Couldn't we find a word that is somewhere "below" revolution to describe this? Bringing connectivity to parts of the world that don't have it might be a revolution, but just bringing faster connections to people who can download more HD content doesn't seem revolutionary
It will really depend on how well Google accomplishes their goal. If it becomes a money sink, it won't be a revolution. Part of the reason Google is doing this is to get first hand knowledge of the costs and challenges.
> "in 70 percent of Kansas City, Google will be able to string fiber using utility poles."<p>I was under the impression that fiber needs to be underground; is running it over utility poles a common occurrence?
I know this is right out there, but why not focus on going wireless to solve this 'need to avoid digging stuff up' hurdle? I thought advances in wireless speeds was going to be the real revolution.