December 15, 2008
Om Malik has some interesting analysis of Google and its stance on Net Neutrality. The genesis of the story is a Wall Street Journal article discussing Google and how it is looking to peer its caching devices directly with network operators. This would allow Google's content to get to you faster than other content and would reduce the bandwidth requirements for carriers.
What is Malik's take on Google after reading this story?
Given how close President-elect Obama is to the current Google management, I can only fear the worst. Many startups might skip over this issue, which I constantly bring up, but they need to wake up and realize that in the end they are all going to be impacted if network neutrality is backstabbed to death. If Google can buy better performance for its service, your web app might be at a disadvantage. If the cost of doing business means paying baksheesh to the carriers, then it is the end of innovation as we know it
A part of me doesn't want to believe this report -- I mean it goes against everything Google stands for. If true -- and I have no reason to doubt a fine publication like the Wall Street Journal -- it proves for once and for all that Google's talk about 'do no evil' is nothing more than hot air, a fancy phrase designed to get more publicity than anything else. Google, at the very core, is no different than any other monopoly before it.
Ouch but if the story is true, how can you argue with him?
, net neutrality
, om malik
, wall street journal
: Related Tags: street journal