps from 200 free of charge. I have been seeing quite the uplift even here, in the middle of nowhere. But sadly, no fiber exists here
I get fucking 35…. lol
i get 3 mbps lol
Well, I'm in Los Angeles, like a mile from Universal Studios... still no fiber on my area either. My speed has also increased with Spectrum as well (yay!) but maybe the ISPs need another kick in the pants to keep installing fiber.
Be glad you don't live in Germany. I live in a very rural area, we literally cannot get more then 100mbps. I have 60mbps and have to pay like 50€ per month.
Internet is just awful here.
Eh, 350Mbps is more than most households need. However, the benefit of fiber is you generally get a matching upload to go with your download. I have Cox fiber and get 250/250 and it is pretty awesome.
What's funny is ISP stagnation was only a thing on the consumer side. However, on the datacenter side, speeds are going up and up and costs are dropping by roughly 20% year-on-year since bandwidth and internet speeds are a big cost center for businesses they are constantly trying to optimize and there are many players competing for their business. Consumer ISPs were just able to get away with shitty service because of a lack of competition.
It’s not because of lack of competition, it’s because all involved parties have decided to screw the consumer unanimously…. This has been a growing problem in many industries. The constant hatred and distain towards the “entitled consumer” is getting worse and worse. Same thing is happening in the work place too. Higher ups hate the employees below them and all… It’s terrible
There's monopoly in the "Tier 1 ISP" market too, BUT, yes, at the end, the Business having transit has very good cost. The negotiation that happens between providers too exist here, and they slash prices by a huge %age too if you find something similar from a different provider, and economies of scale applies here too so if your transit requirements are like many Tbit from many provider, you pay really cheap per Mbit. and not to mention, those big players have more direct ways of reaching their destination with stuff like "Peering, IXP", etc. They anyways try to avoid Transit as much as they can, but it's not purely possible.
The cost to an ISP for providing business internet is lower because the businesses provide the internal infrastucture to their users. Also one customer with one bill for a contract is easier than 100 customers with month to month service who create the same amount of network traffic.
The problem intel has
Well, it's also at least in part because there are 10,000 customer wires to be run for every business wire to be run. If I want to connect two data centers, I can pay to have a bundle of fibers run between them for way less than a separate fiber for every house. That's exactly why phone lines and cable tv lines were the primary means of delivering internet. That last little bit from the corner of the block to each house on the block is (or was) very expensive.
I love my Google fiber. I pay $70 a month and the price hasn't budged in the few years I've had it. No games like the other providers.
Man I wish. By the time next year rolls around, charter will be charging me $75 for a fraction of that (300 Down/10 up) I experienced my first bump in price a few months ago to $65 from $50…… T-T
What speeds are you getting for $70 a month?
@@lorddoma6637 gigabit
@@gent2205 wow that's good I'm paying $25 with Verizon but only getting 300 mbps.
@Alucard oh my goodness. I had spectrum before and it was the same thing with price hikes and a harassment level of advertisements through the mail, phone calls, and texts. I think I even paid more for the pleasure than I currently do. Then when I tried to discontinue my service they ask why, I told them, and they said that was the industry standard. I was pissed. Never looked back.
Google Fiber has been in Irvine CA for years, but AFAIK it's only available in certain large apartment and condo complexes. I guess it wasn't cost-effective for Google to run fiber to individual homes (or even to the curb).
Yeah makes sense
This doesn't make sense to me as a cell site technician. We use a lot of fiber optics because it is A LOT cheaper than copper on runs over a few dozen feet. The expensive bits are the SFPs on either end of the fiber to connect to the switches and routers.
I could see only running fiber to the road and copper to houses. Despite the cable being more expensive, terminating fiber is labor expensive and you don't want it where the customer could mess it up.
This has to do with how it came to Irvine. The Irvine Company made a deal with Google directly(2016) to bring Google Fiber to its properties, and not a deal with the City. I don't know if there is an exclusivity deal, but I imagine there is. Most of Irvine was built/upgraded with underground conduit making it a lot easier to deploy fiber if they want to. SCE is actually using the conduit to give business' 100gig fiber lines.
