Google can’t even PAY to give away broadband

It’s NOT FREE! It comes with huge strings attached such as exclusive use of city resources!!!! It wipes out other wifi networks. It’s effectively another start of a monopoly use of community resources. Of course the supervisors should ask for a huge part of the pie. Anything else is being wasteful of public resources. “Do no evil” is a nice catchphrase but is going down the tubes with their municipal networks. Don’t be fooled by another group of silicon valley pirates. Big money corrupts always…

What a load! The SF plotics is so utterly dysfunctional. They couldn’t mange their way to the pay toilets they love. The sups should be looking at the conditions in hunters Point, the Tenderloin etc etc etc. The city is awash in filth disease depravity yet there’s a lot of very wonderful people just trying to make a life and getting little help from their neighbors who would rather steal them blind. Instead of grandstanding over this, they should be doing something meaningful as representatives of the people rather than playing politics and seeing who can get the most press time or face time with the TV cameras.

Google is wasting their time with Wifi. City-wide Wifi projects are failing to get off the ground. They should be looking at Wimax. Intel will be shipping Wimax laptops in 2008. The timing is perfect. Maybe invest in battered Clearwire who owns a bunch of Wimax spectrum across the US.

People, this is Google! They offer wireless broadband on their transports to and from San Francisco for their employees so they can work while they commute. I would trust them 10 times more to make a smart decision about internet connectivity than any politician. So lets be real, this is all about money. San Francisco knows how much Google could possibly make through ad revenue and they want a cut. This has nothing to do with the citizens or quality of service. When all is said and done Google wants to make more money and the politicians want to be able to say “look at the deal we made and all this extra money we got to pay for more social projects! Elect me as your future _______.”

Well, I pay for Bell (enhanced DSL service) and I get some sort of twice dialup speed as the phone line has errors and cannot be fixed etc (it also belongs to Bell). There are no options here really, and I am in GTA (Toronto). I cannot phantom how can someone stop Google offering any crappy service – you do not have to use it. Can pay Bell to get an even worse one.

To the people of SF: if they offer the basics for free, take it. Why bite the hand that can feed you? If you want faster, then pay for it at a cafe.

To the Board of Supervisors: Just remember that the offer can easily be taken away. Don’t be greedy, and you are delusional if you think you can do it yourself. It will end up being another layer of bureaucracy and undeivered promises

While many mostly pay attention on the fact that the service is free, some details might get overlooked. For once, the free service is not necessarily a good thing for the citizens. Depending on the terms of the deal (mostly exclusivity and minimum quality standards, the citizens might end up being locked out of a better service that could be offered by competitors.

Also, Google doesn’t really give the service away. It is a business plan that is expected to make money so there is no need to feel pitty for Google and offering that service is just another expense/investment.

But of course, if the only motivation of the SF politician is lure of free money, that would be a shame.

Why do the city supervisors need to approve this service?

Can the city itself take advantage of it? i.e., meter reading, fleet tracking, etc?

Google is only using FREE to offer a PREMIUM service to the clueless.

Not happy with your current speed? Give us a Credit Card and we’ll upgrade you. Of course we won’t offer customer service as you are “little people” and we don’t talk to you.

It’s incredibly short-sighted of the supervisors opposing the project. I can’t even begin to imagine what services will be made possible by ubiquitous internet access – using PayPal to pay for parking meters (instead of 8 quarters for 1 hour), knowing wait times for nearby movie theatres, etc. There are creative entrepreneurs who will come up with great services for S.F. residents – only these supervisors are standing in the way.

Share your comments and join us in
http://www.communityhooks.org/mag_view.php?org_id=23

If you agree with this WiFi initiative, tell the citizens how we will benefit. If you don’t you can also voice your opinion so that you can hear what others have to say.

As a San Francisco resident, I’m outraged over the fact that two years later, we are still without citywide WiFi. The supervisors are useless. They believe that San Francisco should run it’s own Internet company. Hmmmm, perhaps they’ll do better at that than they do at running other city services, oh wait, I doubt it. Everything will be union, and then, nothing will get done because the union will have made sure that no one is available.

gog should walk, come to connecticut.

OMG. The entitlement mentality of these people! Yeah. Keep demanding more money. Google and Earthlink will wise up and move their project to a more grateful venue.

I agree with the board of supervisors. Unless Google plans to pony up more money, they should continue to throw that free service right back at them. The right offer should include provisions to subsidize gasoline and possibly contribute funding to research bringing back dinosaurs. Not big dinosaurs though. Nobody wants to be surfing on their free Wi-Fi while looking over their shoulder for a T-Rex looking for its next meal.

Agreed that one shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth. But Lashinsky’s wrong too: Google’s most certainly not offering “free broadband” for San Fran. It’s free wireless, and yes, it’s going to be spotty and relatively slow — probably theoretically broadband, but in practice closer to dialup. By nature, it won’t be secure, meaning you put yourself at risk using it without a VPN or other measure. And yes, its overriding purpose will be to deliver targeted Google AdSense inventory.

As with any public wi-fi service, it’s not meant to provide comprehensive ISP service for anyone. It’ll be a convenience for on-the-run checking of email and quick lookup on Google. For needs beyond that, stick to your home or office connection.

Rather than hastily lashing out at ‘left wingers’ or Harry and Sergey, I’d like to see a bit more information on why objections were raised. How will Google’s offering of free WiFi affect the ability of other potential providers to do the same? Are Google and Earthlink asking for latent city resources (land, utility access, exclusive bandwidth access, etc) for free or for a discount in order to offer free service? And there are numerous other questions that need to be answered before any of us can form an intelligent, informed opinion on the matter. Maybe Adam Lashinsky can follow up with more indepth analysis…

Interesting that all the readers who are criticizing Harry and Sergey are NOT living in places where Google is, or is bidding to, offer “free” WiFi service.
No matter who wins SFO’s bid, the city council is doing what it was voted upon to do: looking out for the best interests of its citizens, just as Google is looking out for the best interests of its Class A voting shareholders: Larry and Sergey [the other Sergey!].

BTW, even though I don’t live in Mountain View, I visit there often and can attest to the spottiness of its coverage; and yes, it IS concentrated near yuppy cafes.

What the other readers do not seem to understand is that Google getting a monopoly on free WiFi service in a city or metro area is just the same as Microsoft getting a monopoly of what programs appear on your PC desktop when you buy a new PC.

Seems like Google is learning a thing or two from Microsoft, after all.

The risk of SFO letting Google win the bid is that it locks in potentially poor service, and the citizens of that city are deprived of the opportunity to get better service from another provider. My belief is that

Whiners! Typical Bay Area drivel. If you don’t want it, pay for your broadband like everyone else.

Posted By Harry S. Pariser, San Francisco, CA : “The deal that Earthlinik and Google are offering is a very bad one for we residents.”

LOL

Um… its “free”.

Google has the right to provide whatever “free” service they wish so long as they are not breaking any laws to do so. If you do not like Google’s “free” service – don’t use it. This is pretty simple thinking if you ask me? If no one wants to use Google’s “free” service, its advertising dollars will dry up. (BTW – you ‘always’ have the option to pay for your service if the free stuff isn’t good enough)

Sad that someone could actually complain about getting something for free, when it is not been forced on them.

Harry, while you’re at it, why don’t you complain that you don’t get cable TV for free? The low speed Wi-Fi is akin to broadcast TV; you want something better (hi-speed WiFi; cable TV), you PAY FOR IT.

Harry & Sergey,

IT’S FREE! Use it if you want or pay for better service if you do not. Google would pay San Francisco to offer the free WiFi, WOW! And people that live there dare to complain about the quality of service, which is beyond me! If you like free internet move to Korea and deal with Kym Jung Crazy. Google should say,” you blew it SF, you greedy POS’s.” Then go do it everywhere else and when San Francisco comes to its senses low ball them. I feel no sympathy for a city that hands out hundreds of dollars a month to each homeless person to enable their addictions and habits. And they dare ask for more money from private companies to offer a free service to their citizens, unbelievable!

Bottom line… It may be slow, it may be spotty but it’s free! I don’t see anyone else clamoring to offer free city wide WiFi to anyone any where else. So stop being greedy.

Only in America can we demand that an organization provide more and better “free stuff”.

This reporter needs to do some research! The deal that Earthlinik and Google are offering is a very bad one for we residents. They offer only slow speed (as opposed to the high speed offered free to Korean citizens), and the signal will be accessible only on ground levels unless you buy a repeater. The higher speed subscriptions and the ads are where they make their money! Wi fi is available for free at the libraries and at many cafes. This is a bad deal!

I live in Mt. View and the Google WiFi is spotty at best! They seem to have concentrated their coverage in areas where the Google Nerds hang out, in mass, when they are not on campus! Mostly downtown were the coffee houses and cafes are.