

Cringely: Is Google on Crack? - pg
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070727_002573.html

======
jey
Summary: Google should bow down to the big telcos and not spend 2.86% to 6.22%
of their market cap to open up a gigantic market because there's a danger that
Google will hurt the telcos' feelings and cause the big telcos to no longer do
special deals with Google.

Google is entrenched enough that they aren't going to wither and die just
because they don't get preferential placement on the default landing page for
the cell phone's browser. If Cringely is saying that the telcos would actually
_block_ Google, that would be an indicator of much bigger problems with the
telco cartel.

Sounds like it's Cringely who needs to put down the crack pipe.

~~~
jsjenkins168
Many suggest Google's mobile plans exceed the cell phone's browser however,
which is why the carrier control issue really is of importance to them. I
agree with the article in this regard. Several respectable analysts believe a
Google phone is ~6-12 months from being unveiled, and that Google has
interests in more advanced on-deck applications such as context sensitive
searching (based on location, time, etc). Both of these objectives are
definitely "blockable" by the telcos under current conditions.

~~~
jgamman
isn't the iphone a google phone? i thought SJ and ES were on each other's
boards. google is trying to create the platform and capitalise on the traffic
(by betting it can build better products) - that's their business space. apple
makes consumer devices which use traffic. sounds like a pretty solid
proposition to me.

~~~
ph0rque
I think that if Google does have a phone in the works, it will be a no-frills,
inexpensive phone that will cost a lot less than the iphone. That way, google
won't compete with the high end of the market that iphone has covered.

------
pg
I don't agree with this article's conclusions, incidentally. I doubt there's
much the telcos can do to Google, no matter how vengeful they feel. But the
article helped me understand what this controversy is about.

~~~
jsjenkins168
I also dont think the demands set by google were a brash mistake like this
article suggests.

The general public is becoming more aware that the carrier's chokehold on them
is stunting innovation and choice. The iPhone is a perfect example. When the
iPhone was released, groves of people with existing contracts signed the 2yr
AT&T contract anyway, but not without a feeling of bitterness. Everyone wants
the Apple iPhone, not an AT&T phone. Everything AT&T about it is a downright
annoyance.

Statements like the one made by Google over the spectrum restrictions reach
the ears of the public. Google is saying: "We will stop the telcos from raping
you over the coals if the FCC will accept our rules to help you, the end user,
by giving you freedom of choice". I think now, more than ever before, people
are standing up and demanding action like this. Google is shown as "good cop"
who will help fight back the oppression that the telcos have imposed.

Regardless of the outcome of the 700Mhz auction, the carrier's restrictions
will crumble, its just a matter of time. Just like Ma Bell and so many other
examples in history, you can only hold back innovation and competition for so
long. By making their stance known, Google is positioning themselves as the
company who will be active to do things right, just like they have done in the
internet space.

The issue at hand though is the importance of this spectrum in particular...
Yes there are talks of utilizing the "white space" spectrums to get every inch
out of available wireless freqencies (which Google is also interested in), but
700Mhz is the real meat. It is a BIG deal. Not only is it the last "prime real
estate" that will likely come available in a long time, it is a lower
frequency than the other wireless phone bands and therefore propagates better.
Google owning this spectrum is far more important than internet search, and I
know they realize it. I just hope they put their money where their mouth is
because like the article suggests, now they have stirred up the bee hive by
pissing off the carriers.

------
avehn
I think Cringely makes some valid points about the risks Google is taking but
I think he is being overly paranoid. Even if he is not and the world is run by
the telcos, I still say good on Google. Even if only some of the rules Google
is proposing are adopted for this new frequency band we would be looking at a
new way to network. A better way. An open way.

------
jsjenkins168
For those interested, the FCC just ruled on this decision today:

[http://www.moconews.net/entry/419-fcc-approves-open-
access-w...](http://www.moconews.net/entry/419-fcc-approves-open-access-
wireless-rules-spectrum-auction-will-not-requi/)

They voted in favor of "Open Access" for 1/3 of the spectrum, which is a win
for Google, but they did not enforce the other rules such as open network
access. Google said they wouldnt bid unless all the rules were enforced but
some speculate they might anyway...

------
patrickg-zill
Only people who have had experience in dealing with telcos know how evil they
are. And any company, no matter how much of an outsider they are at first,
eventually becomes corrupted and also evil (see: Sprint as one example).

Google would have to specifically and repeatedly and publicly repudiate the
status quo of telco behavior in order to have even a chance of avoiding the
same fate, should they get into telco-like services.

------
rms
Google will inevitably stand up to the telephone companies. Fighting for the
old TV frequencies is as good a place to start as any.

In 25 years, do you think that Google or the telephone companies will be more
relevant?

~~~
kingkongrevenge
The telephone companies.

Google is a stack of contracts and IP; they're made of very ephemeral stuff.
The telco's have enduring physical assets. Now, some P2P wireless topology
might eventually kill the telco's, but I doubt it.

~~~
richcollins
They own a ton of physical infrastructure.

------
catfish
Sure hope Google gets what it is asking for here. We need this kind of
network. I would love to give away a phone which carries my applications on
its "desktop" straight out of the box. Imagine the possibilities. Free
cellular for anyone willing to purchase $200 bucks a month worth of widgets
from my sponsor.

Talk to Verizon about an idea now and your sure to see your idea pooped on or
stolen. An open system would let everyone have a hack, and talk about
investors opening wallets for companies with ideas. Deja Vu, the internet
reborn yet again....

------
StStartup
..the author is on crack.The whole article is nothing better than a soap
opera:

"Google, the "little search giant" feels like bidding. Doesnt have enough cash
to win the bid. Rolls out evil plan in sheep's disguise demanding 'openness'
,so that the winning bidder will have to Open up everything.Auction day.As
expected Google doesn't win the bid.The winner and gangs in retaliation blocks
Google.com from the service. Google dies ."

Honestly, WFT?

------
kingkongrevenge
Cringley mentioned the precariousness of Google's position as the #1 search
engine. I switched away from google to search.yahoo.com months ago. Every now
and then I run queries on both and I am consistently getting better results
from yahoo. I'm failing to remember the specific examples, but twice in the
last week google failed to provide a relevant link on the first page at all
but yahoo succeeded.

Has anyone else found that google search has degraded?