Something similar occurred in Nashville. Google Fiber basically only exists in a few highrises downtown. Comcast and AT&T blocked them from being able to access their phone poles to run fiber to other parts of the city. Which would have been more cost effective than digging and burying a bunch of fiber. So the rollout didn't get very far. But when AT&T Fiber rolled out they matched Google's price of $70 a month for two years and then extended that another year or two before raising the price. By that time Comcast started rolling out their gig speed offering. Hat tip to Google for finally spurring fiber expansion in this area. I enjoyed FIOS in Philly but was forced back into the slow lane when we moved back to TN 10 years ago. We were the first house in our neighborhood to have fiber run to it.
If that's the case then I'm surprised that they don't offer FTTC (Fibre-To-The-Cabinet) which is offered in the UK by Openreach whereby fibre-optic cables only run to a cabinet on the street with datastreams converted over to a pre-existing copper cable but I suppose Google doesn't already have that infrastructure in place and making deals with the likes of AT&T likely wouldn't help them...
I remember when Google Fiber was first out, I was struggling with 2 MBps, which was the best they offered. I desperately wished for google fiber in my area and I hated how slow internet was across America, especially compared to other countries. Nowadays, I am routinely offered Gigabit, and even though they're still wiley with the "up to", I can typically rely on at least 40MBps, which is amazing compared to a decade ago. So if this really was intentional, I thank Google for managing to improve the broken ISPs
But Comcast is still being a piece of shit
40mps ? Lol ADSL was about 10 times slower but it was 20 years ago.
@@heloxiii8894 40 "MBps" son not Mbps
@@tikz.-3738 yeah maybe so, i was very young 20 years ago, i know I didn't understand the difference then
@@heloxiii8894 definitions of measurements don't change. The length of a meter hasn't changed in 20 years. Neither has the size of a bit, a byte a megabit or a megabyte.
Google fiber is seriously the best thing to happen to my internet. I purposely moved to an area with it because I was sick of Xfinity, century link, etc. They are actually expanding quite rapidly in my area. Constantly seeing neighborhoods having them come through and install the infrastructure. If you have them as an option, DO IT.
CenturyLink are thieves.
Only 2% of public has the option.
I have it and LOVE IT 🤣 $70 1gig up/down. Was down once in 2 years....some kids messed with the main box down the road. It was fixed within 4 hours 👍🏾👍🏾👍🏾
I have gigabit though AT&T and it’s only $55
@@ross4 if u wanna flex the price gigabit where i live is like 10$ a month here
@@ross4 Sure, but is the service as good as with Google Fiber? Don't think so...
@@deus_ex_machina_ Maybe. What do you mean? What ways if Google service better I am curious.
@@Bixmy That’s how much it should cost. Google and all the telecom companies are price gouging in the US.
I had dial-up way back in 94. Had a whopping 14 kbps. It would take several hours just to connect. Kids these days will never know what actual slow internet is.
😂
Would take 1 week for you to watch this video
And you had to walk in snow, uphill both ways, to get to and from your internet terminal! :)
@@jmtradbr No joke, it probably would have.
@@jmtradbr more than that, unless it was at 144 kbps
This is similar to how Google buying Motorola was also a huge success story, they paid a low price to stop a lot of patent trolling which would have hurt Android massively.
(And even in a very rural part of Denmark, I'm having 1 Gbit fiber internet)
You are using patent troll wrong.
AT&T FIBER
5 GIG speed
$180/mo.
Google buying motorola forced me to Apple and I’ve never been happier with a smartphone.
@@tonycrabtree3416 good for you buddy. Glad you're enjoying your fisher price phone that you paid over a hundred Ben Franklins for. I'll stay in my lane and keep enjoying my 600 dollar android phone.
@@SeanGonzalezMDHEXT Google didn't update my RAZR MAXX HD after 1 year of ownership and basically forced me to buy another phone in 3 short years, so all my apps would work properly. How's that cheaper than owning a 700 dollar phone for years that works perfectly? Anyway, this isn't android v. iOS...it's google doing something shitty in regards to a phone brand. Motorola was the king of cell phones and now? Hot garbage. Anyway, stay triggered!
Perfect strategy when you think about it the higher speeds people have the more internet they will use and in turn, a lot of google services will be used more.
I remember when they switched to fiber in my area. We went from 25mbps speeds to 200mbps for the same price. I used to wait entire days to download games that now take a few hours
In a rural area where fiber isn't available, the best option has been Verizon's 4G cell network. 50 mb/s currently compared to the max 25 mb/s spectrum provided despite advertised 100 mb/s. They can advertise what ever but they never delivered. Plus the cost saving was huge. Anything for more competition I am in favor of.
