Google: So Where Should Google Fiber Go Next?

[mayankleoboy1]

^ First world internet problems :lol:

 

[yamahahornist]

Yucaipa California; I am tired of Verizon and NEED my Google

 

[langroyia]

[citation][nom]shikamaru31789[/nom]Google Fiber makes me sad because I know it'll never come to my area. My area sucks for internet, I'm paying for $40 a month for Verizon DSL, 1.5 mbits/sec and my latency is often as high as 300ms and here I am trying to game on this crappy connection. So much lag![/citation]
feeling bad for you ..

 

[largg]

Indianapolis! Now to think of a clever reason the choose my city other than I want it.

 

[Guest]

Canada! Well, one can always dream.

 

[Guest]

Omaha is the logical next choice given that the television feed for KC originates there.

 

[Marco925]

CANADA!

 

[tomwaddle]

They are building a second data center in Iowa and they are the closest among those listed in the article.

 

[DWillyEfect]

Bowdon, Georgia......please? sadface.jpg

 

[troutickuss]

Maine :-DDDD

 

[Guest]

Little Rock. Do it.

 

[somebodyspecial]

Phoenix AZ. In a 30 mile radius you'd take a good few million customers and we'd all happily pay $100 for even 100mbit. I'm paying it now for 20-30mbit unlimited business. 250GB cab at $64 so you could even get people at unlimited with say 40mbit for $60 easily. It would seem to me you should go where the money is first to pay for the rest (meaning, density, with a large portion of people already paying your rate or more and getting screwed, hence mass instant customers). Anyone on a cap would take unlimited for the same or $10-20 more. You'd get a lot of customers in this area just because of the density in such a small area to cover. A straight line down route 60 with 10mi or so on each side of it and you get most of our population in a 30 mile stretch. I'd be happy to pay $100 for unlimited at 50mbit. That's nearly double what I have now in speed.

Also CA is right next door for another huge population area and they seem to enjoy being ripped off. They overpay all their state workers (police chief gets 350K, teachers 120K, it's ridiculous). Surely you could get 120/house there for unlimited 100mbit. Between these two states you'd have at least 10mil customers. Package it with netflix/roku for a 3yr contract and laugh as you kill cable. Content would beg to be on your network because it would be costing them too much not to be on it as we'd all leave our current ISP's in a heartbeat given the chance at 1/10 what your offering speed wise.

 

[lghost]

i would be happy with st. louis... what is this about free internet? does it have a limit?

 

[mclat72]

Actaully, Wichita, KS would make the most sense. In between Wichita and KC are Lawrence and Manhattan (KU and KSU) Topeka, Emporia, and Salina (sort of). Then roll on to OKC and Tulsa respectively.

 

[Guest]

fuck the usa, they have fast enough lines that are cheap. come to south africa.

i pay 1000 a month for an 400 kb/s line, thats 1/3 a ps3 price. and the service is shit, the line is never constantly on etc..

and i cant go anywhere else because there is a monopoly, unless you are willing to go to wireless and then you will really suffer.

 

[pckitty4427]

AUCKLAND!!!!!!!!

 

[Pherule]

Meanwhile, some people in my country are still stuck on 1GB caps. (home connection, not cellphone connection)

 

[aeurix]

Hit up all major towns from Kansas City east on 70 (St Louis, Indianapolis, Dayton, Columbus, Pittsburg, then Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia and New york). Each stage of release would be to larger and larger concentrated populations, testing the capabilities of the network.

 

[sporkimus]

How about ALL over the US. I hate Comcast...

 

[Jigo]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]EDIT: Also, my ISP does not have a QoS. That means P2P and Netflix gets the same priority as VoIP or gaming. Disaster usually occurs.[/citation]
i doubt that