dslreports logo
 story category
Google Offering TV Over 1 Gbps Fiber in Kansas City
Will Control the Pipe, the Content, and the Set Top
Google's 1 Gbps residential fiber service is officially underway in Kansas City, with consumers expected to be up and running sometime in the second half of the year. Building on earlier rumors that Google was planning to add an IPTV service into the mix, the company is reported to have applied for an FCC license back in December allowing them to run the antenna farm necessary to get into delivering television. While it's still unlikely that Google will ever really want to get into the broadband business, it should be interesting to see what kind of products they offer when they control the development of the content, the pipe, and the even the set top box. Both incumbent ISPs and privacy advocates probably have nightmares that look something like this.
view:
topics flat nest 
brianiscool
join:2000-08-16
Tampa, FL

brianiscool

Member

TV Service?

We just want the full 1 Gbps pipe. I knew there was a catch.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: TV Service?

What are you gonna do with 1Gbps? Feed the 500 houses in your neighborhood? create your own mini internet company? lol Why do people want somthing so badly theyll never use for the next decade?

You wanting a Gbps connection is like wanting a Monster Truck with 66" tires to commute to work.
sandman_1
join:2011-04-23
11111

sandman_1

Member

Re: TV Service?

Might not be viable now but who is to say that someone creative might come up with a good use for that bandwidth in the near future?

I say give the speeds and let people come up with creative ways to use it just like they did from the dial-up to broadband days.

DataRiker
Premium Member
join:2002-05-19
00000

DataRiker to ITALIAN926

Premium Member

to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:

What are you gonna do with 1Gbps?

A better question is why do you care? I live in KC and I can't wait to get it.

Floopie
@sbcglobal.net

Floopie to ITALIAN926

Anon

to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:

You wanting a Gbps connection is like wanting a Monster Truck

Ted Stevens G-G-Ghost!

mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20

mackey to ITALIAN926

Premium Member

to ITALIAN926
Yup, 640K is enough for anybody.

While we're at it, everyone should go back to 1.5Mbit DSL because lets face it, what are you going to to with a 6Mbit connection? Share it with 20 of your neighbours?

/M

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: TV Service?

Are there applications for it TODAY? NO. and thats my point. People talk like they need it NOW. My 35/35 FiOS connection coming in at 43/34 is faster than 99% of the country ( according to speedtest.net).

I never said it wouldnt be needed in the future, but people talk like they need it now like they need air, and they actually would have a use for it TODAY.

mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20

mackey

Premium Member

Re: TV Service?

I hate to burst your bubble, but it's going to take at least 10 years to roll it out to any significant percentage of the country. If we don't start now, it's not going to be available when we do have a need for it.

/M

djdanska
Rudie32
Premium Member
join:2001-04-21
San Diego, CA

djdanska to ITALIAN926

Premium Member

to ITALIAN926
Everybody i knew said the same thing when i ordered my 10Mb cable line back in 1999 instead of at&t's 384-768kbps dsl line.. "The dsl line will do the same thing!" Look where we're at now!

Paladin
Sage of the light
join:2001-08-17
Chester, IL

Paladin to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
That would be awesome!

FREE WI-Fi'S FOR EVERYBODY!!!

firephoto
Truth and reality matters
Premium Member
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA

firephoto to ITALIAN926

Premium Member

to ITALIAN926
Or you could run p2p with all your 1Gbps neighbors and actually have a real and online community that the same. There are amazing things possible if you don't have old men insisting that each person download identical content through a distant pipe once per each individual served.

It promotes sharing of individual content, that is exactly what this whole fight by the mafIAA is about because if they can control the popular content and cripple most methods of sharing between individuals directly they continue to profit with crap products.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: TV Service?

Whats funny is that if YOU worked in that industry, you wouldnt be calling RIAA and MPAA mafia. Yes, lets strive for P2P for all so there is zero revenue for these people, ultimately leading to no money to make any decent shows, music, and movies. You call it crap products, and you expect improvement with LESS money? You call it crap products. yet there are millions downloading this "crap" illegally, every day. Nobody brings a smoking pile of dogshit into their house buddy.

Youre all into letting some guy walk into a theater with his Iphone and record the movie FOR YOU as well, eh?

Youre all into letting the people with morals and a conscious to pay for these things for the P2P losers. If those organizations didnt stand up and fight for whats right, theyd already be destroyed. Damn hate you freeloaders, actually THIEVES is more appropriate. You have no solutions to the problems, you only want things that are free.

firephoto
Truth and reality matters
Premium Member
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA

firephoto

Premium Member

Re: TV Service?

said by ITALIAN926:

Whats funny is that if YOU worked in that industry, you wouldnt be calling RIAA and MPAA mafia. Yes, lets strive for P2P for all so there is zero revenue for these people, ultimately leading to no money to make any decent shows, music, and movies. You call it crap products, and you expect improvement with LESS money? You call it crap products. yet there are millions downloading this "crap" illegally, every day. Nobody brings a smoking pile of dogshit into their house buddy.

Youre all into letting some guy walk into a theater with his Iphone and record the movie FOR YOU as well, eh?

Youre all into letting the people with morals and a conscious to pay for these things for the P2P losers. If those organizations didnt stand up and fight for whats right, theyd already be destroyed. Damn hate you freeloaders, actually THIEVES is more appropriate. You have no solutions to the problems, you only want things that are free.

Guess what, the mafIAA wanting me to buy only their content has nothing to with me knowing I am able to share MY content with other people if a good reliable and very large connection is available and that MY content doesn't make the mafIAA any money.

I can appreciate how it is simple to just push all conversations of peer-to-peer and public sharing into some misguided rant on illegal activity but there are plenty that know this is not what the fight is about but that it's just a distraction from the real situation.

I really don't care what people pay for corporate media, or how many times they have to pay to enjoy the same corporate media. That's not my problem, not my issue, not my concern, and not my need to subsidize those people with my activity related to media that is not owned and controlled by multi-billion dollar outfits. They aren't the only ones that own content and distribute content or create content.

djdanska
Rudie32
Premium Member
join:2001-04-21
San Diego, CA

djdanska to ITALIAN926

Premium Member

to ITALIAN926
I for the first time bought a dvd in december. Was the harry potter dvd & blu ray for someone. Long story short, the ultravilot crap installed some driver that just destroyed their windows installation.

Crap like that is what is doing them in.
meister1
join:2004-10-25
n0b2g0

meister1 to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:

What are you gonna do with 1Gbps?

Three channels of Ultra HD should take care of most of that 1Gig.

»www.ultrahdtv.net/ultra- ··· rements/
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

axus to brianiscool

Member

to brianiscool
I think some people won't switch internet from their current provider without switching TV as well. I'm more interested if you can get internet same price with or without TV.
morph69
join:2001-09-03
Penetanguishene, ON

morph69

Member

maybe we will get lucky and they will beta all of canada

not in my lifetime

JC_
Premium Member
join:2010-10-19
Nepean, ON

JC_

Premium Member

Re: maybe we will get lucky and they will beta all of canada

said by morph69:

not in my lifetime

If only, but none the less it's a nice dream.
voipnpots
join:2011-10-13
USA

1 recommendation

voipnpots

Member

Looks interesting but...

don't like Google so don't want it.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: Looks interesting but...

please continue.
voipnpots
join:2011-10-13
USA

1 recommendation

voipnpots

Member

Re: Looks interesting but...

Google is Cyberdyne Systems.
etaadmin
join:2002-01-17
united state

etaadmin

Member

Re: Looks interesting but...

Cyberdyne? The makers of Skynet? Oh my!

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList to voipnpots

Premium Member

to voipnpots
()☞
TheRogueX
join:2003-03-26
Springfield, MO

TheRogueX to voipnpots

Member

to voipnpots
said by voipnpots:

Google is Cyberdyne Systems.

No, »www.cyberdyne.jp/english/ is Cyberdyne systems. :P And they actually build robotics.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

An antenna farm

is pointless when you can do IPTV and don't even need one.
wolfy339
join:2005-04-30
Edmonds, WA

wolfy339

Member

Re: An antenna farm

Even with IPTV the content's gotta come from somewhere, Google can't magically put it out of thin air. Thats where the antenna farm comes into play.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: An antenna farm

it can be done without one.

»www.matrixstream.com/IPT ··· ider.php

They provide EVERYTHING.
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT
·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68

BiggA

Premium Member

Re: An antenna farm

You have to get the signals into the system somehow. How do you think cable does it? A farm of antennas and dishes that then feeds it into the headend, which modulates them all together, converts it to fiber, and sends it out.

Google would be the same except with IPTV encoding, or possibly just do-modulating and packetizing instead of the modulation portion.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: An antenna farm

that system already does it. The only thing Google would need is an antenna for the locals and that would be it. And really could be done via their fiber network direct to the stations.

You don't see ATT or VZ out building antenna farms for each of their markets.
45612019 (banned)
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY

45612019 (banned)

Member

Re: An antenna farm

That's because Verizon already has two Super Head-Ends equipped with dozens of satellite dishes to retrieve the channel distribution feeds and send them around the country to video hub offices via fiber for distribution to FiOS customers.

Every cable company needs a head end and satellite distribution to retrieve the feeds.
Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL

Joe12345678 to 25139889

Member

to 25139889
Not all channels are on fiber. Directv does fiber in a lot of channels but they still use C-band dishes.

Comcast has that HITS systems (was a TCI cable system before comcast took them over)

And then they have a cluster system with local headends where only 1 per area uses the dishs and other ones are just dropped off of the main one.

Comcast has old (cable net) super head end in Mount Prospect, IL. Later on in the TCI days they had a Digital cable simulation on the B side of the Dual 60 (room for 120 max channel back when cable net build it 1981) analog channel system.

Later once why turned in to a 1 side system.

Paladin
Sage of the light
join:2001-08-17
Chester, IL

Paladin to BiggA

Member

to BiggA
Google already has the space in their Oregon data centers, all they need the antennas for is local TV.
contsole
Premium Member
join:2003-12-30
Newington, CT

contsole

Premium Member

Re: An antenna farm

Local broadcasters often feed the cable companies with a fiber link, though now a noise free OTA signal is much easier.
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT

BiggA to Paladin

Premium Member

to Paladin
This is about Kansas City, not Oregon.
jjeffeory
jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
Bloomington, IN

jjeffeory to 25139889

Member

to 25139889
Great so Google can get into fights with the middle men. I see.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2 to 25139889

Premium Member

to 25139889
Still looks like Satellites are still involved in this. From what I see, it looks like that is a solution for the distro of IPTV to the consumer.

Somewhere in the mix of getting the signal from the content provider to the consumer, there is still a satellite connection involved.
jjeffeory
jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
Bloomington, IN

jjeffeory to 25139889

Member

to 25139889
Why not leverage infrastructure that is already there and being used?

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

what?!

"Both incumbent ISPs and privacy advocates probably have nightmares that look something like this."
I have never understood these fears by privacy advocates.. If new products are delivered, someone will be collecting metrics on those products.
etaadmin
join:2002-01-17
united state

etaadmin

Member

AT&T

AT&T is going to kick their butts with uverse »www.attsavings.com/att-u ··· -mo.html

/sarcasm

VZ SUKZ
@optonline.net

VZ SUKZ

Anon

Fios-Google

Being that Verizon want to get rid of the landline/copper Network and worry about there Wireless part of the Company. It would be a great thing for Google to buy the Verizon copper and fiber networks

•••••
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Did I miss something?

said by Karl Bode:

it should be interesting to see what kind of products they offer when they control the development of the content, the pipe, and the even the set top box.

Did I miss something or is it just ok when Google controls everything?

•••••
Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL

Joe12345678

Member

will they use Motorola boxes?

They own the part of Motorola that makes the other cable boxes

fifty nine
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ

fifty nine

Member

Will probably cost as much as traditional cable

unless by "TV service" they mean Google TV boxes streaming internet content in addition to over the air TV.

I can't imagine that the networks will undermine their bottom line by giving google a special low price.
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

elray

Member

Re: Will probably cost as much as traditional cable

said by fifty nine:

unless by "TV service" they mean Google TV boxes streaming internet content in addition to over the air TV.

I can't imagine that the networks will undermine their bottom line by giving google a special low price.

Indeed. Google has absolutely NO special influence over pay-tv content costs - they're going to be treated the same as any other MSO.

The proof is in the offerings from the tax-subsidized Muni ISPs - despite being able to tap the public purse, their pay-tv rates are the same as the MSOs.

The networks and content owners have absolutely no reason to change their contract terms, except to charge higher rates and force more bundling. Google will probably have to pay more.
contsole
Premium Member
join:2003-12-30
Newington, CT

contsole

Premium Member

License for Antenna Farm?

Since when do you need an FCC license for receiving equipment, or is it just more paperwork required if you want to be a regular cable company?
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080

Member

smart "WIFI" tv's will be killer app

There are already chipsets by broadcom on the way for WIFI routers that obtain 1gbit wireless connectivity (albeit actual throughput is somewhat less than 125 Megabytes per second due to overhead--maybe 80 - 100mb?). This will be a killer application for wifi enabled smart-tv's. No cable-company required!

*Maybe google can develop HDTVs with Samsung to make these new gigabit wifi (android) smart Tv's come out THIS year instead of 2013. Just a dumb wifi streaming ready hdtv is not enough.

The obvious complaints will come up about piracy and it will be interesting to see how google deals with that in this test market.

BTW, just because you have gigabit internet doesn't necessarily mean EVERY source on the internet is capable of sending you 12.5 MEGABYTES PER SECOND (1000megabits divided by 8 = megabytes.. about the speed of hard drives a few generations ago and 10x dvd recorders). Today, just to offer perspective, hard drives & SSD drives of various configurations offer 40 - 300 MEGABYTES PER SECOND local (inside the computer) access to data.
aereolis
join:2003-06-12
Brampton, ON

aereolis

Member

Re: smart "WIFI" tv's will be killer app

said by tmc8080:

BTW, just because you have gigabit internet doesn't necessarily mean EVERY source on the internet is capable of sending you 12.5 MEGABYTES PER SECOND (1000megabits divided by 8 = megabytes.. about the speed of hard drives a few generations ago and 10x dvd recorders). Today, just to offer perspective, hard drives & SSD drives of various configurations offer 40 - 300 MEGABYTES PER SECOND local (inside the computer) access to data.

Uhm... check your math. 1000/8 is not 12.5 its 125. 125 megabytes a second. That's a whole 2.5gb 720p x264 movie in 20 seconds torrented at full speed (assuming you could instantly start downloading at 125 MB/s).

Of course if you didn't want to use all your throughput you could stream it at full 1080 p probably at much less of a hit to your bandwidth, i know some uncompressed hd is around 19 mbit/sec.