Deseret News | Gambling on UTOPIA

Reader comments
Gambling on UTOPIA

Give it a chance | 6:54 a.m. April 2, 2008

I wonder how long people thought coper wire would be state of the art... Let's see, how long ago did Alexander Graham Bell install the first coper wire and all the telecoms are installing it to this very day. Fiber is infinitely superior to wire, but the telecoms and their paid lobbyists in government have done everything to stop Utopia. Yep, it competes with their inferior system, that's for sure. Thanks to its detractors, Utopia is prevented from advertising and promotion. You have to be smart enough to figure out its value all on your own. If the "people" had any idea how many incredible innovations have been shelved because they competed with the inferior status quo. Again, you have to be smart and the telecoms are betting you're not. Shall we see?

Yarstruuli | 7:35 a.m. April 2, 2008

Oh taht UTOPIA we available in West Jordan. I'd sign up in a minute. I get to use a UTOPIA connection at my office in Murray and find it far superior to the DSL service I use at home.

West Valley techie | 7:49 a.m. April 2, 2008

The City Councils who support UTOPIA will someday be viewed as visionaries in the same way as those who built the Erie Canal, public airports, and the Interstate Highway system. This is an information highway built by the government that then allows and encourages private companies to compete on it. Fiber allows data to flow at the speed of light, other technologies including wi-fi, can physically only go the speed of sound. A full length movie takes 5 hours to download on Comcast's fastest plan. The same movie on UTOPIA takes 5 minutes. It's time Utah catches up to parts of Europe and East Asia that view it is a public responsibility to build fiber lines to homes and businesses and then let the private sector compete on those lines. Go UTOPIA!

Comments continue below

JayP | 8:04 a.m. April 2, 2008

UTOPIA is a worthy goal and should be given a chance.

Derek | 8:18 a.m. April 2, 2008

This editorial is very one sided and poorly written. The opposing side is never even addressed. Since when is that good writing? Did the Deseret News simply republish a Comcast press release?

The fact of the matter is that the UTOPIA model makes sense in the same way that public roads and sewers make sense. If you are lucky enough to have good broadband access then kudos to you but many of us simply do NOT have access (no DSL, no cable, no chance of seeing either anytime soon), and UTOPIA is the only ray of hope we have. Others that are dissatisfied with the service of their broadband provider have no competition to turn to. (Which cable provider would you use if Comcast would not/could not meet your needs?)

As a nation we are falling behind in broadband access and the glorious "private sector" is not concerned because their government sanctioned quasi-monopoly status ensures a steady profit. The cost overruns are unfortunate and mostly the artificial result of having a costly/lengthy legal war with incumbent cable and phone companies at every step along the way.

UTOPIA and iProvo make sense, despite what the Comcast press release says.

Gov't in private sector=bad | 8:49 a.m. April 2, 2008

TO: Give it a chance

Private telecom providers use fiber optics. In many cases, you have copper in your home to the first telephone company box and then its fiber optics to the central office from there. And no, I have never worked for the phone company.

TO: Derek

The problem is that iProvo and UTOPIA do not make "cents". If fiber to the home is so great, why does iProvo lose as many subscribers as they sign up in a month? What other great technology will be out there in 33 years? 20 years is long enough but 33 years to pay back a loan? iProvo and UTOPIA = bankrupt in 20 years or less. The city councils that support the 33-year extension ought to be fired from office.

It is nice to see likely UTOPIA employees write comments on how great their system is. Watch what happens to iProvo and the same will occur to UTOPIA.

Orem Parent | 9:16 a.m. April 2, 2008

UTOPIA has been great for us. We got the 3 services (phone, internet, tv.) for $99. That was a little more than I was paying just for my phone with Qwest. Add another $60 for DISH and $30 for a slower internet and you'll see it is a great deal.

Many more people will sign up as soon as the fiber is installed throughout the city. I'm glad they have gone slow and not got themselves into a giant hole they can't get out of. Right now is the pivotal time.

I hope the cities stick with it a little longer and that the lawsuits from the other utilities will stop so UTOPIA can suceed.

