Gmail just feeds the search engine.. Actual revenue from gmail... not
so much...
On 08/11/2016 03:47 PM, Josh Luthman 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
<mailto: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 <mailto: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 <tel:937-552-2340>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2016 6:24 PM, "Brian Webster"
<i...@wirelessmapping.com <mailto: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 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>
>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com <http://www.Broadband-Mapping.com>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM
>> To: af@afmug.com <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net>>
wrote:
>> >
>> > Wait until they experience ducting ;)
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: Bill Prince
>> > To: af@afmug.com <mailto: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
<http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/google-fiber-del>
>> > ays-san-jose-project-may-switch-to-wireless-instead/?comments=1
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
