G+_Mike Lawrence Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 $40 More "In Cupertino, for example, where AT&T recently launched its gigabit service (named "U-verse with AT&T GigaPower"), the company is charging $110 a month for speeds "up to 1Gbps" and $80 for speeds "at 300Mbps." Compare this with the same gigabit service in Austin, where AT&T charges $70 for identical speeds. The difference? Google Fiber is operating in Austin where it also charges (you guessed it) $70 as well." This is why I love when Google enters a New market. They are a catalyst for change. It forces these companies to change -------> Presence. Instead of expecting Google to Takeover which will/would take years. Expect the competitors to change their antics and become better companies. You want good competition not for Google to run things. You want comcast, time warner, fios , at&t etc to be better and offer great deals. This article proves that companies are only acting nice because Google is there. Customers should put pressure on them to be fair across the board. How is it possible for Google to dominate every market sector makes no sense. http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/31/8318491/att-competition-fiber-internet-google http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/31/8318491/att-competition-fiber-internet-google Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Mike Murphy Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 How is using capitalism to force change support net neutrality laws? I'd rather go other way. No net neutrality but make it illegal to not share ( like old phones) with providers. Force transparency on policies and force service reports. Don't make illegal, make transparent and encourage competition. Net neutrality gives people comfort with their oligopoly provider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Mark Stronge Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 The current system is fundamentally broken. Far from this making people comfortable with duopolies, this will enable startup isps to offer competition in broadband supply, showing how process will come down as has been demonstrated above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Mike Murphy Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Right but net neurtrality is not as good as transparency and increased open markets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Mark Stronge Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 That's what it will bring. The open market has resulted in monopolies and overpricing. Secret handshakes between Comcast and Verizon to prevent competition, even within the same building where one side of a building had one and couldn't get any other cable or broadband service and vice versa for the other side of the building. Transparency will come through oversight by the fcc and they will hopefully get the power to actually enforce non-discrmination of data on the internet, I.e. prevent slow/fast lanes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Mike Murphy Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 Government atrophies and is influenced by private sector with lobbies and other influences. It would simply been easier to make it by law all cable lines, fiber, phone, and radio towers are forced to be shared by providers. Or some other measure to promote low barrier to entry to provide service. Combine that with visibility into service reports to empower people to choose. Relying of 'FCC' to do the right thing for next 30 years is not something I will hold out hope for. Instead I want peer to peer internet so we can form our our mesh communication network as the final solution to this central constraint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts