Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Communications Businesses Google The Internet

Google Plans Free VoIP In the UK 226

Posted by timothy from the thinking-ahead dept.
jarich writes "According to this news article, Google may be preparing to offer free Voice Over IP telephone service in the UK. This sounds related to a previous Slashdot article about Google starting to buy dark fiber. So what are they planning? A free service like Skype (computer to computer only) or more along the lines of Lingo or Vonage?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Plans Free VoIP In the UK More

Google Plans Free VoIP In the UK

Comments Filter:
  • Why would they do that?

    "Do no evil" does not also mean "Do stupid".

    • Re:Thinking really hard here (Score:5, Funny)

      by ejdmoo ( 193585 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @03:01AM (#11453401)
      They're going to voice scan your calls and every 5 minutes there will be an interruption by a commercial.

      "Hey Bob, how's that car working for ya'?"

      *beep beep*

      "Come on down to Steve's auto extravaganza!!! We will NOT be oversold!"

      • Re:Thinking really hard here (Score:5, Informative)

        by 1u3hr ( 530656 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @04:02AM (#11453619)
        hey're going to voice scan your calls and every 5 minutes there will be an interruption by a commercial.

        In TFA "a free telephone service that links users via a broadband internet connection using a headset and home computer." So they would surely display ads while you're making the call. Even conceivably targetted from speech recognition, but that's a long shot and likely to spook people.

        • yes, kind of I'm talking with my GirlFriend, and five seconds after I say "Of course I love you" a popup with a dating website appears on my screen... :-(
          • yes, kind of I'm talking with my GirlFriend, and five seconds after I say "Of course I love you" a popup with a dating website appears on my screen... :-( I'd be impressed if a voice recognition scheme would be able to detect the insincerity that well ;-) A more likely suggestion would be a bunch of ads for places to buy flowers, chocolate, rings and other things women need so much more than us men...
        • "...but that's a long shot and likely to spook people."

          I don't see that as a long shot at all, and it most likely will not spook the average computer users away.

          Think about it. Google right now is working on searching video over the Internet. It would not be to far from possible to believe that part of that search capability would include audio and voice recognition. Why not incorporate that into a phone service that uses your PC, so they can display ads. Google seems to be the master of displaying n
    • I don't think they will - the article is full on conjecture, and delivers no hard facts - it all seems based on some guy at Ovum (a bunch hyperbole generators) saying "Now that would be cool"
    • They probably reserve the right to archive the bitstreams and let everyone in the world search them. :-)

  • Skype is not computer to computer only (Score:5, Informative)

    by Nermal6693 ( 622898 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @02:52AM (#11453358)
    You can also call a regular phone with Skype. It's not free, but you can do it.
    • is Skype the best? what are the alternatives (UK)? any advice appreciated.

      • Re:Skype is not computer to computer only (Score:5, Informative)

        by arivanov ( 12034 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @03:34AM (#11453525) Homepage
        Two dedicated VOIP operators - Gossip Telecom and one more which specializes in businesses and offers IP Centrex style solutions (fully outsourced VOIP PBX). These are dependant on your link so your mileage is likely to vary.
        Also at least some ISPs have started offering VOIP as an addon at a minimal cost. Once again, mileage will vary except possibly Nildram. Speaking out of experience (done some measurements on their network and have a non-UK VOIP phone on it): they have nearly 0% packet loss (around 0.01% which is the loss from DSL) and under 3ms jitter. Even the shitties VOIP implementation just works. Of course this does not come out of the blue. They charge you 25 monthly for a static IP with the relevant services attached while the industry average is around 23.
        • That's Gossiptel for those Googling. Also, http://andyabramson.blogs.com/voipwatch/2004/10/uk _voip_player.html has a set of links to UK VoIP companies in one of the comments.
      • It offers the best sound quality, yes. And it uses very little bandwidth (1.5 to 5 KBps). If you're talking prices, then I don't know.

