Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Renew Deal

(81,852 posts)
Sun Jan 12, 2014, 03:20 PM Jan 2014

How two cities brought fiber to the home when the carriers couldn't

It would be hard to find two cities that are more dissimilar than tiny Leverett, Mass., and Stockholm, Sweden, 3,700 miles across the Atlantic. Even so, they have more in common than cold winters: Both sport high-speed fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) networks built by local governments when privately owned carriers were either indifferent or simply not up to the job.

There are many differences, of course. Stockholm's FTTH network is older, and although it was built by the city, it is leased and run by private carriers. Leverett's locally run FTTH network will go live later this year, made possible by the foresight of the state of Massachusetts, which built "a middle mile" fiber network that previously isolated communities can tie into.

Other U.S. cities are considering their own FTTH networks, and it's no surprise to me that carriers, aided by the right-wing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), are trying to stop them. Publicly owned infrastructure may not be ideal, but it's not like private enterprise is delivering. Despite a lot of hype and a very clear need, the carriers are moving toward FTTH at only a glacial pace. Google has had some success with pilot FTTH projects in a few cities, but it's unlikely to ever become a full-fledged national carrier.

Homes and businesses in the United States are still stuck with connection speeds that are far lower and at prices that are higher than in many developed countries in Europe and Asia. Our feeble connectivity is a drag on the economy, education, and government -- not to mention a maddening inconvenience. Maybe it's time to try something different.
<snip>

http://www.infoworld.com/d/the-industry-standard/how-two-cities-brought-fiber-the-home-when-the-carriers-couldnt-233793

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How two cities brought fiber to the home when the carriers couldn't (Original Post) Renew Deal Jan 2014 OP
our time/warner has raised internet fee 3 times in the past 18 months. no competition = msongs Jan 2014 #1
I await this in my neighborhood frazzled Jan 2014 #2
I was just switched over to FTTH last month tech3149 Jan 2014 #5
K/R, I wish this was posted in GD, and a few other DU places. NYC_SKP Jan 2014 #3
I'm not jealous of many things Lefty Thinker Jan 2014 #4
They brag about that too... jmowreader Jan 2014 #6
I lived in Houston when cable arrived. TheJames Jan 2014 #7

msongs

(67,381 posts)
1. our time/warner has raised internet fee 3 times in the past 18 months. no competition =
Sun Jan 12, 2014, 03:29 PM
Jan 2014

gouge gouge gouge. internet should be a public utility.

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
2. I await this in my neighborhood
Sun Jan 12, 2014, 03:30 PM
Jan 2014

I soooo want to get rid of my crappy DSL connection.

I hope it works well in Leverett, but realize that it's but a tiny experiment so far in a rural town of 1,851 people (and one presumes fewer homes) than it is in large urban settings with lots of existing infrastructure and all kinds of housing.

But there are projects elsewhere. Here in Chicago, with state, county, city and private money, 14 Southside communities (the U of Chicago plus surrounding low-income neighborhoods) will be getting fiber connections to 100,000 residents and 11,000 schools, businesses, hospitals and clinics ...

http://www.chicagogrid.com/news/south-side-150m-worth-fiber-internet-tech/

tech3149

(4,452 posts)
5. I was just switched over to FTTH last month
Sun Jan 12, 2014, 03:52 PM
Jan 2014

It's a very small telecom in W PA serving less than half of one county. They were very forward thinking by maintaining their old central office equipment as long as possible. When they did replace it, they chose probably the best North American made system that had fiber capabilities.

My only complaint is the rates. They forced me to work for months to be able to drop cable for broadcast TV. Topography made that impossible so I'm still stuck with that.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
3. K/R, I wish this was posted in GD, and a few other DU places.
Sun Jan 12, 2014, 03:34 PM
Jan 2014

Occupy, Progressive Resources, there are a few great places this story should be posted.

Thanks!

Lefty Thinker

(96 posts)
4. I'm not jealous of many things
Sun Jan 12, 2014, 03:51 PM
Jan 2014

Especially when it comes to Moses Lake, WA. But when both the cable and telephone (monopoly) companies refused to install any kind of high-speed Internet connection, the city formed a public utilities district and installed FTTH. So jealous!

jmowreader

(50,549 posts)
6. They brag about that too...
Sun Jan 12, 2014, 04:31 PM
Jan 2014

Moses Lake has the fastest Internet in the US...which is also why Moses Lake has BMW's carbon fiber factory, and a factory that makes car airbags, several data centers (Yahoo and Microsoft I know about and I think there's one other), a company that makes silane gas (it's like methane but the carbon atom is replaced with a silicon atom; this is used to make high purity wafers for microchip production and also solar cells), a factory that makes those little cranes with work platforms on the boom that sign shops and building repair companies use...there's more I'm not remembering (I print Moses Lake's newspaper), but they have used this fiber backbone to turn a farm town into a place that would thrive if the world stopped eating apples and potatoes and never started again.

TheJames

(120 posts)
7. I lived in Houston when cable arrived.
Sun Jan 12, 2014, 09:34 PM
Jan 2014

There was a big political battle over which provider would get the contract. A lot of noise was made by the citizenry about a monopoly being handed to whoever was "selected". The major complaint was that users would have no recourse for poor service. The "leaders" solution was to divide up the city into 3 (or 4, it was a long time ago) regional monopolies. These people run screaming from true "free markets."

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»How two cities brought fi...