reply to alchav
Re: Google and The Last Mile! What is not environmentally friendly about running fiber optic strands to a house? How else are you going to deliver 1 Gigabit per second symmetrical speeds? A T3 is only 44.736 Mbit/s. It is not customary for residential utility subscribers to do any major connectivity work outside the building. The electric power company runs power lines to a power meter placed on the outside of a building. The connections after the power meter are probably put in by a licensed contractor or a resident who is a licensed electrical contractor. The same with water, sewage, telephone, and cable television.
North Tonawanda, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
Let's not forget: Unless you're delivering your T3 exclusively over Fiber which is standard for such installs, you're eating a lot of copper pairs running a T3 to neighborhoods and probably knocking a bunch of DSL lines out in the process running them should you shamefully be runnign a T3 over anything BUT fiber. Google doesn't have much choice but to run Fiber. Telco copper won't be an option for anything serious, and Coaxial cable, while capable is definitely not their goal.
There's no true point to running such connectivity when Google's bringing the fiber out to such neighborhoods anyways.
Palm Desert, CA
reply to davidhoffman
said by davidhoffman:Out here in The West we put everything underground, we don't want all these messy Poles and Wires. It does take more planning and cost more, but it's cleaner and Professional. That's why I said, it's better to leave it to a Community or City to Wire themselves and Google could just come into a Head-In location. Right now it looks like Google will just Drop a Fiber Line from the closes Pole....Very un-professional!
What is not environmentally friendly about running fiber optic strands to a house? How else are you going to deliver 1 Gigabit per second symmetrical speeds?
Most of the poles were already in existence, they belong to the electric power companies. That was why Google ended up with the disputes about pole attachment fees, worker safety near high voltage power lines, and speed of deployment. Other wireline services also use the existing poles. With the hatred, by the incumbent ISP supporters and free market solves everything believers, of municipalities deploying municipal fiber networks, there is no way either city could have spent tax money to build an underground fiber network. If the electric utility had raised rates to build such a network, they also would have been declared to be unfairly competing with private ISPs. You can say an open access model would work, but Utopia in Utah tried that and ended up getting screwed by most of the private ISPs. Also, open access would not have met with Google's experimental goals.
There are some serious discussions going on in cities that have been hit repeatedly by electric power outages and wireline service outages about putting everything underground. I think Washington DC is the latest after the massive storm this year resulted in very long outages. The issue is getting a realistic cost for the project. No city wants to have a Boston type Big Dig never ending cost overrun mess to deal with.
In new greenfield developments, underground electrical and communication utility placement is mostly the standard. It is the retrofit areas that are not very likely to get done.