I live in an area where fibre is not available and recently got starlink and regularly get 100mb/s download and a decent amount of the time I get over 100mb/s and the upload speeds are between 10-20 mb/s some up to 30
@@dogcat823 Thought about star link, the cost over Verizon was just less for decent service. I think it added 30 bucks to my bill.
@@cmdr1911 yes the down side of starlink is it expensive to get into and it is more expensive per month them most other ISPs
Where I live we could only get 25 download and 0.5-1 up and for me it only $20 more so it was definitely worth it for me
I wander now with starlink If ISPs will expand fibre to at least some of the rural communities
@@dogcat823 Unless subsidized under the 2022 infrastructure law, I don’t see fiber optic connections being expanded to rural areas. I also think that 5G connections will make it unnecessary. I live in NYC and switched to a 5G provider and for $50 a month I am getting gigabit up and down (practically like with all gig services lower when it goes through Wi-Fi to my devices). In my building, I can get gigabit FIOS, and two cable companies with down load speeds in the gig range but I chose and love this simple 5G solution.
When QWest had a monopoly in the area I live in, it cost $120 (once you include all the fees) for 20 mbps and that was the fastest you could get. Then a competitor showed up and prices dropped while speeds soared. That’s why I find the consolidation of so many of these corporations concerning. It’s gives them disproportionate power over the market, which ultimately screws over consumers.
I've had google fiber for the last year and it's easily the best internet I've had with very little hassle. Also the superior up time of the service is absolutely fantastic!
I have Google Fiber in the Research Triangle region of North Carolina and it's been great. It may have pushed AT&T and Spectrum to up their game, but unlike AT&T I have nearly 100% uptime, and consistently high speeds both ways (something Spectrum couldn't match). So at least it works here.
A lot of what stalled google was construction due to securing and rewriting easements and permits for either aerial installs or using directional drilling that was expensive, disruptive, time consuming and caused a lot of damage. Once they switched to microtunneling it’s solved a lot of their issues. When the power lines were buried here, it took just over a year start to finish mostly due to planning and legal, with the bulk of the construction lasting about six invasive and disruptive months tearing up both my front and back yards. Google microtunneled at the same time and had the whole neighborhood finished and my home switched over in just a couple weeks, with just one noisy day for construction on the street only. ATT only offered 40/5mbps and spectrum was 400/20mbps, or 900/50 for $200+/m with a $600 install fee. Now at 1000/1000mbps for $70/m, no install fee, they’ve been easy to deal with, good support, reliable and had been waiting years to ditch spectrum.
Indeed, Google refused to do things the way they had been proven to work for decades. They don't know how to do 90% of the stupid things they try to do. Being an ISP is just one more on the list. Microtrenching doesn't work. Literally everyone in the industry knows this, yet Google had to be different. When all their fiber popped out of the street, they simply wrote it off and walked away. (that's KY, btw.) One Touch Make Ready(tm)? Universally bad idea. In the few places where they got their way, they screamed bloody murder when other ISPs used the rule, and touched Google's infrastructure.
Here, AT&T's installation took *a day!* They didn't make a mess. They didn't break anything. If you didn't see them working that Friday, you'd never know they had ever been here. Google, on the other hand, took a dozen contractors *6 days* to do the same work. They were loud and disruptive. They cut holes in the pavement. They made a mess of the grass. They left massive mud holes. AND they cut the cable hard line, outside their permitted and marked area. There's no way anyone could miss Google Fiber being installed.
Google was always upfront about their concept with Google Fiber. The notion was always to be the halo product offering to prove the viability of 1 gbps fiber at that time. now, here in Canada anyway, Bell Canada is offering 8 Gbps for a bit over $100 USD and things keep getting faster all the time.. Google really invigorated the speed race in connectivity.
Man I remember the days that I had to pay 100/month for 100Mbps Shaw...
Use to work at a major ISP and this is so true. One of our former CEOs went on record saying "...customers don't want faster internet speeds." It was also widely spread info that gigabit speeds were impossible on a cable network. Present day, that same cable network supports gigabit speeds and customers have been taking advantage of it.
They know they're lieing out their asses, they just don't want to spend the money to upgrade their network. They can say whatever the hell they want when they're the only ones with the power to collect the money.
