Google, Sprint, Others to Build Wireless Data Network
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Friday May 09, @04:29PM
from the fast-buildout dept.
from the fast-buildout dept.
Nerdposeur writes "Google has announced that it will partner with several other companies to build a high-speed mobile data network. In a separate but related deal, Google will also become the default search provider for Sprint, including having one-click search access and Google Maps pre-installed on some Sprint phones. 'The consortium includes a disparate group of partners: Sprint Nextel, Google, Intel, Comcast, Time Warner and Clearwire. The partners have put the value of the deal at $14.5 billion, a figure that includes radio spectrum and equipment provided by Sprint Nextel and Clearwire, and $3.2 billion from the others involved. They expect the network, which will provide the next generation of high-speed Internet access for cellphone users, to be built in as little as two years, but there is no timetable on when it will be available to users and the price is not determined. The partners are seeking to beat Verizon Wireless and AT&T Wireless to the market.'"
Related Stories
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.

The better deal (Score:5, Insightful)
Reply to This
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Use SSH, VPH, and other encrypted protocols to landline sites and bounce off proxies to anonymizer networks.
Geez. This is WIRELESS. NSA, FBI, SVR, MSS, Mosssad, Mafia, RIAA,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is spy stuff. You don't know. You just do the best you can with the technology available to you.
In this case you use the best encryption methods and protocols avai
Re:The better deal (Score:5, Insightful)
The NSA has an interest in strong security too. If there is ANY loophole in the encryption (even one that the tin-foil hat crowd thinks they put there) it would be exploitable by the enemy as well.
HOnestly, if the NSA wants to sniff your communications, it would be a lot easier for them to just break into your house and install a sniffer inline between your keyboard and your puter. No I am not talking about the hardware keyloggers you see online for $50.
Reply to This
Parent
I'm in, pending plan pricing... (Score:2)
If Spr
Re: (Score:2)
What is their masterplan? (Score:4, Interesting)
They seem to be moving into telecommunications, as well as data warehousing, on-line information storage, retrieval, and personal communications...
Does it make anyone else wonder whether we heading towards a future where there's only one communications company?
Reply to This
Re:What is their masterplan? (Score:5, Insightful)
Google will do what any publically held company does. They will grow and grow and take over as much as they can until something or someone stops them. That's not as alarmist as it might sound, it's just how things work.
One company owning all of our data scares me a LOT more than one company providing all of our software.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:What is their masterplan? (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, the most expensive (and pretty much the most crap) technical manual I ever had to buy was a £100 ($200 today) book from M$ in the same sort of epoch, so maybe £300/$600 today.
No, M$ was never ever as highly regarded as G still generally is, tin-foil-hat wearers et al aside. And G sets out to do good whereas M$ never gave a rat's arse if the alternative was more $$$.
A perfectly legitimate way to behave for a company, but G is trying not to be in that mold IMHO. They do have duties to shareholders of course, and other than Google.org, they're not a philanthropy.
Partial disclaimer: I use Google (and Microsoft) products, and know people at Google.
Rgds
Damon
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Funny? Insightful?
You decide.
Have to make the market - lot of risk. (Score:4, Interesting)
The tightening credit market has not helped either.
You have to spend money to make money. There are already a lot of last-mile data solutions out there, so someone has to spend a lot of money get the ball rolling. Have to make the market in this case.
Reply to This
Rats... (Score:3, Interesting)
Reply to This
Re:Rats... (Score:5, Insightful)
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Rats... (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree. If I had to chose one specific strategic reason for this I'd say it's to keep things open for Google.
Microsoft has MSN which they like to try to push (quietly so as not to upset the DOJ). If AT&T, Comcast, Verison, Sprint, T-Mobile, or others decided to start giving preference to their own search (this includes site-finder like stuff) or net neutrality falters (so Google services are reduced unless someone pays extra) then Google could be in for a world of hurt. By the time the mandatory court case got far (at least far enough for an injunction) this could have become quite bad for Google.
Should the court not grant such an injunction, take a long time to grant it, or the ISPs did it sneakily enough Google could suffer some real harm by the time things got "fixed".
Google wants more people on the 'net. There is no question about that. This also serves branding ("I get my internet from Google", "Google lowered my broadband prices"). But it promises Google that even if net neutrality is denied by the supreme court, they have a possibly big partner that they can try to prevent from pushing stuff like that on them.
This is at minimum (and skeptically) a preventative measure. In the short term I think the other benefits will be better, but this is a safe play for Google.
Reply to This
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
The potential market for non-phone devices is enormous. Sp
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing of the sort.
T-Mo has publicly said they want to be the first out with Android. That fits in with their usual strategy - first with Windows Mobile 6, first with new Blackberry models & OS's, first with new HTC models, etc.
Android is still half-
Re: (Score:2)
This is also poised against Apple & Microsoft (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple, who doesn't have any one in particular for GPS and mapping, and their 'business partner' AT&T.
Microsoft, whose strategy is clear as mud, and can't seem to get mobile working very well at all.
T-Mobile/DT, who doesn't partner and eschews WiMax altogether.
Verizon, who is more proprietary than any of the aforementioned, in my personal experience.
Nice move Sprint. Too bad WiMax has proven so difficult and expensive to deploy.
Reply to This
Sprint's Network (Score:5, Interesting)
Reply to This
Seriously? (Score:2)
I give the probability of fair pricing to the consumer coming out at 2%.
I give the probability of anything actually getting built beyond a pilot in the next 10 years at 5%.
I give the probabi
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)