Keep in mind these are the first few "huts" we know about. I'm fairly confident they have a plan for such huts throughout the broader city area. One thing about Google is that they don't do anything half-baked.

I have to believe negotiations between Cox and OKC for the cable franchise agreement renewal will be....shall we say...interesting. Pretty sure that's coming up for renewal this year and perhaps very soon...

I will be utterly delighted to shove Cox's $8.50/mo DVR's and tuners right back to 'em when the time comes.

So I only heard a few minutes during a short drive listening. But Google is spearheading an initiative through the SEC that would allow them and other providers to offer cable channels a la carte?? I only watch about 10 cable channels yet my cox bill(with mid-tier internet and phone) is $230. I had one of the first cable modems to come to OKC in the mid nineties. I'm a 20+ year customer and they still treat me like a scrub. I'm just waiting to jump ship.
I have dvr sports tier HBO and 100mbps and I pay $140/month. Go online find an att uverse package, price it out, write down the package #. call Cox, get retention on the phone, tell them you are switching, give them all the details and then say I'll stay if you can get it close. They will always get it close.

I emailed Moore city manager Steve Eddy today to ask if Moore was going to pursue Google Fiber like OKC is doing and below is his response.

I am a citizen of Moore and was wondering if the city is working with Google Fiber to expand to the Moore area since they are starting to get buildings underway and hire staff in Oklahoma city for Google Fiber and are in fact coming to OKC ?

Bobby,
It must be Google day. I received a call this very morning from Google and we are going to meet with them in early April to discuss this. I am assuming they will update us on their progress in OKC and then discuss options for extending it into Moore.

Wow, I am glad to hear this and I hope the city will work with Google to bring it to Moore as I would love to have more options for service than just Cox or AT&T. and I think this would help bring good jobs and business to our city as well. Please keep me posted if you can.

I will try to keep you posted. The only real question at this point is the cost and I assume we will find out more about that when we meet with them.

I have dvr sports tier HBO and 100mbps and I pay $140/month. Go online find an att uverse package, price it out, write down the package #. call Cox, get retention on the phone, tell them you are switching, give them all the details and then say I'll stay if you can get it close. They will always get it close.

Caution advised - hearing lots of rumors that the number of "discount packages" or "promotional offers" is starting to shrink as more and more cord-cutters are threatening to jump ship. Not saying you can't get there - I did again this year - but I'm not sure the wiggle room is as great as it once was.

Bring on Google.

Caution advised - hearing lots of rumors that the number of "discount packages" or "promotional offers" is starting to shrink as more and more cord-cutters are threatening to jump ship. Not saying you can't get there - I did again this year - but I'm not sure the wiggle room is as great as it once was.

Bring on Google.

And that's why the number dropping keeps increasing. They keep raising the cost and more people will continue to drop at a faster rate. They are bringing their own death.

I don't know. I have DirecTV and I got a call from them last month and they proactively gave me a 12 month discount of $40 and did it without making me going into another contract. It was kind of funny bc I asked what they would do if I signed on for another year and it was only another $10 off.

And that's why the number dropping keeps increasing. They keep raising the cost and more people will continue to drop at a faster rate. They are bringing their own death.

Oh I agree completely and I surely didn't mean to suggest people shouldn't be as aggressive as possible in keeping their Cox bill as low as they can. All i was saying is that I think their willingness to respond to "we're leaving" threats is diminishing. I've got my "discount" for another year and I'm cautiously optimistic by then we'll have a much more specific view of Google's deployment plans and a better insight when I can realistically hope to make the jump.

AT&T is not taking kindly to Google Fiber in Louisville (http://mobiledevices.about.com/od/carrierfaq/fl/Google-and-ATampT-The-Fiber-Internet-Wars.htm?utm_content=6300534&utm_medium=email&utm_source=cn_nl&utm_campaign=computersl&utm_term=bouncex3):

Google and AT&T: The Fiber Internet Wars (http://mobiledevices.about.com/od/carrierfaq/fl/Google-and-ATampT-The-Fiber-Internet-Wars.htm?utm_content=6300534&utm_medium=email&utm_source=cn_nl&utm_campaign=computersl&utm_term=bouncex3)

So there is a permit for a Google Fiber "hut" to be built at 16820 N PENNSYLVANIA AVE according to the city council agenda for March 15th. I'm guessing they are going to build more around the city, but it seems that they are beginning physical work on it now.

Does anyone know how close you have to be to a hut?

Does anyone know how close you have to be to a hut?

Well, it's fiber, not DSL. So you could be on the moon if you ran the cable there. The important thing is capacity, not distance.

Does anyone know how close you have to be to a hut?

Folks who I know who are familiar with fiber technology, but who don't work for google, say that depending on the technology, you're looking at 40-50k feet (7-9 miles approx), and the other limitations are number of homes (20k) and signal loss (which is more of an issue than distance).

Folks who I know who are familiar with fiber technology, but who don't work for google, say that depending on the technology, you're looking at 40-50k feet (7-9 miles approx), and the other limitations are number of homes (20k) and signal loss (which is more of an issue than distance).

It has been a while since I have seen the details so may be out of date but it use to be 3 miles of cable max before it either needs to hit a device to either split(down)/merge(up) or repeat the signal (which they likely want to have as few repeaters as makes logical sense). With at least one split between the hut and the house six miles of cable travel from the hut is plausible but both how the info-graphic reads and just optimizing for how much cable it will take to serve a region more like 3 miles driving along city streets from the hut is a safer estimate.

Clearly the graphic is just a simplification, so it depends on if they do multiple tiers of cabinets between huts customer houses (which they probably will if they can) or if they like/need to use huts in more of the tiers.

Folks who I know who are familiar with fiber technology, but who don't work for google, say that depending on the technology, you're looking at 40-50k feet (7-9 miles approx), and the other limitations are number of homes (20k) and signal loss (which is more of an issue than distance).

Hmmm....no fiber expert here, but from what I've read I think they've sustained 10Gb throughput over single-mode fiber across distances of 50mi for some time. Now you may get into switching into local connections back to neighborhoods with multi-mode backbones and the huts provide the transition - you quickly start getting out of my depth on that one :)

I'd have to believe you'd be able to do better than 7-9 mile intervals at 20K home densities to make this practical.

Would love to read some of Google's implementation details. Looks like I need to learn a lot more about fiber optics!! :) :)

The problem is, the 10 channels you watch are probably the 10 channels that drive up cable bills the most. I am sure there would some benefit to a la carte pricing, but if you like sports, news and discovery, probably not that much of a benefit.

I cut the TV cord in 2009, and have never looked back.

The problem is, the 10 channels you watch are probably the 10 channels that drive up cable bills the most. I am sure there would some benefit to a la carte pricing, but if you like sports, news and discovery, probably not that much of a benefit.

I cut the TV cord in 2009, and have never looked back.

From some reports I have heard, there really only are only about 10 channels the majority of people people would frequently pick, though individually probably only want half of those. They naturally have the highest price per channel to broadcast and on top of there own price they often require at least another five be bundled (and payed for) to show theirs.

I am a little more fuzzy on the details between the channels but getting news and discovery would be much more plausible cheaper than sports, if they are viable to continue producing.

However even just the legally VOD services make a lot of the cable channels either pointless or having a need to change their model. Since running a channel entirely or largely padded off old episodes is not what it use to be. Plus will likely continue getting more favorable to VOD than classic scheduled channels as time goes by.

From some reports I have heard, there really only are only about 10 channels the majority of people people would frequently pick, though individually probably only want half of those. They naturally have the highest price per channel to broadcast and on top of there own price they often require at least another five be bundled (and payed for) to show theirs.

I am a little more fuzzy on the details between the channels but getting news and discovery would be much more plausible cheaper than sports, if they are viable to continue producing.

However even just the legally VOD services make a lot of the cable channels either pointless or having a need to change their model. Since running a channel entirely or largely padded off old episodes is not what it use to be. Plus will likely continue getting more favorable to VOD than classic scheduled channels as time goes by.