Gigabit DOWN. Up... still in the toilet. (and gig down is asking a lot of the aging technology.)
Att just upped their offering of max 1 Gbps to 5Gbps just because a start up fiber provider in central Florida sent mail out to a bunch of people saying they'd offer 10Gbps. So att had it in them the whole time but never cared to offer.
True, even in Austin they're offering 10gbps residential fiber, but AT&T has data caps while Google Fiber is truly unlimited
Edit: they don't have data caps for fiber plans. Might try them lol
@@kazoo-out-the-wazoo data caps on 10g link? thats new :D
@@B4rr4cudk4 I just checked, for fiber plans they don't have data caps, my bad
I can't imagine how the makers of hits like Google Glass and Stadia failed with GooFi lol.
Maybe they weren’t trying to get a hit. Maybe they were just trying to push forward the space.
@@LogicallyAnswered Yeah, but it seems like that's 'their plan all along' when they get all ambitious about changing the world in some way that is usually something nobody wants and is disconnected with reality.
Like really, who's gonna adopt a new google 'game changer' at this point, the people who got suckered by Bitconnect back in the day and are now all salty at Logan Paul? It'd take that level of stupid to believe a thing Google says.
And yeah, i'm still part of the 25% of Americans stuck at 1mbps on a good day, but usually more like 500kbps for our only service. One day i got 2mbps down from the arch repo, i think the data had a tailwind that day. Today the wind is blasting and videos are buffering at 360p.
You definitely didn’t watch the video
@@LogicallyAnswered I don't understand why Google wouldn't want Stadia to be a hit.
@@2beJT I guess the income wasn't good so they decided to shut it down, plus not everyone has fast internet to play on cloud
Nicely packaged video
Thanks man!
Sure
True... He makes simple & well detailed v
If I remember correctly some of this was common carrier issues and threats of charging tech companies for traffic on networks. Google Netflix and others were battling a the telcos even though most of the backbones were paid for by tax payers. They were calling telcos bluff
well, it gets quite pricey on the bandwindths going on between likes of google and ISPs :) where fridge size equipment is only one of the connections in between and serves only that connection
I was lucky enough to live in one of the first neighborhoods in the 2nd city that actually got google fiber rolled out (and before their micortrenching debacle). But even in the cities that "have" google fiber, only a small percentage of the city can actually get it.
Now all Google has to do is get ISP's to boost their garbage data caps to like 20TB.
😂
this is why i love google fiber no stupid data cap and i think data caps only exist to get people to get people to get a overpriced tv service
This video didn't mention the elephant in the room. That governments blocked the roll out of Google fiber as they were favoring the established companies. It's so tough to go thru the city, state, etc regulations and authorities and the bureaucracies just to establish home internet. Plus some apartments are not allowing Google to install fiber as they have exclusivity contracts with the established companies.
Those ISPs that sued to keep Google out are lucky that Google didn't keep their phones off their networks or charge them way more for the phones lol
Its going to be intresting in my Area. Google Fiber has the Green light to come here and they are promising 10 gig speeds in my market. So it will be interesting to see what Cox communications will try to pull to compete with the speeds.
The city I lived in paid for all houses to have it, been enjoying it for a few years now. I pay for 100mbps but they mistakenly left 1 port at 1000, I hooked that one to my computer, not complaining......
Hahaha nice
LOOOL
I was always jealous of the USA for having 1gbps speeds! However we got fibre in 2009 connected to our home and it was 100/100, now we have 1gbps as well, so in a way I had glass fibre since day 1 basically but didnt get the major speed till years later
lol dude. The USA lags way behind most other developed countries when it comes to internet speed. I can personally guarantee you that the vast majority of the USA does not have access to fiber internet for x y z reason. There are areas with really great internet and you can go a few streets down and have absolutely atrocious internet speeds. There's a neighborhood not too far from my old high school where they (the school) has a 10 Gbps fiber circuit through AT&T. That nearby neighborhood can get an incomprehensibly fast 0.7 Mbps down and 0.5 Mbps up with AT&T with a 1 year contract.
Here in the US, everything is about money. Money talks. Internet providers will do whatever legal or illegal thing they can do to maintain their infrastructure the least amount as possible and to expand or upgrade their foot print the least amount as possible all while providing terrible customer service support. There are exceptions of course, but in general, the largest telecommunications companies: AT&T, Comcast, Charter/Spectrum, Frontier, etc are considered to be absolutely terrible in various forms. In a lot of places, the incumbent internet provider bribes, I mean lobbies, local politicians so that they (ISP) are the only provider in town and/or make it extremely difficult for other providers to attempt to come into town.
@@JJFlores197 tell me about it. A local fiber optic ISP just laid lines up the street and stopped at the edge of my court. My area was in a buildable area and then they changed it last minute, such bs.
@Javier Flores oh I didnt know that haha, we've had fibers since 2009 in my town. However they are still connecting other cities in my country, but most places here have fiber.
Luck you.
I'm still stuck at 200KB/s network speed
This video is extremely misleading. It says AT&T is cheaper, but that's just flat-out untrue. AT&T will not even price match GF's price, much less BEAT it where I live. Also, they left Louisville because they were trying a different approach to laying the fiber in very shallow cuts in roads, filled in by a new substance that was supposed to protect the wire. That substance failed and was just breaking down, so Google had to give up. Also, Google's real issues with the service right now are just in relation to the TV offering, which is the same issue hitting every cable company. For those who just want an ISP, Google is doing extremely well.
You're correct that Google Fiber achieved what they wanted to do, but I don't think they're going anywhere.
I live in the K.C. area, Google wont even cover all of K.C.. Big suburbs like independence, and blue springs can't get the service, and this was their flagship market. Even though some areas are less than 3 miles away from fiber enabled areas. Google has no plans to finish their rollout. How do I know? I worked for them on the fiber project.
lol satellite internet absolutely "took off", it just only "took off" in rural areas where DSL is unreasonable due to distance and cable is just unavailable. There's plenty of satellite internet companies out there; Hughesnet, Viasat, now Starlink is getting bigger and bigger...
The problem with satellite is even if you get reasonable down speeds (usually about as good as an average DSL down speed) your upload was **miserable**, made worse by an outrageous ping for a double gut punch to gaming on sat.
I am using google fiber to post this. I have had both att and google fiber in my area and have enjoyed them both. I have lost trust in your content. This makes no sense. They are still expanding and it’s certainly not dead. love atts fiber product as well but you painted a very ignorant view of reality at best, at worst you are generating misleading content. You gave literally zero evidence to suggest it’s failing
Google fiber is in my area and expanding. It's good. I expect this video to age poorly.
same
Don't know about Google fiber, but remember the Google airplane that wants to send wireless internet to everyone, don't know what happened to this project?
Google and Facebook are going to be the first tech companies to fall, Google is really an ad company first and a tech company 2nd.
I think I figured this out before the ISPs did. I used to sell fiber optic service and there were areas where it was installed already for years but we couldn't sell it yet because of dealing with municipalities and all the cable companies. I thought there's no way Google is gonna go through the pain and expense of making this a real thing. But they sure scared the industry for a second.
Didn’t Amazon have an even bigger incentive for a faster network speeds, considering AWS and Alexa?
Also crediting google with the ISP monopolies increasing their speeds thinking google is a threat, I would imagine these billion dollar companies can run through more in depth analysis to realize the same thing you did but in real time.
I could care less about what big ISPs offer. None of them serve my address.
I wish they would expand in the cities they're already in. Here in Atlanta, two streets down they have Google Fiber while on my street it's either 600mbps or 1gbps Xfinity or 5mbps AT&T....yes that's right, FIVE mbps.
Idk from what I can tell, anyone who has accessibility to Google Fiber prefers it over any other ISP. You pay $70 every month, that's it, no hidden fees or payment increases. Can't say the same for other ISPs. I love my google fiber (gigabit up and down).
I'm getting an average of 720mbs/down 700mbs/up at $70 with Google Fiber. Can't really complain. This is however on a high capacity ethernet connection.
I live in Louisville Kentucky and everyone was anticipating the new fiber product from Google One of the problems was the contractors they hired to install the fiber there was five or coming up out of the trench es they installed they didn't dig deep enough so when winter hit all the sealant would start coming up in the streets degregating the service.. but you're right about AT&t they started rolling out fiber everywhere but as soon as Google fiber pulled out of Louisville all the expansion stopped lol so we still effectively only have two genuine ISPs in a city the size of about 750,000
I remember when a 56kb dial up modem was the fastest you could get lol
1:20 $140 billion isn't enough, they need to make a law where everyone gets access to cable or fiber internet cause it's annoying not even getting 1mbps on dsl. But I finally got cable internet because I got spectrum to spend $80,000.
In the words of a one of my favourite tech tubers “competition is good”.
Even if Google was only doing it as a bluff, they forced the companies in that space to step up.
Google attempting to not shutdown division challenge
*impossible*
It should be noted this wasn't revolutionary outside of the United States,
Meanwhile, in Greece we have 3 isp (which in reality is only one but alas) that make bold statements like "fiber to all houses by 2027" or "average speeds of 100mbps or more" yet they never upgrade their infrastructure, they just started giving out fiber and gbit connections and if you're in an area that is "taken" by the other 2 isps you are screwed cause they have no money to create a fiber network, yet they still took the area with the promise that they will. I'm in 2023, with an adsl connection in the middle of the capital with 16mbps(thank god its not 8) and 1mbps upload. Most sites straight up cancel uploads cause they take so long. My internet connection gets disconnected every 30 mins. I wish I knew things would be like this cause I could probably build my own isp with the amount of money ive wasted leaving my pc open to download games
Google Fiber announced 6 or 7 years ago, they were coming to Charlotte. WHAT A JOKE! After all of this time Google Fiber is in a VERY small part of Charlotte, primarily in the downtown area as well as a few select apartment complexes.
HEY Google- stop lying about " expanding in Charlotte”! You have been here for 6 or 7 years, and you are a complete joke.
This is a totally inaccurate history. In 1996, GTE (a telecom that became Verizon) laid fiber in Tampa, Florida, which was the precursor to Verizon FIOS. When VZ was created in 2000, FIOS itself was rolled out to multiple cities by 2005, with symmetrical speeds up to 1 GB. This was 7 years before Google ever rolled out fiber to Kansas City - it’s first location. And by the time Google Fiber was being rolled out the world had long moved on from dialup and DSL. Most cable companies were offering relatively high speeds, albeit the nature of cable will always make asynchronous (more down than up).
So I’m not sure where your pulling this false narrative that Google fiber entered in a dial up, DSL and slow cable world. It’s not true.
0:46 - Kansas City, MISSOURI!!! NOT FUCKING KANSAS!
If only companies actually offered this kind of internet now. Gotta be in the city for anything more than 13mbps though. Any remotely rural-ish area gets trash internet. Just sucks. Internet has become garbage again. Gotta use 5g for slightly reliable service that's not charter, spectrum, or comcast. At least google got it in the cities. Just wish the US gave a crap about anything other than money. Gotta charge 100 dollars a month for 200mbps that constantly has outages every week, has horrible upload speeds, and uses only their routers lest you loose features you're paying for.
Sadly, the upload bandwidth hasn't improved alongside the download bandwidth. AT&T certainly has, but companies like Charter fiber doesn't. I tried to get Fiber in my area to host a server. Charter was the only option. They advertised 1 gigabit speeds and when I asked if this included upload they said yes, but that was a lie. After getting it installed I learned that while the download speed was around 600 megabits per second (just over half what they promised) the upload speed was just under 1 Megabit! My cell phone had a better upload rate than that!
So it appears that most of these companies just invested in the download infrastructure and put no effort into upload except for those who were directly challenging Google like AT&T.
The worst part is that because of the monopolies in place there's no way for anyone to compete.
What if, instead of giving the telephone lines to a single company in a given area, the cities maintained them and all companies who wanted to use the lines could do so and had to share in the cost of maintenance. Then you wouldn't have to bury fiber because you could use the telephone polls and anyone could start their own ISP like used to be the case in the 90's. We'd see healthy competition pushing prices down and features up.
I had a 300/300 fiber connection just outside of downtown Vancouver through Telus who installed fiber into our 1994 artist studio condo a few years ago and it had true upstream bandwidth but the dirty bastards block port 80 and 443 on the domestic connections so you can’t serve standard web services without paying for the commercial service, unlike the cable co with their 15mbps upstream (300 down) which they left wide open. I could have gotten 1gbps down but the upstream was still physically maxed at about 300mbps due to the type of fiber used within our unit (more durable but not as high bandwidth) so I felt like paying more wouldn’t be worth it just for a bit more potential downstream speed, which I really didn’t need since I had no 4K TVs at all.
