Google Fiber considering Los Angeles and Chicago

Will Google free me from the evil clutches of the dreaded Time Warner Cable?

Google's first foray into municipal networking was connecting 12 square miles of Mountain View California in 2007. In 2010 they issued a call for proposals from cities wishing to participate in an "experiment" called Google Fiber, which would offer symmetric, 1 Gbps connectivity to customers. In 2012, Kansas City was selected as the first Google Fiber city.

But, was it an experiment? An attempt to goad ISPs to upgrade their networks? The start of a new Google business? In 2013, Milo Medin, who was heading the Google Fiber project, said that they intended to make money from Google Fiber and that it was a "great business to be in."

Today, Google Fiber is operating in three cities and they are committed to installing it in six others. Eleven cities, including Los Angeles and Chicago, have been invited to apply.

Google is considering big cities Los Angeles and Chicago.

Los Angeles and Chicago were just added to the list and it is significant that they are the first very large cities -- both in population and area -- on the list.

Since the initial installation in Kansas City, Google has codified the city-selection process in an informative checklist document. Google knows they are offering a service that will benefit the city in many ways, so the checklist is essentially the guide to an application form in which the city has to offer access to poles and tunnels, 2,000 square-foot parcels for equipment "huts," fast track permitting, etc.

I expect that Google will also have their eye on the Los Angeles tech startup community and entertainment industries. While Google Fiber does not seem to be a mere "experiment," they will doubtless enable and discover new applications that captialize upon gigabit connectivity (and increase Google ad revenue).

Rollout order within a selected city is governed by the willingness of residents of a neighborhood to sign up for the service. High demand areas get high priority. But, this can exacerbate the digital divide within the city -- serving wealthy areas before poor areas. Google encountered this problem in Kansas City. As shown below, wealthy neighborhoods (green) committed before the poorer areas, so Google initiated programs to reach out to them.

Wealthy KC neighborhoods committed early.

Based on that experience, they now consider inclusion plans in the application process and hire city-impact managers for fiber cities. They also offer very low-cost copper connections for those who cannot afford fiber.

I am not familiar with the situation in Chicago, but Los Angeles has been pursuing fiber connectivity for some time. The city issued a request for proposals for city-wide fiber two years ago, and last year CityLinkLA was formed with the goal of providing "basic access to all for free or at a very low cost and gigabit (1 Gbps) or higher speed access at competitive rates." The effort has been led by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and Councilman Bob Blumenfield and they are working with both Google and AT&T toward that goal.

I assume that AT&T will upgrade their current infrastructure to DOCSIS 3.1 in order to achieve faster speeds over copper running from fiber nodes to individual premises, but they only serve a portion of Los Angeles. Other areas may have to wait for Google. It seems that Verizon gave up on their fiber offering, FIOS, some time ago.

Now for the belated full-disclosure. I live in Los Angeles, and am hoping that competition between Google or AT&T or someone will one day free me from the evil clutches of my current monopoly broadband service provider, the dreaded Time Warner Cable.

Google testing high-speed wireless -- the last kilometer for Google Fiber?

Google could even take the Android approach -- make the technology available to municipal governments and others and watch their advertising business grow as it is deployed.

In 2012, Goldman Sachs analyst Jason Armstrong looked at Google Fiber and estimated that it would cost them $70 billion to connect less than half of all US homes. He also estimated that it had cost Verizon $15 billion to bring FIOS fiber to 17 million homes. Armstrong concluded that he was "still bullish on cable, although not blind to the risks." (Armstrong has since left Goldman Sachs and works at Comcast and Verizon has cut back on FIOS).

That sounds grim, but what if wireless technology could significantly reduce the cost of connecting homes and offices?

Google has asked the FCC for permission to conduct tests of millimeter wave-length wireless communication for 180 days.

As shown below, short wavelength, high frequency (E-band) signals travel relatively short distances and can not pass through walls or other obstructions, but they enable gigabit and faster data transmission rates:

E-band wireless in context: The current market is dominated by a few companies selling equipment for cell phone backhaul and other point-to-point applications, but what if the smart guys at Google could figure a way to use it for neighborhood links? (Image: E-band communications.)

How much of Armstrong's $70 billion estimate would Google (or anyone else) save if they could run fiber to the block or neighborhood and reach individual homes using this radio technology?

