dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
5161
share rss forum feed

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

4 edits

Google Fiber Kansas City

I fired TimeWarnerCable today.

Goodbye TWC, Hello Google Fiber
Now have the Gfiber TV/Gigabit service with 2 TV boxes, 2TB 500 hour DVR and it includes a Nexus 7 (2013) tablet, 2 Bluetooth remotes and 1TB cloud storage for $125. Was on TWC beforehand with about 20/1 and only basic HD channels for $95 - will make some comparisons. A gigabit (1 Gbps) is 1000 megabits per second (Mbps) and Google fiber really can do nearly 1Gbps/1000Mbps up and down.

Two other options are 1Gbit only (no TV) for $70/month or the 'free' 5Mbps for 7 years with $300 install fee.

Performance
Yes indeed. The bottom line is that computers/devices will go as fast as they can and other end connecting to - multiple devices likely won't interfere with each other. Was able to stream around 800Mbps from one computer (hard wired/ethernet) but when testing two computers concurrently, combined they were able to pull closer to 1Gbit total (see tests several posts down). On WiFi, my fastest laptop could pull 100-130Mbps. My tablets/phone can range from 15-100Mbps over WiFi, limited by the device, not Google. However if testing several wireless/wired devices at once, it can hit over 900Mbps total. Performance tests are posted below.

Also tested Google Drive, which syncs at over 100Mbps up/down, sometimes higher. Dropbox can do over 200 down but only does about 5 up.

Real World Uses
I was looking forward to the upload speed as I push fairly large files (35MB+) to work often (while on a call) and only had 20/1 on TWC. What would take many minutes on TWC takes seconds on GFiber, but still hits limits of the office VPN network. Dropbox/Google Drive syncs are 5-10 times faster as mentioned. Have Roku and Chromecast and videos naturally start faster with no re-buffering. VoIP also works much better (see below). Torrenting a few Linux ISOs (wink wink) pulled about 500Mbps but it depends on how many seeds/peers and speed of those. While some of these could be done with a 100-300M connection, several people in household can be doing many things at once on a gigabit and not limit or interfere with each other. I have over 15 devices in home connected to the Net. As The Internet of Things takes off, most any appliance could eventually connect.

TV
AMC is only lacking channel I notice but GFiber does include all the TWC 'extra' channels that I didn't have before (Nat Geo Wild, ID, MGM, G4, BBC, etc) and Latino/Asian/World channels that TWC would charge extra for. Unlike TWC SDV, the channels are not compressed (beyond original content provider) so no problems with high motion pixelation and picture is as clear as original content. The TV box can be controlled via tablet, bluetooth remote or your own smart IR remote - the nice thing about tablet and bluetooth is that you don't have to point remote to TV box. Logitech smart remotes have Google TV box configs in their database, was easy to setup. Gfiber TV can also be controlled from any other Android/iOS phone/tablet with app installed. The TV box also has Netflix, Vudu, YouTube with apparently plans to add more - hopefully they make the TV box a Chromecast receiver as well at some point. More later on TV. BTW, each TV box can also act as a WiFi repeater.

Here are all the channels and picture of the bluetooth remote....
»static.googleusercontent.com/med···city.pdf

Phone - VoIP
Google doesn't include phone service. I have Ooma VoIP for under $4/month. Given the improved latency and higher uplink, it's much clearer/crisper on both ends, no jitter. Some thought I was on a cell phone or VoIP with TWC. No one call tell difference on GFiber, even if uploading a large file while on a call (a major problem on TWC 1M uplink).

Installation
I'm in a condo hirise that Google pre-wired over a couple months up to the utility closets of each unit. After wired to all the utility closets, they then sent an email to schedule final install. I was able to schedule install date a few days after getting the notice. They arrived on time and cabled my unit exactly as I've asked them to. TWC would not wire my unit when I moved in and I had to hire a separate contractor to cable up two rooms. Google fiber contractors did what I asked with no problems - though need to be specific or they may take shortcuts. It took about 2 hours to wire/setup 2 rooms.