Jesse Harris | 10:04 a.m. April 2, 2008

I've begun to think that the DMN has a whole stack of these boilerplate editorials for slow news days. It's like they're rooting for failure.

I think that we'll see a real turnaround with PacketFront at the helm. They bring a lot of expertise to the table and I understand they are going to do something about UTOPIA's abysmal advertising (or rather, lack thereof). It's amazing how many people have never heard of the service and aren't even aware that it's in their neighborhood.

Good Qwest Lobbyist piece | 10:01 a.m. April 2, 2008

The wise at Sandy city also thought that a Real soccer stadium was a better tax payer funded investment than Utopia. Or the billion + dollars we put into that small stretch of I-15 for Olympic showcasing was money well spent on the future.

Most of the people in this state do not know the opportunity they have within those cities that have Utopia access. Other places in the know would die to have that speed (duplex) for a song of a price.

From my understanding fiber is scalable. If not then why have all the phone companies spent zillions installing a much more vast fiber network. Make no mistake, this is about controlling monopolies not about the poor tax payer. In fact Utopia is one of the few tax payer backed programs that I have ever seen which has infinite payback potential in terms of jobs and technology innovation.

Shame on the DMN for writing this one sided piece for the benefit of the controlling monopolies who will as they always have take more than the Utopia backed tax dollars through monopolistic fees for inferior service.

Orem resident | 10:17 a.m. April 2, 2008

Utopia was supposed to be to my house by now, but the those controlling the money have placed rules on it that they have to install it to rural customers first. Folks in my area of Orem would pay through the nose for it and be thrilled. The customer base would be practically universal.

Qwest and a few other former monopolies wouldn't extend service into my area until UTOPIA was announced. Now I finally can get faster Internet access from Cable or DSL, both of which are slow, but at least better than dialup.

15MB or 50MB access is the the information super highway. I am just on a small access road where Qwest wants us all to stay.

UTOPIA's problems | 10:27 a.m. April 2, 2008

UTOPIA's is prohibited from any advertising (only the service providers can advertise). Some of those service providers are "still working out some kinks" in their systems, thus turnover. Fiber has been around for (more than) 20 years and will be for decades to come. Why? Simply because is it scalable - thus the reason Comcast/Qwest et al have MOST of their networks on fiber. The difference between them and UTOPIA is the last bit of connection (from the street into your home). The copper wire (Qwest) and coaxial (Comcast) simply can not support the bandwidth fiber (UTOPIA) does and it costs money (from their bottom line) to build it - so they make the customer make do with what they have.
The kicker is that Comcast or Qwest (or anyone else) COULD hop onto the UTOPIA network as a service provider and significantly improve their services to their customers. Why don't they? They insist on keeping (monopolistic) control of the entire delivery system. That attitude works against the consumer. A lot of money could be saved and a lot less duplicate infrastructure installed if they'd all play nicely together.

Education Needed | 10:42 a.m. April 2, 2008

The biggest issue I see here is the lack of understanding the general public has about the situation. The private providers are actively marketing in the Utopia cities with predatory pricing. Advertisements are sent to residents almost weekly with low introductory rates. But in the fine print - it says: "This offer available to [enter Utopia Member city name here] residents only." Why should a resident in one city get such a deal while someone two streets over not be allowed to get the same deal?
It is obvious that the private providers are spending thousands upon thousands of marketing dollars, something Utopia doesn't have, to crush a network that promotes competition -- not competing, but allows the smaller companies like XMission, MStar, Veracity, etc. to compete, providing faster services for less money.

The biggest weakness I see in Utopia's past is not focusing on the Businesses. Companies who could cut internet costs in half while getting 20 times the speed.
T1= 1.5 Mbps (up and down) $500+/mo
Utopia provider= 30 Mbps (up and down) $125/mo

John | 11:29 a.m. April 2, 2008

Comcast is predatory, and monopolistic, plus, their service stinks, and their prices are way over the top.

Competition is what keeps customers satisfied, and prices affordable.

