Mike, Have you ever used Snapchat? I mean for anything other than sending pics of genitals? lol. Its very addicting, almost like facebook or worse. And theres alot more on it than genitals. Actually i only seen a genital pic once and that was a friend of mine was sending it to his girlfriend and accidentally checked my name instead of hers, (both start with the same letter).
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > "and the way texting/FB/Instagram is compared to Snapchat." > > How people communicate is compared to how people send each other pictures > of their genitals? > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Travis Johnson" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:50:22 PM > > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Google fiber going microwave? > > So... Google is going to do what WISP's have been doing for 20 years > (before they were even called WISPs). That's hilarious. > > "Fiber! Fiber! Fiber! That is the answer to everything. We are doing > fiber everywhere!" > "Fiber is expensive, and we can never get an ROI with that model... > let's look at wireless." > > I'm still laughing... a company that size, with those resources, and yet > they still seem to be clueless sometimes. I'm in agreement, I doubt > Google will even be around in 20 years. I own several e-commerce > companies (multi-million dollar ones), and we don't spend a dime with > Google. One company spends $5k/month with Facebook and it generates > $400k in sales, per month. > > Google is becoming "old school"... the same way email is compared to > texting... and the way texting/FB/Instagram is compared to Snapchat. > These companies get big, really fast... but the problem is, that means > someone else can do the same thing. > > Travis > > > On 8/11/2016 6:26 PM, Robert Andrews wrote: > > Sorry to sound like not a google fanboy but it's a typical phd > > company.. They look at the paper pile before the experience pile... > > & yes they will eventually go down because of it... > > > > On 08/11/2016 03:24 PM, Brian Webster 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 > >> www.Broadband-Mapping.com > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 1:29 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> 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: [email protected] > >> 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 > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Wait until they experience ducting ;) > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: Bill Prince > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> 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 > >>> ays-san-jose-project-may-switch-to-wireless-instead/?comments=1 > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > >
