Seattle To Get Gigabit Fiber To the Home and Business 108
symbolset writes "Enthusiasm about Google's Kansas City fiber project is overwhelming. But in the Emerald City, the government doesn't want to wait. They have been stringing fiber throughout the city for years, and today announced a deal with company Gigabit Squared and the University of Washington to serve fiber to 55,000 Seattle homes and businesses with speeds up to a gigabit. The city will lease out the unused fiber, but will not have ownership in the provider nor a relationship with the end customers. The service rollout is planned to complete in 2014. It is the first of 6 planned university area network projects currently planned by Gigabit Squared."
We have seen the future (Score:1, Funny)
I for one believe in internet. The internet makes people stupid and shortsighted, which is why I never use it. My secretary and wife Laura handles all my internet usage for me. As internet usage increases, so will moronosity, advancing the day when I shall rule the world! Ha ha ah ha ha ha ahhhhahahaha!!!!
Re: (Score:3)
What the internet is doing is showing people for who and what they really are.
Color me unimpressed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Color me unimpressed (Score:4, Interesting)
I think it is awesome that they are trying to get fiber through out the city but 55,000 is a really really small number. From the math in the article it is going to cost them $3636.37 per residence/business they connect to the network. Any idea how that compares to google's plans in Kansas city cost wise?
Seeing as I live in one of those areas, and all i can get it either crappy DSL, evil Comcast Cable, or stupid wifi thingy, I'm pretty cool with this. At least till i see what it's going to cost me monthly. I'm signed up and debating on if i should get involved to get the word out to my neighborhood to sign up to show interest.
While this may not be enough for you, it's a start.
Re:Color me unimpressed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Color me unimpressed (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep, we've been paying for these upgrades since Clinton but haven't seen a damn thing really.
The upgrades are always too expensive and they don't have the money, so WTF have them been doing with all those service fees for the past couple decade?
They need to be held accountable, give us the upgrades or give us the money.
Re: (Score:1)
...so WTF have them been doing with all those service fees for the past couple decade?
I'm assuming dividends.
Re: (Score:1)
I would be nice to leave comcrud but it looks like I am just shy of the coverage. I think this is awesome though. Even if I end up moving out of the area by the time it gets more coverage this really should be public utility.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Color me unimpressed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Color me unimpressed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how long they expect that fibre to last? Given a useful lifespan of 50 years that would be $30/year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. $1,500 per house sounds expensive at first, until you compare average cost/benefits analysis. Spread out over 3 years gives you a ROI price of $41.66 per month. (If you charged $41.66 for 3 years, you'd get your money back)
Spread over 10 years is $12.50/month. Suddenly that's not so expensive, and interest rates are at all time lows. A company with AA+A+A+++ credit should be able to easily support this kind of expense with a 10 year term at 8% or less.
Investors are SCREAMING for anything "sure" more th
Re: (Score:3)
There will always be an initial cost, but this is usually paid back in a specied timeframe. My general expectation is that you don't break-even for two years. I also believe that captilism sometimes benefits from a government investment at the right level. In this case the government pays for the general infrastructure, but in doing so allows for competition at the ISP level. Competition prospers, users get choice, business gets to concentrate on service and in general everyone wins.
I believe in general gov
Re: (Score:2)
Or, you never break even, go bankrupt, and start taking cities out as you collapse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency [wikipedia.org]
That's how we did it here in Utah. Your mileage may vary.
Re: (Score:2)
From what it looks like, that project started out great, but then was infected with a bunch of anti-government types who insist on the private sector at all costs, even when it's clear to everyone that the private sector has no interest in doing what needs to be done and is just going to take money to sit on their asses.
Re: (Score:2)
That might be true here, but choices aren't limited to governments. Bad investors, bad management and bad choices in general can burn any project be it government or private.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly as it should be (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
What you would find is that the scumbags are being contracted to build/maintain such a network anyways.
Re:Exactly as it should be (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Before you jump for joy for tax financed fiber you should look at how good UTOPIA fiber is doing in Utah. It's a complete disaster mainly because of the garbage pricing plan.
From TFA: "HOW MUCH WILL GIGABIT SEATTLE COST? Our rates are yet to be finalized..."
If their pricing plans work out like UTOPIA ($3,000 to install plus $70 a month) I suspect this will have a similar fate. Not everyone can afford that much initial cost and lots of tax dollars will be required to keep it afloat.
Re: (Score:2)
To counter you, I would look at Chattanooga, TN.
Just because your project was infected with anti-government types wanting to sabotage it doesn't mean all of them will be.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we'll have it be OWNED by thieving government scumbags, and merely OPERATED by thieving corporate scumbags. Sounds like a brilliant plan!
Re: (Score:2)
The municipality still owns the fibre. They lease it out. So the city should be making money off the infrastructure and the company will be making money off the individual subscribers.
Also a city is far more likely to allow for much longer term profitability than a corporation is. This will allow them to roll out the fibre to places that a corporation would ignore.
Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Seattle threatened the local ISPs to do this sort of thing about 8 years ago, nice to see that they're finally putting some of that dark fiber to use.
I find your lack of faith in the dark fiber disturbing.
Cost to end user? (Score:2)
" The city will lease out the unused fiber, but will not have ownership in the provider nor a relationship with the end customers"
Can there be multiple lessees along particular routes, or is the whole thing likely to be gobbled up by Comcast or FIOS?
Re: (Score:1)
This really should have happened years ago. Centurylink is already upgrading their bandwidth speed in the area. Sure, I'm not going to complain about them going above and pressuring for fiber, but this would have made a much bigger impact several years ago.
Communism? (Score:3, Funny)
Enthusiasm? But isn't that kind of public intervention an horrible communist-like threat to free market?
Oh, wait, ISP have not yet started their media campaign against the project
Re: (Score:2)
I'm ready for them!
Re: (Score:2)
When I posted the above comment, this story had no comment and I was in hope for a first post. Oddly, my comment disapeared after I posted it, and the story remained with no comment. Then it came back after other posted.
Is there a set of keywords that cause a comment to be spared for review before getting displayed?
First... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
I've tried Seattle's best coffee, and I'm not impressed.
Re:Private sector would be more efficient. (Score:4, Insightful)
Be prepared to pay double or triple what you should for this. This would be more efficiently handled by the private sector in a competitive environment. There is no reason tax dollars need to go to subsidize this when it has been proven time and time again that government involvement translates into higher prices, more screwups, and more debt for us all.
yeah, look how efficiently comcast, time warner, verizon et al are rolling out the gigabit fiber.
Re:Private sector would be more efficient. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Except there is absolutely nothing to back up your statement, and the fact of the matter is, the private sector has REFUSED to provide this service.
Seriously, how the fuck can you say the private sector would be "cheaper and more efficient" if they won't do it at all?
Not Comcastic! (Score:5, Interesting)
YES!!! I have been suffering under the Comcast/Century Link (aka Qwest) for 7 years. Minimal competition means that they only have to maximize profits.
I love this city: our utilities are clean and environmentally friendly because of a great administration. Although the public transit system isn't as nice as NYC, we are fixing that too.
Re: (Score:1)
I hope he doesn't mean ending the free-ridership zone downtown...or the viaduct's replacement...or 520...the emerald is only half green, but with 420 legal, we'll see a boon for government spending in the coming years...shit i am highhhh
Re: (Score:2)
I hope he doesn't mean ending the free-ridership zone downtown...
I'm going to point out that the main part, that is, the business part of downtown Seattle is barely a mile long and about 6 blocks wide. And the free bus ride was pretty much only for that area (it was a little bigger). So if you used the free bus ride a lot, pay up, or stop being lazy.
I'm also going to point out the people that will miss the free bus ride the most are the people who would get on the bus with no money and expect a free ride when it got out of the downtown area. So if that is you, HA
Re: (Score:2)
Are marketing posters a sub-species of troll or spammer? Because, according to their website, they don't even have Cox in Washington state, let alone Seattle.
This is what Bonds are for. (Score:2)
Organize your neighborhood then city and pass a bond you can then defer the cost of capital investment over 30 years. Amazing communism plus capitalism defeating unregulated oligarchies in the free market.
don't count yer fibers just yet (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
i've been sitting in seattle, well, since forever... and this is at least the third try at this. comcast the evil monopoly that holds seattle in its death-grip will try everything that was successful at shutting this down and then-some before letting this through. they will start with "incentives" (building computer labs in the schools for example), then move to bribes (there's a hot mayor race coming up. watch if one candidate suddenly gets a zillion in outside funding. "but that's illegal!!" yeah... right), then legal threats like suing for restraint of trade (which have turned the trick before). they may also get federal, using a bribed federal regulatory agency to shut down the endeavor. so as much as i'd love to see this, and might even directly benefit, this ain't going to go down smoothly. this is a fairly fidgety "David" against an massively monetized Goliath.
You do know that comcast only covers parts of Seattle, right? I part of where i live, Capital Hill and Beacon Hill don't have Comcast, they have a different cable provider. I tried to find a map of what Comcast covers, but that seems impossible. I did find a map of Fiber Optics in Washtington, from last year and you can see a big void in Seattle:
http://www.uptun.org/2011/08/29/fiber-optic-coverage-in-seattle/ [uptun.org]
Seems to me that Comcast should have no say. They had their chance and they didn't do anything
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The map you're looking for is here [seattle.gov]. If I remember correctly, yellow is Millenium/Broadstripe/Wave, everything else is Comcast. In shaded areas of the Comcast section, Millenium can wire individual apartment or condo buildings. For example, I live in a Comcast area of Capitol Hill but we only have Millenium in my building, most likely because they offered either the building management or the builder an incentive (e.g., wired the building for cable for free in exchange for a multiyear contract).
Every time so
Give us MORE!!!! (Score:4, Funny)
And what's new with getting Gigabit? (Score:2)
I was offered that several months ago. But the downside is the monthly cost.
ok so you pay twice (Score:2)
you paid for the city government to lay dark fiber for years, then they are handing it off to a private company who will gouge you to flicker lights at the ends of it?
yes I know there is more to it than flickering lights, but I also know the ISP is not going to provide this service for operating cost + small percentage, they will run with it, charge as much as every other fiber service and you footed the bill for their infrastructure, that is "on lease" at a deep discount for might as well be life.
Re: (Score:2)
you paid for the city government to lay dark fiber for years, then they are handing it off to a private company who will gouge you to flicker lights at the ends of it?
yes I know there is more to it than flickering lights, but I also know the ISP is not going to provide this service for operating cost + small percentage, they will run with it, charge as much as every other fiber service and you footed the bill for their infrastructure, that is "on lease" at a deep discount for might as well be life.
So what is your solution? We use dial up modems?
Re: (Score:1)
quit having government meddle with private network projects? or have them start an ISP for the taxpayers that funded the monorail to nowhere project?
Re: (Score:2)
If this had been a good idea, then there'd be no need for the government to get involved. Individuals having free choice would have spent this money in a way that better fits their individual needs, most likely stimulating more decentralized, less censorship-prone means of delivering a high-speed connection. Even though there are private companies involved, this is nonetheless socialism (fascism). Once government is involved, restrictions (ex. "Net Neutrality") are sure to follow and spread. Trading freedom for useless extra bandwidth (that like 99% of people don't need) is never a good thing.
--libman
Okay Comcast shill.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I feel your pain, dude-san. I'm on Sprint's lousy network. 12gb/month where the speed is slower than dialup most of the time.
Is this deployment comparable to Chattanooga, TN? (Score:1)
who is using gigabit? (Score:2)
I wonder who of normal users needs gigabit speeds?
Are there any usage caps in this cyberhighway paradise?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>folks who watch a lot of netflix streaming
You do not need gigabit speed for that. For downloading - that's another story.