Frontier is about to offer 7-gig fiber across several states(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Frontier is about to offer 7-gig fiber across several states
https://www.theverge.com/2024/8/26/24228639/frontier-7-gig-fiber-speed-rollout-plan-pricing
83 comments
I think it makes sense for offices where there are more people doing more things.
It is expensive to use more than 1Gbps. Need router that can do 2.5GBps or 10GBps. For business have separate access points, need switches and APs that can do 2.5Gbps.
It is expensive to use more than 1Gbps. Need router that can do 2.5GBps or 10GBps. For business have separate access points, need switches and APs that can do 2.5Gbps.
That I agree with, I guess I kinda always figured that businesses could already get internet at higher speed / bandwidth. Otherwise many offices would be abysmal.
The use cases might lag behind the infra. All the services we use today are designed around the constraint of lopsided upload/download bandwidth on broadband. If you build it, it will come.
I get what you are saying, but Fios launched their 1gb internet in 2017 and it feels like most services have been stuck at their specific speed since then.
I was curious, so I just went to download the Windows 11 ISO from Microsoft. That is capping out at about 70 mbps. Downloading an almost 7gb file in 2 minutes.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying "oh we don't need this speed". But clearly things have not been changing. We have been past my current download speed from Microsoft being a minimum for a while.
I was curious, so I just went to download the Windows 11 ISO from Microsoft. That is capping out at about 70 mbps. Downloading an almost 7gb file in 2 minutes.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying "oh we don't need this speed". But clearly things have not been changing. We have been past my current download speed from Microsoft being a minimum for a while.
Try Steam
I just tried it and it is currently at about 918, which yeah it is high and using a lot of the available speed.
I mentioned Xbox getting to 500, so yeah there are some that are. But you're not downloading a game every day, at least not ones that are 50gb and won't just finish very quickly.
So that is 2 things that actually seem to utilize the speed that I can get, but it doesn't seem like the rest of the internet is anywhere near this capability and hasn't really been changing much.
I mentioned Xbox getting to 500, so yeah there are some that are. But you're not downloading a game every day, at least not ones that are 50gb and won't just finish very quickly.
So that is 2 things that actually seem to utilize the speed that I can get, but it doesn't seem like the rest of the internet is anywhere near this capability and hasn't really been changing much.
An era of uncompressed 4K?
For clarification: Frontier's rural, degrading DSL is a physically larger (though less dense) footprint than the FiOS they bought from Verizon. That DSL continues to rot in place. Unless something has changed recently, there are no meaningful plans to ever upgrade it to fiber.
My personal position is that customers in outlying areas deserve worthwhile, reliable internet access - even if that reduces shareholder dividends and executive bonuses.
My personal position is that customers in outlying areas deserve worthwhile, reliable internet access - even if that reduces shareholder dividends and executive bonuses.
My first thought was "From their planes???" [1]
But for real. Seeing as most consumers are using WiFi, a quick google suggests the fastest WiFi standard is 1.3Gbps, what is the usecase besides super users who are willing to wire everything? (Is that 1.3Gbps per device and so a combo of devices can use 7gig?)
[1]: for those not in the US -- "Frontier [airlines]" is a ultra low cost airline
But for real. Seeing as most consumers are using WiFi, a quick google suggests the fastest WiFi standard is 1.3Gbps, what is the usecase besides super users who are willing to wire everything? (Is that 1.3Gbps per device and so a combo of devices can use 7gig?)
[1]: for those not in the US -- "Frontier [airlines]" is a ultra low cost airline
Many users, wifi extenders. Supporting what may be instead of the bare minimum. Take your pick.
I get > 2 Gbps goodput on my Wi-Fi but I think you're right that this $310/m offering is aimed squarely at similar power users. 10G-PON uses the same stuff at the back end regardless if they offer 1.1 Gbps or 7 Gbps service so they might as well offer the larger pipe if they can.
WiFi development doesn't stop.
We also don't know when we need more.
When corona hit, a lot of people realized that there normal internet speed was not enough.
Fiber availability means also a general better availability for people, companies or other organizations to have it when needed (a more rural school for example).