Google Fiber started in Kansas City and today it is available in two other cities (and some surrounding areas). They are currently evaluating 34 additional cities and those cities would look a lot more attractive if they were able to use wireless links to reach homes from neighborhood poles. Google fiber could also provide backhaul for mobile communication.

If this dream materialized, Google would provide stiff competition to the incumbent phone and cable companies and drive connectivity prices down, but would that be the best solution for the public?

In the US, most of us have only one or perhaps two competing Internet service providers. Google would be a second or third, but we would still have an oligopoly and, while Google may not "do evil" today, who knows about the future?

Google, Comcast or any other ISP must deal with local government for things like access to tunnels, phone poles and utility boxes. Might we not be better off in the long run if local government owned the infrastructure regardless of the technology? This solution has worked well in Stockholm, Sweden, where the municpality owns the infrastructure and sells wholesale access to ISPs who service customers.

What will Google do if this technology works out? They could become nationwide wholesale or retail ISPs or even take the Android approach -- make the technology available to municipal governments and others and watch their advertising business grow as it is deployed.

All of this is highly speculative, but if the technology and business model work out, we may be able to get low-cost gigabit connectivity without moving to Kansas City.

-----
Update 4/16/2016

The FCC has granted Google an experimental license for terrestrial and airborne high-frequency wireless tests. The grant is effective March 17, 2016, through April 1, 2018, and covers 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz frequencies.

The airborne experimentation may be for Google's Project Loon and the terrestrial experimentation may be for high-speed short-range wireless link in densely populated neighborhoods (like the street where I live :-).

Google may give us some ISP competition

Just after we heard the competition-reducing news of Comcast buying Time Warner Cable, Google has announced that they may become a competitor in the ISP market -- they are evaluating 34 cities in 9 metropolitan areas as potential Google Fiber installations.

This is not a complete surprise. A Google executive announced their intention to expand last year, stating that Google Fiber is "a great business to be in."

Google is evaluating nine metropolitan areas, but none are big like New York or Chicago. I know a large installation would be daunting, but it would also be a learning experience and at least one big city mayor, Eric Garcetti in Los Angeles, is looking for a fiber partner.

(Full disclosure on that last "hint" for Google -- I live in Los Angeles, and my chance for getting fiber dropped to zero when my phone company, Verizon, decided to get out of that business).

Cable companies back bill to prohibit municipal broadband in Kansas -- the same old story

Google Fiber started in Kansas City Missouri, but it has spread to nearby communities in Kansas and there has been speculation that it might expand nation wide. Olathe, Kansas is to be the first Google Fiber community in Kansas.

Well, the cable companies don't like that so they have introduced a bill in the Kansas Legislature to prohibit cities from offering or partnering to offer Internet service.

The bill is called the "Municipal Communications Network and Private Telecommunications Investment Safeguards Act." Opponents suggest that it should have been called the "Incumbent Telecommunications Company Protection Act."

Congress attempted to create competition with the 1996 Telecommunications Act. This is just the latest in endless court and legislative battles waged by incumbent phone and cable companies to thwart the will of Congress and stifle competition.

(I worked on a municipal network in Hermosa Beach, California that was stopped in 2006 by pressure the local cable company put on the City Council).
-----

Update 2/4/2014

Hearings on community broadband services bill have been postponed (http://bit.ly/1brRTCU). It sounds like they are getting some negative feedback, as well they should.

Will Google Fiber go nationwide?

Today's New York Times has an article on yanking US broadband out of the slow lane. Might Google Fiber inspire broadband competition? Better yet, might it be broadband competition? (One also wonders why this article appeared now -- might it have been encouraged by Google PR)?

The article presents a good overview of the mediocre state of broadband connectivity in the US. It prominently features Google Fiber as a possible solution, quoting Milo Medin, who heads the Google Fiber project and was a co-founder of @ Home Networks, a pioneering first attempt to bring broadband to homes shortly after the passage of the 1996 Telecommunication Act (which was designed to create competition, but failed).

Google's announcement that they would install Google Fiber in Provo, Utah, drove speculation that they were planning to go nation wide. This article does nothing to dampen that speculation.

-----

Update 5/31/2013

Speaking at the Fiber-to-the-Home Council meeting, Milo Medin, Vice President of Access Services for Google, told an audience of city planners, engineers, and mayors that Google Fiber is a business that they expect to make money from -- "a great business to be in."

Medin admitted that at first Google didn't see Google Fiber as a viable business -- it was to be a testbed for Google services. At that time, Google was lobbying for a Gigabit networking bill in Congress, but "someone on the management team" said "If we really think this is important, why whine to the government, when we can do it ourselves?"

Rather than worry about Federal or State governments and subsidies, as the phone and cable companies do, it seems that cooperation with cities is a strategic part of their plan.

The project began with a call for proposals from cities wishing to become the first gigabit testbed. Medin said "We thought a handful of cities would say they were interested ... Then we saw that 1,100 communities replied. No one at the time thought there was a real business here. But that changed when we saw the interest."

Google wants to be your ISP! Wow -- when do the come to Los Angeles?

-----

Update 6/25/2013

Seattle will have gigabit connectivity for $80 per month with no installation fee with a one year contract. This sounds pretty much like Google Fiber and lends credence to Google's claim that this is a real business.

One caveat -- it is not clear which parts of the city will be covered. As of last December, they spoke of 14 neighborhoods, shown on this map:

-----

Update 7/2/2013

This article and picture gallery profiles Startup Village, home to more than 20 startups in a cluster of small houses in Kansas City. The village was established to take advantage of Google Fiber, but the community of local start-ups is even more important than 1Gbps speed.

-----

Update 7/15/2013

More innovation spurred by Google Fiber -- The KC Gigabit Education Project.

-----

Update 8/1/2013

Google to offer Starbucks WiFi (http://bit.ly/142g2Mp). Google says that most locations should see 10x faster Internet speeds than currently available. Every single one of the over 7,000 locations will see this increase in speeds, and the rollout should be completed over the next 18 months. And, Starbucks in areas with Google Fiber access will utilize Google Fiber and its gigabit Internet speeds.

Bob Frankston (http://bit.ly/1edA9J7) has pointed out that as browsing speed rises, ad clicks rise, so Google has a hidden motive for gigabit speed.

-----

Update 8/5/2013

Japan and Korea lead in fiber penetration -- US 14th

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reports that Japan and Korea lead the world in fiber broadband penetration. The US is 14th, trailing Turkey. I've given up on ever seeing FIOS in my neighborhood -- let's root for Google Fiber.

More statistics at the OECD Broadband Portal.

-----

Update 8/15/2013

DSL Reports has seen an internal memo sent to Comcast employees, which says they will revise their bundle offerings and pricing in Provo, Utah in response to Google Fiber.  Google is offering aggressive competition, and, if the leaked report is accurate, Comcast will still be much slower than Google.

_____
Update 10/26/2014

Google has a 180 day license to experiment with millimeter wirelss transmission. The high frequency transmission would cover only short distances, but, if they are thinking of taking Google Fiber nationwide, they may be looking for a technology to cover the last few hundred yards from an access point on a street to the houses on the block. Google (or municipally owned fiber) would provide high speed backhaul.

_____
Update 10/27/2014

Google is evaluating 34 cities for the possibility of installing Google Fiber.

-----
Update 10/29/2014

Google has a 180 day license to experiment with millimeter wireless transmission. The high frequency transmission would cover only short distances, but, if they are thinking of taking Google Fiber nationwide, they may be looking for a technology to cover the last few hundred yards from an access point on a street to the houses on the block. Google fiber (or municipal fiber, as in Stockholm) would provide high speed backhaul.

-----
Update 3/2/2015

Milo Medin, VP of Access Services at Google Fiber, spoke of problems they have dealing with city bureaucracy at the Comtel Summit last week.

Medin mentioned byzantine permission processes, inaccurate information about infrastructure and the reluctance of owners of multi-unit buildings to cooperate as hurting some cities chance to attract Google Fiber.

His remarks must have left folks from the incumbent ISPs smiling and mumbling "we told you so." They also make me curious as to the nature of the deals Google makes with the cities. Does Google expect some sort of advantage over the incumbents? Do they prohibit municipal ownership of infrastructure in the future?

Google is offering a terrific deal in Fiber cities today, but what will happen in, say, ten years if Google advertising revenue has flattened and the company has a lot of employees and overhead? Will they become just another oligopolistic ISP?

-----
Update 3/4/2015

Under Title II, Google can now access telephone poles, simplifying the installation of Google fiber, but what fees do they have to pay for that access and what sort of red tape permitting may they face?

When the 1996 Telecommunications Act ordered incumbent telephone companies to grant competitors access to their lines, the incumbents stifled those efforts. Could something similar happen with respect to phone pole access? (That is not a rhetorical question -- I don't know).

