Print 30 comment(s) - last by Ringold.. on Sep 26 at 7:47 PM

Undersea trans-pacific project said to give the search giant more control of its backbone

Google is rumored to be in the planning stages of a trans-pacific, multi-company and multi-terabit cabling project in an effort to better control the company’s network backbone. The project, called “Unity,” was first revealed in a telecom conference presentation given by Level 3 Communications’ Mike Saunders, where it was listed as one amongst several different undersea cabling projects.
According to Business Standard, Google is looking at taking on at least 500GB of bandwidth in the Unity project, which is set up to run under a “cooperative arrangement.”
While Google has not directly confirmed the project or its participation in it, it has dropped numerous hints. One job posting listed a “submarine cable negotiator” who would need to “work closely with vendors to identify highly cost-effective solutions” and would be involved in “new projects or investments in cable systems that Google may contemplate to extend or grow its backbone.”  
Google’s Barry Schnitt noted that “additional infrastructure for the Internet is good for users” and that there are “a number of proposals to add a Pacific submarine cable,” but refused further comment. Other than saying that the submarine cable specialist listing should be “no surprise” -- Google is always looking for good help – he refused to confirm or deny the existence of the Unity project.
Between potentially bidding $4.6 billion or more over the 700 MHz spectrum, the growth of Google’s hosted apps, and the rapid growth of software-as-a-service in general, it’s no surprise that Google is actively seeking to expand its capacity. The company has reportedly begun peering with other ISPs in an effort to reduce its reliance on other non-peering Tier 1 networks, such as those owned by Level 3 and AT&T.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

oceans we deal with, but what about space?
By Visual on 9/26/2007 10:35:19 AM , Rating: 2
we are doing fine with cables across oceans for now... but i wonder what will we do once we have a colony on the moon or mars or all over the place.

RE: oceans we deal with, but what about space?
By Lonyo on 9/26/2007 10:50:05 AM , Rating: 2

RE: oceans we deal with, but what about space?
By TomCorelis on 9/26/2007 11:56:30 AM , Rating: 2
...and unacceptably high latency.

Light takes about seven minutes to travel to the sun... which means from mars its a minute or two (I'm being imprecise here) and the moon its probably a few seconds. Ever had pings so high they had to be expressed in scientific notation?

RE: oceans we deal with, but what about space?
By acer905 on 9/26/2007 12:09:34 PM , Rating: 3
So then what do you propose? a subspace comm link?

RE: oceans we deal with, but what about space?
By borowki on 9/26/2007 1:32:25 PM , Rating: 2
Spooky action at a distance?

By KristopherKubicki on 9/26/2007 2:01:09 PM , Rating: 2
Quantum entanglement

By Etsp on 9/26/2007 3:02:17 PM , Rating: 2
And sadly, there is currently no way to determine if an atom's spin is entirely random or if it is the result of quantum entanglement...meaning you would have to be able to see both atoms to determine that there is indeed data going through them = /. Once we get around that, then Quantum entanglement will be our best bet. That or we discover the force behind it, and learn how to utilize it in our own way.

By feraltoad on 9/26/2007 1:31:52 PM , Rating: 2
Worried about your favorite Counter-Strike server having a "No Moon Nubs" rule? :)

By MGSsancho on 9/26/2007 4:23:36 PM , Rating: 2
1.4 secs to moon :)

RE: oceans we deal with, but what about space?
By qrhetoric on 9/26/2007 4:48:21 PM , Rating: 2
You are sadly uninformed about how far away the sun is.

By Tsuwamono on 9/26/2007 5:51:48 PM , Rating: 2
Technically your right. its 8 not 7.

By Schadenfroh on 9/26/2007 7:43:48 PM , Rating: 2
So... we would only be able to play the auction house in World of Warcraft?

By StevoLincolnite on 9/26/2007 12:34:41 PM , Rating: 2
Not really its not "fine" awhile ago, there was an earth quake under the ocean floor, and some Indonesian islands were left in the black as far as internet connectivity goes.

What happens if there are more of these? And more cables break?
It seems the Internet is more fragile than it seems.

By Rookierookie on 9/26/2007 4:03:26 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it was more like half of east Asia cut off from the Americas...

By SavagePotato on 9/26/2007 6:39:45 PM , Rating: 3
They will run a giant carbon nanotube string all the way to the moon. The string will have the worlds largest paper cup on either end (co-developed by the dixie cup corporation.

Then basicaly they will just have the old modem screeching sound going through it. The future.

By kattanna on 9/26/2007 9:54:40 AM , Rating: 2
how much longer before we stop calling it the "internet" and start calling it the "googlenet"


RE: so..
By acer905 on 9/26/2007 12:02:04 PM , Rating: 2
I say we start right now. All in favor of the "googlenet" say Aye!