I can also see a future with robots: Imagine you are old and need help. But you only need help a few hours a day for food, cleaning etc. Buy a robot, have someone remote help you through using the robot (video streaming, spacial data streaming, voice, audio etc.)
We also don't know when we need more.
When corona hit, a lot of people realized that there normal internet speed was not enough.
Fiber availability means also a general better availability for people, companies or other organizations to have it when needed (a more rural school for example).
I can also see a future with robots: Imagine you are old and need help. But you only need help a few hours a day for food, cleaning etc. Buy a robot, have someone remote help you through using the robot (video streaming, spacial data streaming, voice, audio etc.)
Directionally that's true, but as a counterexample, I've never really had a need for anything > 10 Mbit/s while working from home, and maybe 50 Mbit/s for VOD streaming in the evening.
Much more important than high peak data rates was getting those 10 Mbit/s consistently throughout the workday, and in both uplink as well as downlink.
For that, top speeds per individual connection are almost meaningless; what matters is a not-oversubscribed network. I nominally got 1 Gbit/s, but during Covid often saw that slow down to 0.3 Mbit/s during business hours.
I'd much rather pay for 100 Mbit/s with an SLA (maybe something like "at least 50 Mbit/s to your city's top three POPs at the 99th percentile or you don't pay for the entire month"?) than for "up to 7 Gigabit!!!" with none.
Much more important than high peak data rates was getting those 10 Mbit/s consistently throughout the workday, and in both uplink as well as downlink.
For that, top speeds per individual connection are almost meaningless; what matters is a not-oversubscribed network. I nominally got 1 Gbit/s, but during Covid often saw that slow down to 0.3 Mbit/s during business hours.
I'd much rather pay for 100 Mbit/s with an SLA (maybe something like "at least 50 Mbit/s to your city's top three POPs at the 99th percentile or you don't pay for the entire month"?) than for "up to 7 Gigabit!!!" with none.
> a quick google suggests the fastest WiFi standard is 1.3Gbps,
For now you're correct, but this year there is expected to be a new WiFi standard.
802.11be (Wi-Fi 7) 2.4/5/6 GHz Up to 46 Gbps
For now you're correct, but this year there is expected to be a new WiFi standard.
802.11be (Wi-Fi 7) 2.4/5/6 GHz Up to 46 Gbps
I suppose I could have my security camera DVR entirely offsite. That thieves could steal it is kind of a weakness, and I’ve been too lazy to complete my project to auto upload smaller clips based on Frigate detection.
The article says Frontier currently offers fiber internet in most of the 25 states it serves. This is a weird way of saying it's in 18 states.
The vast majority Frontier's FiOS is in California, Texas, Florida and New York. Frontier's little footprints in other states are basically them padding their resume.
The vast majority Frontier's FiOS is in California, Texas, Florida and New York. Frontier's little footprints in other states are basically them padding their resume.
[deleted]
I always laugh at these offerings. Even 1gb symmetrical. Most people pay for this and then run it through the cheap Wifi router the ISP gives you that will max out at 100 mbit.
At $309/month, something tells me the plan is only going to be of interest to the technically savvy.
Yes, this my first knee jerk reaction as well. Just because the fiber is cable of a speed does not mean that you will receive that speed. Unless you are trying to serve multiple devices simultaneous, there's very few things that will support that bandwidth. Even trying to use the AWS CLI to move data to/from a bucket will not saturate my available bandwidth.
Being too fast to easily saturate is a benefit. It keeps your ping low.
In Europe we have had gigabit at home for 8+ years (and it is cheap - 15$/month), and gigabit routers are provided by the ISP, why wouldn't it be the same everywhere else.
It is not like gigabit is state of the art anymore, we are now starting to upgrade to 10 gigabit at home, 1 gigabit routers are cheap, and ISP's buy them in bulk.
It is not like gigabit is state of the art anymore, we are now starting to upgrade to 10 gigabit at home, 1 gigabit routers are cheap, and ISP's buy them in bulk.
I am using the router my ISP provided, a Technicolor one, it happily handles over 500mb/s in both directions for a service sold as 500.
You shouldn't because you clearly don't understand it.
If good/faster fiber is easily available to everyone, this also includes people or organizations who need it and benefit from it.
Also just because you coulduse it, doesn't mean you need to but fiber as a technology is a lot better than copper which is the main reason why we had slow internet for ages.
Fiber has a lot less issues with powerlines (basically none). Its a lot faster, you can have a lot longer lines without performance degredation like dsl or vdsl.
And if these people actually need to upgrade, they can just buy a new Wifi router or use a cable. But with a slow copper line, they don't have any option.
If good/faster fiber is easily available to everyone, this also includes people or organizations who need it and benefit from it.
Also just because you coulduse it, doesn't mean you need to but fiber as a technology is a lot better than copper which is the main reason why we had slow internet for ages.
Fiber has a lot less issues with powerlines (basically none). Its a lot faster, you can have a lot longer lines without performance degredation like dsl or vdsl.
And if these people actually need to upgrade, they can just buy a new Wifi router or use a cable. But with a slow copper line, they don't have any option.
This comes with a wifi 7 router
I will be surprised if you can leverage all the bandwidth even with wifi 7. Performance will probably drop off a cliff once you move a little away from the point and in cities the interference from your neighbours will probably mean you actual speed is way lower than the theoretical speed.
If you need this speed you should be hardwired not of wifi IMHO. Great for servers. Preferably use fiber to the servers not 10gb Ethernet. I've been meaning to run fiber to my outbuildings, may as well go 10gb+ for that, it doesn't cost much more.
If I don't have to run fiber and still get acceptable performance, it's just more convenient. Question is, how does it do in the rain and/or with trees/hills/buildings in the way?
why are you using 7g if you don't need speed? Wifi 7 can maybe keep up but it has distance limitations and so fiber is better.
of course if performance is accaptable is the real question. But if you are happy on wifi you can be satisfied with a cheaper plan, or so I'm guessing
of course if performance is accaptable is the real question. But if you are happy on wifi you can be satisfied with a cheaper plan, or so I'm guessing
Where the theoretical max speed for Wifi 7 is something ludicrous, if I can only get 800 Mibps actual speed I'm not going to cry that hard. Wifi 6's max speed is also stupid fast compared to most consumer Internet connections.
You shouldn't have tons of interference on 5 and 6 GHz.
Even without wifi 7 and just using 5GHz, I think your estimate of 100mbit and that gigabit is too much for wifi is overly pessimistic.
Even without wifi 7 and just using 5GHz, I think your estimate of 100mbit and that gigabit is too much for wifi is overly pessimistic.
Frontier is one of the worst Telcos I've ever dealt with. A friend had their ADSL Service. Something went wrong the lines in her area. They gave her a 4 month ETA on the restoration of service. They tried to tell her she had to continue paying her bill while she had no service and once service was restored they would consider a partial credit.
They were content to just let their Copper network rot, and didn't start doing fiber until there was state and federal money to do it. meanwhile our local Telephone CO-OP went all in on fiber years ago and now offers 8gb Fiber to your door for about 175 a month.
They were content to just let their Copper network rot, and didn't start doing fiber until there was state and federal money to do it. meanwhile our local Telephone CO-OP went all in on fiber years ago and now offers 8gb Fiber to your door for about 175 a month.
Hard disagree. For most of a decade they've provided me with reliable symmetric gigabit fiber with only one slight price increase of $10 more per month. Meanwhile my neighbors on Comcast have to call every single year to try to convince another support representative to not increase their price by 20%.
I'm sure its different in more metropolitan areas. this is in rural Georgia near Savannah.
You're both right. Frontier bought up established infrastructure.
Where that purchase was DSL nearing end of life, Frontier neglects much of the network. West Virginia and the NorthEast US are degrading by the day.
Verizon's FiOS was very well engineered and Frontier acquired it near the beginning of it's life. Even there Frontier spends less than Verizon did. They abandoned Verizon's IPv6 deployment, for example.
Where that purchase was DSL nearing end of life, Frontier neglects much of the network. West Virginia and the NorthEast US are degrading by the day.
Verizon's FiOS was very well engineered and Frontier acquired it near the beginning of it's life. Even there Frontier spends less than Verizon did. They abandoned Verizon's IPv6 deployment, for example.
Frontier, Lumen, and Windstream are all pretty much the same on this. They all were built on a base of ancient POTS infrastructure and do the minimum required to continue collecting universal service fund subsidies from the government for those accounts. All three are mainly focused on high value backbone and business services, with residential customer growth being mainly cable and fiber in areas that are dense and affluent (relatively speaking). Low income rural areas are of little interest to them even though that's how they were founded. Should the subsidy from the universal service fund ever go away, they'll quickly stop selling ADSL service in those areas.
In the long run, both the users and the government probably would be better off if everyone switched to Starlink.
In the long run, both the users and the government probably would be better off if everyone switched to Starlink.
They didn't even start a build out initially, they bought most of their fiber from Verizon. Which ironically sent them into bankruptcy.
My development doesn’t have above ground wiring.
All the Frontier fiber options in my area are not available to me.
Comcast xfinity is the only option.
All the Frontier fiber options in my area are not available to me.
Comcast xfinity is the only option.
We have an 8 gig option through i3 fiber in Illinois. I’ve no need, but it does have me wanting to get there with 10 gigabit networking equipment.
Also, as an anchor price, it’s assuring that 1 and 2 gigs are easy.
For other Illinois readers, i3 customer support and the installation were excellent. After Comcast it’s been refreshing to just pick up the phone or start a live chat and immediately talk to a human with agency. And they do deliver the promised symmetrical speeds.
Also, as an anchor price, it’s assuring that 1 and 2 gigs are easy.
For other Illinois readers, i3 customer support and the installation were excellent. After Comcast it’s been refreshing to just pick up the phone or start a live chat and immediately talk to a human with agency. And they do deliver the promised symmetrical speeds.
I consider myself on the higher end of bandwidth consumption, but it's challenging to see myself ever saturating a 7Gb link. I've been struggling to get 10G working in my house -- 2.5Gb sort-of works, but there's just so much equipment to upgrade in the meantime. I had to get a fibre link installed just to connect two parts of my network together and doing that as a regular-joe consumer is practically impossible.
I wonder if they are counting on the fact that it's practically un-saturable as a home user.
I wonder if they are counting on the fact that it's practically un-saturable as a home user.
When I moved a few years ago into Verizon Fios territory, I was excited about the 1Gb/s upload speed vs the 20Mb/s I had with my previous cable provider. I WFH, and upload a lot of kernels and entire OS images to our test servers.
My excitement was short-lived. Soon after moving, I realized that our internal VPN implementation was limited to 50-60Mbs/. So had 50x more upload bandwidth than before, but could only make use of 2x as much bandwidth for the use case I care most about.
My excitement was short-lived. Soon after moving, I realized that our internal VPN implementation was limited to 50-60Mbs/. So had 50x more upload bandwidth than before, but could only make use of 2x as much bandwidth for the use case I care most about.
I have a 8/8 Gbps fiber (suburbs of a large city in France), and the point is more or less that you never sature it neither up or down. That's essentially why I upgraded from my 5/1 previous offer.
For 60e/month I get that, ~260 TV channels, amazon prime, netflix/disney+/canal+ included, wifi 7 and a secondary extender with ethernet backhaul support, a 2.5Gb switch, dedicated ipv4, and a bunch of other things included like a cellphone sim card, a portable 4G router with 50Gb of monthly data, etc ...
What our governement did in incentives push for their "project high speed internet" really worked here, 15 years ago even in large cities we were behind with lackluster adsl. Add EU's push to open the historic copper lines and Free's push into breaking the old money's market, both the home and mobile market is really great.
For 60e/month I get that, ~260 TV channels, amazon prime, netflix/disney+/canal+ included, wifi 7 and a secondary extender with ethernet backhaul support, a 2.5Gb switch, dedicated ipv4, and a bunch of other things included like a cellphone sim card, a portable 4G router with 50Gb of monthly data, etc ...
What our governement did in incentives push for their "project high speed internet" really worked here, 15 years ago even in large cities we were behind with lackluster adsl. Add EU's push to open the historic copper lines and Free's push into breaking the old money's market, both the home and mobile market is really great.
> What our governement did in incentives push for their "project high speed internet" really worked here,
Similar is happening in spots in the US. I'm in a location that was trenched for fiber using the recent broadband stimulus funds. I went from 40Mb up to 2Gb.
Similar is happening in spots in the US. I'm in a location that was trenched for fiber using the recent broadband stimulus funds. I went from 40Mb up to 2Gb.
Part of what they did here that worked so well was put a lot of money on the table, but tie it + deployment privilege in big cities / money sources to guaranteed deployment in smaller areas.
France is much more empty than people in other country usually believe, we're no germany with our population spread out all over, we have a large areas with a lower population density than the midwest called the "empty diagonal" [1], and yet as of today we have 83% of fiber coverage There is no way those area would be covered without such a system
For the mobile coverage they made it even simpler, in that the ISP right to their frequencies is tied to a timeline of coverage % of the territory, so we have 75% covered in 5G and 90% in 4G.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_diagonal
France is much more empty than people in other country usually believe, we're no germany with our population spread out all over, we have a large areas with a lower population density than the midwest called the "empty diagonal" [1], and yet as of today we have 83% of fiber coverage There is no way those area would be covered without such a system
For the mobile coverage they made it even simpler, in that the ISP right to their frequencies is tied to a timeline of coverage % of the territory, so we have 75% covered in 5G and 90% in 4G.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_diagonal
[flagged]
Even for the most voracious "Linux ISO" consumers it's well into diminishing returns, with a single gigabit connection it only takes 5 minutes to download a 50GB Bluray remux. That's already at the point where you can download the absolute highest quality video an order of magnitude faster than you can watch it. For data hoarders, one gigabit is already enough to fill a 10TB HDD in less than a day.
[flagged]
I'd imagine SOHO situations are the the most likely to benefit not Joey Gamer. It also really feels like more of a commercial vs residential offering. Unless your house is running a camming website where multiple feeds are being pushed simultaneously. We all have different hobbies
My hobby includes a lot of large docker images, self-hosting a somewhat popular website, and attempting to get my file server serving as quickly as possible to the other places in my house.
I use a reasonable amount of bandwidth in my WFH job (and my partner does as well), but we're just barely topping out a 300Mbit connection right now. I think we could make use of gigabit during the burstiest periods, however.
I use a reasonable amount of bandwidth in my WFH job (and my partner does as well), but we're just barely topping out a 300Mbit connection right now. I think we could make use of gigabit during the burstiest periods, however.
An internal file server used on your local net has nothing to do with WAN speeds though. If you have a residential account, most of those actually exclude running a server with external public access on those accounts, but many people are not aware of that specific fine print.
Well yeah, obviously LAN and WAN are different. But they're all running over that same LAN fabric to get to the WAN. Having high-speed streaming access to files on the server is somewhat important as well (mostly while travelling).
With Cloudflare access my file server and website are available without being detectable to the ISP, though I actually do have a static IP + hosting plan through an interesting ISP called Skyway West in Canada.
With Cloudflare access my file server and website are available without being detectable to the ISP, though I actually do have a static IP + hosting plan through an interesting ISP called Skyway West in Canada.
I think part of it is marketing and part of it is building last-mile infrastructure that doesn’t need to be upgraded for a long time. Last-mile is already such a pain, you might as well build something that will last.
(Just my guess.)
(Just my guess.)
That's totally fair. Building out a 7Gb last mile is probably giving them 10-15 years of headroom for last mile upgrades.
It's not that hard or expensive now, there are lots of 10 gig unmanaged switches on Amazon. I recently upgraded my home network to all 10/2.5 and I used the TP-Link TL-SX1008 as my "main"
I bought a bunch of 2x10gbit/4x2.5gbit switches as well but I'm in a townhouse with four floors and it's a small challenge to distribute that bandwidth. We have individual runs to each room, but part of my network is built on older in-wall UniFi wifi nodes that have their own PoE needs and top out at 1Gbit themselves.
The problem is that there's just a lot of home infrastructure that requires upgrading before I can get to this point. I could get 10Gbit to the UDM no problem, but then I need to install the 10Gbit cards in my file server that are sitting on top of it, swap out a 1Gb mikrotik that routes all the home server traffic, etc etc etc
The problem is that there's just a lot of home infrastructure that requires upgrading before I can get to this point. I could get 10Gbit to the UDM no problem, but then I need to install the 10Gbit cards in my file server that are sitting on top of it, swap out a 1Gb mikrotik that routes all the home server traffic, etc etc etc
I am thankful every day that Ziply Fiber bought out Frontier in the PNW. They offer up to 50Gbps service and are rock solid (at least at my 2Gbps plan).
They are active on reddit (or was when I used to use it), have a YouTube channel, and even offered tours of their switch buildings to fans!
https://www.youtube.com/c/ZiplyFiber
They are active on reddit (or was when I used to use it), have a YouTube channel, and even offered tours of their switch buildings to fans!
https://www.youtube.com/c/ZiplyFiber
Yeah, I'm on a Ziply 1 gbps plan and I probably have less than 2 hours of downtime per year. Usually, when I DO have downtime, it's just a hiccup that I resolve by rebooting the router, and when it finishes, I find myself with a new WAN IP. It's like my DHCP lease expires but my router doesn't know.
I don't even know what I would do with 2 gigabit, let alone 7 or 20. Even with gigabit, the only time I really take advantage of it is downloading a new game. Streaming video requires only what, 20-30 megabit?
I don't even know what I would do with 2 gigabit, let alone 7 or 20. Even with gigabit, the only time I really take advantage of it is downloading a new game. Streaming video requires only what, 20-30 megabit?
I live in Chattanooga, TN and it seems like a better deal ($300 if you want a 10Gb link, with other decent low cost options. It really seems like the rest of the US has missed the boat with municipal ISPs.
As others said, you really need to upgrade your home LAN to get much of a boost. I splurged on a nice Intel NIC with quad 10Gb RJ45 ports, and am running a OpenSense router in a VM. I now need a nice 10Gb switch to make the most of, since everything downstream from the router is on 1Gb speed.
As others said, you really need to upgrade your home LAN to get much of a boost. I splurged on a nice Intel NIC with quad 10Gb RJ45 ports, and am running a OpenSense router in a VM. I now need a nice 10Gb switch to make the most of, since everything downstream from the router is on 1Gb speed.
Does it come with a static IP?
I have a 400 megabit upload speed which is more than a lot of the VPS services I use in practice. However, the IP sometimes changes without warning. No way to get a static one without business pricing which is an order of magnitude more. I'd like to run my servers locally.
I cannot imagine much use for more than 200 megabit. I know Alan Kay preaches that you need to be living in the future to invent the future in a technical way. But I don't believe it. The things we need today don't seem to more and faster but better organization of the tech we already have.
We're absolutely in the stone age with software architecture, organizational structures, and communication technology that helps (and not hurts) humanity. We've got a lot work to do here.
Peer to peer networking enabled by reasonable upload speeds could help here. But still, you need a static IP to make it practical.
I have a 400 megabit upload speed which is more than a lot of the VPS services I use in practice. However, the IP sometimes changes without warning. No way to get a static one without business pricing which is an order of magnitude more. I'd like to run my servers locally.
I cannot imagine much use for more than 200 megabit. I know Alan Kay preaches that you need to be living in the future to invent the future in a technical way. But I don't believe it. The things we need today don't seem to more and faster but better organization of the tech we already have.
We're absolutely in the stone age with software architecture, organizational structures, and communication technology that helps (and not hurts) humanity. We've got a lot work to do here.
Peer to peer networking enabled by reasonable upload speeds could help here. But still, you need a static IP to make it practical.
I get a mostly static IP that cycles when the power goes out long enough (central florida location). I use Cloudflare, Tailscale and DDNS, works fine for my uses. Importantly, it’s not CGNAT like T-Mobile Home Internet or Metronet, which makes inbound services significantly more challenging. $40/month for 500Mb symmetrical.
Anything important is in a rack at a colo facility.
Anything important is in a rack at a colo facility.
I have A/AAAA records set dynamically for my home connection. Granted I don't host anything that requires 99.99% uptime at home.
Anecdotal, but in my area (Central US-IL), we had Verizon as the telco many years ago and we had Verizon DSL (Comcast was the only other choice at the time). We had only 1 issue w/ Verizon and it was fixed quickly.
Frontier bought them out and they could not keep DSL working at all. Problem after problem that they couldn't fix. So we switched to Comcast - that's how bad Frontier was.
Now we use Metronet and I'm waiting for that to get completely enshitified since they were purchased by TMobile or someone like that. I hope i3 is available in our area, I'm guessing if it's not, they'll be moving in as Metronet goes to shit.
Frontier bought them out and they could not keep DSL working at all. Problem after problem that they couldn't fix. So we switched to Comcast - that's how bad Frontier was.
Now we use Metronet and I'm waiting for that to get completely enshitified since they were purchased by TMobile or someone like that. I hope i3 is available in our area, I'm guessing if it's not, they'll be moving in as Metronet goes to shit.
https://www.metronet.com/blog/press-release/t-mobile-and-kkr... (“T-Mobile and KKR Announce Joint Venture to Acquire Metronet and Offer Leading Fiber Solution to More U.S. Consumers”)
Time to champion municipal/coop fiber in your area.
Time to champion municipal/coop fiber in your area.
> Unlimited Data
I think they left off the usual provider's asterisk next to that bullet point, or they're hoping to have so few customers that know what to do with that amount of throughput that only the long tail customers would use it
I think they left off the usual provider's asterisk next to that bullet point, or they're hoping to have so few customers that know what to do with that amount of throughput that only the long tail customers would use it
From my experience fiber-oriented ISPs don't really care about bandwidth usage because they don't over-provision their network nearly as bad as copper-based ones.
Wild, I knew Frontier as an ISP in upstate NY that only provided DSL service with abysmal speeds. I assumed they would just die off, but I guess not.
The local company laid fiber in my neighborhood last year and still won't take my money. I guess they are waiting for a certain number of people to sign up before they light up the fiber. It is just a few yards away! Take my money!
Google Fiber offers 8 Gbps in Austin for half the price. They're also piloting 20 Gbps in some areas.[0] I wished it were available where I live because the only maximum options currently available are 1 Gbps through either GVEC (fiber) or Spectrum (cable). Spectrum is slow and has outages occasionally. GVEC lacks useful information on their website and hides pricing.
0. https://fiber.google.com/gfiber-labs/20gig
0. https://fiber.google.com/gfiber-labs/20gig
Anything beyond 10 Gbps is basically the datacenter world and the switches, NICs, etc. are going to be real expensive. I wonder if their terms allow hosting on that 20Gbps plan as that's probably the only real use for it.
They also refuse to do installs in new builds in many neighborhoods. I have lived sandwiched between two addresses that have Google Fiber, and they have refused to come out to install the last 25 feet of cable to my house for 5 years. So I'm paying $100/mo for crappy Spectrum internet that goes down all the time.
I've reached out to them several times to come out or do a survey, or run the existing fiber through already existing conduit and they just refuse.
I've reached out to them several times to come out or do a survey, or run the existing fiber through already existing conduit and they just refuse.
I'm curious what people with >1Gbps service are running for their home networks.
I'm setting up a bunch of new Unifi gear 90% of it is 1Gbps speed, this is prosumer gear too so I'm wondering where people are buying cheap 10GbE equipment.
These services tend to come with a box that'll do your NAT so you just need some dumb ports. I started with a MikroTik 4 port 10G for ~$130 to be able to connect a NAS, my main PC, and my Wi-Fi since the box it came with didn't have that many high speed ports. The rest can go into the 1G ports or on a standard 1G switch.
Since then I've picked up a cheap piece of shit 8 port 10G on Aliexpress for ~$100. Works surprisingly well.
Since then I've picked up a cheap piece of shit 8 port 10G on Aliexpress for ~$100. Works surprisingly well.
Oh duh, yeah I guess most devices don't support/need 10Gb so why not just use 10Gb in a couple places - good point.
> Frontier is bringing its new 7-gig fiber internet option to customers across the country. The 7-gig plan costs $309.99 / month and is the fastest widely available fiber plan so far.
I'm not against 'progress' generally per se, but I think that you're reaching diminishing returns >1 Gbps, and that's quite the price tag, especially compared to:
> Google Fiber has a $150 / month 8Gbps plan, but it’s only available in select cities, such as San Antonio, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Mesa, Arizona.
From a strictly societal utilitarian perspective, I would think that going for more ubiquitous fibre coverage would be better.
Back in the last century/millennium, there was a mass push to having electricity and telephone connections everywhere, and I'd like to see the same thing done with fibre Internet—ideally owned by local government, with Layer 3 being provided by companies:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network
I'm not against 'progress' generally per se, but I think that you're reaching diminishing returns >1 Gbps, and that's quite the price tag, especially compared to:
> Google Fiber has a $150 / month 8Gbps plan, but it’s only available in select cities, such as San Antonio, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Mesa, Arizona.
From a strictly societal utilitarian perspective, I would think that going for more ubiquitous fibre coverage would be better.
Back in the last century/millennium, there was a mass push to having electricity and telephone connections everywhere, and I'd like to see the same thing done with fibre Internet—ideally owned by local government, with Layer 3 being provided by companies:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network
The cost to deploy 1G-PON and 10G-PON are very close to the point if you're talking about deploying fiber it doesn't really change the viability.
They're already at 50 Gbps:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_Speed_PON (G.9804)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_in_the_first_mile
The main point is to deploy fibre everywhere, and not necessarily which service speed is offered.
(A separate question is whether to go with PON or with 'active' networking.)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_Speed_PON (G.9804)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_in_the_first_mile
The main point is to deploy fibre everywhere, and not necessarily which service speed is offered.
(A separate question is whether to go with PON or with 'active' networking.)
Those higher speed PON can actually be a lot more expensive to deploy right now, though they eventually come down with time of course. Deploying active direct fiber everywhere would be quite the undertaking in terms of funding.
I agree though the goal should be to deploy fiber everywhere. I was just responding whether or not it's utilitarian to roll out the higher speeds like 7G while waiting for that - it is at it costs next to $0 on the infrastructure side for the areas already having the fiber independent of resources we dump into rolling out more fiber.
I agree though the goal should be to deploy fiber everywhere. I was just responding whether or not it's utilitarian to roll out the higher speeds like 7G while waiting for that - it is at it costs next to $0 on the infrastructure side for the areas already having the fiber independent of resources we dump into rolling out more fiber.
I love seeing developments like this, and while Frontier wouldn't be my first choice in provider, it's a good thing that even a historically poor performer like Frontier is pushing the boundary a bit.
What I don't love seeing is the same, predictable responses every time something like this is posted. It's always the same: "oh, they'll never be able to deliver", "their subscribers will never use it, why don't they stick with 50/10", "I get by just fine on my 100Kbps ADSL", "why would anyone want to stream video". I get it, as tech people, we're predisposed to being skeptical and questioning, but why the hostility to progress? Okay then, let's just stick with dialup, because that's only anything anyone will ever need, apparently. We should be celebrating anything that pushes the art forward.
The demand will be induced, the pipes will be filled. Let's think about applications that can actually take advantage of new capabilities like this, instead of pooh-poohing every little bit of change.
What I don't love seeing is the same, predictable responses every time something like this is posted. It's always the same: "oh, they'll never be able to deliver", "their subscribers will never use it, why don't they stick with 50/10", "I get by just fine on my 100Kbps ADSL", "why would anyone want to stream video". I get it, as tech people, we're predisposed to being skeptical and questioning, but why the hostility to progress? Okay then, let's just stick with dialup, because that's only anything anyone will ever need, apparently. We should be celebrating anything that pushes the art forward.
The demand will be induced, the pipes will be filled. Let's think about applications that can actually take advantage of new capabilities like this, instead of pooh-poohing every little bit of change.
Very few things seem to go above 100mb (hard wired). The single exception I have seen is my Xbox which sometimes gets up to 500 when downloading a game.
I guess if you have a big family and a lot of things are downloading or streaming at once, but are people really hitting a limit. Even Netflix’s recommendations are super low.
It just seems like we have some pushes for these crazy speeds(maybe for marketing or increments) when the reality is the speeds to you will never utilize it.
I feel like I am missing something for how you could possibly justify this in your home.