Comcast XFINITY → Netflix ranks ISP performance, Comcast is 3rd

Netflix ranks ISPs by streaming performance, Google Fiber wins, Comcast is in thrid place.

»blog.netflix.com/2012/12 ··· usa.html

Our 30 million members view over 1 billion hours of Netflix per month, so we have very reliable data for consumers to compare ISPs in terms of real world performance.

Starting today, we’ll publish monthly rankings of major ISPs based upon their actual performance across all Netflix streams. ...

So why do Google fiber users even need Netflix?
don't they get the best TV package dirt cheap?

I guess the answer to that would depend upon what you mean by "best TV package".

How can Google Fiber be ranked the highest? They only offer service to about 10 households. When the offer service to more people then let's see their rankings.

looks like they ranked it accdg to bandwidth which explains the speeds beside the name and not by counting the users accessing their servers...

My kids watch a ton of netflix, and we've never had an issue on Comcast service. That said, most of what they watch is cartoons which a) is smaller in general and b) compresses better.

Those rankings don't surprise me at all.

Sarcasm aside , there's time-shifting. Plus, many of the even slightly older shows in syndication are not aired in wide-screen even when the content is (which is really annoying).

Right cause Comcast can compete speedwise.... I don't care if Google served 10 houses, their speeds are so far ahead that Comcast can't see them, and their prices beat them all...

Just let Google get a hold in a big market......

and the 0.02mbps lead by fios is no doubt really awesome

Given that the typical FiOS subscriber probably levels out at 25-35mbps, it's "awesome" that FiOS is only that far back. I guess Netflix is the real "problem". HoHoHo

Most of their SD content is 2mbit/s tops. Hence why the average is dragged down.

easier to watch content on the computer than to watch a tv

i watch via boxee box or netflix on tv

I have Performance and I watch Netflix TV shows and Movies just fine in HD over Xbox Live. I even watched how fast a 1080p YouTube clip would load at the same time and in most cases (unless Google or Netflix has too much traffic) both YouTube and Netflix both load fine.

More portable perhaps, and fine for one, but most would choose to put it on as big a screen as the resolution will scale too.
you can easily watch 2 Netflix "HD" streams and do some light browsing on performance tier.

My point was TESTING 1 gig fiber with a 2.5Mbps source is a joke.
believing the numbers generated by the first 1-100 users on fiber VS the AVERAGE of everyone from Comcast Domains (which includes those trying to stream to their phones on overloaded cell/public Wi-Fi in the east coast area is equally laughable.

not sure why Karl loves this story quite this much (on the front page 2 days running) other than his google and fiber fetishes.

You can't beat a good Fiber

Google Fiber should not be in the rankings because they are not a "major Internet Service Provider".

Google Fiber is an experiment.

»Sorry, Google Fiber Really Is Just An Experiment [125] comments

As long as they aren't using experimental money with which to pay Netflix each month, I don't think Netflix really cares what ISP their subscribers use or what labels get tossed about in their blog and news articles. They probably include Google Fiber because they're the fastest in the stats compiled by Netflix for these rankings, and--more importantly perhaps--those Netflix/Google Fiber subscribers make an excellent control group for comparison. I expect Netflix execs and Google Fiber customers would say: "Major, schmajor. Speed is king." (even if the "margin of victory" is rather slim)

Anyway, there are other ISPs of dubious "majority" in the list aren't there?

That's just the opinion of an overly ambitious editor, even though you state it as a fact.

Here are other opinions, based upon people who have actually talked with Google and travelled to Kansas City to see the deployment in action:

»online.barrons.com/artic ··· 932.html

ONE OF THE MORE TANTALIZING themes is Google's effort to wire homes with a billion bits worth of broadband at a dirt-cheap price.

The "Google Fiber" project, as it's called, offers subscribers a gigabit of Internet for $70 a month, after a $300 installation fee, which Google is currently waiving.

That is 100 times the speed of a normal cable package for the same price. For another $50, Google will add television service, where it has inked a deal to show Walt Disney (DIS) content, and offerings from major cable networks.

Google in years to come could, conceivably, be serious competition for the telephone company broadband offerings, such as Verizon Communications' (VZ) FiOS, and AT&T's (T) U-verse. It could certainly give the cable multi-system operators a run for their money as well.

It's early days for Google Fiber, but the response from Wall Street and some cognoscenti is overwhelmingly positive. BTIG Research's Rich Greenfield, who formally covers Time Warner Cable (TWC) and doesn't rate Google shares, traveled to Kansas City last month with his colleague Walter Piecyk, and observed the service firsthand. When I asked Greenfield whether Google Fiber could go national—Kansas City is currently its sole test market—he replied, "They are far more serious than people give them credit for."

"My suspicion is it's going to grow, based on Google's interest in expanding its user base," Greenfield adds, "and based, too, on the fact that anyone who can afford this [$70 a month] would want to have it, no question." Whether it will really come to many other cities depends on how quickly Google can move into other markets, given that it took it two years to get into one market.

Blair Levin, a fellow at the Communications and Society Program at the Aspen Institute who helped draft the FCC's national broadband plan in 2010, tells me that "the real genius of what Google is doing is that they've figured out how to deliver a gigabit of bandwidth much more cheaply."

As Levin sees it, there are two costs to broadband, capital expenditures, and operating expenditures. Leaving aside the raw cost of fiber, Google's got most everyone beat when it comes to running a big network. "There are only a few companies in the world that can get operating expense down to the kind of level Google has got it when you're talking about transporting bits," he says.

Google won't take over broadband overnight—it will take many years—but it's the kind of exciting investment—a bet on a market "disruptor," a bet on the future of television, a bet against the cable companies—that is seriously interesting to a tech investor, and much more interesting than wondering how many PCs will be sold this year and next.

It's pretty simple really. Give everyone a gigabit NIC, connect them to a router, and just get out of the way. Such real networks are simple, efficient, and self-managing as long as you're not trying to squeeze every penny out of your customers that you possibly can with caps and baby-step upgrades. Yep, simplicity... real genius.