Google Fiber coming to Austin

http://www.kvue.com/home/Google-Fiber-coming-to-Austin-201695291.html

by nlh • 13 years ago

176 94 13 years ago

just2n• 13 years ago

When I initially asked, I didn't get an answer: why wouldn't Google go ahead and roll it out Fiber here, in its own back yard? How many times are we going to see this story and then pay our monthly Comcast/AT&T/Verizon over-priced tithe for a mediocre service?

The cynical old man in me thinks maybe there's some kind of bribery going on to keep the Bay Area off the table for as long as possible. How much would Comcast have to pay you, Google, to keep you from destroying its market here? A billion? Ten? Fifty?

I've thought about relocating to Austin if I ever tire of the startup scene here, but now it looks like I'd have a very good reason to just go ahead and do that.

banachtarski3• 13 years ago

As somebody in the area, I've been annoyed at how despite Apple, Google, and a number of other tech companies are clustered together in the Cupertino/Mountain View area, I still go home to shitty AT&T internet.

hox• 13 years ago

Telecom is quite a different world. There are a number of small ISPs in North Bay that are trying to make a dent; see Sonic.net in sebastapol. http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20120506/BUSINESS/12050...

protomyth5• 13 years ago

Telecom is weird. Here are some plans from a small city in ND:

  $34.95/month* - High Speed Advantage - up to 15 Mbps down & 3 Mbps up
  $54.95/month* - High Speed Advantage Plus - up to 15 Mbps down & 10 Mbps up
  $104.95 to $114.95/month - High Speed Extreme Advantage - up to 50 Mbps down & 25 Mbps up

They have optical lines they keep adding and no bandwidth caps.

(apparently contrasting crappy service in Silicon Valley to rural areas is downvote worthy)

jordanthoms• 13 years ago

I've got 100mbit up/down for $50 per month in SF with webpass.

andymoe• 13 years ago

Or maybe it's about testing the service and gaining expertise in smaller markets where there is less competition before committing a huge amont of risk in order to roll out to a very large market... Pretty much par for the course for telecom rollouts.

intopieces2• 13 years ago

This is an astute observation. Additionally, Apple just opened a large campus in Austin, which is also home to Dell. It's a good roll out strategy: middle of nowhere, semi-large city, then bay area/chicago and maybe even NYC.

raj564• 13 years ago

Better hurry up. Condo construction is taking over the city. Rental market is skyrocketing. There are 82 people relocating to Austin everyday, according to my realtor friend.

intopieces2• 13 years ago

I've heard it as high as 100 people a day, but it's also a part of the whole 'the sky is falling'/'welcome to Austin, please don't move here' attitude that pervades the entire city's culture. Also, 'Austin was great before you got here.' So I take those statistics with a grain of salt.

OldSchool• 13 years ago

"according to my realtor friend" - a reliable source of "supplies are limited" messages.

Austin experiences relatively mild boom/bust cycles. The metro area is not that big and there is still a great deal of undeveloped land so developers are always ready to build more, thus holding prices stable. The biggest problem the area faces is water supply. High property taxes of 2-3% annually offset most any gain from not having a state tax. Racial diversity is about 50 years behind most major cities.

hkmurakami• 13 years ago

In one of Marco Arment's podcasts last year (I've been going through the old stuff lately), he mentioned how in Kansas City, the city is in charge of what can go on the poles (rather than smaller jurisdictions), so there is only one entity with which Google would have to negotiate.

Given how much of a clusterfuck residential development and zoning restrictions are in SV, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Goolge would have to negotiate with many many governing bodies to roll out fiber in 'its back yard'. (Wasn't it San Mateo that blocked some Bart line extension back in the day? I remember a HN'er sharing that info with us a few months ago)

Maybe Austin is another city where one entity owns all the rights to the telecommunication poles and pipes. Even if that's not the case, Texas cities have proven to be more business friendly than California overall in the last decade. There's probably an incentive for State govt to coerce cities to work with Google to build infrastructure that will help business. Heck, it'll surely help Rackspace and other Datacenters to have a stronger backbone of internet bandwidth.

sylvinus• 13 years ago

This "single entity" argument makes a lot of sense. But then shouldn't NYC be the next step after testing in smaller cities like KC and Austin?

geori• 13 years ago

Austin has a huge incorporated area. Yes, there are some small towns at the edges (Round Rock, Pflugerville), but the city constantly grows and takes in new developments.

Nrsolis3• 13 years ago

This thing is bigger than Austin or Kansas City.

This is Google's answer to the cold war declared on the Internet by Comcast and Time-Warner Cable.

Do any of you remember when Comcast was complaining that Google was making billions of dollars selling ads on Comcast's cable modem service? Do you remember them saying that they wanted a part of that revenue? That this was UNFAIR?

Make no mistake: this is Google making the cable companies watch their step. If push comes to shove and the cable companies start to try and constrain the open Internet in an effort to extract rents, you can bet your bottom dollar that Google will expand this service QUICKLY and get into the wireless broadband business post-haste.

This is about ACCESS. Google isn't Google if they can't ensure that they get the visits to their web properties. Right now, the cable companies are the only game in town in way too many cities. This is wrong. We should have competing wireline providers. I'm no Google apologist but I can't say that I disagree with their strategy.

OGinparadise3• 13 years ago

you can bet your bottom dollar that Google will expand this service QUICKLY and get into the wireless broadband business post-haste.

With what? A city here and a city there is a great experiment hoping to push telcos into action. Trying to expand nationally can get hairy and extremely expensive.

I have a feeling that Google is losing on this project and the "real price" would be much higher than the current one.

reustle• 13 years ago

One of the big factors in deciding which cities to look at is cost I'm sure. They're starting with the smaller cities and moving up. The amount of red tape in cities like SF and NY must be outstanding.

bluedino• 13 years ago

SF is smaller in size, and slightly smaller in population than Austin.

pdeuchler• 13 years ago

Rolling out new infrastructure like this requires an immense amount of coordination and support with the local municipal governments. Between cities of relatively the same size and layout the sunk costs may not vary much, however the ease of obtaining permits, gaining access to main lines, having city hall support, etc. etc. can be worlds apart.

The first Google Fiber campaign seemed to me like it was more or less "Which city government will bend over backwards the most for us?", and I'll bet KC ranked first with Austin close behind. It wouldn't surprise me at all if there were well entrenched interests, especially in SF, that would prevent Google from making an easy entrance there.

bajsejohannes• 13 years ago

To broaden the question a bit: What's likely to be the next location or locations for Google Fiber?

I'm not in the bay area, but would love to see it in my city. I was so dissatisfied with the webpage and user experience of signing up for Comcast [1] that I eventually just gave my neighbor some cash for his wifi password.

[1] Off topic: They'll tell you that you can get pretty decent internet for $10 a month. Then it turns out you're not eligible. And it turns out you're not eligible for the $20/month either. So after a lot of back and forth, it ends up being $40/month. Which is fine, unless you though you were getting the same deal for $10 just a few hours before. I don't understand how this scheme could work. Maybe by annoying users enough that in the end they just click Sign Up to get it all over with? Somehow it must work, though, since they keep doing it.

jseliger3• 13 years ago

>To broaden the question a bit: What's likely to be the next location or locations for Google Fiber?

It'll probably be somewhere without decent options right now, which rules out anywhere Verizon operates FiOS. I would guess that it will show up in a low-regulation stat, which rules out most of the West Coast and Northeast. Somewhere like Seattle is plausible, but the city is teaming up with a company to offer Gigabit Seattle.

Some of the more plausible options might be Phoenix, AZ, Denver or Boulder, CO, a city in one of the Carolinas (Raleigh / Durham?), Oklahoma City, Minneapolis / St. Paul, or Madison, Wisconsin (some may already have FiOS).

raldi• 13 years ago

Because this is what happens when you try to build something in the Bay Area:

http://sfcitizen.com/blog/2011/11/15/no-att-lightspeed-inter...

badgar2• 13 years ago

Sorry, evil (bribes in this case) is the only answer for when Google does something an HN commenter doesn't like.

DannyBee3• 13 years ago

Why would google want to deal with the kabillion regulations that exist here.

"Sorry, we'll bring fiber to your area just as soon as we get through the 46 meetings necessary to remove this heritage tree blocking the way"

Imagine the red tape involved in doing anything in MTV or SF or the bay area.

The cynical old man in you consider just how over-regulated the area really is. California requires lighting and wattage density calculations to place lighting in a building. This part is actually not so uncommon, since IECC has some requirements.

However, compare:

http://www.lightingcontrols.com/support/statecodes/excerpts/...

with

http://www.lightingcontrols.com/support/statecodes/excerpts/...

Note: Texas just follows IECC (so for example, you will find it the same for NJ, MD, VA, TX, etc), while california has gone off on their own.

I'm actually all for permitting and code inspection, but a lot of the crap you deal with in SF and MTV is truly crazy.

driverdan3• 13 years ago

Issues like this are the reasons I moved to Austin instead of SF. The CA government is bonkers.

r0s2• 13 years ago

Austin really is a great place to be a techie.

Submitting resumes last week was a surprisingly optimistic experience. In addition to several referrals from friends, I'm qualified for development work at diverse companies, from games to chemicals to media to nuptials.

caseysoftware• 13 years ago

I've been here for three years and my only regret is not getting here a bit sooner.

hpagey• 13 years ago

I just completed a 3 month accelerator program based in Austin. It is great place to be.My co-founder is definitely returning to Austin once he wraps up his stuff from Orlando. I am also seriously thinking of moving to Austin but am unable to makeup my mind between Austin and Bay area/SFO.

jmsduran• 13 years ago

I've been living in Austin for roughly 2 years now. Great city to live, and is one of the friendlier cities in Texas.

I'm looking forward to ditching Time Warner Cable Internet once Google Fiber goes live in Austin :).

modarts• 13 years ago

Would you recommend it over the bay? I've lived and worked here all my life and getting a bit bored.

Aloisius• 13 years ago

Bored? In the middle of coastal California? Surrounded by people with every hobby and passion imaginable?

And you want to move to Austin? In the middle of Texas?

LisaG• 13 years ago

If you are bored in the San Francisco Bay Area the problem is likely internal rather than where you live, so moving (even to somewhere awesome like Austin) will not resolve it.

dr_doom3• 13 years ago

I think it's good to try different places but Austin is especially cool. The nightlife is better than SF, the rents are more affordable, outdoor lifestyles are huge, the girls are prettier, and the weather is better.

Austin is consistently ranked at the top of various best of lists, a quick google search found this link. http://www.austinhomelistings.com/blog/is-austin-the-best-ci...

driverdan3• 13 years ago

I moved to Austin in 2011 after traveling for 6 months around the country, including weeks in the bay area and other tech cities. I like SF and I'd consider living in SF if it wasn't for the terrible CA government (both local and state). High tax rates on everything, ridiculous entitlement expenditures, anti-business anti-free market policies (rent control, stupid building restrictions contributing to ridiculous housing costs, high business fees, etc).

That said, Austin is great. Come out and visit, flights are pretty reasonable. I prefer Austin weather, Texans are very friendly and welcoming people, and the area is booming which creates a lot of opportunity. TX is much more business friendly. No income tax, a strong libertarian sentiment, similar social views to SF.

The tech scene is obviously smaller but vibrant. There are quite a few coworking spaces and a few incubators. There's at least one tech meetup / event every day of the week. SXSW.

Like any city it has its weaknesses. North south traffic during rush hour is terrible. Our public transportation isn't great. It's very much a car city. The pickup trucks take some getting used to (I still find their proliferation odd). Housing costs are going up but IMO are still very reasonable. Much, much less than the bay.

methodover• 13 years ago

Ha, I've had the exact same feelings about Austin -- I've lived and worked here all my life, and have been thinking about moving to the bay area for some time now.

Austin's great. I just want to experience what it's like living in someplace different.

pjbrunet4• 13 years ago

There was an Austin Hacker News Meetup but looks like it died. Probably because it costs $ to start a Meetup now.

pulledpork• 13 years ago

It costs? For what?!

mildweed• 13 years ago

I'm surprised they're going into other markets when they haven't even started phase 2 for Kansas City (getting the rest of the metro signed up).

loceng• 13 years ago

Testing in only one city would be silly.

aspensmonster2• 13 years ago

As an Austinite and an EE student, I am very excited about the potential. However, our local media (KXAN)[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8A08jNxAaA] is harping on all the benefits this will bring startups, and I'm not convinced. Google's ToS for their fiber lines essentially forbids all of the cool things that you could do with a symmetric gigabit link. They have a wiggle-room clause in their (non-binding) FAQ about whether such things are "legal and non-commercial," but I'm not holding my breath. I don't get the obsession over how this will "help" tech startups if commercial use of the line is expressly forbidden. If I were a founder, I'd be very wary about basing my business on something Google could pull out from under me at any time. If I developed a standalone Dropbox alternative that could take advantage of fiber lines to customers' homes, would that constitute a "commercial" use of the lines? Probably not for the customer, but what about me? As well, I've heard that the hardware provided is relatively limited in terms of network configuration, and has no bridge mode to hand off the connection to hardware that _can_ handle such configuration. That means no pfsense or other routers with Tomato or DD-WRT or other firmware. And I've yet to see an official stance from Google on whether things like running exit nodes or seeding legal content are permitted.

TL;DR - This Austinite isn't convinced.

aspensmonster2• 13 years ago

Downvotes? How about an explanation?

cbhl• 13 years ago

Stanford nearly shut down Google when it was still operating out of the campus network.

It's not unusual to be in legal gray zones when you're in the humble beginnings of a startup (in the parents' garage, say).

They have to say things like "no running servers" and "no commercial use" because of the lawyers, but I doubt Google's own employees would let the Fiber team live it down if they found out a legitimate startup had been disconnected for a frivolous violation of their ToS.

driverdan3• 13 years ago

They don't mean running servers out of your basement. At least I hope they don't, that'd be stupid. They mean the opportunities that accompany residential gigabit access.

OGinparadise3• 13 years ago

" is harping on all the benefits this will bring startups"

Google giveth, Google taketh when they want to. Don't be the sucker to base your start-up on the idea that a 1 GB pipe is going to be there and or at $80 /month.

Google is just trying to pressure TW, Verizon, Comcast etc to increase the speed (Youtube, G Play and all)

kyrra2• 13 years ago

Do you have any details about the google fiber router and bridge mode? I've been trying to find any details that walk through the router's configuration UI without much luck. Looks like it always NATs connections and the best you can do is port-forward.

shmerl2• 13 years ago

Does Google have plans to expand it much more and in different states / cities? I lost hope for Verizon FiOS to grow in urban areas, and I'm not going to use any coax. cable companies for sure.

__david__2• 13 years ago

> I'm not going to use any coax. cable companies for sure.

Why not? I'm all for fiber but really what I want is a fast symmetric connection. If someone can provide that over coax, that's fine with me.

shmerl2• 13 years ago

They are all media companies at core, who push all kind of idiocy on the Internet, from DRM to SOPA-like stuff and who support all kind of censorship. At least Verizon is just a communications company, even though their service isn't the best.

6thSigma• 13 years ago

Hopefully they work their way down to San Antonio before I work my way up to Austin.

mesozoic• 13 years ago

Maybe next Google can fix the traffic problems in Austin :(

Google Fiber coming to Austin

Related Stories