SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: Honestly, give Google a few years and they will be charging for services the same as all the other providers. Always happens with the "new" guy in town.
IIRC, GF is $180/mo.
Worth it.
SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: Honestly, give Google a few years and they will be charging for services the same as all the other providers. Always happens with the "new" guy in town.
IIRC, GF is $180/mo.
Worth it.
Knurled wrote:SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: Honestly, give Google a few years and they will be charging for services the same as all the other providers. Always happens with the "new" guy in town.IIRC, GF is $180/mo. Worth it.
I just have the internet service through them at the moment... 70 bucks a month... and like I said... typically reading 950mbps up and down.
Google Fiber is in no way superior to Super Colon Blow.
T.J. wrote: In reply to ProDarwin: Wait...what...vote tomorrow? Is that state-wide or a county/city specific thing? I'm afraid I am out of the loop on this.
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/01/tons-of-att-and-verizon-customers-may-no-longer-have-broadband-tomorrow/
I've got FIOS in NoVA- 15/15 (used to be 15/5 down/up), but it's freakin' $70/mo. 950 is effing crazy (not a computer guy, but that seems ridiculous.
ronholm wrote:Knurled wrote:I just have the internet service through them at the moment... 70 bucks a month... and like I said... typically reading 950mbps up and down.SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: Honestly, give Google a few years and they will be charging for services the same as all the other providers. Always happens with the "new" guy in town.IIRC, GF is $180/mo. Worth it.
You must of not seen my other post.
I will not argue that it's a good deal. It is.
My point is give it a couple years and it won't be a good value.
i know there are geographic realities in the US, but its counter balanced by the fact that most people using the internet live near SOME city distribution in the US.
that being said, in South Korea, people pay 15$ a month or so for 10mps internet. For those speeds, i don't see anything advertised less than $50 in the US.
I had faster and cheaper internet in the year 2000.
Running little slow tonight.. But the kids are upstairs with two different things streaming on Netflix and the wife is surfing.. and this machine is an antique.... So...
SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: I will not argue that it's a good deal. It is. My point is give it a couple years and it won't be a good value.
Unless cable or DSL magically get FIFTY times faster in a couple years, it will be a good value.
In reply to Knurled:
Comcast has already been playing with gigabit service......over coax. 
Knurled wrote:SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: I will not argue that it's a good deal. It is. My point is give it a couple years and it won't be a good value.Unless cable or DSL magically get FIFTY times faster in a couple years, it will be a good value.
Sort of. There is a point where the speed is overkill. (I can't believe I just said that). Most households couldn't use a 100/50 connection if they tried to. They simply don't have enough streaming devices, processing power, etc.
I guess what I'm saying is... if cable/dsl could provide something like 100/50 (So FIVE or TEN times faster) for half the price of Google fiber, many customers would be fine with that. Hell, I'd probably lean that way for cost, but end up going with Google just on the principle that I berkeleying hate TWC.
ProDarwin wrote:T.J. wrote: In reply to ProDarwin: Wait...what...vote tomorrow? Is that state-wide or a county/city specific thing? I'm afraid I am out of the loop on this.http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/01/tons-of-att-and-verizon-customers-may-no-longer-have-broadband-tomorrow/
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/01/fcc-chairman-mocks-industry-claims-that-customers-dont-need-faster-internet/
The Federal Communications Commission today voted 3-2 along party lines to change the definition of broadband to at least 25Mbps downstream and 3Mbps upstream.
In reply to ProDarwin:
I've never seen anybody advertising "broadband", so a lot of good that will do.
Kenny_McCormic wrote: In reply to ProDarwin: I've never seen anybody advertising "broadband", so a lot of good that will do.
Yeah its just their definition, but a step in the right direction IMO.
I think there are areas where ISPs can no longer claim there is "competition" in their broadband market, which has an impact on them. May change the TWC/Comcast merger also.
You'll need to log in to post.
