Google To Blanket U.S. In Super-Fast Wireless Internet

[Megalith]

With its original plan involving high-bandwidth fiber-optic cable proving to be “expensive and slow moving,” Google is now turning to wireless technology to roll out its Fiber services at a more economical rate. It will all hinge on the performance of new “experimental transmitters,” which will operate in a band that relieves Wi-Fi congestion.

The company has been testing a new wireless-transmission technology using the 3.5-GHz band in Kansas City, but the heavily redacted FCC filing suggests that it wants to dramatically expand to testing "experimental transmitters" at up to 24 US locations, including Provo, Utah, Omaha, Nebraska, and Boulder, Colorado, for a period of 24 months. Google is requesting authorization to operate between the 3.4 and 3.8 GHz band. "We are working to test the viability of a wireless network that relies on newly available spectrum," a spokesperson tells Business Insider. "The project is in early stages today, but we hope this technology can one day help deliver more abundant Internet access to consumers."

 

[Axehandler]

Interesting.. so ..wi-fi Cell service?

 

[EODetroit]

The problem is that wireless fundamentally sucks due to being half-duplex. And nothing I've heard is going to cure that. I won't sign up for google wireless, but I will sign up for google fiber.

 

[TonyZ]

The problem is that wireless fundamentally sucks due to being half-duplex. And nothing I've heard is going to cure that. I won't sign up for google wireless, but I will sign up for google fiber.

I hope they get it rolled out nation wide, we need more competition to keep the incumbent cunts from fucking everyone over. Just like now that Charter has bought TWC, they have stopped all Maxx deployments and standardize on Charter offerings which are sub par and much more expensive. After I read about it I ordered DTV and will be dropping my internet package from 300/20 to 100/10 and shoudl they try to pinch me with Charters 100mb pricing (100/mo) at a later date I'll just switch to ATT and deal with the slower speeds.

 

[Skripka]

The problem is that wireless fundamentally sucks due to being half-duplex. And nothing I've heard is going to cure that. I won't sign up for google wireless, but I will sign up for google fiber.

It might suck...but geographically speaking most of the US has the "choice" of ultra-high-latency satellite internet that costs a crapload OR 56k dial-up.

 

[Bigbacon]

guarantee rural america doesn't get this and some how in states like WV, it would get blocked by the government since Frontier pretty much rules them.

 

[bigddybn]

The problem is that wireless fundamentally sucks due to being half-duplex. And nothing I've heard is going to cure that. I won't sign up for google wireless, but I will sign up for google fiber.

There is nothing "fundamentally" half duplex about wireless. Wifi yes, not wireless. If you want full duplex then simply run 2 frequencies which could easily be done with 400Mhz of wifi congestion free spectrum.

 

[EODetroit]

There is nothing "fundamentally" half duplex about wireless. Wifi yes, not wireless. If you want full duplex then simply run 2 frequencies which could easily be done with 400Mhz of wifi congestion free spectrum.

That doesn't work because each frequency can still be disrupted by any other wireless transmission near the same frequency. Not to mention requiring the same antenna and transmission hardware in both devices, instead of just the wireless router having the really sensitive and powerful stuff. To sum up: still can't do full duplex.

 

[bigddybn]

That doesn't work because each frequency can still be disrupted by any other wireless transmission near the same frequency. Not to mention requiring the same antenna and transmission hardware in both devices, instead of just the wireless router having the really sensitive and powerful stuff. To sum up: still can't do full duplex.

None of the reasons you give have anything to do with duplex. Interference can occur in half duplex situations just as easily. The fact that it is or isn't full duplex has absolutely squat to do with that. Yes, running two simultaneous channels requires 2 simultaneous RF links. This is exactly how the cellphones that many of the people reading this on work today. This also has nothing to do with your wireless router. If you read the article you would have seen this is planned on a band that has nothing to do with wifi.

To sum it up: you don't seem to have any clue what you are talking about.

 

[Poseur]

Hopefully this is a stopgap effort until fiber is fully deployed. Fiber is far superior to wireless. But, yeah competition is good. Bring it, especially if it doesn't interfere with anything else.

 

[Skripka]

Hopefully this is a stopgap effort until fiber is fully deployed. Fiber is far superior to wireless. But, yeah competition is good. Bring it, especially if it doesn't interfere with anything else.

"Far superior" for consumers...but far more expensive to deploy for the people wanting to make money off of it.

 

[Wierdo]

They're experimenting with this because incumbents have been playing hardball with pole access, causing barriers to fiber deployment in many locations. So I'd say the two approaches may intersect in some fashion to get around this problem here and there.