
Google Domains Launches to All in U.S - KarenS
http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/13/google-domains-launches-to-all-in-u-s-with-support-for-blogger-integration-templates-and-more-domain-endings/?ncid=rss
======
Someone1234
None of Google Domain's features are novel. In fact the article spent most of
its time talking about an up-sell. Which isn't to say Google Domain isn't a
good product, just that we now should look at price because nothing else seems
interesting...

~ Google Domains charges $12/year for .COM, .NET, .ORG.

~ NameCheap charges $10.69/year for .COM, $11.98/year for .NET, and
$11.48/year for .ORG. Sometimes with an 18c/year fee tacked on.

~ GoDaddy charges $12.99-13.99 for a .COM but that might increase randomly
because they're scumbags.

So my point is that this article claims that everyone is "rushing" to this new
product, and while this product doesn't seem "bad" it also isn't exactly
market changing. The prices are well within 10% of the market (sometimes
higher, sometimes lower) and the features are pretty generic also.

Can someone explain why Google Domains is compelling and not a "me too!"
product?

~~~
rpedela
Private registration usually costs extra, but not with Google domains. That is
a compelling reason to me. I also like the clean interface, some of the other
vendors have horrible interfaces.

~~~
rndn
What is private registration?

~~~
blfr
Registration without revealing your private information in the whois database.
Providers usually put their own details there and forward emails to the end
user.

Depending on the registry, it's unavailable or at least against the rules for
some tlds.

~~~
nly
> Depending on the registry, it's unavailable or at least against the rules
> for some tlds.

And yet other TLD registries are sensible enough to make privacy the _default_
for private individuals. .EU isn't bad in this regard, and others like .SE
even go so far as to hide your name (most only hide your postal, email,
telephone)

Frankly I don't know why anyone who can avoid it would want to touch Verisign
TLDs with a barge pole... they have the continued gall to keep putting their
prices _up_ despite more competition than ever, and fail to raise the bar on
basics like whois protection. Even .UK domains can be had for $5/year with
registry level whois protection for heavens sake.

------
venomsnake
Knowing first hand google support I will stick to namecheap ...

~~~
MichaelApproved
I like everything about namecheap, except the name. I hate having to mention
their company name to a customer who I'm managing the domain for. It sounds
like I'm using a discount service from the bottom of the barrel when that's
really not how the company operates.

It would be nice if I could refer to a parent company with a more appealing
name.

~~~
tamar
When I bought Namecheap domains in 2006, domains were close in price to ~$70.
Namecheap's name was intended to show that you'd buy it for less.

The brand grew from there. That's why Namecheap is still called Namecheap.

Disclosure: Namecheap employee/personal experience

~~~
JeremyBanks
Domains were nowhere near ~$70 in 2006. Maybe in 2000.

~~~
pcurve
Neh. Not even Network Solutions was charging $70 in 2000. Only half that.

------
qeorge
$12/yr - not bad at all. I might recommend this next time a friend asks how to
buy a domain.

Namecheap takes great care of me at $10/year though, so I'm not very compelled
to switch.

~~~
wise_young_man
I started moving all of my domains back to NameCheap from Badger after they
raised their prices to what Hover charges.

The domain renewal with whois privacy/guard at NameCheap ends up being a
little more than Google Domains.

I keep hoping NameCheap will overhaul their control panel design like they did
with their main site.

I will probably end up moving to AWS Route53 or Google Domains or to use their
DNS and a clean/modern interface and simpler pricing (include whois privacy).

~~~
AlyssaRowan
The dealbreaker for us with NameCheap/eNom is simple: _still_ no DNSSEC.

It's been how many years now? And all they say is "we're working on it" and
have no ETA. So we moved most things to Gandi.

Feels good having no GoDaddy, however.

~~~
tptacek
Seriously? I'm surprised to see you of all people write that. No DNSSEC is a
feature, not a bug.

~~~
ademarre
Care to elaborate on DNSSEC? I've been interested in seeing wider adoption of
DNSSEC for things like DANE.

~~~
tptacek
DANE is a replacement for the CA system that effectively cedes cryptographic
control of most of the Internet to world governments.

~~~
danyork
No... DANE doesn't cede control to world governments.

<insert-standard-many-hundred-line-exchange-between-you-and-I-that-has-
happened-in-other-HN-threads-here>

DANE can work perfectly fine with the existing CA system to provide another
way of verifying that the correct TLS certificate (or CA) is being used. Or...
it can be used with a completely different trust anchor or TLS certificate
that you control. Your choice.

But you and I will just have to disagree on this topic. Your dislike of DNSSEC
is well-known, as is my support for it.

~~~
tptacek
The USG controls .com, .net, and .org. The government of Libya controls .ly.
DNSSEC puts cryptographic key material under the influence of the DNS. "No it
doesn't" isn't a rebuttal to that.

~~~
danyork
But Thomas ... I still don't understand the attack that you say can be made
against DNSSEC-signed domains. Here's what I see, if I have a .COM domain:

1\. I sign my domains and generate a DS record.

2\. I upload the DS record to my registrar who passes the DS record up to the
.COM registry.

Now, when someone does DNSSEC validation on my DNS records, they wind up doing
this process:

1\. Going through the DNS process to get my DNS records as well as the DNSKEY
and RRSIGs.

2\. Following the chain of DS records up to the .COM registry and on up to the
root of DNS... being able to validate along the way the integrity of the
records.

Where do world governments get to interfere here?

If a govt were able to manipulate the TLD registry the best they could do
would be to point my domain to some other name servers that weren't mine... is
THAT the attack you see? I seriously would like to understand.

~~~
tptacek
Your "1\. Going through the DNS process" starts with records the USG controls!
Yes, "the best they could do" would be to defeat the entire system. What do
you think happens in a TLS MITM? They USG isn't trying to sign _your_ keys and
publish _your_ addresses!

This is not, of course, the only problem with DNSSEC. It's also an archaic
1990s cryptosystem built around 1024-bit PKCS1v15 RSA, which by default makes
every DNS record in the system public, trivially dramatically amplifies DNS
traffic, and does all this _without actually securing DNS lookups from
browsers_ , which still run the old insecure DNS protocol to talk to DNSSEC-
enabled caches.

It's a silly system, has been since the USG paid TIS to design it in the
1990s, is nearing _two decades_ delayed, and isn't going to happen. Look at
what Chris Palmer from Google has to say about it. Whatever the opposite of
"betting on it" is, that's what Chromium is doing with DNSSEC. We should get
to work designing a modern alternative.

------
justhw
The last thing I trust Google with is my domains. They can outright ban or
disable you just like with any of their products and not offer support or
explanation.

------
uptown
So when somebody steals your domain, do you actually get to talk to a person
at Google to help resolve the matter, or is it like every other customer
service experience they offer?

~~~
EarthLaunch
That's just it - it's impossible to social engineer a takeover of your domain,
since nobody can reach a human!

~~~
iancarroll
Actually, I've gotten pretty fast response times on normal business days with
Google Domains.

~~~
SG-
I'm assuming before it launched?

~~~
iancarroll
Yeah.

------
SG-
I have no idea why this is US only other than Google just being extremely
lazy. Previously I've always understood why companies couldn't release
products internationally or at least in their own continent when it came to
rights for content, however I really don't see any reason for this one.

If it's an issue of not wanting to deal with certain country top-levels then
so be it and simply offer the ones you've implemented already and add in more
top levels in the future.

------
m0th87
Don't waste your time on this service. I registered for it years ago while it
was still in beta, and it's been nothing but a trainwreck.

The latest debacle: I can't renew my domain. They started sending me
notifications a few months ago that my domain was expiring because my credit
card is out of date. I can't sign in because of a redirect bug. There's no
support to reach out to, and requests for help on forums have gone unanswered.

Alternatively, dnsimple has been nothing but charming to work with.

~~~
kemayo
The Google Domains page has a claim of "chat, phone and email support" which
links to:
[https://domains.google.com/registrar#contactus&chp=contactus](https://domains.google.com/registrar#contactus&chp=contactus)

I haven't actually tried following through with it, since I don't have any
support queries myself, but that certainly /looks/ like a way to directly talk
to support.

~~~
beowulfey
I can confirm that the contact us does connect you to support; usually Google
provides at least adequate support options for paid services (e.g., Domains).
I spoke with someone over Chat that was surprisingly knowledgeable, and even
gave me the heads up that the new features would be rolling out soon (this was
a couple weeks ago)

------
joshfraser
I've been using Google Domains for several months now. I like the simplicity
of their user interface and I trust Google to be good at DNS. My biggest
complaint is that they don't support very many TLD's. I'd prefer to have all
my domains in one place, but they don't support .co yet.

