said by tmc8080:Who else is left..? Verizon doesn't want any more geography, unless it's $10+ a gigabyte wireless data. What I meant was this premise (for google) to expand beyond it's original deployments and out of the two google lottery winning states. West Virginia and North Carolina come to mind. Also, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico.
Just CenturyLink. Since AT&T is already effectively challenged by Google (check the DSLR AT&T Southwest forum; both Kansas and Missouri are covered), their North Carolina (AT&T Southeast) presence is included.
How about Comcast? Do they have a KCK/KCMO presence?
It's also time for consumers to lose the apathy, to rise up and push for change to incubment power which solidifies ISP monopolies (ensuring bad corporate behaviors) ...
Okay. One either signs up for service from an incumbent (apathy), or does without. One could vote for change in government, since government regulations are contributing to the problem; but look at the 2012 election results to see how that went. The voters pretty much chose the
status quo ante.
Google fiber is a reasonable alternative to that gridlock and will prove that a partnership model can move consumer access to broadband forward where it's been buried for generations. While it's not the only model that can succeed, it's the one with the money behind it to push back against incumbent lobbying and corruption to protect doing NOTHING and charging consumers more for less.
But Google doesn't seem to want to expand beyond KCK/KCMO. And even in areas with effective incumbent challengers, such as Paxio (in Santa Clara, California) and Sonic.net, LLC (Fusion and fiber in the S.F. Bay Area), people aren't leaving the incumbents (AT&T, Comcast, Road Runner, and Verizon) in droves for the challengers. Apathy? Or uncertainty that the "little guy" will still be around in ten years?