| 5:39 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
And I thought they were all going to buy Ferrari's with that IPO money... :)
| 5:47 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
quite incredible to think just how much data they need to move about from datacenter to datacenter.
| 7:02 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Are they planning to do in USA what Yahoo broadband has done in Japan, that is to provide cheap broadband? If they need network for their own use then they can buy as many GigE circuits as they want on very short notice and that too for a low cost. Buying dark fiber certainly doesn't make sense if it for their own use.
| 7:20 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Isn't this likely just to provide fast, private connections between their data centers? They have a ton of data that they have to keep synchronized. If the bandwidth didn't cost them anything, they could synchronize much more frequently.
| 7:33 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
The demand for bandwidth continues to grow. To me, Google's interest seems like a no-brainer, akin to the "domain name speculation" done a few years ago.
|Corbato says he has noticed signs of increasing interest in dark fiber from private enterprise of late, most notably among large financial institutions. Meanwhile, in December, cable giant Comcast signed a $100 million-plus deal to buy long-haul dark fiber to build out its network. |
| 8:40 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
diversifying while their stock is still sky-high. Like AOL did with Time Warner.
| 9:34 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
OK - Just a thought, maybe a little out there but...
Google wants to compete with Msoft in not only the browser market but OS, Office, etc... But Google is going to do it via the web - For a long time is speculated that Msoft would port Word to the web & allow companies to run it on their intranet & only pay per usage or seat. With a super infrastructure Google would be able to use their version of Word (probably OpenOffice spinoff) on the Net. Next step would be developing a OS that runs on a remote Web Server to compete against Windows. This is all possible in the next 2-3 years. Thats why they need to have a fast backbone.
| 9:43 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I agree with seamarket, thin client is the way forward
| 9:54 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This is a tough one, yet it seems like everyone always refers back to the Google OS theory. I too think that would be a great idea and a cash cow to say the least.
I guess they play like a game of cards, keep them hidden until you are ready to win the hand. Always keeping us on th edge of our seats for sure!
| 10:15 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"With a super infrastructure..."
Bad move if true. The infrastructure is already there for this and is beeing improved daily by the backbone companies. Google cannot wire the entire country and control everything from your DSL to their servers...unless they have a few hundred billion laying wround. Even then, the money would be better spent in a much higher growth area. Broadband isn't.
| 10:35 pm on Jan 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think this illustrates what makes Google so popular: Google redeems the dot-com boom's dreams.
When the dot-com happened it made its dreams ridiculous. One by one, Google has made the ridiculous plausible again, ie.
1. A "global library"
2. A company that can stand up to Microsoft
3. A company run by computer geeks, most under 35.
4. A company combining productivity with bean-bag chairs, lava lamps and in-office pets.
5. A company that seems to care more about being excellent than being profitable.
And now, of the most dramatic miscalculations of the dot-com boom: Building a vast oversupply of bandwidth in the expectation of exponential demand increases.
Then again, I could see them sitting in the back room making up job postings for effect. (I'll bet Yahoo is having a meeting on whether they need to buy bandwidth too.) Next up, "Wanted: Person to open web-based pet store. Bring sock puppet."
| 12:17 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
There was an interview posted on slashdot a few years ago where they mentioned that a huge part of google's financial equation is savings on bandwidth. Buying up dark fiber sounds like a good hedge.
| 12:56 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"A company that seems to care more about being excellent than being profitable."
| 2:58 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|5. A company that seems to care more about being excellent than being profitable. |
That was google in the stanford days. That is google no longer. They are there to make as much as possible. Good laugh though.
| 3:17 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
A few of things make me think this might be blown out of proportion.
- The job also talks about them being responsible for negotiations for all the data centre and power stuff, their Internet traffic, and HVAC. So this isn't a "take over the world with dark fibre" position
- In the part where they ask for experience getting dark fibre, they also ask for the same thing with managed MAN and lambdas. Basically, all the pipes G would use for their network.
- It's not unreasonable to assume that G makes use of dark fibre, or would look to try and lower the $/Mb/s costs by trying alternative means. If you look at the "Peering Manager" description above, they have a guy that does this solely for their Internet peering.
- It doesn't specify "bundles" of dark fibre. It could easily be a single pair.
The stuff about global backbone networks, while true, sounds more like it's there to get the right person excited than it is to announce they're competing with the telcos ;)
| 3:44 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
They still make some pretty silly moves that don't seem to be based on profit. Trust me they are still quite altruistic. I have been trying to give them money for adwords for a while and they refuse to take it. I have spoken with adwords reps that represent some of the biggest adwords accounts and adwords is always doing things that are supposed to be better for the user and end up hurting the adwords buyer. G has not sold out yet. They are the only internet entry point that does not advertise on the front page.
| 11:48 am on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I worked for fibre companies for several years as a network planner, and let me tell you the notion that it's a great concept to 'build a highway and set up toll booths and let the money roll in' is far away from the reality of building backbones.
