Google Fiber now offers gigabit for $55 per month to one City

[DudeWazap]

8 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Aye. That doesn't change the fact that most places have higher prices for internet though, now does it?

Perhaps, but at the amount they'd need to invest compared to the potential income, it just doesn't make sense to expand into Canada. Take San Antonio for example. 1.4 million people would put it as the third largest city in Canada.

ifrc doesn't Luke and Linus have fiber in their home. Does that mean that Canada ISPs have started to build fiber more or just in inner city areas? I'm just curious.

Also are they no contract and no data caps like in the US or do they have caps?

[Bigbootyjudy]

what is google not going to start doing. I swear they are going to take over the world faster than amazon.

[kiska3]

Please come to Australia, Google.

I have a quote for gbit services over DOCSIS

Spoiler

$660 per month over a very oversubscribed line.

 

[dizmo]

8 minutes ago, DudeWazap said:

ifrc doesn't Luke and Linus have fiber in their home. Does that mean that Canada ISPs have started to build fiber more or just in inner city areas? I'm just curious.

Also are they no contract and no data caps like in the US or do they have caps?

You're capped at 1TB. It's a contract service usually, but it depends on the provider. I think Telus still makes you sign a contract.

They're expanding pretty rapidly in some areas, super slow in others. There's also some stand alone fiber companies that service apartment units in the GVRD.

[rockking1379]

49 minutes ago, WhiteJaguar77 said:

And I'm here paying $50 a month for up to 100mbps.

 

Unfortunately the last I heard, Google Fiber halted its roll out in my city for an undisclosed amount of time..

I’m paying 60 a month for 50/5

i don’t feel like it’s to terrible. Sure could be better but I don’t feel ripped off either.

[DocSwag]

1 hour ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

If you think Google isn't a greedy ISP then you really need a reality check.

What company out there isn't greedy? A company should be greedy.

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, DocSwag said:

What company out there isn't greedy? A company should be greedy.

I'm referring to OP's statement closer towards the end of the first post.

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, dizmo said:

Perhaps, but at the amount they'd need to invest compared to the potential income, it just doesn't make sense to expand into Canada. Take San Antonio for example. 1.4 million people would put it as the third largest city in Canada.

I doubt google is using all their own infrastructure. But it would make sense to enter into 2 canadian provinces Ontario and BC Why? Close to the USA, highest population.

Think of it if they did wire their own stuff coming from the USA they would hit Niagara Falls 88k St. Catharines 133K Then the GTA with over 6 million people. Sure large area but running Fiber cable isn't the most expensive thing they could be doing (looks at space exploration). Hell I'd be willing to pay $100 CAD 

 

"Bell is investing more than $1 billion to bring the world's best network technology to Toronto." Think of it like this if google makes 0.01 from every person a day in the GTA area on ads That's 22 million a year on ads alone but the truth is they likely make on average 0.15+ depending on how much one uses their internet. Plus fiber laying isnt too expensive https://www.howmuchisit.org/fiber-optic-cable-cost/ the TTS has over 5000 km and doing cheeky math (cpm instead of cpk and in usd) it would cost about 130 million to lay fiber on almost every street in Toronto.

 

Where i used to live has Fiber 1gbps Bell wants a insane $185, fiber isnt available where i currently live, max i can get is 100 mbps for 20 less, both with TV/phone.

Also the biggest reason why google likely wont come to canada? CRTC, these egocentric morons support the big 3 and only the big 3.

55 minutes ago, DudeWazap said:

ifrc doesn't Luke and Linus have fiber in their home. Does that mean that Canada ISPs have started to build fiber more or just in inner city areas? I'm just curious.

Also are they no contract and no data caps like in the US or do they have caps?

Our bandwidth costs are insane  Bells Virgin mobile finally came out with their home internet package which is still more for less bandwidth (better speeds tho)...

[PhantomJaguarr]

25 minutes ago, rockking1379 said:

I’m paying 60 a month for 50/5

i don’t feel like it’s to terrible. Sure could be better but I don’t feel ripped off either.

 

Seeing more terrible prices than mine doesn't keep me from feeling being ripped off from seeing San Antonio's numbers.

[Septimus]

1 hour ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

If you think Google isn't a greedy ISP then you really need a reality check.

Could you elaborate please? I haven't heard of or read anything that exposes them in a manner that's negative. If you're simply referring to pricing, I understand your point, but if there's something else I'm missing, please explain.

[Mornincupofhate]

1 hour ago, KuJoe said:

Giving people a 1Gbps uplink to the internet without the common knowledge to protect their networks is a bad thing. The majority of DDoS attacks I and clients receive are from residential IPs which is why my biggest attack so far has only been about 60Gbps. If those same people are upgraded to 1Gbps connection then the internet we know it is done for until Google Fiber connections get blacklisted.

Does your company not have the hardware available to rate limit? Why blacklist when you can just limit each client to 1Mbps when a ddos function is triggered?