Other install tips: Be prepared to decide where you want them to place the fiber jack. They run fiber to the room from the outside and then run ethernet/CAT6 cable to network box. I had them put the fiber jack in my second room/office. It needs to have power nearby.

Fiber jack..
»dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3812···6.35.jpg

'Free' 5Mbps Service
Everyone in my building gets the 'free' 5/1 connection with option to upgrade. I believe 5M users have to pay a few $/month in taxes. A relative lives in a different condo building and has always been a light user, using her phone mostly for internet or bumming off her neighbors WiFi (with permission). She can afford Pay TV but never had any interest in it. She got the 'free' 5Mbps (as did everyone in her building too) and I set her up with Netflix/Chromecast and gave her an old tablet. The 5Mbps was more than enough for 720p Netflix while also browsing and the latency is as good as Gbit. She's changed from a mostly phone only Internet user to a much broader user, which I'd guess is what Google wants.

The Bad
The only downside I've noticed so far is that there is no favorite channels or custom guide feature, an annoying first world problem. I called support and they've added it to the 'requested features' list. There are also some other not so intuitive TV quirks but can be addressed with software updates. An example is when the DVR is in middle of recording something and you press play, it starts at live part, not beginning. It would be nice if they offered a middle tier but then few would do the Gbit option, which is an install base they likely want to create.

Feel free to ask any questions about service or tests you'd like me to perform.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

4 edits

1 recommendation

Speed tests...

Note that this is the fastest this one computer can go, Google Fiber isn't the limit. If testing 2 or more devices at same time, the total can hit closer to a Gbit. Edit: See a few posts below for concurrent tests.

KC to KC - within GFiber network



KC to KC - outside GFiber network



KC to NYC



KC to LA



KC to Chicago


existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

1 edit
Some traceroutes for nerds...

traceroute to www.washingtonpost.com (192.119.16.178), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets

traceroute to washingpost.com (198.72.14.16), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 networkbox.home (192.168.1.1) 1.017 ms 1.010 ms 0.999 ms
2 xx.xx.xx.xx (xx.xx.xx.xx) 3.349 ms 3.306 ms 3.297 ms
3 * * *
4 xx.xx.mci101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.70) 3.189 ms 3.142 ms 3.132 ms
5 ae0.ar01.ord101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.55) 13.509 ms 13.509 ms 13.699 ms
6 ae3.pr01.ord101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.65) 18.014 ms 16.180 ms 12.396 ms
7 10gigabitethernet4-1.core1.chi1.he.NET (206.223.119.37) 11.892 ms 11.506 ms 15.240 ms
8 100ge7-2.core1.nyc4.he.net (184.105.223.162) 28.976 ms 29.185 ms 29.359 ms
9 10ge4-1.core1.nyc5.he.net (184.105.213.218) 33.878 ms 33.561 ms 33.693 ms
10 lightower-fiber-networks.10gigabitethernet3-2.core1.nyc5.he.net (216.66.50.106) 29.067 ms 29.180 ms 29.402 ms
11 ae12.nycmnyzrj91.lightower.net (64.72.64.110) 42.257 ms 29.728 ms 42.220 ms
12 nwbrnynwc11.hvdata.net (72.22.160.13) 31.965 ms 31.944 ms 30.494 ms
13 xe-0-0-0-washdc12j41.lightower.net (72.22.160.11) 37.559 ms 37.556 ms 37.760 ms
14 72.22.160.194.available.lightower.net.160.22.72.in-addr.arpa (72.22.160.194) 38.322 ms 38.319 ms 37.551 ms
15 ge-0-1-4.pghknyshj42.lightower.net (72.22.160.197) 38.097 ms 38.331 ms 38.331 ms
16 72.22.160.251.available.lightower.net.160.22.72.in-addr.arpa (72.22.160.251) 39.196 ms 39.187 ms 39.554 ms
17 66.37.33.198.lightower.net (66.37.33.198) 40.326 ms 40.558 ms 40.667 ms
18 198.72.14.16 (198.72.14.16) 39.272 ms 39.274 ms 39.772 ms

traceroute amazon.com from Google Fiber in KC.. Curious that it appears to hop via Dallas to WA.