Yeah, I know the sports channels are by far the most expensive. Not really sure what comes after that, I'm guess it isn't ABC Family, Oxygen and Bravo and definitely not Bravo-Spanish 3 ;).

I hadn't thought about VOD hurting most of the lesser channels, but I think you have a really good point.

The problem is, the 10 channels you watch are probably the 10 channels that drive up cable bills the most. I am sure there would some benefit to a la carte pricing, but if you like sports, news and discovery, probably not that much of a benefit.

I cut the TV cord in 2009, and have never looked back.

Surely we can knock off a Benjamin or so for the 250 channels I don't watch. Spanish language...****ing E NETWORK? I already pay a la carte for my HBO Netflix and HULU content. If I could just buy espn, fx(x), amc, and the discovery network. I'd cut the cable in a heartbeat and stream it all.

As far as the "bundle" for $130 is concerned. That lasts 2 years then they charge whatever they want.

Surely we can knock off a Benjamin or so for the 250 channels I don't watch. Spanish language...****ing E NETWORK? I already pay a la carte for my HBO Netflix and HULU content. If I could just buy espn, fx(x), amc, and the discovery network. I'd cut the cable in a heartbeat and stream it all.

As far as the "bundle" for $130 is concerned. That lasts 2 years then they charge whatever they want.

You might check out PS Vue.

Surely we can knock off a Benjamin or so for the 250 channels I don't watch. Spanish language...****ing E NETWORK? I already pay a la carte for my HBO Netflix and HULU content. If I could just buy espn, fx(x), amc, and the discovery network. I'd cut the cable in a heartbeat and stream it all.

As far as the "bundle" for $130 is concerned. That lasts 2 years then they charge whatever they want.

Sling TV lets you steam ESPN and AMC, not sure about FX. $20/month. You only get to stream live, however, you can use the login at watch ESPN and amc.com as a workaround. Comes with other channels, too:

https://www.sling.com/

Sling TV lets you steam ESPN and AMC, not sure about FX. $20/month. You only get to stream live, however, you can use the login at watch ESPN and amc.com as a workaround. Comes with other channels, too:

https://www.sling.com/

I've tried Sling a few times (each time hoping they had improved). Until they fix their interface, it is simply not worth the hassle. The controls are sluggish, at best. The DVR is terrible and works with very few shows. Their servers cannot handle big premieres like Walking Dead or Game of Thrones.

It is good if you just want the logins for the apps, but for just a bit more, you can get the same logins and more channels, better interface, better DVR functionality with PS Vue. Only drawback right now is Vue isn't on Roku yet. I think the base package is only $29.

I haven't looked ad PS Vue yet, but on initial glance I think I would get more (and better) channels than I do right now with Cox. I might have to look into that.

I'm also 1.5 miles from the proposed Google Hut, so I have that going for me!

Thought this was interesting... No more free google fiber service in KC. Wonder if this will spread to other cities.
Google Fiber drops free basic service in its original city (http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/09/google-fiber-drops-free-tier-in-kansas-city/?sr_source=Facebook)

No more free google fiber service in KC.

People keep spinning it that way, but it won't make it true. Every article I've read says free is still offered to 'low-income' areas, whatever criteria is used to define that, and that those who currently have it can choose to be grandfathered in. Or they can choose the package that's 20 times faster than what they have now. The only thing truly 'no more' is the installation fee.

On the home front, just to add to the development news above, Google is definitely moving forward with their development system here. They've already started hiring contractors to install the lines. Hoping to learn more about where some of the first service will be over the next month or so.

But yeah according to the Oklahoman we aren't/weren't "getting" Google Fiber... glad they were on the ball as usual in their snarky reporting a few months ago.

On the home front, just to add to the development news above, Google is definitely moving forward with their development system here. They've already started hiring contractors to install the lines. Hoping to learn more about where some of the first service will be over the next month or so.

But yeah according to the Oklahoman we aren't/weren't "getting" Google Fiber... glad they were on the ball as usual in their snarky reporting a few months ago.

Possibly hedging bets, not pissing off an existing paying advertiser but not going so far as to give Google a reason not to pay if the did come. Plus the original announcement was kind of non-committal.

Possibly hedging bets, not pissing off an existing paying advertiser but not going so far as to give Google a reason not to pay if the did come. Plus the original announcement was kind of non-committal.

Yes there were plenty of reasons to be non-committal in the newspaper and I don't think anyone had a problem with that. It was all the pointless twitter commentary from some of the reporters bashing OKCTalk that was annoying.

On the home front, just to add to the development news above, Google is definitely moving forward with their development system here. They've already started hiring contractors to install the lines. Hoping to learn more about where some of the first service will be over the next month or so.

But yeah according to the Oklahoman we aren't/weren't "getting" Google Fiber... glad they were on the ball as usual in their snarky reporting a few months ago.

The Oklahoman has been a bit pissy in regards to news that breaks on OKCTalk. If there isn't 100% confirmation (i.e., a press release), then they're going to downplay it and pretend it isn't happening, because that makes it okay that they got scooped. It isn't "someone else beat us on this" and it becomes "we heard about this but it's just baseless rumors". It's kind of a spiteful way to protect their credibility.

Google moves forward with plans to bring Fiber to OKC | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2016/04/15/google-moves-forward-with-plans-to-bring-fiber-to-okc-general-news/)

Google moves forward with plans to bring Fiber to OKC | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2016/04/15/google-moves-forward-with-plans-to-bring-fiber-to-okc-general-news/)

What does the text of the article say? You can not read it if you don't subscribe to the Journal Record.

Hopefully Google Fiber is a little more widespread in its coverage than Cox Gigablast.

Google moves forward with plans to bring Fiber to OKC
By: Brian Brus The Journal Record April 15, 2016 0

OKLAHOMA CITY – Google is moving forward with negotiations to bring its high-speed Internet fiber network to Oklahoma City, officials confirmed Friday.

Although installation details have not been resolved yet, City Council members have already agreed to a rezoning request to allow construction of a small building to hold the company’s fiber-optic cable interface equipment. If Google goes ahead with its plan, the hut will be built at 16820 N. Pennsylvania Ave.

The town of Cary, North Carolina, went through a similar process with Google two years ago, ultimately agreeing to lease land to the company at an annual cost of $2 per square foot, for a total charge of $4,200 to $7,000 annually for three to five network huts. Several other cities have similar leasing contracts. Google asked Phoenix, Arizona, and Portland, Oregon, for access to about 35 parcels each.

Sources familiar with the project estimated Oklahoma City will need about 10 to 15 huts spread around town to provide Internet connections at 1 gigabit per second, several times faster than the current standard for broadband service.

Google announced the fiber rollout in October, informing Oklahoma City officials that the company was considering eight other cities as well. Google did not make any commitments at the time; project director Jill Szuchmacher said her staff was interested only in evaluating municipal government processes and the resources already at hand. The targeted cities are not in competition with each other, she said.

City officials responded by setting staff to help Google in its research of locations of utilities and easements.

The same week in early April that the Oklahoma City Council considered the rezoning proposal, Google submitted a similar fiber hut request in Portland.

It takes about two years to get a new network running, if other cities’ experiences with Google are used as a guide. For example, Google announced its interest in Salt Lake City, Utah, about a year ago and is now less than a year away from launching service there.

Google has been offering free basic Internet access after installation in several markets. However, the company recently announced it was moving to a $50 monthly rate for its bottom tier of service in the Kansas City metro area. Google Fiber in Atlanta has a similar pricing option, while offering an alternative of gigabit speeds at $70 per month or more for both television and Internet.

Today Google announced Dallas is also being considered as a potential future expansion city for Google fiber rollout. Would this help or hurt us in any way?

Today Google announced Dallas is also being considered as a potential future expansion city for Google fiber rollout. Would this help or hurt us in any way?

Think it has no effect whatsoever.

My understanding is that Google is very committed to OKC and that city leaders are moving heaven and earth to accommodate them.

Think it has no effect whatsoever.

My understanding is that Google is very committed to OKC and that city leaders are moving heaven and earth to accommodate them.

Any new word on possible Hut locations? I'm assuming those first ones on the north side is but the beginning of a wave across OKC as part of their deployment.

I have the Go-Away-Cox-Number on speed dial to see if I can set a faster-than-the-crackle-of-lightning record for quickest phonecall to drop Cox once I hear GF is ready to go :) :) (okay, maybe not literally, but you get the drift [evil grin])

Seriously, however, Pete - are OKC and Cox not in franchise renegotiation? Reasonably sure their agreement is up this year and will have to be re-voted on early next year, IIRC..

Any new word on possible Hut locations? I'm assuming those first ones on the north side is but the beginning of a wave across OKC as part of their deployment.

I have the Go-Away-Cox-Number on speed dial to see if I can set a faster-than-the-crackle-of-lightning record for quickest phonecall to drop Cox once I hear GF is ready to go :) :) (okay, maybe not literally, but you get the drift [evil grin])

Seriously, however, Pete - are OKC and Cox not in franchise renegotiation? Reasonably sure their agreement is up this year and will have to be re-voted on early next year, IIRC..

I just happened to find a couple of those huts as a part of building permits and I'm sure there are a bunch more I haven't seen.

Not sure about the Cox piece but as a reluctant customer myself, I can't wait to have a viable option. I had FIOS in California and it was amazing, as was their customer service. I bet Google Fiber is even better.

My understanding is that Google is very committed to OKC and that city leaders are moving heaven and earth to accommodate them.

I wish Mustang felt the same way. After emails (that's plural) went ignored, I finally called the city manager and the response to "What is the city of Mustang doing to encourage Google Fiber?" was basically "Man, we sure hope they come here, wouldn't that be great?".

Mustang is screwed.

I wish Mustang felt the same way. After emails (that's plural) went ignored, I finally called the city manager and the response to "What is the city of Mustang doing to encourage Google Fiber?" was basically "Man, we sure hope they come here, wouldn't that be great?".

Mustang is screwed.

Eh, while it is not a good sign for it happening the next few years, as long as they start operations in Oklahoma City expanding into the suburbs has decent chance of happening eventually.

Had the opportunity to drop off my cable box at the Cox Store today. We switched to PS Vue and are pretty happy with it so far and I like their selection of channels better than what I had on our much more expensive Cox package. On top of that we don't have any of the signal noise or "not available" messages that we were frequently getting. In the end we are saving $60 with the switch and all we are loosing are the local channels, and we will just get an antenna for the weather coverage.

The Cox folks tried very hard to keep me on their cable service without success, their cheapest package was the same price as the most expensive PS Vue package. Then they tried to upsell their internet, which has been working fine for streaming so far for us. "Only a $5 trial!" They stopped trying to sell me stuff when I mentioned that we are less than 2 miles from one of the Google Fiber Huts.

Had the opportunity to drop off my cable box at the Cox Store today. We switched to PS Vue and are pretty happy with it so far and I like their selection of channels better than what I had on our much more expensive Cox package. On top of that we don't have any of the signal noise or "not available" messages that we were frequently getting. In the end we are saving $60 with the switch and all we are loosing are the local channels, and we will just get an antenna for the weather coverage.

The Cox folks tried very hard to keep me on their cable service without success, their cheapest package was the same price as the most expensive PS Vue package. Then they tried to upsell their internet, which has been working fine for streaming so far for us. "Only a $5 trial!" They stopped trying to sell me stuff when I mentioned that we are less than 2 miles from one of the Google Fiber Huts.

Perhaps you can help me witht he PS Vue stuff? I really only want ESPN and fox sports.

Perhaps you can help me witht he PS Vue stuff? I really only want ESPN and fox sports.

What kind of help are you needing? I've had Vue for a few months and really like it.

What kind of help are you needing? I've had Vue for a few months and really like it.

What you're paying now, what you were paying before mostly, and what package you have now.

What you're paying now, what you were paying before mostly, and what package you have now.

I'm not sure exactly what package we were on before on Cox (they seem to change frequently, but there were a couple channels that the wife wanted that you couldn't get unless you upgrade) but we were paying almost $110 including the rental and HBO. I was trying to figure out what the actual price is for HBO, but it is pretty telling that you cannot find the actual "this is what you pay after the promo period" price very easily on the website. So now I'm pulling up one of our old bills to compare:

Cox:
Starter + Expanded Service + Faith & Values Pack $79.99
HBO $15.99
TV Box $8.50
Broadcast Surcharge $3.00
Total for Cox: $107.48

PS Vue:
Elite Slim $44.95 (I think the $34.99 plan is the cheapest they have for ESPN & Fox Sports)
HBO Now $14.99
Total: 59.94

So it's almost $50 a month in savings for us. When I trialed PS Vue I was using our PS4, but the controller isn't the most intuitive to use with the interface. We were already using a Chromecast for Netflix that we controlled with our phones, but that was causing some problems when grandparents were coming over to babysit. We had to load up Netflix on the PS4 so that they can watch shows there for the little one, and then switch between regular TV and the PS4 which just made things more complicated than they needed to be. So we ended up getting an Amazon Fire Stick with the baby remote, so now Netflix, Music, PS Vue, and HBO Now are on the same channel and since the grandparents have a Fire Stick on their own it makes it easy for them to use.

PS Vue also has apps for phones and tablets, so if you are on vacation or around town you can take your subscription with you.

What you're paying now, what you were paying before mostly, and what package you have now.

I have the 29.99 package As far as sports i get. Espn 1 and 2, Fox sports 1 and 2 nbc sports.
And all will give you acesss watch espn, fox sports go and nbc live extra for additional sports content.
Now there isn't a separate fox sports Oklahoma channel on psvue. But
I have been able to log into my fox sports app with my ps vue log in and seen
fox sports Oklahoma there. So hopefully we won't be a problem with Sooners and Thunder
games later this year. As you I'm mainly watch sports. And just using the cloud recording
for few other shows.

30.00 ps vue
12.00 netflix (I trade my login with my friend and in return I get:
Amazon prime free
7.50 hbo go (split the price with same friend)

Under 50 bucks tax free. Its a pretty good value. With a wide variety of content.
Not everyone has the luxury of trading accounts with someone. But if you can
with a limited group like. 1 or 2 other people. YOu can save some money.

What you're paying now, what you were paying before mostly, and what package you have now.

I was paying 64.99/month for "Cox Advanced TV", to which I subscribed only during football season. I had a promotion for HBO, Starz, and Showtime for free for some length of time. Looking at my old bill, it also looks like my TV package included one receiver. I also had the 100 Mbps internet service for 73.99/month.

I also had a subscription to Netflix (7.99 at the time), and Amazon Prime (99/year, which I use primarily for the shipping benefit).

I dropped the TV part of my package, and now subscribe to PS Vue Access Slim for 29.99/month. It has all the channels my wife and I watch, and they're adding local channels as they get contracts. Regional sports networks should also follow soon. I'm optimistic this will be enough for me during OU football season. They also upgraded the 100 Mbps service to 150 Mbps, for which I pay 76.99/month.

I'm a big fan of having one box do all the work, so I really like having my streaming channels available as an app on my Amazon Fire TV box, along with my other streaming services (Netflix (now paying 9.99/month) and Amazon, primarily).

My brother-in-law in Austin has been waiting on Google Fiber since 2014. That's when they announced they were coming to Austin.

$30 a month might not be too bad. Right now I subscribe to two different services which I'm sure are questionable in terms of legality, but I can watch any game I want and it's a flat fee.

I hope Google Fiber comes soon because the High speed/Broadband options feel kind of limited here. There's ATT, Cox..... and that's pretty much it.

$30 a month might not be too bad. Right now I subscribe to two different services which I'm sure are questionable in terms of legality, but I can watch any game I want and it's a flat fee.

If you have a Fire TV, you might also research Kodi.

If you have a Fire TV, you might also research Kodi.

