dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7140
share rss forum feed

navyson

join:2011-07-15
Upper Marlboro, MD

Thought FIOS TV was the best until I saw this. Wow

Up to one gigabit upload & download speed • Full channel TV lineup • 2 year contract • No data caps
Nexus 7 tablet • TV Box • Storage Box • Network Box • 1TB Google Drive • $120/month

»fiber.google.com/plans/residential/



bohratom
Jersey Shore is back again.

join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ

U forgot to read the fine print..

ONLY AVAILABLE IN KANSAS CITY.


voipnpots

join:2011-10-13
USA
reply to navyson

I'll switch once they have a triple play with phone service.

But the price for what you get seems awesome.

It will be interesting to see what Comcast and Verizon do to compete with this.

If this service gets around, I don't see anyone going with the competition because the price seems comparable.



aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA

said by voipnpots:

I'll switch once they have a triple play with phone service.

But the price for what you get seems awesome.

It will be interesting to see what Comcast and Verizon do to compete with this.

If this service gets around, I don't see anyone going with the competition because the price seems comparable.

They won't do anything to compete unless they are in the Kansas City area.

Just like Comcast only plans on offering their 305Mb/s tiers in FiOS areas.


bohratom
Jersey Shore is back again.

join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ

1 edit

said by aaronwt:

They won't do anything to compete unless they are in the Kansas City area.

Just like Comcast only plans on offering their 305Mb/s tiers in FiOS areas.

Should be interesting how the current cable/telco providers respond in Kansas City. Im guessing the subscribers there will be offered some tremendous deals just like those in the NYC have with competition....


CrzyCrakr
Premium
join:2005-06-24
Edgewater, MD

1 edit
reply to voipnpots

said by voipnpots:

I'll switch once they have a triple play with phone service.

But the price for what you get seems awesome.

It will be interesting to see what Comcast and Verizon do to compete with this.

If this service gets around, I don't see anyone going with the competition because the price seems comparable.

They already have phone service...Google Voice.

To the OP...FIOS is still the best. The quality and reliability is second to none. Comcast seems to go out around once a week for me. The Google Fiber looks good but if it is not reliable and solid then I want nothing to do with it. If it is then I may consider moving to KC. LOL


matcarl
Premium
join:2007-03-09
Franklin Square, NY
reply to navyson

That price is without phone and there are several TV networks missing like ESPN, HBO, Disney, Fox News, TNT, AMC, TBS


JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4
reply to navyson

Except they haven't delivered anything yet. That's why the link you posted has the word 'plans' in the URL. If Google makes good on this, then that's great. I hope they do. I've frankly never understood why many get upset (on this forum as well as other venues) when they see other cable companies catch up to Verizon - that's what competition does! It makes ALL the companies better! That's GOOD. I think it's a great thing that Comcast, e.g., feels the need to one-up Verizon by doubling their internet speeds. I hope they succeed. I was on this very forum, several years ago, praising DirecTV's efforts at upping the HD count, and getting the HD race moving. Because I knew what it would mean for me as a FiOS subscriber. More HD!

Same thing here. I really hope Google blows the doors off this thing. But for now, no offense, but you're getting wowd by marketing. They haven't actually executed anything yet. I'll also reiterate what Matcarl already pointed out - the utter lack of channels. No ESPN/Disney. No HBO. No CNN. No Fox suite of channels. No TNT, AMC, or TBS. Will they add them? Probably. At least most of them. I can't see this venture being successful without them (what kind of take-up rate will they have if they don't carry a channel like ESPN?), but like everything else - such a move will change them as well. It will necessitate significant price increases... probably programming tiers (recall when FiOS had one tier - Premier). Heck, we don't even know what VOD they'll offer. They say they'll have it... but nothing in the material to indicate anything of what they're going to offer on that front.

I'm not saying this is going to suck. I'm saying that there's nothing yet delivered. I hope Google knocks it out of the park. I really do. But I'm going to reserve judgement until they actually roll their stuff out the door.


robjlevin

join:2002-10-30
Millington, NJ

There's a lot of people that don't give a rat's behind about sports and those folks have been screaming about the high price of TV service for a long time.

Given an opportunity to buy a package devoid of sports at a much lower price, I think there's a good deal of people that would jump at it.

That said, this has no effect at all on most folks, but it will certainly be interesting to see how Google makes out with it.


JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4

There are a handful of people that scream loudly about having to pay for channels like ESPN. But ask yourself this - why is ESPN so darn expensive? It's so expensive and yet everyone carries it? Why? And not only do they carry it, but for just about every provider out there, it's on the lowest-possible tier. Again... why? Because the channel is extremely popular! That's why. Ok, they'll attract the number of people out there who are ok with not having a channel like ESPN, but I'll argue that that's not enough. I can make an extremely niche cable company that will scratch the itch of some very vocal people out there. That doesn't mean that I'll be able to attract enough customers to make it work. That's the issue, in my mind. How do you survive as a cable company... without offering any of the most popular cable channels around?

