Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google Businesses The Internet

Google's Sinister(?) Plans 287

puppetman writes "This week, Robert X. Cringely makes some interesting observations as to what Google's up to next. He theorizes that Google is looking to create a bandwidth shortage that will drive ISP/cable/telephone customers into it's open arms (often with the blessing of the ISP/cable/telephone company). The evidence: leasing massive amounts of network capacity, and huge data centers in rural areas (close to power-generation facilities). The shortage will only occur if the average bandwidth consumption by individual consumers skyrockets; think mainstream BitTorrent, streaming moves from NetFlix, tv episodes from iTunes, video games on demand, etc, etc. Spooky and sinister, or sublime and smart?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google's Sinister(?) Plans

Comments Filter:
  • Econ 101 Anybody? (Score:3, Informative)

    by moehoward ( 668736 ) on Friday January 19, 2007 @09:51PM (#17690572)

    This is just plain good business. Of course, there are many nutjobs (rhymes with star-heft-miberals) that will always look at big business with shifty eyes. And, Google certainly is as big-business as they come. But good strategery like this is just common sense. They are most certainly not out to create a artificial (or whatever he is implying) shortage.

    And, Google builds data centers in rural areas (and gosh, everywhere else) near powerplants for economic reasons as well. Heck, look at the economics of building that new data center in SC that they announced today. Average salary is shy of $50,000 for some few hundred jobs. Compare to placing that data center in suburban Chicago or San Jose or in Manhatten. I mean, this is just math. Makes for a pretty good conspiracy theory, though.

    This Cringely article comes off very tin-foil hattish. Look at all the disclaimers and suppositions and "theories." Gosh, so shocking that a big company is "secret" about their overall strategy. He wants to know Google's "secrets" (strategry) just like an analyst of the oil industry wants to know BP's strategy. Any huge corporation is not going to let that out. Google is no more "secret" than anyone else. It's just that more people are asking Google.
  • by abigor ( 540274 ) on Friday January 19, 2007 @10:00PM (#17690660)
    I'll make a prediction: you didn't read the article. Also, Cringely tracks his own predictions, and every year he gives a summary of how he did. He tends to hover around 70-80% accuracy.

    But don't let things like facts and background reading stop you from being angry. Grrr! That darned Cringely! Grrr!
  • I hate to do this... (Score:0, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 19, 2007 @10:07PM (#17690718)
    But the grammar standards of adults are pathetic.

    "drive ISP/cable/telephone customers into it's open arms"

    should be

    "drive ISP/cable/telephone customers into its open arms"

    Otherwise the first quote would expand to be

    "drive ISP/cable/telephone customers into it is open arms"

    which makes no fucking sense.

    It's /= its people, and I thought only kids were stupid enough not to know the difference.
  • by uss_valiant ( 760602 ) on Friday January 19, 2007 @10:15PM (#17690776) Homepage
    After RTFA, here's a summary:
    - Google owns (leases) tons of fiber, they control the bandwidth market.
    - Google plans to build a lot of large data centers in rural areas.
    - Google anticipates a massive growth in bandwidth usage due to p2p, youtube, etc.
    - ISPs will be faced with buying tons of new bandwidth OR contracting with Google to use / connent to the nearby data center directly.

    No sir. Google needs a lot of servers for their services. Sure they profit from their local data centers as edge proxies the same way Akamai does, but the whole theory about controlling ISPs, targeting contracts with your local ISP etc. is BS. These data centers are used for their CPU / memory power and then to minimize latency.
  • Re:Or how about... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 19, 2007 @10:30PM (#17690884)
    Sorry, I have acutally work on the Net Backbone in several locations: New York, San Jose and Illinois. With respect to them causing a shortage; not likely. The Incumbant LEC's control most of the fiber with some others being run by small companies. If there is an issue; people can lay more fiber or go through various competing CLEC for bandwidth.

    Also, I have worked in the same datacener with Google; they have over 30 GigE feeds over dark fiber. As of a couple years ago; they had something like 60 strands per data center. Well, 60 for the larger data centers. As for tapping SBC (my current region) not likley. As for Chicago; downtown? They might give it some trouble; the city and the county have told SBC to maximize their fiber usage. The City and the County (cook) basically spanked SBC for putting too much in? How can you put in too much? Simple they put small end electronics on it; something like a chincy OC-12 or an OC-3 ring; instead of a OC-48 which is using (TTL's) Tight Transmission Lasers; ofcouse with those TTL's being sent over a DWDM system. If true; downtown is screwed; but not the state.

    Now that my NDA has expired; I feel like saying:
    1) Google in their data centers and beyond use Gig-Ethernet; and my suspicions is that it goes back to the Googleplex in California. Currently; they use your standard "Wester Digital HD" with Gigabyte MOBO's; using Penitum III IV proc's. Their network is done by Force 10. Each rack has between 20 and 40 servers; depending on MOBO. Each rack is seperated by an HP switch. Their core switch used to Juniper M20's and they have upgraded to T320's.
    2) funny clip of the telecom industry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj1Mtv9cD0I [youtube.com] they forgot Pacific Telesis in the video.
  • Re:What? Me worry? (Score:3, Informative)

    by admactanium ( 670209 ) on Friday January 19, 2007 @10:42PM (#17690990) Homepage
    Don't you mean AT&T? Why would Verizon run fiber to your home in CA?
    because they already do? verizon fios is available in some cities in california already. in fact, i hope to be moving to a city that has it available relatively soon.
  • by logicnazi ( 169418 ) <gerdes@iMENCKENnvariant.org minus author> on Friday January 19, 2007 @11:09PM (#17691182) Homepage
    Cringely didn't call it sinister or even imply that it was. He just suggested that google was positioning itself to take advantage of the coming bandwidth shortage. The only passage that even suggests sinisterness was his aside that maybe gathering up leasing deals should trigger government scrutiny and that seemed to be only a remark on policy not google's plan.

    It's only the tinfoil hat slashdoters that added the word sinister.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 20, 2007 @04:11AM (#17692966)
    Bill Gates has never been "the good guy". He was the person who stole code from the bins of various universities and then wrote a manifesto demanding that nobody else share his work.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 20, 2007 @01:09PM (#17695354)
    >> they could just provide free wireless for everyone
    You're joking, right? I live in Mountain View, CA: Google hometown and one of the polities that Google claims to cover with free wifi. Their wifi is absolutely useless. I've asked around and haven't found anybody with Google wifi success, either. Sure, you get the occassional fleeting connection, but comparing Google wifi to a real, hard-wired ISP is like comparing the rabbit-eared television set that requires you to physically touch the rabbit ears before it gives a clear signal to modern digital TV. I've long since given up on Google wifi and am happily back to paying monthly bandwidth charges, right there along with everybody else I know in Mountain View.

The moon is made of green cheese. -- John Heywood

Working...