BRAINSTORM: What makes Alameda an excellent choice?
Jim Meyer
http://blog.wirealameda.org/2010/02/the-google-fiber-for-communities-rfi.html
What we've inferred from our reading is that Google is very interested
in four primary points:
* How easily and quickly the deployment can be accomplished
* What they can learn from the deployment
* The level of adoption we'll get in the community
* What they'll be able to do with the advanced fiber setup afterward
With that in mind, let's look at the reasons we think Alameda's a good
choice. As Nick points out:
* Our current broadband users don't have a strong attachment to their
providers
* We've got a lot of land available at Alameda Point which could be put
to interesting uses, including a place to house new tech startups
helping develop applications for this network
* Alameda Point in its current, underdeveloped state is much easier to
deploy than if it were densely built and populated
* We've already got quite a number of tech businesses in our city (and
capacity to caffeinate them all many times over)
Some other points:
* We own our own utility and its infrastructure (poles, etc.) which simplifies a lot of the negotiations
* We have experience in cable roll out, what works, what doesn't, and how to approach the project. Google can build off of this knowledge and save time and money.
* We own our own dark-fiber backbone, which might be useful in reducing the amount of deployment needed
* Geologically speaking, we're a pretty flat and easy to dig kind of place
* We've got a temperate climate, which make construction easier
* Alameda is a fairly compact city, which makes the project easier to manage and reduces the amount of fiber needed
* Our community is tech-savvy enough to be interesting and quickly engaged without being so techie that we're outside the norm
* We're physically close to Google's HQ in Mountain View, which makes it easy for them to directly participate
* We have a diverse mix of large-scale potential uses: AUSD, College of Alameda, Alameda Free Library, Alameda Hospital,
* We've already appointed a single-point of contact at the city*
* Last but certainly not least, we're a tightly-knit community who's very interested in this and demonstrating how quickly and completely we can come together
Whew! That's a lot to write (and read!).
What have we missed? Why else do you think they should choose us?
--j
* Jennifer Ott, who has been just plain wonderful; she made time while
on vacation to speak with us and got things rolling even before she
returned to her office.
Rocky Kahn
Glad to hear Jennifer Ott's on the ball
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WireAlameda" group.
To post to this group, send email to wirea...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wirealameda...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wirealameda?hl=en.
Adrian Blakey
Adrian Blakey
adrian...@gmail.com
skype: adrianblakey
(510) 747-8057
First, if you haven't read through the RFI, please give it a quick skim:
http://blog.wirealameda.org/2010/02/the-google-fiber-for-communities-rfi.html
What we've inferred from our reading is that Google is very interested in four primary points:
* How easily and quickly the deployment can be accomplished
* What they can learn from the deployment
* The level of adoption we'll get in the community
* What they'll be able to do with the advanced fiber setup afterward
With that in mind, let's look at the reasons we think Alameda's a good choice. As Nick points out:
* Our current broadband users don't have a strong attachment to their providers
Is there data to support this?
* We've got a lot of land available at Alameda Point which could be put to interesting uses, including a place to house new tech startups helping develop applications for this network
Isn't the "point" really that Alameda has limited room to grow physically - and that real growth can only happen virtually. Sure there is room out there but the physical infrastructure does not make it usable.
* Alameda Point in its current, underdeveloped state is much easier to deploy than if it were densely built and populated
Sure - but why would any business in its right mind want to move there? There is better cheaper cleaner more physically accessible space elsewhere.
* We've already got quite a number of tech businesses in our city (and capacity to caffeinate them all many times over)
Some other points:
* We own our own utility and its infrastructure (poles, etc.) which simplifies a lot of the negotiations
Is this true? Can someone tell us what was sold by AP&T to Comcast? Do they have any exclusivity on rights of way?
* We have experience in cable roll out, what works, what doesn't, and how to approach the project. Google can build off of this knowledge and save time and money.
Really - wasn't it all contracted out?
* We own our own dark-fiber backbone, which might be useful in reducing the amount of deployment needed
Is this true? Wasn't this sold to Comcast? Can someone fill the details of the deal? Do Comcast have any control over whom else can share the fiber?
* Geologically speaking, we're a pretty flat and easy to dig kind of place
* We've got a temperate climate, which make construction easier
* Alameda is a fairly compact city, which makes the project easier to manage and reduces the amount of fiber needed
* Our community is tech-savvy enough to be interesting and quickly engaged without being so techie that we're outside the norm
* We're physically close to Google's HQ in Mountain View, which makes it easy for them to directly participate
* We have a diverse mix of large-scale potential uses: AUSD, College of Alameda, Alameda Free Library, Alameda Hospital,
* We've already appointed a single-point of contact at the city*
* Last but certainly not least, we're a tightly-knit community who's very interested in this and demonstrating how quickly and completely we can come together
Whew! That's a lot to write (and read!).
What have we missed? Why else do you think they should choose us?
We have a vocal, self-organized group that could provide help, collaboration and feedback to help ensure its success and improve the success of other similar ventures.
Not wishing to be gloomy - but how about the "cons"? Maybe by looking at these we could formulate some learning experiences that would improve the "pros"?
AP&T failed - why? lack of market penetration, no compelling differentiators from Comcast/AT&T, lock-in by the established providers.
No compelling apps. to attract consumers that demand Gigabit bandwidth. Unless Apple/Google etc do plan to get into being serious 3D broadband content providers?
An awful economy that is depressing consumer spending.
A move to wireless connectivity that attracts a larger consumer base than fixed/wired connectivity - perhaps we'd be better off supporting alameda wireless or at least a "whole product" that is Google+Wireless to get the place properly wired - multiple AP's all connected to a fiber ring?
...
--j
* Jennifer Ott, who has been just plain wonderful; she made time while on vacation to speak with us and got things rolling even before she returned to her office.