      • I have been using SIPgate since they launched in the UK. They provide (free) numbers in nearly all area codes, incoming calls are free and calls to other VoIP phones are free. You only have to spend money to pay for outgoing calls to standard phones.

        See sipgate.co.uk [sipgate.co.uk]

    • Skype is Computer to something. VoIP / SIP is phone to phone (or computer if you want).

      The standard protocol is SIP, and there is a multitude of SIP phones and adapters available (allows you to use old phones). This allows you to use IP telephony even with the computer turned off, and you can also get real phone numbers so you can get rid of the POTS/ISDN phone and do it all over broadband.

      The Skype phones you can buy all requires a POTS telephone line if they are to be used with the computer turned off.

  • Kind of restrictive... (Score:5, Funny)

    by stever00t ( 618001 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @02:53AM (#11453361)
    There's a 32 word limit per call.

  • Endgame (Score:5, Insightful)

    by locokamil ( 850008 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @02:53AM (#11453362) Homepage
    Once again, I find myself wondering what Google's endgame is. Are they going to remain at the forefront of search technology, or are they going to attempt to orchestrate an M$ style invasion of our lives?

    • Re:Endgame (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I wonder the same thing!

      Such is the problem of being a public company - constant pressure to be a jack of all trades and master of none. Expansion, expansion, expansion. Diversify! Must make more profit for greedy stock holders.

      IMO, companies should only sell their stock to employees. Not that I've thought about it much. I just wish companies could be left to do what they do well, instead of being forced to keep trying to rule the world.

    • Re:Endgame (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ScentCone ( 795499 )
      Oh, come on. Besides, just about all we hear on slashdot are people who would only be happy if everything, in every form, was operating on Linux, making slashdotters the new priesthood.

      Every growing company isn't evil. Every dollar earned isn't corrupt. When two people form a partnership, is that bad? How about when two hundred form a company, or two thousand form a corporation? Lots of chat here about the importance of scalability - just not when it comes to farsighted or well-run groups of people servi

      • Re:Endgame (Score:2, Interesting)

        by locokamil ( 850008 )
        I'd be happy about Google diversifying if I knew that their core competencies were not being compromised. But from what I hear from inside Camp Google, people are being stretched too far, too fast, and search, although important, is taking a backseat to rapid (and often not very well thought out) expansion. That worries me... and it should worry you too, because rapid expansion into everything results in buggy products that promise the world, but in the end crash every 20 minutes or so. Like MS products.

    • Re:Endgame (Score:5, Insightful)

      by seanadams.com ( 463190 ) * on Monday January 24, 2005 @03:09AM (#11453435) Homepage
      Once again, I find myself wondering what Google's endgame is.

      Great businesses don't have "endgames". Microsoft has no "endgame" - their goal is to have all the money. It's not something you can ever finish, but that doesn't mean you can't make it your goal.

      Google's goal seems to be having ALL the information. There's a hell of a lot of info on the phone lines so it makes sense to go there once you've got a handle on the web.

      • Re:Endgame (Score:4, Insightful)

        by locokamil ( 850008 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @03:24AM (#11453484) Homepage
        It seems to me that Google's business model revolves around (gross oversimplification follows) simply throwing out targetted advertisements when they hear a keyword.

        I can't see how a phone based system can rely on that business model. As many of the more comical posts on this article have pointed out, a third party interrupting a phone conversation with an ad about some product or the other is... well... annoying. No one is going to use such a service.

        What it all boils down to is that Google is trying to diversify into areas where it has little or no chance of making money in. While it does so, it is going to ignore what its good at... and lose its search muscle to MSN or Yahoo. And while this speaks highly of the market economy, it doesn't really promote the idea that Google is run by highly intelligent people.
        • I can't see how a phone based system can rely on that business model. As many of the more comical posts on this article have pointed out, a third party interrupting a phone conversation with an ad about some product or the other is... well... annoying.