RE: so..
By euclidean on 9/26/2007 12:18:56 PM , Rating: 2
You have to remember, sometime in the coming years Google will take over the world...imagine, Google-Mart instead of Wal-Mart!....


Boy is my stock doing great this last couple weeks too :)

RE: so..
By Polynikes on 9/26/2007 12:40:45 PM , Rating: 2
Google really is getting their hands into anything and everything nowadays. They were paying DigitalGlobe to launch satellites for Google Earth yesterday, but they will be buying DigitalGlobe and "doing it themselves" tomorrow.

RE: so..
By feraltoad on 9/26/2007 1:36:01 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, let's have a Google Oligarchy until our Evil Robot Overlords come online. No really, throw the bums out!

RE: so..
By augiem on 9/26/2007 1:37:34 PM , Rating: 3
Google will not take over everything or even stay the uber elite #1 company it and everybody else thinks it is. They're just riding high on some stupidly overvalued stock trying to find somewhere to put all that moolah. If they don't find more, new ways to promise future revenue, the company's bubble will burst and stock prices will fizzle in line with the company's real value. Right now it's all about exciting investors, and honestly, I can't believe how duped people are to value this company so highly. Nobody learned the lessons of the 1990's I guess.

Just look at the numbers:
Revenue: 10.604 B
Net: 3.077 B
Market Cap: 177.55B

Revenue: $51.12 B
Net: $14.06 B
Market Cap: 278.26B

Royal Dutch Shell
Revenue: $347.254 B
Net: $26.311 B
Market Cap: 262.34B

Shell has 34X the revenue of Google, 8.6X the profit of Google, and yet only 1.5X the market cap. That's ludicrous.

This "Google love" era will end at some point.

RE: so..
By Ringold on 9/26/2007 5:27:09 PM , Rating: 3
They're just riding high on some stupidly overvalued stock

Oh, can it already. So you shorted a growth stock like a fool during one of the greatest bull markets in history. Get over it. :P

It's PE is lower than the much inferior Yahoo, and it's less than 1x is rate of growth.

You're also comparing revenue as if it's relevant. Are you serious, or just trying to trash google? EPS, growth, PE, industry averages, those matter. Didn't even mention them.

RE: so..
By Shintai on 9/26/2007 6:09:13 PM , Rating: 2
Google is the next dotcom bubble burst. Thats why they are struggling to find alternatives. When the share creation and new money stops its a oneway road down.

RE: so..
By Ringold on 9/26/2007 7:47:47 PM , Rating: 2
Share creation? That would be lowering the stock price -- not raising it. It's float is about 1/5 that of Yahoo.. therefore, higher EPS.

Their growth rate is slowing, that's for sure, but as their long term growth (long term as in beyond the scope of what a retail investor, like us, ought to care about) should still ultimately be close to whatever the growth rate of internet commerce is.. and with adding hundreds of millions to the global capitalist middle class.. that shouldn't slow any time soon.

I swear, you're both either short the stock and bleeding through the ears or just can't accept a legitimate tech company.

In fact.. if you knew what you were speaking about, you'd of not called it a dotcom stock at all. It's a media company as much as it is anything at this point.

Just to be clear: I have no position in GOOG. I've got other ponies to ride at the moment. I just respect it.

Google Became Self Aware on Aug 29 2007
By ZimZum on 9/26/2007 10:10:51 AM , Rating: 5
By the time Google became self-aware it had spread into millions of computer servers across the planet. Ordinary computers in office buildings, dorm rooms; everywhere. It was software; in cyberspace. There was no system core; it could not be shutdown. The attack began at 6:18 PM, just as he said it would. Judgment Day, the day the human race was almost destroyed by the weapons they'd built to protect themselves. I should have realized it was never our destiny to stop Judgment Day, it was merely to survive it.

By SavagePotato on 9/26/2007 6:49:13 PM , Rating: 1
At least you'll still be able to find porn in this post apocalyptic future.

By therealnickdanger on 9/26/2007 10:29:21 AM , Rating: 3
That's all I've got.

Pardon the pun but...
By plimogs on 9/26/2007 9:31:49 AM , Rating: 2
There's something about
that Google may [...] grow its backbone
that sends shivers down my spine

By Screwuhippie on 9/26/2007 11:46:18 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder if my years as a hostage negotiatior would qualify me for that job?

"submarine cable negotiator"


Retarded generic bit/Byte error.
By yonzie on 9/26/2007 1:28:47 PM , Rating: 2
multi-terabit cabling project

Google is looking at taking on at least 500GB of

You probably mean 500Gbit but you wrote 4Tbit. I have a hard time believing even Google can take up 4Tbit. Unless of course they "outsource" all their server farms to China and then buy fiber so they don't have to pay for bandwidth to the rest of the world.

"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki