Here in Seattle there seems to be this fear that not getting Google to install Google Fiber™ means we'll just have the crappy offerings from Comcast and CenturyLink for the next 50 years.
In reality, I believe not selling ourselves to a provider immediately will allow a better market to develop where we get real competition and the possibility of a city run fiber network. It may take a few more years than having Google build out the whole thing at once, but I think the alternative will be better and other municipalities will have wished they had waited too.
This article has been floating around Seattle for a while and I think it's done a great job illustrating areas which can be improved to encourage broadband competition.
It is a valid point, but we're in 2015 now, and I'm sitting in the SF bay area (which is not supposed to be the place where it's hard to get new technologies going) and see not much change in the quality of access or pricing for years now. So "wait a few years more" may not be working as well as it could. And as for the prospect of city run network - I see how they run public transportation, it is a disaster. Why would I want to have the same disaster in internet access?
I've been living in the Seattle area for 10 years, and my only option for high speed internet has been Comcast. So where has the magic of the free marketplace been for that time?
Same. I also find it very strange that there's not DSL offering in either of the places I've lived. I'd rather have slow and steady DSL than erratic cable :(
Here in Portland, Frontier and CenturyLink are experimenting with gigabit internet and Comcast just doubled their speeds, all based on the threat of Google Fiber as an option.
Comments
Here in Seattle there seems to be this fear that not getting Google to install Google Fiber™ means we'll just have the crappy offerings from Comcast and CenturyLink for the next 50 years.
In reality, I believe not selling ourselves to a provider immediately will allow a better market to develop where we get real competition and the possibility of a city run fiber network. It may take a few more years than having Google build out the whole thing at once, but I think the alternative will be better and other municipalities will have wished they had waited too.
This article has been floating around Seattle for a while and I think it's done a great job illustrating areas which can be improved to encourage broadband competition.
For example, one recent change: http://www.geekwire.com/2014/seattle-approves-bill-allows-fi...
It is a valid point, but we're in 2015 now, and I'm sitting in the SF bay area (which is not supposed to be the place where it's hard to get new technologies going) and see not much change in the quality of access or pricing for years now. So "wait a few years more" may not be working as well as it could. And as for the prospect of city run network - I see how they run public transportation, it is a disaster. Why would I want to have the same disaster in internet access?
I've been living in the Seattle area for 10 years, and my only option for high speed internet has been Comcast. So where has the magic of the free marketplace been for that time?
Same. I also find it very strange that there's not DSL offering in either of the places I've lived. I'd rather have slow and steady DSL than erratic cable :(
Free marketplace has been squashed by Seattle process.
I think the article explains where has it been - buried under the pile of papers and red tape and still unable to come out.
Here in Portland, Frontier and CenturyLink are experimenting with gigabit internet and Comcast just doubled their speeds, all based on the threat of Google Fiber as an option.