Google Fiber - RIP?

[wayner]

The head of Google Access is leaving - is Google Fiber dead?

The Alphabet division that operates Google Fiber is laying off or reassigning about nine percent of its staff as well as "pausing" or ending fiber operations in 10 cities where it hadn't yet fully committed to building.

I hope this doesn't affect Jeff and the rest of the SageTV team that moved over to Google.

http://arstechnica.com/information-t...for-10-cities/

[reggie14]

That's an unfortunate development on so many levels. As you said, hopefully the old SageTV team makes it through this OK.

[tvmaster2]

Google does this way too many times for my liking. I still see Google 411 display on my Pioneer car nav system. They killed that four months after I bought the $650 unit. This is just more of the same...

[wayner]

It sounds like they are moving to wireless service as opposed to FTTH. Does this mean that they won't be offering TV service in the future? I believe from what Jeff has posted in the past that the had already moved away from SageTV as their DVR.

[Taddeusz]

Google basically uses the spaghetti model of R&D. They try all sorts of stuff no matter how crazy and see what sticks. I think the idea being that even failed projects generally yield some sort of advancements even if the overall project goals are not achieved or that it doesn't gain some sort of success. Even successful projects may be dropped in favor of newer projects as technology advances.

The only problem I see with this form of R&D is that the people that get caught in the failed or superseded projects get lost if there isn't a clear path to the better thing, if there is a better thing.

[routerunner]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

Google basically uses the spaghetti model of R&D. They try all sorts of stuff no matter how crazy and see what sticks. I think the idea being that even failed projects generally yield some sort of advancements even if the overall project goals are not achieved or that it doesn't gain some sort of success. Even successful projects may be dropped in favor of newer projects as technology advances.

The only problem I see with this form of R&D is that the people that get caught in the failed or superseded projects get lost if there isn't a clear path to the better thing, if there is a better thing.

I couldn't say it better
Eddy

[SHS]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

Google basically uses the spaghetti model of R&D. They try all sorts of stuff no matter how crazy and see what sticks. I think the idea being that even failed projects generally yield some sort of advancements even if the overall project goals are not achieved or that it doesn't gain some sort of success. Even successful projects may be dropped in favor of newer projects as technology advances.

The only problem I see with this form of R&D is that the people that get caught in the failed or superseded projects get lost if there isn't a clear path to the better thing, if there is a better thing.

I petty sure they didn't abandoned it nor give up Google Fiber I think taking a step back more then like newer advances technology projects like webpass
Let not forget who keep throw a lot of monkey wrench in there way crying like bunch little baby AT&T, Comcast and min other.

[SHS]

Originally Posted by tvmaster2

Google does this way too many times for my liking. I still see Google 411 display on my Pioneer car nav system. They killed that four months after I bought the $650 unit. This is just more of the same...

I maybe wrong but didn't cellular phone web brower petty much kill it.

[Monedeath]

Originally Posted by SHS

I maybe wrong but didn't cellular phone web brower petty much kill it.

Data rates are dropping for Cellular Data. Pair that with the underlying technology that has to be supporting such a drop, and I could very much see why Google is dropping efforts to push fiber "the last mile" to the home. They now only need to get "close enough."

Fiber is still the superior option, but for most users going wireless for "the last mile" or so is going to be more than "good enough" for most things.

I think the cord cutters have started cutting other things as well, and Google Fiber was feeling some of that. Throw in the additional matter of the other Telephone and Cable Companies starting to directly compete or roll out their own infrastructure prior to Google turning up in the neighborhood, and it's pretty much "mission accomplished" for what they were wanting with the initial Google Fiber reveal.

Which was to break the logjam that seemed to have developed in regards to increasing available internet bandwidth @home. Google Fiber took care of inducing upgrades in highly urbanized areas and surrounding communities.

Now moving into the wireless side of things, they can continue to push into the remaining neglected urban areas(where Fiber may still remain an option once certain thresholds are crossed), and start looking at more rural applications where fiber to every home didn't make business sense, and probably still doesn't(not enough customers to recover the cost of running cable/fiber out to them). Various Wireless technologies might just work for those markets, as they can skip the whole laying down cable to the customer. They just have to build out a mix of wired and wireless (backhaul) infrastructures to get to where the customers are.

The "other side" of their shifting to wireless data, in particular if they start focusing on rural, is that it potentially assists another project of theirs:

Their self-driving cars, many rural, and even some (moderately) urban areas are very poorly served by wireless carriers even now. Pushing wireless data services out into those last remaining "frontiers" ensures better network connectivity for their self-driving cars when they go tooling across the (remote) countryside.

[wayner]

Data rates are dropping for wireless but data consumption is growing quickly. Sure LTE and 5G is fast enough for most people, but can you economically use it if you are a cord cutter? My family's usage has average over 600GB per month, I don't know that I could easily replace that with a wireless service that didn't cost a fortune.

And part of the raison d'etre for Google Fiber was to increase demand for services where you had a big fat bidirectional pipe. Do you still get that with a wireless service?

[SHS]

Originally Posted by Monedeath

Data rates are dropping for Cellular Data. Pair that with the underlying technology that has to be supporting such a drop, and I could very much see why Google is dropping efforts to push fiber "the last mile" to the home. They now only need to get "close enough."

Fiber is still the superior option, but for most users going wireless for "the last mile" or so is going to be more than "good enough" for most things.

I think the cord cutters have started cutting other things as well, and Google Fiber was feeling some of that. Throw in the additional matter of the other Telephone and Cable Companies starting to directly compete or roll out their own infrastructure prior to Google turning up in the neighborhood, and it's pretty much "mission accomplished" for what they were wanting with the initial Google Fiber reveal.

Which was to break the logjam that seemed to have developed in regards to increasing available internet bandwidth @home. Google Fiber took care of inducing upgrades in highly urbanized areas and surrounding communities.

Now moving into the wireless side of things, they can continue to push into the remaining neglected urban areas(where Fiber may still remain an option once certain thresholds are crossed), and start looking at more rural applications where fiber to every home didn't make business sense, and probably still doesn't(not enough customers to recover the cost of running cable/fiber out to them). Various Wireless technologies might just work for those markets, as they can skip the whole laying down cable to the customer. They just have to build out a mix of wired and wireless (backhaul) infrastructures to get to where the customers are.

The "other side" of their shifting to wireless data, in particular if they start focusing on rural, is that it potentially assists another project of theirs:

Their self-driving cars, many rural, and even some (moderately) urban areas are very poorly served by wireless carriers even now. Pushing wireless data services out into those last remaining "frontiers" ensures better network connectivity for their self-driving cars when they go tooling across the (remote) countryside.

That not what I was ref to when come to Google 411 as everybody I know just use there phone and google search or voice search now days.

It my surprise you but where I live at rural have all ready had been getting Fiber Cable last year (Bolt Fiber Optic Services) but kind of way over price for 1GB service at $256 per month and that just for internet side of thing and the city where I live it doesn't even have that even know that AT&T has run fiber this year just one street over so all we have here is reg Cable (200MB) w/up 500GB Data caps or DSL (6MB) or Fixed Wireless (if get luck up to 3MB).

As for cord cutter I do under those people they want true la carte programming with out all the BS Advertising which seem getting longer and longer I remember a time when it was only like once every 30 min and about 3min to 5min long where today it like every 15min and about 5 min long and show they have been come out for last 15 years have been a joke not very good other then this year I did started watching a few local new show which very rare for me to watch any local or any one else in our house hold.
What ever happing to local saturday morning cartoon now day it just nothing but news this and that which getting old as well.

I and I'm sure min other want pick there own Channel or Network we want watch we don't need 10+ news channel nor 20+ Sport nor any of 50+ mickey mouse rip off PVP nor On-Demand channel then what the point of having a DVR in first place (thank god for skip ahead) nor any useless Music's Channel.

[Monedeath]

Originally Posted by wayner

Data rates are dropping for wireless but data consumption is growing quickly. Sure LTE and 5G is fast enough for most people, but can you economically use it if you are a cord cutter? My family's usage has average over 600GB per month, I don't know that I could easily replace that with a wireless service that didn't cost a fortune.

And part of the raison d'etre for Google Fiber was to increase demand for services where you had a big fat bidirectional pipe. Do you still get that with a wireless service?

Which is why I said "last mile" service, not so much cellular service. (Although, again, with such a build out, placing a (micro-)cell tower on site may not add much "meaningful" overhead, as you're already erecting a communications tower)

Basically they run a hybrid between Fiber and the Cable Co's community bandwidth. You place a radio transceiver somewhere to service a given area. Once you hit a certain number of customers, you add a second or even third transceiver and split the load between them. Decreasing the distance traveled, and lowering the total power out each unit needs.

Once it hits a particular magic line for a given area, you run fiber to that area and get them off the RF bandspace entirely. In some cases, that may translate into just running fiber instead of bothering to add more transceivers. You reduce the load on the wireless system by wiring more of the customers.

Presuming you're running fiber to where many of the transceivers would be instead of doing wireless relays, it may not be much of a "stretch" for them to try to convert any customers who are "reasonably close" to fiber while they're at it.

Basically, for example, running 3 miles of fiber to 1 transceiver that can service 10 households over a 4 square mile area is more cost effective than running dozens of miles worth of fiber to service the same number of households. But once we're talking about 40 homes in the same area, now we're talking about that fiber operation being more viable. (maybe not cost effective, but closer to it)