          How about this instead:

          1.) You call someone that is using google's voice service.
          2.) There not home, so you go to their voicemail and leave a message.
          3.) Your friend checks his voicemail messages via a Google web interface.
          4.) Based upon the conversation

      • Re:Endgame (Score:4, Insightful)

        by HuguesT ( 84078 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @04:58AM (#11453799)
        Replace endgame with "vision" or business plan.

        MS has a vision (windows everywhere) and a business plan (own the O/S everywhere from cell phones to supercomputers, crush everybody that disagrees, leverage O/S dominance to applications).

        You don't see MS diversifying into airlines, insurance, manufacturing, automobiles and whatnot.

        The question is: what is Google up to? Are they on a collision course with Microsoft in the short term ?

        In the last few months they have been putting out products for the windows platform only: hard disk search tools, image indexing tools, etc.

        To me this means that Google is getting less interested in the search business. Are they going to turn into some run-of-the-mill software house for the windows platform only or are they up to something else?

      • Re:Endgame (Score:3, Interesting)

        by davesag ( 140186 )
        It's a bit like wondering, "but what if deep down google really is evil." Google claim their ethos i to do no evil, but if I were truly evil, and out to do as much evil as i could - a genuine evil-doer in fact, the first thing I'd tell people is I am devoted to not doing evil. So Google's very prominent "we are not evil" claim is truly the first evidence that they are in fact as evil as Hitler.

        If google are evil then their endgame still just is as murky as if they are benign. I mean say you are google -

        • Re:Endgame (Score:3, Interesting)

          by batemanm ( 534197 )
          Google claim their ethos i to do no evil

          I always had problems with that statement since it is meaningless since evil is undefined. They may think nothing they do is evil but other will disagree. For example I eat meat so to some people I'm an evil cow killer. To me isn't wasn't a bad thing it was just lunch. It is all just a matter of your viewpoint.

      • I'm pretty sure Goole's goal is to have all the money, too. In fact, I think most corporations want all the money.
    • well.. they got no clue as what to do.

      so they're hiring zillions of smart people and put them into rooms to come up with something, anything.

      though, maybe they forgot that they should tell them to come up with ideas that could lead into them getting cash in the end... it's easy to come up with service ideas - not so easy to make them profitable.
    • http://www.broom.org/epic/

      Epic is on persons idea of googles endgame. What is epic? Watch the short film at the above link.
    • I find myself wondering what Google's endgame is.

      It looks like Googles end game, is to make it easily available for all people to search any and allinformation. Not just the Web. If Google can simplify my life by making information more available, without forcing upon me outrageous EULA's and licensing fees, then let them invade my life.

  • Possible Google Plan... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by madstork2000 ( 143169 ) * on Monday January 24, 2005 @02:53AM (#11453363) Homepage
    I wonder if this is a step towards making VoIP basically a free tool, much like the web is today. It would be interesting if Google or another
    VoIP provider go to an advertising model to support free VoIP.

    I think it would be interesting to have ads while a call is being connected (i.e. ringing). It seems like they could pipe audio ads down the wire during the inevitable pause while the system tries to track down a cell phone, or the long distance call is being routed...

    A company like Google could also put a phone front end on to the search engine, I'm thinking along the lines of directory assistance, but instead of limiting info to just addresses / phones numbers, the Google directory assistance would search the internet and speak the results (and a few related ads) over the phone.

    They might even have the CPU power to do adequate speech recognotion. All told it is pretty easy to imagine a system taking adavtage of the newest phones, with enhanced SMS, web interfaces, along with a voice interface. It would also be cool if you could specify where you want your search result output to go. Maybe if they had VoIP and some type of phone based interafce you could have your results displayed on your phone, pda or spoken. With a viable VoIP perhaps you could have the results faxed to you at a hotel. I'd also like to see the option of having the results emailed.

    All told these relatively small technical advancements, would be large strides in making Google even more ubiqutious. Non-computer users and casual users would have another resource to get and retrieve information in the "real-world".

    I just wish I was smart enough to get a job with them . . .

