They just need to generate enough revenue with Apps to keep their primary focus going. :)
Wait, you're not in favor of them using their own personal cash to throw a wrench in the works of 1Mbps DSL LECs who have received billions upon billions of taxpayer money? On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote: > 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 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >
