Fiber OpticsIt’s been a couple of years since Google started building its gigabit network in Kansas City — and attitudes toward ultra-high-speed networks have changed a lot in that time.

Initially many people saw gigabit service to the home as overkill. But skeptics now seem to see the logic of future-proofing networks, particularly now that network operators have found creative ways of minimizing construction costs — such as seeking synergies with stakeholders or beginning construction in individual neighborhoods when a pre-determined number of residents have anted up a deposit toward future service.

Telecompetitor has reported on numerous network operators that announced gigabit network plans this year including:

And all of these projects were announced after the Institute for Self-Reliance early this year identified 35 gigabit projects in the U.S., including several that resulted from the Gig. U initiative to bring ultra high speed broadband to university communities.

Telecompetitor looks forward to bringing news about more gigabit networks to you in 2014.

In the meantime, you can read about other important broadband developments of 2013 in a year-end wrap-up published on the Telecompetitor Plus site. Click here to register for a free trial subscription to Telecompetitor Plus.

Join the Conversation

3 thoughts on “2013: The Year We Stopped Scoffing at Gigabit Networks

  1. Anything short of FTTH is a mistake, IMO. Anything less will end up being a disappointment.

    No FTTP, No FTTN, No NBN, No Premise that does not go into the home. Nothing less than fiber, no cable, or anything else less than fiber.

    Most importantly, No Fiber that does not allow for the same un-throttled broadband upstream as downstream! 10Mb/10Mb; 30Mb/30Mb, 50Mb/50Mb/, 1Gb/1Gb, etc… Even 1Mb/1Mb would be better than the throttled cable broadband of 20Mb/2Mb, that after throttling becomes equal to or less than 300Kb / 30Kb. Usually 101Kb/20Kb per DD-WRT firmware on a supported firewall/router. If the second number (upstream) is less than the first number (downstream) its a waste of time and effort. If the service has to be throttled for the company to make money, they should go out of business and do something else. No more BS.

    No Throttling, no limits, no restrictions, no excuses. Its telling that there are barely over 20 communities in the USA that offer the same bandwidth upstream as downstream:

    Fibber To The Home, all the way into the home! Let the companies that are willing, compete at the switching station, preferably have the switching stations controlled/owned by the community in which the customers reside to stop the current abuse of throttling propagated by lies (scarcity myth, copyright, theft, bitnet torrents, etc…. Do not allow the fiber network and switching stations to be owned by any independent corporate entity that will attempt to spread the scarcity myth to enrich their bottom line at the expense of their customers. Since the Telecos did not provide the fiber as promised in 1990 that Japan realized through the deregulation of NTT only in 2000 (they did not have the farce that was the 1996 Telecommunications Act) they no longer deserve any monopolies, duopolies, tax incentives and should be forced to pay back the money (government loans and grants) and reimburse the fees (fiber taxes, many still on customer's bills today, but called something else, to customers for their transgressions. Their transgression, not providing the Fiber to customers they promised to provide in 1990. That promise is not excused simply because one telco declared bankruptcy and another telco bribed their way into obtaining the territory. No more excuses, put up fiber or go away.

    Anything less than Fiber To The Home (FTTH) is inferior, unacceptable, so go elsewhere for your failing business model.

    The FTTH links (from switching station to home) to be owned by the homeowner and sold with the property the home sits on. This increased the value of a home by an estimated $5,000.00! That home can be sold for $5,000 more simply because it has that Fiber link. The cost of running a fiber link in most locations runs to between $1,500 and $3,000 dollars. Probably less as companies do not run them one at a time, ever.

    So 5G, 4G, anything-G networks are pathetic by comparison.

  2. This then links to the same issue as always, haves and have nots. The nicely curbed, finely cut grass yards will have fiber, and the project, the lower income housing, will still be struggling with twisted pair. It’s always about money. The Educator.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Don’t Miss Any of Our Content

What’s happening with broadband and why is it important? Find out by subscribing to Telecompetitor’s newsletter today.

You have Successfully Subscribed!