1 networkbox.home (192.168.1.1) 1.641 ms 1.629 ms 1.617 ms
2 xx.xx.xx.xx 3.494 ms 3.485 ms 3.477 ms
3 * * *
4 xx.xx.mci101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.70) 3.406 ms 3.406 ms 3.398 ms
5 ae0.ar01.dfw101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.53) 10.174 ms 10.430 ms 12.552 ms
6 ae4.pr01.dfw101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.67) 10.821 ms 10.404 ms 10.453 ms
7 xe-7-1-0.edge5.Dallas3.Level3.net (4.59.36.57) 10.443 ms 10.252 ms 10.429 ms
8 vlan80.csw3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.190) 34.840 ms vlan90.csw4.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.254) 35.544 ms 35.542 ms
9 ae-63-63.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.151.134) 35.941 ms ae-93-93.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.151.170) 35.304 ms ae-73-73.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.151.146) 36.209 ms
10 * * *
11 ae-2-2.ebr1.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.132.86) 35.407 ms 36.434 ms 36.644 ms
12 ae-71-71.csw2.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.134) 36.619 ms 36.621 ms ae-91-91.csw4.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.142) 36.985 ms
13 ae-2-70.edge3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.81) 37.073 ms ae-3-80.edge3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.145) 64.213 ms ae-4-90.edge3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.209) 35.133 ms
14 AMAZON.COM.edge3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.59.144.178) 36.753 ms AMAZON.COM.edge3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.59.144.174) 35.197 ms AMAZON.COM.edge3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.59.144.178) 35.096 ms
15 72.21.220.125 (72.21.220.125) 36.462 ms 36.450 ms 72.21.220.133 (72.21.220.133) 36.051 ms
16 72.21.222.147 (72.21.222.147) 37.279 ms 72.21.222.129 (72.21.222.129) 37.246 ms 72.21.222.33 (72.21.222.33) 37.991 ms

StubbyinKCMO

join:2008-11-15
Kansas City, MO
reply to existenz
Wish they would come to Riverside. Would love to have speeds like that. What part you in? KCMO or KCK?

At least they are moving toward the Northland. Brings some hope that they may include Riverside at some point.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

1 edit
I'm in a Plaza area fiberhood in KCMO. It's a condo hirise with nearly 150 units and all units are wired for Gfiber. Many in the area already have GFiber (we are one of last buildings in this zipcode to get it) yet I'm stilling getting these speeds.

BTW, the way it works for apt/condo buildings is that if a building comes to agreement with Google, the property owner/condo association pays $300 for every unit so everyone in building gets the 'free' 5Mbit service. For each person who upgrades to TV or Gbit, the property owner/condo assoc gets $300 back.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

1 edit
Here are tests from two high end laptops on same connection running tests concurrently. The total is well over 900Mbps on one connection and while there are probably other things going on in the fiberhood...






If you have 20 wifi devices that can only do 50Mbps each (like tablets), they will still stress Gfiber to near 1Gbit when doing all of them concurrently. Basically in a household with many active devices, they won't interfere with each other.


Msradell
P.E.
Premium
join:2008-12-25
Louisville, KY
reply to existenz
If they went nationwide all the other providers would be really hurting!!
--
Written using Dragon NaturallySpeaking


gatorkram
Need for Speed
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
reply to existenz
Some nice posts, with the speed and traceroutes.

