hrm. maybe it’s just me, but i’m not really seeing a lot of anything interesting the in google-verizon announcement that concerns me. apparently, unlike about just about every other tech pundit out there. the big concern seems to be net neutrality not applying to “new” internet services.
really. here’s the way i see it:
- google’s part of the deal was the “old internet” part.
- verizon’s part of the deal was the “new internet” part.
- they’re basically acting as proxy for other interested parties.
why it’s brilliant for google and the rest of us? verizon got SWINDLED! there’ve been many, many attempts of a “second internet” that’s faster/better/cooler than the old, crusty one. why are none of those popular? or even still around?
nobody used them because the “old internet” already has the network effect going.
and no amount of “new shiny” is going to draw anyone out, ‘cause that’s where all the people and relationships already exist. and since that’s where the people already are, that’s where the eyeballs are. since that’s where all the eyeballs are, that’s where all the ads are. since that’s where all the ads are, that’s where all the content will be. since that’s where all the content is, that’s where all the people will be. rinse, repeat.
just like wap, the “wireless web”, vcast , fios tv (*snicker*) and all other “walled gardens” — the “new internet” will be expensive to maintain, expensive to use and be plagued by a dearth of users.
it’s a sneaky wedge-win for google and leaves verizon holding a soon-to-be expensive bag of vacant “new internet” streets.
m3mnoch.
