One is whether Google will have the resources to stay abreast of the bandwidth-eating feature adoption curve. Comcast offers 4 mbps downlinks in my neighborhood, and that will only become more common in the future. The infamous technology-improvement curve, with CPUs and routers getting faster and cheaper all the time, figures into that equation, too.

The second issue, speaking of Comcast, is whether the cable cos. will attempt to keep the fast lane all to themselves and block Google and others by gating their access to the consumer. Cable companies are used to having a lock on the consumer and a monopoly position (indeed, after Comcast acquired my locally-owned cable co-op some years ago, our service bill has spiraled steadily upward). Google won't be able to get around the last mile problem unless they want to start stringing fiber to everybody's houses or find a way to do that with as-yet unperfected wireless methods.

The best thing for me, the customer, is if cable cos. (and maybe telcos, too) are stopped from profiting by throwing up artificial roadblocks (the so-called Net Neutrality issue), and thus have to compete with Google and all comers. Experience shows that if competition is allowed, prices will go down, and quality and service will go up until some value equilibrium emerges that represents good value. There are two information network wires connected to my house - one for 'telephone' service, where I have a choice of provider and my bills have been going down for years, and one for 'cable', which is a monopoly, and my bill has been going up for years...
Comments 8:13:52 AM    

Chris Gulker's view from Silicon Valley - in words and pictures