    • Re:Possible Google Plan... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I don't understand why everybody thinks Google is going to offer telephone service. They haven't said anything that would give that impression, and AFAIK nobody has any information linking Google with VOIP at all! Everybody is just extrapolating because they are making a high-capacity global network. Isn't it possible that Google might want a high-capacity global network for a different reason? They are a network company after all! Let's not jump to conclusions here.
    • adverts while ringing seems very crude, plus unreliable for the advertiser since you're only guarateed a couple of seconds. unless there's forced waiting, in which the whole thing completely stinks and would, imo, mark the beginning of the end of Google if they need to resort to such a disgusting interface (their fame being from their excellent interface in the beginning).
      • I agree, I know there is advertising in this...

        But I think google will not even have ads on thier VoIP, they are thinking bigger:

        Companies pay for a 'click to call' link on the web? Perhaps they have this idea...

        Just to make this a well rounded /. response, what is the state of free VoIP sex lines, and when will we have star wars type communications on earth? Holographics-over-ip anyone?

        • Re:Possible Google Plan... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by grcumb ( 781340 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @06:10AM (#11453959) Homepage Journal

          "But I think google will not even have ads on thier VoIP, they are thinking bigger:"

          Or, they're thinking simpler. What do you do when you're talking on your home phone? You idle the time away, gazing abstractedly around you.

          I worked for a VOIP company who shall remain nameless. In that time, our business unit beta-tested a VOIP handset that had a fairly functional web interface built into it. The early versions had monochrome display, but the newer ones had colour. They were fed by standard CGI scripts.

          It's fairly easy these days to do text to speech, and with a display on the handset, you could be served up text ads as you talk. They would be about as unobtrusive as their current set of web ads are, and people would be getting their phone calls - anywhere in the world - for free.

          If that's not a viable business model, I don't know what is.

    • Re:Possible Google Plan... (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I just wish I was smart enough to get a job with them

      I think you mean, "I just wish I were smart enough to get a job with them" ;)

    • Re:Possible Google Plan... (Score:2, Informative)

      by hyu ( 763773 )

      I think it would be interesting to have ads while a call is being connected (i.e. ringing). It seems like they could pipe audio ads down the wire during the inevitable pause while the system tries to track down a cell phone, or the long distance call is being routed...

      There's already a few places that have services like that in place. In Ottawa, Canada, there's a service called CHUM Total Free Call. You dial a number, connect to their server, and they play an ad for you. At the end of the ad, you're give

    • all that aside...

      I think it would be interesting to have ads while a call is being connected (i.e. ringing). It seems like they could pipe audio ads down the wire during the inevitable pause while the system tries to track down a cell phone, or the long distance call is being routed...

      Which creates a motive to make sure your call doesn't get through too quickly. I think that would get sucky real quick.

      • If it is too slow nobody would use it, and therefore they would not be able to sell ads. So they certainly have an incentive to make it work reasonably well. Perhaps they add a ring or two, perhaps there would be a 5 second minimum connect time. Just long enough to hear "$5 Dollar Large Pizza at Dolly's - press *3 after finishing your call."

    • I wouldn't be surprised if Google has the processing capabilty to be able to process speech.

      I remember a few years ago, I was digging through google's lab pages and found some expiremental things they were doing.
      One of them was to call into one of their office numbers and you would be connected to a server. Say your thing and it would do a search for you.

      Grump
      • So you think this might be about a speech based search interface? Or the ability to search through recordings of phone calls? I'm sure there are some government agencies that would be very interested in such a technology.
        • Somebody mentioned directory service. I wouldn't be surprised. 411 and google is doing dir service.

          They already have local search capabilities, reverse lookup by phone number. So the info is there and the voice implementaion (if they have done previous homework with the phone in search) should be a whiz to do.

          As for searching through recorded phone calls, I believe it is an invation of one's privacy ot do so. I consider my phone calls to be private matter. Under the most extreme of circumstances shou
    • Here's my theory of what Google is planning. Its not related to the telephony thing, so sorry if its off-topic.