[KuJoe]

5 minutes ago, Mornincupofhate said:

Does your company not have the hardware available to rate limit? Why blacklist when you can just limit each client to 1Mbps when a ddos function is triggered?

Throttling my clients won't stop a DDoS attack. That's not how it works.

[Mornincupofhate]

5 minutes ago, KuJoe said:

Throttling my clients won't stop a DDoS attack. That's not how it works.

Neither will the other method by blocking all incoming traffic. That's not how it works.

[Creed1]

2 hours ago, DudeWazap said:

I know they are all after their bottom line.

What I meant was over charging for internet like Spectrum does in my area. 

 

$110 for 300mbps is way too expensive.

Yeah Spectrum is pretty nasty. Spectrum recently moved into my area and it costs like $60/mo for 60down and 5up 

[KuJoe]

Just now, Mornincupofhate said:

Neither will the other method by blocking all incoming traffic. That's not how it works.

It is if the traffic is blocked at the edge it works. Blocking traffic before it hits the network is literally the only way to stop DDoS traffic that doesn't cost me money, once the traffic hits my routers or switches it doesn't matter what I do because I'm still paying for that bandwidth.

[Kobathor]

4 minutes ago, CmzPlusHardware said:

Yeah Spectrum is pretty nasty. Spectrum recently moved into my area and it costs like $60/mo for 60down and 5up 

Crazy seeing the variable pricing even just in the US. Spectrum charges us $30 a month for 100 down 10 up

[DudeWazap]

2 minutes ago, CmzPlusHardware said:

Yeah Spectrum is pretty nasty. Spectrum recently moved into my area and it costs like $60/mo for 60down and 5up 

Yeah, It used to be called TimeWarner before Carter ought them and changed the name. But they forced everyone to pay more for the same plan they had.

the exact same plan I had for only internet costed $85 then after Spectrum was made they brought it up to $110 and said that the my price was just a promotion which isn't true at all.

 

I felt great the day I went to spectrum and canceled everything to switch to AT&T fiber.

and I'll feel great again when I go to AT&T to cancel and switch to Google Fiber.

[DudeWazap]

Just now, Kobathor said:

Crazy seeing the variable pricing even just in the US. Spectrum charges us $30 a month for 100 down 10 up

Yeah it's based on what ISPs are in your area and they adjust their prices accordingly.

[Creed1]

Wow I am being ripped off horribly. I also have no other options besides getting one of them mobile data things from either AT&T or Verizon. I actually do believe in my state their is some monopoly preventing our area from getting any large fiber networks in my state. 

[KuJoe]

7 minutes ago, CmzPlusHardware said:

I actually do believe in my state their is some monopoly preventing our area from getting any large fiber networks in my state. 

It's not just your state, back in the 90s the top ISPs carved out their areas and they all agreed to not compete with each other in their areas. They also had laws passed that prevented competition in their areas. One town wanted to build their own ISP for their citizens but it was against the law for the town's government to compete with the ISPs already there. It's sick.

 

EDIT: Link for those interested: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/isp-lobby-has-already-won-limits-on-public-broadband-in-20-states/

[Rune]

Sign me the hell up.

[KuJoe]

Quote

Here is one of the key truths about the cable industry: the major cable providers in this country do not compete with one another. The operators clustered all cable during the summer of 1997—the “Summer of Love,” according to Leo Hindery, then-President of Tele-Communications, Inc., and the architect of the effort—pursuing swaps and partnerships that put most markets in the U.S. in the hands of a single operator. Clustering continued when Comcast and Time Warner Cable divided the assets of the bankrupt Adelphia Communications in 2006. On the national level, the cable industry appears deceptively competitive. Comcast—the largest cable company by far—has about a 30% share of the nationwide market, and Time Warner Cable has about a 17% share. But these figures obscure the fact that the big cable companies never enter each other’s territories. This is a physical, geographically bound business of big pipe monopolies, and Comcast dominates in Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, Washington, D.C., Houston, Seattle, and Detroit. Comcast has chosen its territories well: 94.4% of the U.S. population and 94.4% of U.S. households with an income of at least $50,000 live in the thirty-nine states (plus D.C.) served by Comcast. Brian Roberts, CEO of Comcast, has said that he would like to see Comcast increase its share of the high-speed data market from 33% to 90–100%—after all, Comcast has just one competitor: Verizon’s FIOS service.

http://scrawford.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/The-communications-crisis-in-America-final.pdf

[GOTSpectrum]

I could love Google to come to Britain and Larry a decent, gigabit fibre network. 65+ million people all on what is essential a large island. We love our internet and the openreach network is a disaster... Not quite on the scale of Australia's NBN though.

[GDRRiley]

man if only google would hit up its home area of the SF bay area. The east bay is getting AT&T fiber 100/100 but my town has a fiber line and will sell you upto 10gb up/down so AT&T said they will work on getting 1gb in. 

[8uhbbhu8]

Yet I get 800kbps for $60... and its probably going to go up again this next year...