OT: I really wish Google Fiber would be in San Diego

[Coronita]

We really need ISP competition in san diego.

Now, the only real choices is between ATT and cable companies.

That is all.

[spdrun]

That’s true for most of the country — it’s either the phone company (DSL/fiber) or cable (coaxial). Google Fiber is a good product with some concerns:
(1) I don’t like giving Mtn View even more control of the Internet
(2) Right now, they’re well-behaved, but who’s to say they won’t use their status as an ISP to push Google’s service to the detriment of competitors?
(3) They seem to want to go with a sort of wireless hybrid system in future vs bringing fiber to everyone’s doorstep. Fiber is nearly 100% reliable, wireless Internet … less so.

On the other hand, they seem less Kentish than most ISPs about permitting home servers and serverlike devices.

[an]

flu, it’s not just now. It has been that way for as long as I can remember. It’s government induced duopoly. It’s intentional. That’s why we don’t have Verizon Fios down here.

[spdrun]

Careful what you wish for … Verizon is awful. It has reneged on commitments to expand its fiber network to cover NYC (with city support) and threatened to cut service for users with water-damaged copper circuits entirely vs upgrading the areas to FiOS. It took a lawsuit to force them to replace copper with fiber, as opposed to giving customers a glorified MiFi box.

[an]

More competition is always better. If VZW failed to deliver, guess what, we won’t be any worse off than the duopoly that we have now between TIme Warner Cable and AT&T.

[spdrun]

This isn’t VZW, this is land-line Verizon. Problem was that they took public subsidies in NY and NJ and then didn’t deliver, so you might in fact be worse off, since your taxes would have gone to subsidize a boondoggle.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun]Careful what you wish for … Verizon is awful. It has reneged on commitments to expand its fiber network to cover NYC (with city support) and threatened to cut service for users with water-damaged copper circuits entirely vs upgrading the areas to FiOS. It took a lawsuit to force them to replace copper with fiber, as opposed to giving customers a glorified MiFi box.[/quote]

If i remember it was some rural areas where small businesses still wanted to use dial up for their credit card machines….. time to upgrade to new technology.

Should people in rural area expect subsidized services? Maybe they should pay more to make the business viable for providers.

[flu]

4G wireless was suppose to provide a competitive alternative to wired broadband.

The only problem. Is that, technology limitations asside, the same providers of wired broadband are also the same providers of 4G. Verizon, Att, etc.

I am not convinced it will get any better with 5G

[FlyerInHi]

Fast internet is nice… but I wish they had a cheap option at $10/mo for 15mbps. That’s all I need.

I have Cox 5mbps in Vegas ($38 because I’m cheap). It’s fine for streaming Netflix and Youtube in 1080p. But I don’t think it’s fast enough for 4K. I don’t have a 4K TV yet.

In SD the slowest on TWC is 10mbps (recently increased from 6mbps)

I think the sweet spot is $100/mo. The providers want you to spend at least that. Some of the sales practices are deceiving. My dad called about service issue and they told him to upgrade and that would take care of it. He’s 86 so he said OK to a service he doesn’t need.

[spdrun]

Original cable here was $15/mo for 2/1, upped to 6/1 (or maybe 10/1 now). So I’m grandfathered on TWC’s $15/mo plan in the rental.

I’m surprised that you’re paying Cawks $38/mo for 5 mbps. As far as I know, TWC is $35/mo for 50/10 service pretty much nationwide.

Hookers about 4k. I mean who cares? You need either a huge TV or a magnifying glass to get any real benefit from 4k. Human vision makes it irrelevant.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=flu]We really need ISP competition in san diego.

Now, the only real choices is between ATT and cable companies.

That is all.[/quote]

Um, didn’t the news just announce the “mega-merger” AT&T buyout of Time Warner.

[FlyerInHi]

TWC in SD was 2/1 for $15. Upped to 3/1. Too slow for streaming.
Next level 10/1 is $30.

Cox has even less competition in Vegas so prices are higher. But they do provide gigabit speeds in new neighborhoods.

4K TV is nice even without content. I will get an ultra slim one. TVs are getting so big now that you need a whole wall. People who have nooks or above fireplace TVs will need to remodel.

[FlyerInHi]

NSR, Time Warner Cable is separate.
https://www.timewarnercable.com/en/support/faqs/our-company/charter-twc-merger/twc-charter-merger-information.html

[millennial]

[quote=no_such_reality][quote=flu]We really need ISP competition in san diego.

Now, the only real choices is between ATT and cable companies.

That is all.[/quote]

Um, didn’t the news just announce the “mega-merger” AT&T buyout of Time Warner.[/quote]

I thought that was for the TW cable company, which is separate from their Ethernet (which is now Spectrum).

BTW, just switched over to Spectrum from ATT and am very happy. I have download speeds of up to 100 MBPS (recent clock test was 60 MBPS) for only $39.99. No contracts and cable box rental fee are required.

Only downside from ATT is due to the drag wireless has on the download speeds. I’m not sure if this is because it’s cable vs. dsl. Either way, wasn’t affected since my home has DSL ports installed in most rooms which go to my main hub downstairs.

[spdrun]

TWC in SD was 2/1 for $15. Upped to 3/1.

LOL! Guess my tenant is on 3/1 then. As long as he doesn’t complain…

TVs are getting so big now that you need a whole wall. People who have nooks or above fireplace TVs will need to remodel.

Only if they want a big idiotbox. I see plenty of 60″ and under TVs for sale. Why should anyone remodel just because marketing filth tell them that a TV-wall is the latest thing and everyone’s doing it.

[Author]

Posts