Because it's not just sports. Do you see any news stations on there? How many kids stations are there? Even if I detested sports, my kids would mount an insurrection if they couldn't get Disney.



matcarl
Premium
join:2007-03-09
Franklin Square, NY

More on this:
»www.multichannel.com/article/487···e_TV.php


JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4

Here's the money quote, that backs up what I've been saying:

"Without the full suite of traditional cable channels, it is doubtful Google will be able to attract core TV viewers and get them to switch from traditional cable,"

Yep, that's the issue. The upfront costs are there too. While $300 is very reasonable, in my book, just to get 1Gpbs internet speeds, think about the average consumer. What is the incentive for an average family to convert to Google? Their traditional cable company will give them decent HSI, a full slate of channels, and no up-front installation cost. Before you can get someone to shell out $300 for fiber, you had better be able to convince them that the cost is worth what you're getting. 1Gbps is great, and I would love it, but if it's way beyond what a normal family needs... that's a hard one to justify. Add in the lack of channels, the lack of phone service (another biggie - triple play bundles), and what's the incentive for customers to switch?

That internet speed alone will be incentive enough for a very small population. And in a business like this... small populations don't cut it. Ask Sezmi if you can get away with providing few channels, but for a great price... if they're still in business.

I'm not trying to pan Google. I think this has potential. Like I said - I'm reserving judgement until I see the execution. There are lots of nitpicky details that you can't get the answer for in a glossy marketing pack. For example, the use of the Nexus as your remote. Very slick. But what if your remote 'breaks'? What if you get consumers who don't like the whole tablet thing? Traditional remotes certainly have their short-comings, but they're cheap, ubiquitous, and already widely accepted. I think Google is making a mistake by not offering a traditional remote with their service. Ok, offer up the Nexus app too, but without a traditional remote, you're going to lose consumers. How is their hardware? Who do you call if you have a hardware issue? All of that. Those are details that consumers weigh when making a decision like that.



Onedollar

join:2001-08-27
Pomona, CA
kudos:6

I think in the press conference they mentioned a blue tooth remote?


JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4

said by Onedollar:

I think in the press conference they mentioned a blue tooth remote?

Right... which is the Nexus tablet. Look at the press package. There's an item under there titled 'The new remote...' And they show a picture of the Nexus, and talk about the fact that the tablet will serve as your remote.

Now, to be fair, it doesn't say that they DON'T allow for a more traditional (albeit blue tooth) remote as well. That's one of those details that aren't there that I was talking about. But it's clear in the package that they're banking on you using the tablet as the remote.

I don't have an issue with that, for the most part, but many many consumers would. There's simply no wide acceptance for such a remote just yet. Even the FiOS remote android app that I now have on my phone - it's very cool, and works really well... but I can't say I'd be thrilled if Verizon told me that the only remote option available to me would be that app. That's what it SEEMS like Google is saying, but I don't know. Like I said - all in the execution.


nascar

join:2000-02-28
Verona, NJ
kudos:3
reply to navyson

I started following this a year ago and when Kansas City was mentioned. I'm glad to see it coming and hope it is a success. It will take a long time but competition is always better. 5 choices for TV (currently 4) is very nice indeed!



Kingscup

join:2006-03-01
reply to navyson

I see this as a Google experiment/hobby that they will sell or abandon in a few years. One of those "let's see if we can really do it" sort of things.



Onedollar

join:2001-08-27
Pomona, CA
kudos:6
reply to JPL

Hrmm I would think channel changing capabilities would go through wifi network to the network box, vs bluetooth. Guess the devil is in the details.

I agree a tablet for a remote is not what I would want. It needs to be simple small and perform basic functions

said by JPL:

said by Onedollar:

I think in the press conference they mentioned a blue tooth remote?

Right... which is the Nexus tablet. Look at the press package. There's an item under there titled 'The new remote...' And they show a picture of the Nexus, and talk about the fact that the tablet will serve as your remote.

Now, to be fair, it doesn't say that they DON'T allow for a more traditional (albeit blue tooth) remote as well. That's one of those details that aren't there that I was talking about. But it's clear in the package that they're banking on you using the tablet as the remote.

I don't have an issue with that, for the most part, but many many consumers would. There's simply no wide acceptance for such a remote just yet. Even the FiOS remote android app that I now have on my phone - it's very cool, and works really well... but I can't say I'd be thrilled if Verizon told me that the only remote option available to me would be that app. That's what it SEEMS like Google is saying, but I don't know. Like I said - all in the execution.


lijacobs

join:2010-07-30
Lawrence, NY
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to JPL

said by JPL:

Right... which is the Nexus tablet. Look at the press package. There's an item under there titled 'The new remote...' And they show a picture of the Nexus, and talk about the fact that the tablet will serve as your remote.

If you look at the entire, long, tedious video of the announcement they do show one of the announcers holding a traditional, small remote. Each of the very small STB's (which is also a WAP and an ethernet swtch BTW) comes with a traditional, small remote. The Nexus tab is gravy.


Onedollar

join:2001-08-27
Pomona, CA
kudos:6

I noticed this too, the asian guy was holding a regular remote at one point


JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:4
reply to lijacobs

said by lijacobs:

said by JPL:

Right... which is the Nexus tablet. Look at the press package. There's an item under there titled 'The new remote...' And they show a picture of the Nexus, and talk about the fact that the tablet will serve as your remote.

If you look at the entire, long, tedious video of the announcement they do show one of the announcers holding a traditional, small remote. Each of the very small STB's (which is also a WAP and an ethernet swtch BTW) comes with a traditional, small remote. The Nexus tab is gravy.

Ok, I'll take that back, then. I didn't watch the video. I went by what was on their website. Just seems odd to make a point of the fact that your tablet is your remote on their website. I got the wrong impression... it's easy to see other consumers doing the same. Generally when you advertize some novelty, it's treated as an add-on, not as the main feature.

I'm sure much more will shake out as the product rolls out there and the various tech writers get their hands on it.


Metatron2008
Premium
join:2008-09-02
united state

Just get 1 ghz internet and directv. Problem solved.


PJL

join:2008-07-24
Long Beach, CA
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

said by Metatron2008:

Just get 1 ghz internet and directv. Problem solved.

Since Stockbridge GA does not have FiOS, why is your comment pertinent? I'm just curious, also what is "1 ghz internet?"


TitusTroy

join:2009-06-18
New York, NY
reply to navyson

can they use the same fiber lines as FiOS or do they have to build their own?



nycdave
Premium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:16

What do you think?



nascar

join:2000-02-28
Verona, NJ
kudos:3
reply to navyson

Google's plan (on the other hand) is to make their fiber network "open". Curious on how "open" that will be.



bohratom
Jersey Shore is back again.

join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ
reply to nycdave

said by nycdave:

What do you think?

BTW they could use dark fiber via Verizons Wholesale UNE division. But of course that would be a money loser for Google so they will roll out their own fiber rings.

My company is a CLEC in the Northeast and we routinely use Verizon's dark fiber via UNE.

billhere

join:2011-10-21
Santa Monica, CA
reply to navyson

Sounds like a great idea, but there's no way I'm moving from my house eight blocks from the beach in California to Kansas City. It's been well over 100 degrees there this week!

I'll stick with FiOS here, although I wouldn't mind picking up the Nexus 7 tablet for uses other than as a remote.


hubrisnxs

join:2009-12-30
Fountain Valley, CA
kudos:2
reply to navyson

might as well be in canada...



09129800

join:2012-06-27
New York, NY
reply to navyson

From what I see Google's already got most of the "must have" channels on board which offer exclusive content you can't get in superior form elsewhere.

said by JPL:

Same thing here. I really hope Google blows the doors off this thing. But for now, no offense, but you're getting wowd by marketing. They haven't actually executed anything yet. I'll also reiterate what Matcarl already pointed out - the utter lack of channels. No ESPN/Disney. No HBO. No CNN. No Fox suite of channels. No TNT, AMC, or TBS. Will they add them? Probably. At least most of them. I can't see this venture being successful without them (what kind of take-up rate will they have if they don't carry a channel like ESPN?)

I predict a huge uptake considering most people do NOT care about ESPN.

CNN - who cares? MSNBC, Fox News are fine for crappy "American" news; Al Jazeera for real news.

Disney - releases all of their content on Netflix and iTunes. The iTunes releases are actually better picture quality than their channel, primarily because Disney is stupid and broadcasts at 720p instead of 1080i. Also, no channel logo.

HBO - Overpriced for what they offer; reliably releases their good scripted shows on Blu-ray. So you really only need HBO for the rare new documentary and Real Time with Bill Maher.

Fox - anything of worth is also released on Blu-ray or iTunes

Turner networks - Cartoon Network is now releasing their shows in HD on iTunes so CN HD is not needed; TBS/TNT are junk channels. I'm sure most people can live without the Tyler Perry Network.

AMC - All of their shows are released on iTunes within hours of their first airing with better picture quality because their distribution feed is so atrocious; every one of them also eventually sees a Blu-ray release so AMC is another unnecessary channel. If you're actually watching AMC shows on the crappy AMC HD channel instead of alternate venues, you're doing it wrong.


aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA

1 edit
reply to navyson

I guess millions of people are wrong. The vast majority of people are not waiting for the AMC shows to come out on Blu-ray Disc. I know I'm certainly not going to buy any videos on iTunes. Although I do buy video content on Vudu, Xbox Live and Amazon though. But for shows like The Walking Dead, I'll watch them the night they air from my TiVos, and then buy the BD when they are released almost a year later.