@@SchwaAlien You could potentially get around that by using an encrypted VPN connection. At least in that case, since they couldn't inspect the traffic, they'd have no excuse to throttle you.
@@Elliandr presumably most VPNs won’t let you forward port 80 and 443 into your server without quite a bit of money. The one I was using allowed one port that was assigned randomly to be forwarded, so not terribly useful even though it was a paid service.
@@SchwaAlien Depends on the VPN service. I use ProtonVPN. I paid ahead for 3 years and no such restriction appears to exist, but then my upload bandwidth isn't high enough to test your use case. You could ask them ahead of time of course.
For servers I'll likely pay a friend to leave it plugged in at his house a short drive away. Seems to me that there should be businesses whose sole model is to have a place to plug a box into the internet that the customers fully owns and manages.
I’m in Kansas City, and google actually offers 5 gig for $125/month. Right now I don’t need those types of speed and am getting by with 1 gig for $70, but a 5x speed increase for a 56% price increase is damn good for the money if I ever had the need
Google Fiber bought Webpass in 2015 (I think). I wish they would have went full in with Webpass technology once the ISP's and local municipalities got in their way in particular states/cities
I thought consumer ISPs were crap here but I must confess the US takes the cake..It is just crazy seeing youtubers doing nice full network setups with great hardware..that end pluggin a DSL line 😵💫 WTF. Here consumer ISPs have been on a speed race for decades recently reaching up to 10gbps. (No I am not buying beyond gigabit yet because there isn't a domestic usecase yet)
I was so happy when some people started a local ISP a few years after Google fiber decided not to enter our market. I particularly hate the cable company and I dislike the phone company. I had to buy internet from the cable company because I had no other choice. In a one-year time span 22% of the time the internet was not working. no they wouldn't give me a discount or cared when I told them it was interrupting work. This is one of many situations of why I hate them.
The local ISP caused the cable company to lower their highest internet plan by ~$100 a month and increase its advertised speed by over 900 megabits per second and there's still more expensive. The real speed is closer to 700mbps and the ping is about twice as high as our local ISP.
In my opinion still one of the best examples of competitive intrusion. Every time they expand to a new neighborhood they get about 60% to 80% of the customers in that area. Not to mention initially as you can see above they were probably about order of magnitude cheaper/better. Just recently they doubled or more all of their speeds for their plans leaving their competitors in the dust again. you actually get 100% the speed you pay for too assuming the other side can support it.
At about 1 gbps or more you might not see full speed when downloading. This may or may not be because of your ISP or the website you're connecting to just doesn't have more bandwidth to spare then that.
If you get a download server with 10 gbps of connectivity. Well at the 1 gbps isp plan that server could support approximately 10 people at full speed. How often do you think you're going to only have 10 people on that server. That's not an unreasonable example for a lot of smaller websites.(or worse but they're generally not sending lots of large files or have a CDN between them)
I may have the option of a gigabit cable internet package through Spectrum (Charter) but that is NOT equivalent to fiber gigabit internet. What is TRULY game changing about a real-deal symmetric fiber internet connection is having access to gigabit upload speeds. Being able to download AND upload at such speeds from home is what is truly groundbreaking. The ability to communicate with other machines/services over the internet as if they were connected to your home LAN enables practices that were previously unthinkable. However, for most of us, that ability still remains an unattainable dream that will likely go unfulfilled for a very long time to come.
Lord. This video made me realize why TH-cam creators can be problematic: you (a channel I tend to like) just talked of a topic I am specialized in, in a very misleading way. Now I wonder if you take similar shortcuts on other topics.
Basically, it’s not because Google consumes a lot of bandwidth that they work automatically be good at providing the bandwidth to others.
Where I live, the only 2 options are Comcast, and att. Att only has 50mbps dsl so Comcast is the only good option. T-Mobile 5G home internet recently became available so maybe Comcast can face some competition now.
I'm in the same situation in my town. I tried T-Mobile's 5g thing and it was terribly slow. I tried in 2021 and most recently in late 2022. It seems worse the 2nd time. I can't get more than 35 Mbps no matter where I place the gateway in my house. Most of the time, its slower than 10 Mbps. I'm going to be cancelling it soon.
If they want fiber to be successful they need to get it in more cities, thats the whole reason I haven’t gotten it, literally just because it’s not available where I live
Try living in a rural area where your only access to internet is satellite. Absolute misery.