Thanks

I had recently made a thread about fiber, and speedtests, its nice to see some traces too, seeing how low the latency is as you exit the google network.
--
What the heck is a GatorKram? »www.gatorkram.com

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2
^Thanks. And here are VoIP test stats from...

»www.onsip.com/tools/voip-test

VoIP test statistics
--------------------
Jitter: you --> server: 0.0 ms
Jitter: server --> you: 0.2 ms
Packet loss: you --> server: 0.0 %
Packet loss: server --> you: 0.0 %
Packet discards: 0.0 %
Packets out of order: 0.0 %
Estimated MOS score: 4.2

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
reply to existenz
FYI, "Washington" in the Level3 traceroute is D.C., not Seattle. So the trace to Amazon isn't too indirect.

Also, mind tracing to 108.61.204.176? It's in Dallas. My bet is you'll get there in 10ms.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

4 edits
said by iansltx:

Also, mind tracing to 108.61.204.176? It's in Dallas. My bet is you'll get there in 10ms.

This time it routed through Chicago before going to Dallas...

traceroute 108.61.204.176
traceroute to 108.61.204.176 (108.61.204.176), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 networkbox.home (192.168.1.1) 1.468 ms 1.448 ms 1.434 ms
2 xx.xx.xx.xx (xx.xx.xx.xx) 3.397 ms 3.401 ms 3.405 ms
3 * * *
4 xx.ar01.mci101.googlefiber.net (xx) 3.345 ms 3.328 ms 3.314 ms
5 ae0.ar01.ord101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.55) 13.475 ms 13.721 ms 13.718 ms
6 ae3.pr01.ord101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.65) 14.000 ms 11.548 ms 11.825 ms
7 xe-1-3-0.chi11.ip4.tinet.net (199.229.231.109) 11.668 ms 11.600 ms 11.687 ms
8 xe-3-2-0.dal33.ip4.tinet.net (141.136.109.150) 25.157 ms xe-2-0-0.dal33.ip4.tinet.net (89.149.185.85) 33.221 ms xe-3-1-0.dal33.ip4.tinet.net (89.149.180.246) 25.516 ms
9 gtt-gw.ip4.tinet.net (173.241.130.138) 25.622 ms 24.791 ms 24.588 ms
10 as20473.xe-5-1-2.cr1.dfw1.us.nlayer.net (69.31.63.238) 25.625 ms 25.182 ms 25.382 ms
11 108.61.204.176.vultr.com (108.61.204.176) 25.890 ms 26.127 ms 25.764 ms

Here's one to dallas.com, this one goes straight from KC (mci is KC airport code) to Dallas...

(66.111.96.159), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 networkbox.home (192.168.1.1) 1.000 ms 0.987 ms 0.974 ms
2 xx (xx) 2.847 ms 2.833 ms 2.816 ms
3 * * *
4 xx.ar01.mci101.googlefiber.net (xx) 2.756 ms 2.747 ms 2.864 ms
5 ae0.ar01.dfw101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.53) 12.002 ms 12.206 ms 12.176 ms
6 ae4.pr01.dfw101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.67) 12.256 ms 10.327 ms 10.293 ms
7 xe-7-1-0.edge5.Dallas3.Level3.net (4.59.36.57) 10.253 ms 54.555 ms 54.484 ms
8 ae-42-90.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.196) 10.957 ms ae-22-70.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.68) 11.164 ms 11.362 ms
9 HOSTING.COM.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.71.171.82) 11.587 ms 10.692 ms 10.700 ms
10 ae1-core1.dal01.hosting.com (199.168.255.5) 10.921 ms ae1-core2.dal01.hosting.com (199.168.255.7) 11.508 ms ae1-core1.dal01.hosting.com (199.168.255.5) 11.512 ms
11 199.168.255.21 (199.168.255.21) 12.078 ms po4-dist3.dal01.hosting.com (199.168.255.15) 12.253 ms 199.168.255.21 (199.168.255.21) 12.221 ms
12 66-111-96-159.neospire.net (66.111.96.159) 12.232 ms 12.468 ms 12.601 ms

Edit: I did various tests to coasts and looks like anything E goes through Chicago, anything W or S goes through Dallas, which is strange because KC has over 12 longhaul providers that have trunks from KC to both coasts. I would think Denver or Phoenix would be a hop if not straight to W coast.