Google Fiber plus ubiquitous, free WiFi -- an offer your mayor cannot refuse

Google Fiber started in Kansas City. Based on that experience, they expanded to nearby Olathe, Kansas and hi-tech cities Austin, Texas and Provo, Utah will be next.

There has been a lot of speculation about Google's intention. Is Google Fiber just a proof of concept designed to spur the incumbent ISPs on? Were they picking hi-tech cities hoping to see some futuristic application development? Or, were they planning to become a nationwide ISP?

We got a hint when Eric Schmidt said Google Fiber was a "real business" and we read estimates of the cost of the Kansas City network and of a nationwide build-out.

Jason Calacanis has no doubt about Google's intention. His latest blog post is entitled "Google's Fiber Takeover Plan Expands: Will Kill Cable & Carriers."

You should read it for yourself, but I want to focus on one claim he makes:

More importantly, every Google Fiber home will have a public wifi component. In order to get Google Fiber, you’re going to have to agree to put a router in that lets anyone use a portion of your bandwidth.

That’s not announced, but it’s gonna happen.

His contention is bolstered by the fact that Google is an investor in Fon. I wrote about Fon a few years ago in a post about people owning their own Internet infrastructure and providing decentralized backhaul for Wifi. Fon gave users free, open WiFi routers, but there were two problems.

For Fon to succeed, the open modems had to be ubiquitous. I was an original "Fonista," but there were only a few others in my part of Los Angeles. The second problem was backhaul speed. I had a slow DSL connection at the time. If a lot of neighbors and passersby had connected to my Fon router, it would have impacted my connectivity.

Those problems disappear if Fon is tied to Google Fiber. Google Fiber is such a good deal that it would become ubiquitous and, if you have gigabit service, you won't notice the load imposed by WiFi users.

Google needs cooperation with cities if Google Fiber is to succeed. One "carrot" they have been offering is free connectivity for community sites like libraries and hospitals. What if they sweeten the pot with ubiquitous WiFi? That is an offer the mayor cannot refuse.

Google has another asset. Recall that the decision to start in Kansas City was based on a proposal from the city. I don't know how many proposals Google received or what the cities offered, but Topeka joked about changing the city name to Google and Kansas City offered significant subsidies. I bet Google got some sweet offers.  I know they got a sweet sales-lead list.

If Jason Calacanis is right, and I do hope he is, this is the beginning of the end of business as usual for wired and wireless ISPs (aka cell phone companies).

-----

Update 4/26/2013

Time Warner Cable says they will offer free Wi-Fi in Austin (http://bit.ly/Y1vSUX).  It seems they got Google's message.  That being said -- I wonder whether they will be able to deliver.  What will be their backhaul strategy?

Google fiber will expand to Olathe, Kansas

Google chose Kansas City for its first gigabit fiber network, and they just picked the second city, nearby Olathe, Kansas.

Google skipped over Kansas City suburbs like Prairie Village, Mission, Shawnee and Overland Park to bring their gigabit fiber to Olathe, a separate city with 125,000 residents. I lived in Prairie Village while in high school, and at the time, Olathe was way out in the sticks. Times have changed.

Does this portend more Google Fiber cities? Are they just trying to make a point to get the incumbent cable companies off the dime? Time will tell.

-----

Update 4/9/2013

As rumored for some time, Google has announced that they will extend Google Fiber to Austin Texas.  Austin is about the same size as Kansas City and it a hi-tech hotbed.  Google will gain insight into future applications of high speed networks and it will not cost them much.  In the wake of the Austin rumors, we also saw speculation on the cost of the Kansas City networks and of a nationwide buildout.  Eric Schmidt has been quoted as saying that gigabit Internet is a real business.  Maybe they will focus on somewhat small, hi-tech cities??

Google and Kansas City push to narrow the digital divide

We have covered various aspects of Google's gigabit connectivity trial in Kansas City. Their plan is to install fiber first in areas of the city, "fiberhoods," with high demand for the service, as measured by the percent of households willing to pay a $10 pre-registration fee.

The deadline for pre-registration was midnight last night, but, as of last Friday, the map of fiberhoods that had met their goal reflected the digital, cultural, racial and income divide in Kansas City, Missouri.