Its disgraceful to see Comcast writing editorials in the paper under an assumed name like this one. Its nothing but an advertisement for them and Qwest.

Fiber is not going to be obsolete in 20 years. The speed and flexibility it provides guarantees that. Maybe something better will occur, but no one is going to rip up a city and install more crap underground to go from a 5 minute movie download, to a 2 minute movie download.

The government needs to get the heck out of the way, and let the consumer decide what is best for them.

Have you ever heard of satelite? | 11:40 a.m. April 2, 2008

Have the "We need to invest in running fiber-optics to all houses" people ever heard of using a satelite? The days of running coper or fiber-optic cable to every house in the world are already over. Just put an antenna/dish on the house and your done.

Bad Idea. | 11:51 a.m. April 2, 2008

If UTOPIA is such a great money making idea, why no private investors? Why are the folks selling the bonds offering interest rates at rates many times the equivelent for what would be considered legit projects.

If Comcast and Qwest are pricing in a predatory fashion, why isn't UTOPIA threatening an anti-trust lawsuit? Possibly because that pricing isn't predatory? I don't use high speed internet at home and I don't want to pay for my neighbors to play Xbox Live with tax dollars. That's the crux of my gripe - the same reason I don't want to pay for smoker's healthcare. Pay your own way.

The problem UTOPIA is having is people aren't buying it even where they have rolled out service. If everyone posting here is right, and you get more for less, wouldn't the invisible hand of economics drive customers to then - yet their customer base is declining.

This isn't the fault of Qwest, Comcast, Digis, Utah Wireless, Sprint Broadband, Verizon Broadband, or the nearly 1 dozen other broadband providers in Utah. Don't listen to lobbyists, bloggers or columnists. Go to your city council meetings and listen to the UTOPIA people. They are admitting this isn't working.

anonymous | 12:29 p.m. April 2, 2008

i have worked for comcast and qwest. both are predatory and competitive, depending on the situation and neighborhood. both qwest broadband and comcast broadband have their benefits and liabilities. fiber to the house is optimal. i have seen a utopia connection and it is far superior to either qwest or comcast. but did they mention that utopia contractors have cut major phoneline trunks on more than one ocassion leaving qwest customers without service. how much did the fines Utopia had to pay figure into their lack of profit?

make it work, or stop.
i love competition

Fiber vs. Satellite | 2:43 p.m. April 2, 2008

Fiber: In 2001 I read an article about Bell Labs achieving speeds of 10 Terabits per second (Tbps) over fiber optics. There is also an article that states:

"Scientists from Lucent Technologies' (NYSE: LU) Bell Labs have calculated the maximum amount of information that can be transmitted over optical fiber, demonstrating that fiber optics technology will result in robust, long-term and scalable communications networks.

"The Bell Labs team ... determined that it is theoretically possible to send approximately 100 terabits of information, or roughly 20 billion one-page e-mails, simultaneously per strand of fiber."
(found at findarticles. com -- can't post a proper reference, sorry)

Technology is available today to transmit 10 Tbps. This provides plenty of expansion to last much longer than the 33 year Utopia bonds.

Satellite:

Satellite is simple to set up, but wireless/satellite can't touch the transfer capabilities of fiber optics. As wireless technology improves, so will fiber technology.

I work with a satellite internet connection. It costs $100/month for 1Mbps down and 56Kbps up. DSL and Cable are better and cheaper than satellite.

Don't get me wrong. Wireless has it's place for mobile applications, but doesn't come close to fiber speeds.

We need 10 TBPS in our home? | 3:43 p.m. April 2, 2008

Do we really NEED 10 TBPS for home applications?

My company has the largest privately owned T1 network in the US. The WAN isn't fiber-optic, it's a dish, but it works great for us.

If we can run a 10,000 person nation-wide company on a T1, why do you need 10TBPS speed into your home? And why should I be paying for you to have 10 TBPS into your home?

Mr. T1 | 5:23 p.m. April 2, 2008

You don't really run 10,000 persons/site on a single T1, now do you? My guess it it's lots of T1s and if you added them all together it would be rather a lot of bandwidth. "Largest privately owned T1 in the US"? Really? Bigger than SPRINT, VERIZON, Qwest, et al? I doubt it.

Do you NEED electricity, water, or sewer in your home? Not 200 years ago, but today they're pretty important. The network UTOPIA is building is actually a 100Mb system as the 10TBPS lasers are VERY VERY Expensive. Simply put, just because you don't see a need for that bandwidth in your home today, with that type of capacity a lot of new services become that we haven't even though of yet. It might be nice for Grandma to video conference into talk with the grandkids in HD quality for no extra charge, eh? Blockbuster and Netflix ought to be worried.

While it's not a need, it certainly opens up the way for a lot of really cool conveniences... :)

Mr. T1, | 6:24 p.m. April 2, 2008

I'm glad that your 10,000 person company can survive on a T1. I imagine that all you use it for is e-mail and surfing the web.

There is a company in Brigham City that sends several large plans by truck (ups, fedex, etc) daily. The cost for sending those plans really adds up. Freight charges are probably thousands of dollars per month. A fiber optic connection with 100Mbps to the internet would allow this company to transmit these plans across the internet, decreasing their turnaround time. They are anxiously awaiting the Utopia Fiber to reach them. Just because a 10,000 person company can survive on a T1 doesn't mean that a small to medium size business can.

Well said, poster at 5:23pm
Today, a 10Tbps internet is not realistic for even a business. My point was the technology exists, proving the flexability of fiber optics. If it's possible today, it proves the flexability for the future. The network is capable of providing the growth we'll need in the future.

100 years ago, telephones existed, not everyone had them and they weren't a necessity. Today, millions of people can't function without a cell phone?

Anonymous | 9:29 p.m. April 2, 2008

Whether or not UTOPIA competes with private enterprise is probably a good debate to have. If broadband has truly become "infrastructure" like roads, sewers, etc (and I think it has) then there is likely a legitimate role for government in a UTOPIA-like project, but at least its a good conversation to have and the DNews position is reasonable.

However, to spend several paragraphs knocking fiber as if it's a passing fad is simply poor reporting. Fiber HAS been around for 20 years, and every indication is that it will be the vehicle of choice for massive high-speed traffic for another two or three decades at least. There is NOTHING to compare with it on the horizon. Anyone that tells you otherwise probably works for Comcast.

Wireless has its place, and is getting faster, but nothing comes CLOSE to fiber for the information superhighway. To base editorial objections on the validity of fiber is just sloppy reporting, in my opinion.

A few thoughts | 1:47 p.m. April 3, 2008

Is this throwing good money after bad?

And secondly, even if this technology is the future, what if iProvo and UTOPIA are 5-10 years before their time and go belly-up and leave taxpayers holding the bag? The debate isn't as simple as "good project versus bad project." Is it the right time and environment for them to be able to make this profitable (as you recall, Provo and the UTOPIA participants were told this could actually add lots of cash to city coffers when it became a huge success. That unfortunately cuts both ways.

Yes, we NEED 10 TBPS | 10:33 p.m. April 3, 2008

8 - 9 years ago we were just amazed at the fast speeds of 256k DSL. There was NO need for anything faster.

Yeah. Right.

With as much TV/Movies/Music that get pulled into homes, why not plan on using 10 TBPS so we aren't always behind on technology.

UTOPIA User | 10:27 a.m. April 7, 2008

"The days of running coper or fiber-optic cable to every house in the world are already over. Just put an antenna/dish on the house and your done."

You're joking... right? Please say you are.

James | 5:43 p.m. April 14, 2008

No. The investment required to even enter the market for high speed broadband without something like UTOPIA is immense. The playing field will only have a very, very tiny number of players. And it's all duplicated effort.

With commonly accessible infrastructure, one should expect a large number of ISPs to be able to compete. The barrier to entry is the question here. Last-mile fiberoptic cabling is a natural monopoly. It's exactly the sort of thing the government _should_ be doing. UTOPIA is providing fiber links, not Internet. You can choose your ISP. They just centralize the access point for ISPs. _Good_ idea.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.