      At the moment, Microsoft dominates consumer computing. Why ? Because the desktop is the computer, and Microsoft owns the desktop.

      Remember the Sun catchphrase, "the network is the computer" ? Sun's plan was to replace fat desktops with thin clients connected to their servers, and thus rule the world. It didn't work for a number of reasons - Sun was not powerful enough, they couldn't convince e
    • Thats the stupid thing, 80% of the work is mundane coding/implementing stuff, which doesnt need super iq status, just enough smarts to code as per spec and nicely. The real brains are only needed in the thinktank groups, hiring too many uber egoheaded brainheads is just going to cause more boredem and people leaving if they cant make their own ideas, if any one is that good, would they really work for google? or start their startup?

      Or are google paying 150k?

  • fixed link (Score:5, Informative)

    by Devil's BSD ( 562630 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @02:53AM (#11453365) Homepage
    Someone left a bracket on there, so...
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1454225, 00.html [timesonline.co.uk]
  • An alternate link [timesonline.co.uk]
  • it would be good if they can do a free 2 phone in canada
  • ...but I'd love to know how they're going to add unobtrusive advertising to a phone conversation.
  • CORAL link [nyud.net] for this article.

  • Focus? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by maelstrom ( 638 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @03:07AM (#11453424) Homepage Journal
    Is it just me or is Google getting a little unfocused with too many acquisitions and weird plans like this? How about spending some time on your core business, your google groups "upgrade" was three step backwards.

    Focus.

    • Re:Focus? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by mikeb39 ( 670045 )
      You can only go so far on as limited a platform as search technology, and Google has done more with it then anyone could have imagined 5 years ago. So, they've got a great stable core (and I don't imagine they will abandon it to work on things like this, development will continue to keep them better then everyone else) and now have the LUXURY of expanding into other markets. Kudos to them for making it work.

    • Is it just me or is Google getting a little unfocused with too many acquisitions and weird plans like this?

      Well I'm similarly confused. I guess what they do is up to them, but I can't see how VoIP fits in with their current business at all.

      From what I understand (I vaguely remember my commerce degree), it's generally good business practice to have a general but definite statement of what your business is designed to focus on. Not something that specifies the concrete aspects of day-to-day busi

  • What Skype is missing though... Skype IN (Score:5, Insightful)

    by buro9 ( 633210 ) <david&buro9,com> on Monday January 24, 2005 @03:07AM (#11453426) Homepage
    Skype to Skype... fine, cool, fantastic.

    Skype to Phone... fine, cool, fantastic.

    Phone to Skype... missing link.

    Without that last bit there is no incentive for someone to make a move to VOIP on a permanent basis for all of their calls.

    Why? Because you still have to keep a landline or mobile to be able to receive calls from regular phones... and because the cost of making a call to a mobile is prohibitive, it's likely that you keep a bundled (with TV package) landline.

    If the weight Google helps to make this a feature that is developed, then we may start to see a willingness to switch in large numbers a reality.

    As it stands at the moment... my (red neck equiv') mother was impressed, but she just sees it as one more way to do things, and she's very lazy and is still more likely to pick up and dial a regular phone. Show her she doesn't need the landline (by receiving calls, thus 100% functionality) and then there'll be something impressive.

    What has all this to do with Google? Well Skype In as I'll call it... it requires a network, something has to receive calls and store messages for you whilst your computer is off... who's to say context related sound adverts wouldn't be appended to the answer phone service... how would that differ from Gmail advertising?

    Things to think about :)

    • Re:What Skype is missing though... Skype IN (Score:5, Informative)

      by blake182 ( 619410 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @04:33AM (#11453719)
      There was an interview on Engadget [engadget.com] last November with Skype co-founder and CEO Niklas Zennström:

      What is SkypeIn and what are the plans for it?

      SkypeIn will allow phone calls from the traditional phone network in to Skype. We don't have a specific launch date yet, but hope to offer it sometime this winter.

