Wireless is better than nothing, but it will never compete with wired connection to the premises.
As an aside, I've always wondered if 5G or some other pending wireless tech could be used to one day replace Comcast...
Here's the idea, and is actually the current setup I have with a private company:
A p2p transmitter can broadcast to a lower tower that sits next to multiple neighborhoods. Then from that tower, lines can be run to individual houses and/or other small receivers like on people's rooftops.
With this system, they can literally cover vast areas, with just as fast speeds, in a fraction of the costs and time.
I have this setup right now, pointing my p2p device right at the top of a building downtown (not in San Jose.). It is crazy fast and even during heavy storms, there is no disruption.
San Jose, I wouldn't complain just yet, you might actually get your 1 Gbps + speeds faster than you thought despite this "construction delay".
My house (rural small town) is 4x5Ghz & 1x11Ghz hops away from my datacenter and I get ~15-20ms ping times to Google, League of Legends, etc). At various times I've had Frontier VDSL2 and Charter DOCSIS and both had higher latency.
and it's also very consistent. It's not dealing with the million redirects and other traffic that going through the phone line or cable line will have.
In very heavy rain and hind wind, my direct TV dish was out at the start of the storm, my internet p2p connection never lost signal, didn't even slow down.
I was really stoked to see Fiber coming to my house in the near future, but this doesn't look good for places like MV/PA.
Having fiber optic to the building (ala AT&T Gigapower) isn't all that useful if the entire neighborhood is oversubscribed 50:1 -- during PM rush, whether you use FTTH or point-to-point wireless, you're going to see speeds top out at ~20-200 Mbps on a "gigabit" link no matter what.