Google Explains ISP Rumors 111
WindozeSux writes to mention a Wired article explaining why Google bought all that dark fiber, the event that spurred rumors they were planning an ISP. From the article: "When asked by Wired News whether Google was buying up dark fiber, a company spokesman replied that 'Google has and will continue to invest in the equipment our company needs to give our users around the world the best and fastest search results.' Rumors of Google as an ISP were also fueled by the company being granted a large block of new IPv6 addresses last year." They plan to restrict their role as an ISP to the Mountain View and San Francisco areas.
restrict? no... (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't think of this as a restriction to that area think of this as Google ISP Beta, which will be rolled out around he world within the next 3 years but will stay as an invite only beta
Re:restrict? no... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:restrict? no... (Score:2, Redundant)
Sort of like Gmail? Very exclusive indeed.
Re:restrict? no... (Score:1)
Then, after MSN 'went public' with the Windows 95 release, they offered a
fear of uncertainty (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:fear of uncertainty (Score:2)
Everything else they're trying (like this new gBuy thing) looks like a bunch of shots in the dark. They are. They burn a few hundred thousand on a new idea, if it catches, great. If i
Re:fear of uncertainty (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:fear of uncertainty (Score:1)
If ISP's really do start breaking net neutrality (really bad for Google, who's service depends on getting users to any site on the internet quickly) - Google has the leverage to play hardball, and realistically threaten to offer free Wi-Fi in the nation's biggest markets (cities).
Walmart syndrome (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:5, Insightful)
As an aside, I think Walmart is a by-product if your inane zoning-laws. Mostly everywhere else, local shops compete with the convience factor, ie being local, close and within walking distance, but with your extremely clear-clut Residential / Commercial area split they lose that advantage.
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:2)
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:1)
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:1)
Er, I mean, We're number one! We're number one! We're not like all them backwards nations... have I established my American credentials sufficiently?
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:3, Interesting)
Time and time again I read rants, here on
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:1)
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:2)
Where do you live?
Gotta move there...
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:1)
Abusive use of bandwidth has never been anything 'evil' and that goes all the way back to the days of the BBS. Sysops would line-kill warez nuts then (who often contributed NOTHING to the community, going directly to the transfer area and sucking down files,) and it's no different now.
Granted, the ISPs should be more clear about their business being a managed cooperative of people sharing a portal to the In
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:3, Insightful)
...until Wal*Mart has virtually no competition in the area.
Re:Walmart syndrome (Score:1)
Masses of dark fiber and IPv6 addresses? (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's to super-intelligence!
Re: Masses of dark fiber and IPv6 addresses? (Score:1)
They are creating an artificial super-intelligence?
So they become a Central Intelligence Agency?
I see how it is... (Score:5, Funny)
Well, with a better name, I hope.
Re:I see how it is... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I see how it is... (Score:1)
Re:I see how it is... (Score:1)
Re:I see how it is... (Score:3, Funny)
wired: GNet
wifi: GSpot
Re:I see how it is... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I see how it is... (Score:2)
Consider Led Zeppelin: they dropped the 'a' in lead, because they wanted to make sure Americans pronounced it like the soft metal, and not as if some zeppelin were out in front.
Similarly, Google would never set themselves up to have their territory pronounced "Goo-gland".
2001:4860::/32 (Score:4, Informative)
Re:2001:4860::/32 (Score:5, Informative)
A
So a
Re:2001:4860::/32 (Score:1)
"if you do not have an IPv6 allocation already, you can ask support to be allocated a
Re:2001:4860::/32 (Score:2)
The only
google down? (Score:1)
if you can't beat them (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:if you can't beat them (Score:2)
Re:if you can't beat them (Score:2, Interesting)
- Tash
Re:if you can't beat them (Score:2, Interesting)
Right now they only have to interface with marketing types (fellow 'carnys') as customers. The rest of us are just 'marks.' A switch to a 'retail' operation just doesn't seem like a natural transition for Google.
Re:if you can't beat them (Score:1)
An Internet of Their Own? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:An Internet of Their Own? (Score:3, Interesting)
In the end, the big ISP's will be clamoring all over each other to be the one that doesn't piss off Google into becoming their own ISP, and thusly curries their favor, and their support.
Essentially we have a giant game of corporate chicken, in which Google has the biggest cock.
Re:An Internet of Their Own? (Score:1)
Giant Cock! [rathergood.com]
Re:An Internet of Their Own? (Score:2)
And the biggest bowls of cock-flavoured soup [buygracefoods.com].
Re:An Internet of Their Own? (Score:2)
Re:An Internet of Their Own? (Score:2)
Re:An Internet of Their Own? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How does it explain anything? (Score:2)
Re:How does it explain anything? (Score:1)
Why not Google as your ISP? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've mentioned elsewhere that with the telecoms and cablecoms doing everything they can to protect their ability to make Internet users pay twice (or more) for bandwidth that has already been paid for at both ends of every 'Net connection, Google ought to look into competing in the global ISP market -- one way for it to do so would be to offer fiber connections to people's door. How would that get paid for? Well, I imaging that they could do just what the cablecoms do with their fee-based subscriptions, but provide more reliable service (fibre doesn't care about electrical storms as much as copper wires do).
All Google need do is be as good as current telecoms and cablecoms are at delivering content and providing N-way communications (all kinds of phone services) to convince increasing numbers of people to switch to equivalent services from Google, if Google delivers those services via fibre and charges competitive rates. People talk. Most people I know hate their current phone companies. Many aren't thrilled with their cable services. (My ISP is a cablecom and they do a good job, IMHO, but I'm not so loyal I wouldn't switch if I got fiber to my home as part of the deal.) If it starts in a few cities on the Left coast, I can't blame it. They are close to home. If things work out well at those "beta sites", it will probably have other cities begging it to compete with telecoms and cablecoms in other locations.
The problem would be "the last mile". Most of us have four or more physical connections to our home from outside organizatons: power, gas, water, sewer, telephone, and CATV are the main ones that come to my mind. Is there room for another? Yes, especially if it replaces two existing ones with better technology. The rights of way are already in place everywhere that matters, but Google (or anyone else wanting to run fibre to the doors of everyone in your neighborhood) would have to gain access to (permission to use) them.
Re:Why not Google as your ISP? (Score:1)
Re:Why not Google as your ISP? (Score:1)
Google has this going for it: most geeks seem to like or at least not dislike Google. Guess who the majority of people who are non-Geeks turn to for advice on what tech products to use/buy? Guess what happens oh, starting maybe a decade from now, when the first "Google Generation" is a major market factor and is making serious IT buying decisions? Hmmm?
Google is a young company. IMNSHO, what it does and
Re:Why not Google as your ISP? (Score:2)
and (distributed) supercomputing power for companies that wouldn't or couldn't dream of using a supercomputing facility.
you mean like the sun grid [sun.com]? we all seen how well that worked out.
Log Files A Plenty (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe I'm being overly paranoid, but I just don't like the idea that my browsing habbits from today could bite me in the ass in a few years time.
Yes, Google are still riding on the backs of their 'do no evil' mantra, but something has gotta give. Given the current political climate in the US, I'd rather not leave a nice handy log trail for someone to follow.
That said, I think I trust Google more than anyone else right now.
Re:Log Files A Plenty (Score:5, Insightful)
So far, unlike the big ISPs, Google has fought the Government in court when it comes to giving up records. Other companies just say "Here you are FBI, here's all the records no problem".
Re:Log Files A Plenty (Score:1)
As much as I despise being forced to trust a large company, I'd certainly rather be forced to trust Google over, say Comcast or a Telco.
Re:Log Files A Plenty (Score:2)
No mail provider automatically deletes your email. (Score:1)
The reason's pretty sound too - Backups. A mail provider that cannot ensure that its users can pick up their mail reliably will quickly be deserted, and the easiest way of making sure that noones email gets lost is to make sure that you have both backups and audit trails of all the mail that comes through your servers.
Deleting your email from the 'live' servers will tag those emails for deletion, but what about the backups? Either those continue to exist until the backups a
hedging their bets (Score:4, Insightful)
Google, benefitting in general from flat-rate fees for bandwidth regardless of content, only naturally would like to keep this from happening. In the event that they fail in the courts and in congress, it would make a whole lot of sense for them to simply own a LOT of the basic infrastructure themselves. This gives them leverage in two ways - first, they can sell this bandwidth at whatever fee structure they find fair, enhancing their business by catering to their customers. Second, they can use their infrastructure as a bargaining chip to ensure that other carriers do not levy additional content-based and company-specific fees. Try to charge google and google customers extra fees, and get cut out of google's search engine and lose access to their fiber.
The carriers have been entrusted with a national resource and have benefitted from huge government concessions and subsidies for decades, but now that they have a little wiggle room they're turning around and trying to gouge more money out of both the average consumers, but also content providers on a deliberately biased basis. Some customers are simply going to be charged more for their bandwidth than others, and some customers will find themselves throttled or cut off entirely if they don't pay the proper extortion fee.
The phone system was supposed to be equally accessable by EVERYONE in the nation. That's why the govt set up the telcos the way they did from the beginning. Minor variations by region and based largely on actual costs aside, it cost about as much to get a phone in new york city as it did in the middle of Arizona. And calling from California to Nevada or California to Maine cost the exact same amount per minute. But now the data carriers are going to take this nationally funded infrastructure and make it inherently unequal.
That's abuse of a national resource, but knowing that congress is hopelessly in the pockets of lobbyists and big business, it makes complete sense for google to bank away some insurance against this sort of thing.
Google Proxy Server (Score:2)
Why not start with exploring a Google Worldwide Proxy. Google said they want to entrance to the market as high as possible, so you can't be beat by, say, two students with a good idea like concentrating on search alone.
So what if they offer everybody faster surfing experiences? I have a broadband connection, but don't enjoy full speed across the globe, because there's only that much my isp can do in
Re:Google Proxy Server (Score:1)
Telco Miscalc (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Telco Miscalc (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Telco Miscalc (Score:1)
Re:Telco Miscalc (Score:1)
What? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Telco Miscalc (Score:5, Insightful)
I like a lot of Google's products, but seriously, quit making them about to be some savior of the tech industry that is going to take down "M$" (what a stupid acronym btw) and save the customers from their evil grip. They're a bloody search engine that also makes a couple of nifty web apps that next to no one actually uses (with the exception of Earth and Gmail), except for some of the people who worship the company. I wouldn't be surprised if the company is bankrupt in 10 years from mis-management, as they seem to have little to no control over their employees (the senior guys admitted as much recently) and they're throwing away money on stupid projects that are never going to make them a dime, and just sit there on their web servers not being used.
Of course, Gmail, Earth, News, Calendar and Google Search rock, but who the hell needs Google Spreadsheets? Do they honestly think it is going to make them any money? At least Ask.com is around and well for if Google implodes under its own weight...about the only thing that would be hard to move away from would be Calendar and Gmail.
Re:Telco Miscalc (Score:2)
Re:Telco Miscalc (Score:2)
Pretty Clever on Googles part (Score:3, Insightful)
Google Skynet (Score:2, Insightful)
Cheers to Google Skynet.
Re:Google Skynet (Score:3, Informative)
Google as an ISP (Score:4, Insightful)
Totally ignoring people just does not fly.
The folks they have assigned to Google Adsense are a prime example.
Re:Google as an ISP (Score:2)
Why do you say that ? I've been on Adsense for a few months and had some serious issues at the begining. They answered and solved the problems within a day or two each time. So no complain from this side. Adsense is their big moneymaker, so I'd hope they take care of their paying cutomers. I can understand the
Re:Google as an ISP (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Google as an ISP (Score:3, Informative)
My website was accused of generating clicks, when I tried to plead my case, they refused to listen. When asked to review the matter, like 4 months later they told me that there was still enough evidence to suggest I was artificially clicking on ads to generate revenue.
The amount of revenue I had generated was about $3.50 worth and was aquired when I was developing the website and was testing it with friends and family
Re:Google as an ISP (Score:2)
Re:Google as an ISP (Score:2)
Anyway, it seems they've f
Re:Google as an ISP (Score:3, Insightful)
A couple of months ago my site had problems with address-spoofing on a members-only Yahoogroups discussion site. Their response was something like: "you have a virus, it's not our fault, and even if it was, we've sent this automated reply to placate you while we maybe try to investigate the problem. Have a nice day."
Re:Google as an ISP (Score:2)
Google needs a satellite network... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Google needs a satellite network... (Score:1)
somewhere over the f***ing rainbow (Score:1)
Cannibal corpse (Score:2, Interesting)
Use Google, but don't foolishly compete with it! (Score:1)
If Google (or any large IT company) obviously can (or ought to) go somewhere to make a profit, it is foolhardy to make that place your market niche, assuming that getting there first gives you some sort of dibs on the spot or that Goog
Re:Lets all spell along (Score:1)
Beta? (Score:2, Interesting)
Bandwidth is dirt cheap (Score:1)