    • While I realize that most of Slashdot doesn't ever leave their computer one must realize that Skype is not in anyway the way in which VoIP will become broadly useful or popular. I am living in Italy right now and we have a phone number for Woodside California USA sitting right next to the router. It can call any real phone in the world. Skype is for people who live at their computer; Vonage, VoicePulse, etc. are for the people who just want to use the phone.
      • Very true... but on vonage.co.uk it would cost me 4p per minute to call Sweden where my girlfriend lives.

        On Skype the same call costs less than 1p per minute.

        Less than quarter of the cost.

        Vonage might be for those who just want to make calls, but for those of us who make several hours of international phone calls a day Vonage is still extravagantly expensive.

        Besides... I don't use a headset... my little computer is silent and always on, and I have a regular telephone plugged into a USB dongle. I pick up
    • How about a mobile that can sense your wifi ,can connect to your PC and use direct PHONE->SKYPE via the mobile, and not pay a cent!!!!!

      The first GENIUS ^H^H^H^H^H manager with a clue that puts this through will have a winner, but we know that cell phone networks like only features for phones that can make money , so the makers wont do it, unless someone makes a wifi+java combo that allow s3rd parties to tap into wifi voip calls.
  • TINFOILHAT>

    VOIP is digital, and quite searchable with a text-to-speech converter. What if google wants to make your conversations searchable?

    What if you make defamatory comments about GW? (or whoever is the power-that-be of the day)

    What if they made it searchable, but didn't tell anybody? /TINFOILHAT>
    • er... text to speech wouldn't help much given that this is digital audio. They'd be using voice recognition...
    • No doubt the terrorists would stop speaking in text, if they got word of this.

  • Total message integration (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @03:39AM (#11453538) Homepage
    Voicemail shows up in your gmail inbox, e-mail gets summarized in voice messages, voicemail is indexed...

    And it all has ads.

    • Better yet: Voice conversations gets indexed too and our previous telephone calls are suddenly searchable. This could be rather usefull, just as looking up old mails is today, but of course various matters (like privacy and storage) needs to be sorted out first.
    • I can see it already. Imagine checking your voicemail.

      You have one new message from George W. Gates.

      One-n-crease you are pee-three-n-iz size wit-hith new role lex watch

      GAH

  • *scratches head* (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheSHAD0W ( 258774 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @03:47AM (#11453560) Homepage
    This article seems to be taking a huge speculative leap. Google is investing in heavy bandwidth - therefore, it must be for VoIP? Either there's evidence the reporter isn't revealing, or someone has telephony on the brain.
    • Mod parent up.

      The entire article is based on a job ad. So the article itself is making a huge leap, and then this Slashdot story makes the further leap that this supposed VoIP network would be UK-based. This seems to be based on the fact that the article is from a British paper. Only problem is... as far as I can tell, the job with Google isn't in the UK and isn't specific to the UK.
  • Slashdotters will be Slashdotters and will come up with far-fetched theories about how this meshes with Google's existing products and how it makes financial sense.

    But the fact is this is all wild *Speculation*. In fact, it does not make sense for google to get into VOIP and there are several more plausible reasons for google to look into buying fiber.

    Think about that for a second, take a deep breath, move on.
  • It seems to me like it might be more likely that google is working on something more mundane. I mean, the most reasonable guess to me would seem that google is just buying up lines while it has the cash in the hopes of being able to make money off them later, or they are just planning on putting in some new boxes over there or something.
    If they were working on a new project though, it would seem more likely to me that it would be some aspect of a new search technology or something, maybe for big businesse

  • No substance corroborating the statement (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sipmeister ( 615618 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @04:57AM (#11453792)
    Can someone please point out where in the article the claim that Google will offer VoIP service is substantiated? As far as I can tell, it's based on speculations by "Julian Hewitt, senior partner at Ovum, a telecoms consultancy".

    Some comments on the article below:

    "The technology that will enable Google to move in on the market has been around for some time. Software by the London-based company, Skype, has been downloaded nearly 54 million times around the world but no large telecommunication firms have properly exploited it."
    The technology has indeed been around for a long time, and Skype, a proprietary walled garden system, is definitely not the first or only one to use it. So why is Skype implicated here?
    "The basic cost of making calls across the internet is almost nil. The real cost is in developing the software; after that, the service exploits available internet capacity."
    So why would Google buy dark fiber if the call "exploits available internet capacity"?
    "In addition, the sound quality of calls across the internet can be poor and the connections can be less reliable."
    As can been witnessed by using Skype, or other applications which incorporate modern codecs, for example the freely available wideband iLBC codec (http://www.ilbcfreeware.org [ilbcfreeware.org]), the voice quality over a broadband connection is usually excellent, in the case of iLBC much better then PSTN. The biggest issue is latency, which is increased in the case of Skype, where calls are often routed over media proxies to traverse NAT's.

    Overall a poor article, "By Elizabeth Judge, Telecoms Correspondent". But what can be expected of the Times?

  • Well, they already have to maintain some huge data centers and they've built up some expertise doing that. They're already in the information maintenance and delivery business, even if it's very low bandwidth compared to other content.

    They're digitizing every book that they can get their hands on.

    They're buying up dark fiber.

    They'll be offering free VOIP.

    To me, this suggests that they're building towards a mixture of data delivery services and a multihomed caching company like Akamai.

    Infrast

  • 5 second add (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I could see google putting a 5 second add before dialing. That is about as long as I would wait b4 I got pissed. Hear me out - I think they will offer the phone service for free and they will make money by making advertisers pay to place their 5second add before the phone connects to the other person. That way the person dialing is forced to listen to the add (though the person could just as easily ignore it as well). However, This is much better than getting interrupted at dinner time by a telemarketer

  • Google frightens me (Score:2, Interesting)

    by shm ( 235766 )
    Google frightens me. I know their motto is "Do no evil" but ...

    Consider this:

    * They have one of the world's largest compute clusters.

    * They have the demonstrated capability to use that cluster effectively.

    * They've practically centralized all of the web in their cache. Even though you can ask for a site to be removed from the cache, I expect that all that does is hide the cache from the outside world - google still has a copy.

    * Now they have all your email too, if you've signed up for a gmail account.
    • Certainly Google has the capability if not the intent to do a lot of evil.


      I have the capability to do a lot of evil. Do I frighten you? The guy who lives next to you has the capability to kill you if he wants to, does he frighten you?

      Basically, you are afraid because Google has a powerful computer-system and the know-how to use it effectively. and that's "evil" because....??
  • For a start, you're paying your broadband costs.

    Here in the UK, I have a deal with Bulldog (4Mb line, non-VoIP phone included) as a monthly fee. All calls to landline phones in the UK are unlimited and 'free'. On top of that, however, I have signed up with voipuser [voipuser.org] and outgoing VoIP (including calls routed to POTS) is 'free' including international calls to quite a lot of areas (Hong Kong, USA, Australia etc.). It's 'free' because incoming calls are made to premium rate numbers which subsidise the out

  • not really (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Ghost_3k ( 521943 ) on Monday January 24, 2005 @07:06AM (#11454097) Homepage
    Has anyone actually read that article?

    Although Google is reluctant to talk about its plans, the logical use of such a network would be to help to support a new telephone service.

    So, if any big company has open jobs for "strategic negotiator" to help the company to provide a "global backbone network", does that mean it's going to start a voip service?

    Is it really only me who thinks that this articole is speculating, no facts, no evidence...nothing...

    ghost_3k
  • I wonder if Googles VoIP plans are related to it's interest in dark fiber here in the states?

  • I'm baffled at people's failure to see how this would trivially make a fair amount of money.

    Google already gets a ton of revenue from targetted advertising. People really do click on those ad links, and Google really does get a cut. But note first that there is a big difference between clicking on the link and actually ordering a product. Note second that the difference between calling the vendor and buying the product is smaller. I'm sure that many vendors would be much happier to have people call t

Slashdot Top Deals

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Close