Edit: Anyone happen to have IP or name of a Netflix streaming server, not the website but actual streaming server? I guess I'll do a tcpdump on a Netflix session and find one.

Edit: Here's a speedtest to a Dallas server...


nephipower

join:2012-02-20
San Antonio, TX
reply to existenz
Could you try doing a speed test to Microsoft Windows Azure data centers.

I am curious to see which is your lowest latency data center and what you average around.

»azurespeedtest.azurewebsites.net/

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

1 edit
said by nephipower:

Could you try doing a speed test to Microsoft Windows Azure data centers.

I am curious to see which is your lowest latency data center and what you average around.

»azurespeedtest.azurewebsites.net/

The lowest is around 80ms to a N Central US server, which seems poor. It might be on the Microsoft side because every traceroute I've done is below 50ms to anywhere in continental US. Edit: And for Central US, 10-15ms is more common.

nephipower

join:2012-02-20
San Antonio, TX
Which browser did you test with. I surprisingly found i got about 30-40 ms lower using IE instead of Chrome.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2
Huh, yeah IE gets 28ms while Chrome is much higher.


CoolMan

join:2008-01-07
Tennessee
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Charter
·Suddenlink
reply to existenz
said by existenz:

Edit: Anyone happen to have IP or name of a Netflix streaming server, not the website but actual streaming server? I guess I'll do a tcpdump on a Netflix session and find one.

Here is a few:

108.175.35.136

108.175.41.138

108.175.40.69

108.175.43.135


Nixinit

@rr.com
reply to existenz
Great review on Google Fiber. I'm also in KC and should get it installed in May. My question is concerning the TV HD recording. How many shows can you record at a time in HD? Also, does it force you to knock one down to SD like TWC does? Thanks again.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2
I think DVR can record 8 channels at once, all HD. I have noticed when I stress test to over 800Mpbs while recording, TV can start to pixelate. According to Google forums, they are working on giving TV full priority.

And if you don't like their router, you can use own with better QoS (quality of service) settings, etc. I have my own higher end router plugged in as a secondary but haven't tried it yet as the primary. Google router doesn't support 802.11ac (yet) but you can plug in a Wifi router that does and have at it.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2
reply to CoolMan
said by CoolMan:

said by existenz:

Edit: Anyone happen to have IP or name of a Netflix streaming server, not the website but actual streaming server? I guess I'll do a tcpdump on a Netflix session and find one.

Here are a few:

108.175.35.136

108.175.41.138

108.175.40.69

108.175.43.135

Thanks, I found what I connect to but it doesn't seem Google is using Netflix CDN yet. Maybe they don't need it.


Nixingit

@rr.com
reply to existenz
I appreciate the info. Thanks!

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2
reply to existenz
Is curious to see how Windows and Linux perform on a lower end netbook. I have a Win7 Atom-based netbook that is setup to dual boot Linux Mint. On exact same netbook, hardwired, it can do over 600Mbps down running Linux but Win7 can only do about 150.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

2 edits
reply to existenz
said by existenz:

And if you don't like their router, you can use own with better QoS (quality of service) settings, etc. I have my own higher end router plugged in as a secondary but haven't tried it yet as the primary. Google router doesn't support 802.11ac (yet) but you can plug in a Wifi router that does and have at it.

Edit: I was able to get a NetGear R4500 to work on same segment as Google router when putting Netgear in AP mode. It can't replace Google's and it also doesn't do 802.11ac but conceptuallly adding your own 802.11ac router should work in AP mode.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2
Picked up Sprint's Galaxy S5 yesterday. Google Fiber performs well for WiFi. The top 3 are Google Fiber/WiFi, the bottom 3 are on Sprint LTE Spark at home...

»dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3812···0GS5.png

nephipower

join:2012-02-20
San Antonio, TX
Dang those are some pretty impressive wireless speeds.

Are you using the Google Network box for wireless or did you setup your own router?

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2
From either GFiber Network Box or from my own router. But only with the 5Ghz connection. In comparison, the Nexus 7 2013 tablet pulls about 100Mbps while the GS5 phone can approach 200.

For those with GFiber, I noticed the default SSID name of 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz are the same in the router settings. Make sure they are different because devices that support both may connect to the 2.4Ghz. I had to change the name of one of them in order to connect go 5G.

nephipower

join:2012-02-20
San Antonio, TX
Out of curiosity could you try doing a bunch of pings to 167.24.23.60?

I am interested to see what kind of ping you get. How much latency there is all the way from KC to San Antonio.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2
ping 167.24.23.60
PING 167.24.23.60 (167.24.23.60) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 167.24.23.60: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=19.9 ms
64 bytes from 167.24.23.60: icmp_seq=2 ttl=243 time=19.8 ms
64 bytes from 167.24.23.60: icmp_seq=3 ttl=243 time=19.7 ms
64 bytes from 167.24.23.60: icmp_seq=4 ttl=243 time=19.8 ms
^C
--- 167.24.23.60 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3005ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 19.796/19.874/19.984/0.072 ms

traceroute 167.24.23.60
traceroute to 167.24.23.60 (167.24.23.60), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 networkbox.home (192.168.1.1) 1.258 ms 1.246 ms 1.232 ms
2 xx.xx.xx.xx 3.362 ms 3.352 ms 3.333 ms
3 * * *
4 ae10.ar01.mci101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.70) 3.258 ms 3.246 ms 3.227 ms
5 ae0.ar01.dfw101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.53) 12.235 ms 12.429 ms 12.521 ms
6 ae4.pr01.dfw101.googlefiber.net (192.119.17.67) 12.769 ms 10.491 ms 10.478 ms
7 xe-7-1-0.edge5.Dallas3.Level3.net (4.59.36.57) 10.581 ms 10.382 ms 10.436 ms
8 vlan60.csw1.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.62) 15.264 ms 15.554 ms vlan80.csw3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.190) 15.831 ms
9 ae-71-71.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.151.138) 15.810 ms 15.811 ms ae-91-91.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.151.162) 16.192 ms
10 ae-1-13.bar1.Houston1.Level3.net (4.69.137.137) 16.271 ms 16.610 ms 14.843 ms
11 UNITED-SERV.bar1.Houston1.Level3.net (4.34.205.42) 19.998 ms 20.165 ms 20.155 ms
12 a167-24-11-33.deploy.static.x.com (167.24.11.33) 20.712 ms 20.708 ms 19.837 ms

nephipower

join:2012-02-20
San Antonio, TX
wow, this just illustrates the sad state of internet today.

My ping to this ip address in my city averages around 29 ms. So even though your ping is traveling way further than mine, it takes about 30% less time.

Well, luckily San Antonio is one of the proposed cities to be getting GF and I really hope it does get built out here.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

3 edits
reply to existenz
So the two biggest complaints I've noted about GF TV in original review are the lack of custom guides and not starting DVR recordings at beginning while recording. Fixed - nice.

Edit: New features..
»support.google.com/fiber/answer/3485424

Now if they would just add DMZ to the router.

Edit: I'm not able to update the original post anymore. A permanent review thread has been moved over here...

»Review of Google Fiber by existenz

nephipower

join:2012-02-20
San Antonio, TX
reply to existenz
existenz could you comment on a new thread I made about Google TV?

»Comments about Google Fiber TV Picture Quality