Google Apps is great but doesn't generate much money. Now Gmail kind of does but it's mostly the ad revenue (their premier product).
They've done decent things otherwise but I have a hard time respecting a company that just uses tons of money to build a network with the intention of destroying other companies business. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Aug 11, 2016 6:32 PM, "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: > You have a very naive viewpoint of what they have accomplished. Look > at how successful many of their projects have been! Not all will be > hits, but the ones that have done well have done VERY well. > > They are also doing a lot of work with robotics, driverless cards, > drone delivery, and a TON of medical research. Google "X" (secret > projects / labs) will. > > Many of their things have spun off into their own Alphabet projects, > so that they require each one to fund themselves. Smart business > strategy. > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Josh Luthman > <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote: > > Who is we? I think Google turned to a garbage generator, look at all the > > cancelled projects. > > > > Josh Luthman > > Office: 937-552-2340 > > Direct: 937-552-2343 > > 1100 Wayne St > > Suite 1337 > > Troy, OH 45373 > > > > > > On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster" <i...@wirelessmapping.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Having been directly involved in the Google Fiber projects, I can tell > you > >> there are a number of factors that caused them to take pause on the > >> deployments. One was the almost obstructionist attitude of pole owners > (read > >> competitors to their broadband deployment). This forced a lot more of > the > >> project deigns to underground deployment. In cities like San Jose and > San > >> Francisco, there were a lot of requirements that cost more money than > Google > >> budgeted for. In some respects Google kind of had the idea that cities > would > >> remove obstacles like that to get them in their city. With so much > existing > >> broadband already in place, this is certainly not the case. I think > Google > >> thought all cities were going to have the attitude like they had with > the > >> first cities who applied for Google to come to their cities (Like Kansas > >> City did). > >> > >> Google was also of the impression that they could design and permit > their > >> networks and then cherry pick neighborhoods to deploy based on pre-sign > ups > >> (in Google terms - fiberhoods). This creates a huge logistic problem in > >> planning construction especially with underground deployment. This also > >> drove up costs. > >> > >> Google is still investigating the wireless options. What you will see > from > >> them should be a hybrid network system. They will buy up dark fiber, > >> capacity on lit fiber, conduit space and whole fiber systems where they > can. > >> They may use microwave to cross connect systems or bridge high > construction > >> cost areas such as railroad crossings. They are looking at wireless to > >> basically go more from the curb to the customer, especially in MDU > cases. > >> Existing competition and/or existing contracts within an MDU makes it > risky > >> to do a wired play if they cannot assure themselves of a huge take rate > >> within the MDU. I see their wireless play as more of a high capacity > short > >> hop last mile, but even then they will have challenges with spectrum, > >> interference and capacity. > >> > >> While we all would think Google is a great company with resources to do > >> whatever they set their minds to, keep in mind I have seen a lot from > the > >> inside. I like to equate them to a group of thirty somethings with ADD > and > >> too much money. They also seem to have the attitude that older folks > are too > >> far behind the times to possibly know what they are talking about. > Google is > >> certainly not a utility infrastructure company and lack the people, > tools > >> and skill sets to be one. They are their own best cheerleaders and they > have > >> a dangerous habit of believing their own hype internally and are not > real > >> good at listening to fresh viewpoints and outside input. > >> > >> Thank You, > >> Brian Webster > >> www.wirelessmapping.com > >> www.Broadband-Mapping.com > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM > >> To: af@afmug.com > >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? > >> > >> They may have great RF engineers, but you still cannot fit a camel > through > >> the eye of a needle. > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Josh Reynolds > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:04 AM > >> To: af@afmug.com > >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? > >> > >> So, I get it. You guys are sitting around feeling so smug with your > WISP. > >> > >> We're talking about one of the largest and most powerful companies in > the > >> world though. Do you really think they don't have some of the best RF > >> engineering talent in the world on their payroll? > >> > >> They're not doing anything different than many of us have done, which is > >> evaluate the business case for each technology and pick the most > appropriate > >> one for the application. If it was going to cost you a couple hundred > >> thousand just to cross an intersection, you'd be doing the same thing > too. > >> It's the smart play. > >> > >> At least they're not doing this in LEC style, which would mean "saying > >> they can't do it unless they receive federal subsidies". > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:59 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller > >> <par...@cyberbroadband.net> wrote: > >> > > >> > Wait until they experience ducting ;) > >> > > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: Bill Prince > >> > To: af@afmug.com > >> > Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 11:48 AM > >> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? > >> > > >> > It's apparently "too expensive" to do underground fiber. At least in > >> > San Jose. > >> > > >> > Anyone know anything about Webpass? > >> > > >> > > >> > bp > >> > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > >> > > >> > On 8/10/2016 9:44 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: > >> > > >> > Google Fiber considering fixed microwave technology as alternative to > >> > fiber. > >> > Interesting times! > >> > > >> > http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/ > 08/google-fiber-del > >> > ays-san-jose-project-may-switch-to-wireless-instead/?comments=1 > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >
