dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
1237

googluva
@charter.com

googluva

Anon

Do no evil (or hide it well)

Google is great, Google is good, let us thank Karl for this Google food. Yum, yum, I love cool-aid.

Google has been driving down ISP costs with their massive size for years. This has a rippling industry impact. May sound good in principal, but traffic growth costs still exist and guess where they are going... quietly and completely to you and me.

Peering you say??? Well most smart ISPs know that peering with content is not really a good thing in the long run. May sounds good day 1 to save on today's transit costs, but it allows content growth to double, triple, 10x output without worry and at the expense of the ISP. Growth is something to watch. Shift in "who pays" is something consumer sites should consider.

goliath28
@comcast.net

1 edit

1 recommendation

goliath28

Anon

Wrong, let us not forget the whole reason people even turn those computers on and pay ISPs in the first place, TO ACCESS THE FUCKING CONTENT! What do you think that a bunch of people turn their computers on just so they can say they are connected to ATT? They do it to access Google, YouTube etc.. Instead of complaining about what Google is doing offer a better product so the user doesn't want to access Google, instead use the ATT better search engine (ugh, left a bad taste in my mouth when I said that).

All this has to do with is the fact that the ISPs don't have the talent to build a better product to keep traffic on their network instead they are losing $$$ to other better content providers and it is pissing them off.

ISPs shouldn't bite the hand that ends up feeding them, and in the end it ISN'T the customer it is the content provider who attracts the consumer in the first place and makes them want to get online. Just like with football do you really think a bunch of people would buy tickets to go to a stadium just to watch the grass grow?? No, they go their to see the game!

Lets face it the business model these providers want to go to is that of a casino. "Give me your money have a free 8 ounce watered down beer and shut up!"
goliath28

1 recommendation

goliath28

Anon

And now that I have thought even more about it ATT needs to be careful because Google could easily argue that since they are the 'content' provider they should be paid.

For example the producers of a TV show are paid by the broadcast company for the rights to show their TV show. Not the other way around, which seems to be the way ATT wants it. So maybe ATT and all the other ISPs should be flipping the bills for ALL content providers for the right to even access their content..

Hmmm interesting ain't it!


JeffFromOhio
@protocall-pdi.com

JeffFromOhio

Anon

said by goliath28 :

And now that I have thought even more about it ATT needs to be careful because Google could easily argue that since they are the 'content' provider they should be paid.

For example the producers of a TV show are paid by the broadcast company for the rights to show their TV show. Not the other way around, which seems to be the way ATT wants it.
There's one essential difference there, though. In the world of TV, the production company which creates the TV shows doesn't sell any ads directly to advertisers [ok, well, they do sell product placements, so that can kind of qualify as ads]. Instead, ABC, NBC, et. al. get to sell the ads. ABC, NBC, et. al. then give a portion of the revenue back to the show's producers.

With Google, when you use a Google property, Google is the one selling the ads, not AT&T.

However, there is one good point to your posts, about the ISP's needing Google in order to sell Internet connections to consumers. I think that if AT&T starts to play hardball on this issue, Google should stop serving any of their regular content to AT&T customers for a day or two. Instead, they should get a minimal/low-bandwidth page from Google explaining the situation, that the customer has paid for an Internet connection, but because of the policies of AT&T's executives and lobbyists, Google may no longer be able to provide them service in the future, and that they can consider this a taste of the Internet without Google, GMail, Youtube, etc. Then, prominently in the page, provide an email address for AT&T customer service so that customers can communicate their position on the issue to AT&T.

I bet that would shut AT&T up fast.