Google and the City worked hard to bridge the divide. The threshold to qualify for fiber was higher in affluent areas than poor. For example, in the circled area on the map shown below, only 5% of the households had to register in order to qualify.

Furthermore, on August 31st, Google adjusted some of the thresholds to make it easier for poor neighborhoods to qualify.

During the last weekend of the six week registration drive, Google and the City worked overtime to close the gap. They held meeting, walked door to door, deployed an ice-cream truck refitted as mobile registration site, and more.

The map below shows that many fiberhoods east of the traditional Troost/Paseo Avenue division line met their thresholds during thd weekend push. (This map shows Kansas City Kansas as well as Missouri). Google reports that 63 fiberhoods qualified during the last week of the registration drive and that at least 180 out of 202 have qualified for service. They will announce the final tally on the registration drive and publish a fiberhood installation schedule next Thursday.

This is important for two reasons. Google will give free gigabit connectivity to all schools, hospitals, libraries and other public facilities in qualifying fiberhoods. That will mean more to a school in a poor neighborhood than an affluent neighborhood.

Furthermore, while Google will charge subscribers $70 per month for gigabit access, they offer free 5 mb/s DSL connectivity to those who wish to pay less. (Households that elect free connectivity must pay a $300 installation fee in 12 monthly $25 installments).

While 5 mb/s sounds slow compared to gigabit connectivity, the fastest DSL speed Verizon can offer me in my middle class Los Angeles neighborhood is 3 mb/s for $29.99 per month. At that rate, I could pay off a $300 installation fee in ten months.

(Verizon does not offer fiber service in my neighborhood, but, where they do, they charge $89.99 a month for 75 mb/s service).

I would expect less contention for backhaul with Google DSL than Verizon since they are provisioning for gigabit service. Five mb/s customers will not add much load.

Google's free DSL service will be more important to many households on the wrong side of the digital tracks than their gigabit service. It will provide very usable speed to newly connected households.

I have said a lot about Google's effort, but, as Timothy B. Lee points out, Kansas City is an active partner. To attract Google, Kansas City taxpayers offered power, office and equipment space and more.

This is a good example of blended public-private investment. It reminds me of Stockholm where the municipal government provided "middle mile" fiber then invited private companies to compete using that infrastructure.

Lee points out that some right-wing commentators have claimed the Kansas City project shows that industry (Google in this case) can build exellent infrastructure without government guidance or subsidy. That is clearly not the case in Kansas City. Hundreds of cities applied to participate in this pilot study, and I am sure they all offered various incentives to Google.

Google and Kansas City cannot bridge the cultural, income and digital divide by themselves, but they are making laudable effort and I applaud them.

Google unveils Gigabit network in Kansas City -- will they disrupt the ISP and mobile access industries? (and other questions)

Google has announced three pricing plans for gigabit networking in Kansas City:

Gigabit +, $120/month: You get 1 Gbps Internet access plus TV. You also get a 2TB cloud DVR with 8 virtual tuners and a Nexus 7 tablet that you can use as your remote control.

Gigabit Internet, $70 per month: You get 1 Gbps Internet access plus "advanced" WiFi and 1TB of cloud storage on Google Drive.

Free Internet, $0 per month: You get 5 Mbps, but there is a one time, $300 construction charge that can be paid in $25 installments.

Note that they are not even bothering with a telephone/TV/Internet "triple play" -- they assume you will do IP telephony and/or have a cell phone.

Google's rollout scheduling is innovative. Instead of doing purely speculative installation in various parts of the city, they are asking people to pay $10 to pre-register. Those pre-registrations will determine the scheduling of installation in various "fiberhoods." The fiberhoods with the highest pre-registration percentage during the next six weeks will get Google fiber first.

They urge people to encourage their neighbors to pre-register and they have sweetened the pot by promising to give community buildings like schools, libraries and hospitals in the fiberhood free Gigabit Internet.

Well, there are a lot of unanswered questions. Is the Internet service symmetric? How many fiberhoods will Kansas City be divided into? Local channels are included in the television coverage, but which other channels will be included? Will there be bandwidth caps? Will the subscriptions be month-to-month? How good a job will they do integrating the Nexus 7 controller with the TV set? What will be the uptake and response to the fiberhood rollout plan? What new applications will be developed to utilize the bandwidth? Will Google "seed" the Gigabit application market?