I have it on a raspberry pi. I'm slightly annoyed that the highest res is 720, and most of the links are dead. Currently running ares with Spinz Tv premium lite

I have it on a raspberry pi. I'm slightly annoyed that the highest res is 720, and most of the links are dead. Currently running ares with Spinz Tv premium lite

If you have a raspberry pi and want to run Kodi, check out osmc. It's a custom-cut version of Raspbian with kodi built in. Regularly updated and very stable.

If you have a raspberry pi and want to run Kodi, check out osmc. It's a custom-cut version of Raspbian with kodi built in. Regularly updated and very stable.

That's exactly what I'm running =)

I have it on a raspberry pi. I'm slightly annoyed that the highest res is 720, and most of the links are dead. Currently running ares with Spinz Tv premium lite

I'm guessing the pi is the reason you're having lower res options, as I can get 1080 on the fire TV. Also, check out https://seo-michael.co.uk/ for a lot of helpful info.

I'm guessing the pi is the reason you're having lower res options, as I can get 1080 on the fire TV. Also, check out https://seo-michael.co.uk/ for a lot of helpful info.

The pi doesn't control which providers provide what content.

That's exactly what I'm running =)

Okay...well I have two boxes and they're spitting out 1080p...

The pi doesn't control which providers provide what content.

I see. I thought you were saying you couldn't run 1080, not that you didn't even have the option. Not sure why you aren't seeing any working links, though.

Okay...well I have two boxes and they're spitting out 1080p...

Perhaps I'm running the wrong services? From what I've seen, I've liked Exodus, and ProSports for everything else.

Currently have it set to choose the highest quality that's available up to 1080, but come the auto selection it always says 720

Remember, Oklahoma City is still listed as a "potential city." Google has made clear that means they proceed with an assumption that the in-depth market study will result in that city being selected. The huts go out and the whole bit. But there's no guarantees the city will be selected. Google just put Dallas on the "potential" list last month and there's talk of it being fast-tracked.

On the other hand, Portland, OR is getting very nervous. Google says they are still conducting marketing studies and insiders have learned Portland could be the first "potential" to be a no-go, it's just a big wait and see. Portland has been a "potential" since February 2014 without a formal greenlight.

Add to all this Google's moving to "neighborhood selection" within selected cities and it appears to be a bit less than many expected. In typical Google fashion, they attach cute names to these selected neighborhoods (Fiberhoods). Here's an example in Austin:
https://fiber.google.com/explore/austin/

This could be a long wait for Oklahoma City, and then it looks like you'll need to live in one of the "right" neighborhoods.

Believe me, I'm hoping for the best, but being realistic about these subtle changes in the Fiber rollouts.

Perhaps I'm running the wrong services? From what I've seen, I've liked Exodus, and ProSports for everything else.

Currently have it set to choose the highest quality that's available up to 1080, but come the auto selection it always says 720

I believe it has more to do with the servers (i.e. Torba, Uploaded) than the actual add-on (i.e. Exodus, SALTS). There may just not be a lot of 1080p material available. Also, I've noticed some links showing SD content, when I click them to load, they're actually sending HD content. The labels on the links aren't always accurate.

You might also look into Real Debrid for better quality links.

I believe it has more to do with the servers (i.e. Torba, Uploaded) than the actual add-on (i.e. Exodus, SALTS). There may just not be a lot of 1080p material available. Also, I've noticed some links showing SD content, when I click them to load, they're actually sending HD content. The labels on the links aren't always accurate.

You might also look into Real Debrid for better quality links.

Real Dedbrid being a better version of trakt.tv that comes with the software?

Real Dedbrid being a better version of trakt.tv that comes with the software?

No, they're two different things. trakt is just a management piece for lists of movies and tv shows, and tracking your progress in tv series, etc. I use that a lot.

Real Debrid is supposed to offer higher quality connections for the various scrapers, and it's supposed to be more reliable, as well. The service is very inexpensive. I wouldn't say it's mandatory, or even necessary, but you might find it worth checking out.

That website I linked earlier has some pretty good guides for customizing the add-ons to get the best quality scrapers. S.A.L.T.S., in particular, has a lot of customization available, depending on how much you want to tweak your setup.