Major inter-city backbones cannot be bought in a regular sense. Fibres can only be rented. This is the one solid asset that the telcos have and if they started selling them off you'd see even more than the normal 2 companies a month going under.
So then you are left with the intermediate metro spans which are astronomically high to build, as you gotta have building permits, construction crews in the streets stopping traffic, and all the other factors associated with urban construction. Not to mention these urban backbones are typically built with specific customers in mind, i.e., a new business complex was built west of the city so let's build to it.
In effect, regardless of how much cash you wanna wave at the telcos, you can't waltz in and procure substantial fibre, dark or not, without being regulated as a telco yourself.
Granted, in my hometown of Vancouver, some guys started a company called Metronet literally in their basement, which eventually got bought up and became AT&T canada. That being said, there's been a couple 're-structurings' and bankruptcy-type affairs since then.
It's difficult business and trying to buy up bulk amounts and play connect the dots with datacenters sounds like they should switch to decaf in the designer espresso machines at G HQ.
| 12:08 pm on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
So who else quickly rushed to his favourite domain name registrar to check on availability of more domains in the spirit of gmail.....
gferrari.com (just joking Gregg)
| 12:28 pm on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Google wants to compete with Msoft in not only the browser market but OS, Office, etc... |
I think they should fix their search engine before trying to take over the world with a new OS :-)
| 2:50 pm on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Google should and will diversify its revenue model. They remember the Netscape's doom and they won't repeat the same mistake. The advertising model won't be enough in the future. Why? The click fraud and the new aggressive players in the search field are the main threats. Google Mini is part of the transformational process. What's next? Can we say Google Broadband?
| 7:31 pm on Jan 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Google is planning on indexing the offline world as well, including shops & supermarkets.
The will need fiber going into these shops for live spidering and possibly results.
It appears that they have determined costs can be reduced through forward intergration, ie. owning the last mile.
| 12:05 am on Jan 19, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This would also be a move toward internet telephony I think. I read today in Newsweek that Google has signalled its intention to enter the market.
Who will profit from internet telephony? The bandwidth providers of course.
| 12:15 am on Jan 19, 2005 (gmt 0)|
one day: video.google.com ;)
| 1:29 pm on Jan 19, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|A company that seems to care more about being excellent than being profitable |
HAHAHA do me a favour - sorry suidas - maybe was their original intention but that could not be further from the truth now.
They are owned by the City, they will be driven by the City and they will be keen to please the City and what they want.... kiss goodbye to most of the altruistic bits.
Doesn't mean they can't still be market leaders, but I can;t see them staying out in front for too much longer.
| 9:04 am on Jan 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Google is planning on indexing the offline world as well, including shops & supermarkets |
dont underestimate this. G is all about information retrieval and Id love to see them doing something like this. im thinking outside the internet.
they already have something like this in place (google answers via sms about locations of shops in your area).
this will lead to google being able to tell you which shop stocks the cheapest product of your choice. "where can i find the cheapest toothpaste of brand x".
| 5:29 pm on Jan 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
quote:they already have something like this in place (google answers via sms about locations of shops in your area).
this will lead to google being able to tell you which shop stocks the cheapest product of your choice. "where can i find the cheapest toothpaste of brand x>
I believe that this was discussed on the 60 minute piece that it is something they already are working on - and were able to demo it then
| 2:37 am on Jan 24, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This was posted tonight at the Times Online
Google gears up for a free-phone challenge to BT [timesonline.co.uk]
Sounds like they are close to launching this. A free call with ads is not a bad deal.
| 4:21 am on Jan 24, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Sounds like they are close to launching this. A free call with ads is not a bad deal. "
Hmm...NO source mentioned and they seem to be the only paper to suggest this.
I think it is very smart for Google to use their brand and expand. If they do they will probably have one with ads and one with e fee--ad free. Many people rather pay $20 or so a month than listen to ads every 5-10 minutes.
| 4:28 am on Jan 24, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I can't comment on the rest of this, but if Google buys long distance fiber backbone
their timing couldn't be better.
In the dot-com bubble, lots more fiber was laid than the market could fully absorb or utilize.
There was a crash in prices, or so I understand.
NOW with a resurgent internet etc., prices should rise again so
Google is buying low while they still can. That's my guesstimate.
| This 35 message thread spans 2 pages: 35 (  2 ) > > |