I wonder what Google's deal with Kansas City looks like. The City is gaining valuable infrastructure and Google is getting a pilot-test network. Is Google paying anything for access to City tunnels and conduit? Is the City paying anything to Google? (Remember that many cities wanted in on the program). Is there any sort of exclusivity? Time limits?

This also reminds me of Google's 2007 WiFi rollout in Mountain Veiw, California. I've not heard much about that recently, and looking at the project Web site, it does not seem like a lot has been happening.

The most important question is -- what will be the response of the cable and telephone companies in Kansas City? Google's high speed service is a direct competitor to cable companies (and FIOS where available) and the slow, free service competes with DSL. And, just maybe Google has provisioned enough fiber to eventually provide backhaul from cell towers. Is this the beginning of the end of the "gentleman's agreement" to divide up landline and mobile Internet access among the cable and telephone companies?

Regardless, my hat is off to Google for trying and I hope they succeed!

----

Google has answered the questions about their contract terms. After a year, you have paid your $300 construction fee in full. For TV customers, your first set top box (and Nexus 7) are free. You can rent ($5 per month) or buy ($120) more if you have multiple TVs.

They also adjusted some of the fiberhood thresholds to make it easier for poor neighborhoods to qualify.

-----

Timothy B. Lee provided answers to my questions about Google's deal with the city in a post entitled How Kansas City taxpayers support Google Fiber. Lee points out that the city offered Google many incentives and includes a link to the text of their agreement for those wishing to delve into the details. It turns out that Google is receiving power, office and equipment space and more.

Google is ready to roll out fiber in Kansas City

A while ago, Google invited cities to apply for subsidized installation of fiber infrastructure, and Kansas City was selected.

They have now completed detailed engineering plans and are ready to begin installing fiber in Kansas City.

There are many models for fiber infrastructure ownership -- a mix of private companies, government agencies, home and building owners, etc. For example, the ownership of a portion of the infrastructure by Swedish government agencies has enabled them (and others) to surpass US Internet service.

Here's to the Google experiment and what we may learn from it!

(This fell through the cracks and was not posted at the time I wrote it -- better late than never).

The FCC and Google want faster Internet access

After a year of public hearings and input via the Internet, the FCC has released their national broadband plan.

The FCC wants to bring 100 Mb/s download and 50 Mb/s upload speed to homes and 1 Gb/s to schools, hospitals and government buildings. They also advocate converting wireless spectrum used for TV broadcast to Internet access, with the goal of giving the US the fastest and most extensive wireless access in the world. They hope competition will lead to relatively cheap Internet access.

To put this in context, relatively low cost 100/50 Mb/s access is available in a number of cities and nations already.

More context -- Google plans to roll out 1 Gb/s fiber to between 50 and 500,000 homes in a test network.

Google hopes their test network will pressure on the FCC and the ISP industry to be more ambitious. Faster speeds mean a better Internet experience, which means more users and more Google ads. One hundred megabits per second sounds pretty good today, but it won't seem so fast in ten years.

They also hope to spur innovation. We have seen that researchers often develop applications for technology they expect to be available in the future. For example, Ivan Sutherland, shown here, built prototype image processing software with a graphical user interface in the early 1960s, using a very expensive computer. It was over twenty years before similar programs like MacDraw and AutoCad became economically viable.

Google hopes that, like Sutherland's expensive computer, their gigabit per second network will be used for new applications. They also hope to develop advanced technology for building fast networks.

How does 100 megabits per second compare to your current home Internet connectivity?

What sorts of applications would a gigabit per second connection enable?

Congress hoped to bring about competition and low prices for Internet access with the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Did the act succeed in spurring competition and lowering prices?

Google's Mountain View network

We have talked about municipal WiFi networks. Many municipal networks were oversold and have been disappointing. Still, the technology is evolving, and Google has operated a network in their headquarters city, Mountain View, California for a year. The network covers 12 square miles and 25,000 homes and serves approximately 15,000 unique users each month. This is a research project for Google, and perhaps the most interesting thing Google has learned is that over 100 distinct types of portable WiFi devices have been used -- not only laptops. Google applications on Apple's touchscreen portable devices also shows their interest in portable service. You can get a feeling for the Mountain View network at this support site.

Update, 8/2/12. Google's Fiber rollout in Kansas City reminded me of Google's WiFi trial in Mountain View, California (coverage map shown here).

I did not check with Google, but, based on the sparse Web site with a broken link, I would guess that the network was not a great success. Let's hope the KC rollout is!