~~~
da-bacon
.co is now supported and the full list of supported TLDs is here
[https://support.google.com/domains/answer/6010092?hl=en](https://support.google.com/domains/answer/6010092?hl=en)

~~~
joshfraser
That's great news. That wasn't the case last I checked.

------
msoad
I was a beta tester for Google Domains for a long time. Here are reasons I'm
very satisfied:

\- Unlike other domain sellers, Google Domains is NOT trying to sell me
anything other than domains.

\- Canceling is easy! I don't have to wait in calls with 1&1!

\- Customer support was great. They get back to me after an hour if I email
and if I call, responses are very fast.

\- User interface is clean and clear.

~~~
Fastidious
I was a beta tester as well. All the reasons you listed apply. Even before
they opened for the masses I have moved all my domains in. Some extra reasons:

\- Simple integration if you are on Google apps (I am grandfathered, using
their, old, standard, free Gapps.

\- Customer support was superb and instant, via chat, and it was great. The
person knew what he was doing.

Definitely a keeper.

------
richardlblair
Many people miss the point of this product:

Easily buy a domain, have it automatically hooked into the Google Apps suite
of products, and easily hook it up with a select number of third party vendors
like Wix or Shopify.

That's what this is about. The ability to create something cool, run a
business, without having to worry as much about the technical bullshit.

Great product, and for the ease of use it is well worth $12/year. And yea, I
know, $2 more a year than namecheap... but $2/year is well worth the time it
takes to setup a domain (even if it is only a 2 minute ordeal).

~~~
tamar
I believe you'll love the new Namecheap backend when it launched. :)
(Disclosure: Namecheap employee)

~~~
stoic
finally ditching eNom, eh? kudos

------
nostromo
Google: please provide free and easy to setup SSL with every domain. :)

~~~
gesman
It's more of a request to your hosting provider albeit Google likely will be
happy to selling you SSL certificate :)

Agree though - clear instructions are missing.

~~~
higherpurpose
Apparently their certificates are only SHA1. Ugh. What happened to the whole
SHA2 promoting thing?

[https://twitter.com/geeknik/status/555150703090364416](https://twitter.com/geeknik/status/555150703090364416)

------
grayfox
Can't wait to ditch enom. This looks like a good suitor.

No Canadian support yet.

Soon, eh!

------
throwaway34052
I don't think google should be in this space. They don't need your $12/year.

The world needs to resist ceeding every last bit Internet governance to these
people.

Centralization is death!

------
blissofbeing
Does anyone know if the DNS servers you get with this are the same as the
google cloud DNS[1] product?

If so, buying your domain here could be worth it for the DNS alone, as they
are anycast, DNSSEC enabled, and fairly fast[2].

1: [https://cloud.google.com/dns/docs](https://cloud.google.com/dns/docs)

2: [http://www.solvedns.com/dns-
comparison/2014/12](http://www.solvedns.com/dns-comparison/2014/12)

~~~
Navarr
My domain, navarr.me is on google domains.

The nameservers are ns-cloud-d$.googledomains.com (1-4) resolving to
216.239.3$.109 (32, 34, 36, 38)

------
joeblau
I've been using this for a few months now and it's been great. The cool thing
is that they allow you to solve the problem of having domain emails pointing
to your personal emails so for example blahblah@joeblau.com ->
josephblaus@gmail.com. The only challenge with this is that I use Cloudflare
as my CDN and Google's email redirects work if you use Google's nameservers.

~~~
SEMW
> The cool thing is that they allow you to solve the problem of having domain
> emails pointing to your personal emails so for example blahblah@joeblau.com
> -> josephblaus@gmail.com

Am I missing something...? I didn't realise this was a problem - I've never
used a domain provider that doesn't let you do this. I currently use
Namecheap, which certainly do.

~~~
joeblau
Ah I've been using iwantmyname as my domain provider and they didn't do this.
Your domain provider clearly offers more features.

------
balladeer
I wish I could somehow post this in really large fonts here that a domain name
is a service where you actually need support, "real support". When your
account (which is linked to dozens of other services and the reason can be an
algorithmic false alert in context of any of those services) is disabled you
again need support.

And customer support is something Google doesn't believe in.

------
jacquesm
I'd _never_ in a lifetime want to depend for something as critical as domain
registrations on a company that can't be bothered to answer its customers.
Google has an absolutely horrible record when it comes to end user support and
if there is one thing you want from your registrar then it is that they
actually answer their phones and email.

------
arifulanam
That's very good news. BIG threat to GoDaddy :D

------
vld
I'll stick with internetbs [1], $8.49-8.99/year for .com and free private
registration.

1:
[https://internetbs.net/domain_names_usd.html](https://internetbs.net/domain_names_usd.html)

~~~
torbit
A domain host that is pushing .bs & with a cliche web 2.0 logo & .net. That
alone worries me. How long have you been with them.

~~~
newaccountfool
They have been around for years. Their deisgn is pretty standard for a domain
name seller, if you want to talk about web2.0 and cliche have a look at the
Google Domain website. Also, .net is the correct tld to use in this
situation....

Who shat in your cocopops?

------
jastanton
The best feature is that it's not GoDaddy, or NameCheap. Having registered
hundreds of domains, dealt with all kinds of customer service and had to
perform numerous operations for my domains the user experience matters and
though Google hasn't has the best track record with UX they certainly do
invest in it more heavily than GoDaddy & NameCheap.

~~~
tamar
Hey, Tamar from Namecheap here. Would love to hear about your user experience
so I can pass it on. thanks.

~~~
wineisfine
For one, why can't we delete a domain directly from within the control panel?
That's just tactics. Nooh, we have to let it expire.

On the marketplace, your display name is the same as the username. What a
security risk.

And most of all: why charge at all for the domain name privacy option? As if
this is such a costly tech thing to accomplish.

------
Killah911
I keep thinking of Peter Theil's analysis of monopolies trying to say they're
just a competitor in a larger market. There doesn't seem to be anything
special here in this offering from google. As a google developer I wonder if
the difference will be in more integration and better API access compared to
someone like godaddy.

------
fugyk
I think integration with other Google products is the main reason they are
venturing here. It can offer one click integration to google apps, app engine,
cloud compute and blogger. If they offer free google apps for personal use, I
think it can be a major selling point.

~~~
Navarr
I doubt they'll go down that road again (I' ma free Gapps user - grandfathered
in). It's also the most terrible experience these days. I still don't have
Inbox by Gmail or the ability to view my orders in Google Wallet.

So much for being an early adopter :|

~~~
josteink
> I' ma free Gapps user - grandfathered in ... So much for being an early
> adopter :|

You, like me, was an early adopter which provided the platform with traction
when it was new.

Now the platform is proven, established and popular.

From an economic point of view we're now merely free-loading leeches, and I
honestly don't find it reasonable to expect that we should be given the best
treatment at the expense of others.

Google now has a shitload of paying customers, and they are getting
prioritized. And I'm completely fine with that. Our reward is that unlike
others, we're allowed to go free-loading!

I've noticed too that I'm not getting features and upgrades paying customers
get. That's Google trying to give me an incentive to convert to a paid
account, because obviously Google wants to convert us free-loaders to paying
customers too. And I'm fine with that as well.

Just don't act entitled because you were the first one to sign up for a free
product. You don't deserve anything in return for that.

------
briHass
Does anyone know if they support dynamic DNS on subdomains and is it RFC2136
compliant? For example, I have mydomain.com pointing to a standard server, but
home.mydomain.com updated from pfSense to point to my dyn IP on namecheap.

As usual with Google, technical details are scant.

~~~
dudus
The help center page has a lot of info. It does support sub domain support. I
don't use it so I'm not sure it follows the spec you mentioned or not but it
seems to have a fairly simple protocol.

[https://support.google.com/domains/answer/6147083?authuser=1](https://support.google.com/domains/answer/6147083?authuser=1)

~~~
teddyh
> _Google Domains uses the dyndns2 protocol_

So, not RFC 2136. No standard protocol for you.

------
ForFreedom
Takes you to manage domains page without login, if you click on "Manage my
domains" \- [http://ajean.net/google-domains-launches-u-s-
u-s/](http://ajean.net/google-domains-launches-u-s-u-s/)

------
michaelbuckbee
I'm surprised that so far nobody has mentioned DNSimple in this conversation.
They seem the closest to what Google Domains functionality is - domain
registration and then easy integration with external services.

Also, fwiw they're fantastic.

------
d0ugie
Not seeing any mention of SSL certificates. Might they get into the CA game as
well?

~~~
michaelbuckbee
They're are already a certificate authority (they issue their own certs for
google.com, etc.) and do lots of interesting "tricks" like only issuing them
for 3 months at a time so they can roll them over faster as things like SHA1
get deprecated.

------
ksk
>We include 10 million resolutions per year for each domain you register with
Google Domains.

Hmm, what does that mean for an average website?

100 readers * 365 days * ~273 (html+css+js+gif/png/jpg) ?

I guess some browsers cache the DNS requests too..

~~~
driverdan
DNS gets cached at multiple levels (browser, OS, router, upstream DNS
servers). The higher you set your TTL the longer it'll be cached.

~~~
ksk
You're correct. I was wondering what we could deduce from that 10m number
since Google felt it necessary to mention it on the landing page. It would
tell us who they intend to market this to. It is a bit weird to restrict DNS
requests like that. Or maybe they don't want people to abuse their service to
create URL forwarders or some such. I suppose unlike startups, for a company
like Google, anti-abuse mechanisms need to be baked into the design/feature
set.

------
gesman
Dethroning Godaddy is a noble act of course, but other than that I don't see
any show stoppers from Google in managing domains space.

Adding support for more .bullshit TLD's that no one cares about?

Connecting to Blogger?

Yawn...

------
tdicola
Funny, I had just switched over my last GoDaddy domain yesterday to start
using a different nameserver and finally move it off their system entirely.
Might have to give this a try.

------
marincounty
I'm just glad Godaddy has some real competition! Get ready for Godaddy to
bring back discounts for annual renewals. hell, you might get a call from
Danika personally?

------
spb
The only factor on what registrar you use for buying a domain should be their
renewal rank on [http://domcomp.com](http://domcomp.com).

------
longlivegnu
Still no .io support :(

------
wnevets
Ive had beta access for a while now and havent had any problems yet. The main
reason why I switched my domain to google was how seamless it works with
gmail.

------
thekevan
Does anyone know anything about migrating a domain to Google Domains if that
domain was originally published through Blogger, then migrated to Google Apps?

------
gesman
Adding Route 53-like feature would be a killer addon that only large company
like Google can (if they want to) properly handle.

~~~
mbesto
[https://cloud.google.com/networking/#DNS](https://cloud.google.com/networking/#DNS)

------
Alex3917
It looks like CrunchBase may have gotten hacked. Their URL for Google points
to a spam domain.

~~~
mintplant
It's not doing that for me -- at least, it isn't right now, anyway. You might
want to check your computer for malware.

~~~
Alex3917
I don't think so, I see it on both my work and home computers, both of which
are running OS X. Also to clarify I'm talking about the CrunchBase widget on
this TechCrunch article, not the entry on the actual Crunchbase website.

------
jcadam
I've been using name.com for a while. Been ok so far (and way better than
godaddy).

------
ereckers
If the email integration is seamless then it's worth looking into for me.

------
jtwebman
Don't use it Google is known for not having great customer support. They like
to build big and make you support it. Just like the Google Play store. Notice
there is no phone number on the site? Not good if you are doing real business
and need to get something fixed ASAP.

------
ilaksh
Would be nice if they had an API like Namecheap, or supporte the new TLDs.

------
ddingus
I prefer Gandi.net No bullshit.

------
Eleutheria
Can I pay with bitcoin? or paypal?

------
curiously
This is a welcome news. I've had it with name.com and it's horrible webmail.
Unable to send email for weeks, support replying with unhelpful answers every
48 hours. Have to pay for whois privacy and bunch of other stuff most
registrars give you for free.

------
enbrill
haha of course it's "in beta testing" grow some balls Google

------
glitterman
They're clearly heading for worldDOMAINation.

------
debacle
I don't think I would ever rely on Google to host an application critical to
my business.

------
Dirlewanger
It is now complete. With Google Fiber, Big Brother Google will looking over
you every step of the way.

------
bebrown2
The coolest domain name search tool is probably
[https://domainr.com/](https://domainr.com/)

------
peterwwillis
....in before "Google has decided to end support for this product; your
10-year-registered domains that last longer than next month will be moved to
GoDaddy."

(edit: actually, they'd never voluntarily transfer your domain; they'd force
you to transfer it, at some kind of discount. suffice to say i am less than
confident)

