Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google and Facebook Cancel Satellite Plans

Posted by Soulskill on from the turns-out-space-is-hard dept.

schwit1 writes: Facebook and Google have both cancelled their plans to build satellite systems to provide global internet access. It appears Google pulled out earlier this year, while Facebook's decision was revealed today (paywalled). Google remains a partner in Skybox, a space imaging company, as well as O3b, which is trying to provide internet using satellites.

"While Facebook’s cancelled project comes from the more traditional approach to satellite internet, the current hope of Wyler and other satellite entrepreneurs is that constellations made up of many small satellites could solve those two problems. They would offer faster service, since they are closer to earth than the typical communication satellites, which fly at high altitudes to maximize coverage; and they would cost less, since tiny satellites are typically less expensive than their larger siblings. But even this plan may over-promise—one of the pioneers of the satellite business, Martin Sweeting, chairman of Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd., compared interest in small satellites to the froth on top of a cappuccino. The technical challenges to flying and operating a full-fledged constellation of them may still prove too difficult to surmount."

33 comments

  1. But Motorola did it. by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    >> The technical challenges to flying and operating a full-fledged constellation of them may still prove too difficult to surmount.

    But Motorola did it. (Ducks.) (Ducks 65 more times.)

    1. Re:But Motorola did it. by idontgno · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But Motorola did it. (Ducks.) (Ducks 65 more times.)

      But the history of Iridium tells a tale that Google appears to have listened to.

      It's 66 satellites, not 77 (the actual atomic number of Iridium, the purported reason for the name) because 66 satellites are cheaper to launch and maintain than 77. And still, the company went bankrupt because they couldn't get customers willing to subscribe to the service. And the successor company depends on the US DoD as a major customer -- 23% of their 2012 revenue. That's quite a lifeline -- not one I envision Google's corporate culture rushing out to embrace.

      The technical challenges aren't hard, notwithstanding the validity of the "it's rocket science" jokes. The financial and market challenges are the real ones. It's not the same as sticking a website out there and labeling it "Google Foobar (beta)". It makes money from Day One or it gets the hose again.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    2. Re:But Motorola did it. by bledri · · Score: 4, Informative

      But Motorola did it. (Ducks.) (Ducks 65 more times.)

      But the history of Iridium tells a tale that Google appears to have listened to.

      It's 66 satellites, not 77 (the actual atomic number of Iridium, the purported reason for the name) because 66 satellites are cheaper to launch and maintain than 77. And still, the company went bankrupt because they couldn't get customers willing to subscribe to the service. And the successor company depends on the US DoD as a major customer -- 23% of their 2012 revenue. That's quite a lifeline -- not one I envision Google's corporate culture rushing out to embrace.

      The technical challenges aren't hard, notwithstanding the validity of the "it's rocket science" jokes. The financial and market challenges are the real ones. It's not the same as sticking a website out there and labeling it "Google Foobar (beta)". It makes money from Day One or it gets the hose again.

      Google didn't abandon the idea, they invested $900 million in SpaceX instead of trying to do it themselves. And SpaceX isn't going to try to communicate directly to the handset, they are creating a worldwide, LEO based, Internet backbone. It's a completely different business model that will leverage lower cost launches and lots of existing real-estate and infrastructure (Tesla super charger stations and probably some SolarCity projects as well) to bootstrap in the US and much of the developed world. Profits from the project will then likely be used to expand into the developing world. And with almost a billion dollars backing the project it does not have to be profitable from day one.

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    3. Re:But Motorola did it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And so did Globalstar http://www.globalstar.com/en/ ...twice.

    4. Re:But Motorola did it. by recharged95 · · Score: 1

      Just took Moto, what? 20yrs and a lot of real aerospace and telecom engineers.... which facebook and google don't have.

    5. Re:But Motorola did it. by aaronb1138 · · Score: 1

      There's also the aggregate bandwidth problem. Also the fact that Google and Facebook have been pushing HTTPS everywhere and customized content so hard that most forms of caching break.

    6. Re:But Motorola did it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually Google made it clear they were investing in SpaceX for launch systems not for satellites (you can find the comments somewhere if interested) which will take way more than the money spacex raised (much of which went to cash out employees who had been sitting on stock for 10 years).

  2. good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't want either of these companies operating an ISP. Neither one can be trusted with your data.

    1. Re:good. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      "It's not your data if it's on our networks." - All ISPs, probably

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    2. Re:good. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      I am less concerned if Google or Facebook know if I'd prefer to buy Pampers or Depends than if government can eavesdrop on all that without a warrant (and, apparently, no real technological barriers to spying without a warrant.)

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    3. Re:good. by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      But if Google or Facebook do the eavesdropping they'll just charge the government for the privilege to see it which will get passed on in the form of taxes. We literally pay if it costs them to spy more on us.

  3. Everyone thinks providing broadband is cheap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Until they try it, and finally come to realize there will never be such thing as free broadband for everyone.

  4. Bow before your God. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elon Musk will rule all.

  5. Google and SpaceX by buback · · Score: 1

    Google just invested a large sum of money in SpaceX
    http://www.wired.com/2015/01/g...

    SpaceX has a big leg up in this race since it's very likely Google or Facebook would have launched on SpaceX rockets anyway.

    1. Re:Google and SpaceX by kellymcdonald78 · · Score: 1

      SpaceX also just filed with the FCC to launch two prototype satellites for its future constellation

  6. Google is still in satellites by Koreantoast · · Score: 2

    Small Correction - Google outright acquired Skybox Imaging and their soon to be launched constellation of satellites, not just partnered. So Google will still be in the satellite game, just focused on the imagery market versus broadband from space.

  7. Wait... you mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All these futuristic headlines about new innovations coming down the pipeline are actually lies, obsolete strategies and propaganda from the highest corporations to keep the rest of us hopelessly confused!?

    I am shocked.

    Really.

  8. Bought or threatened? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the masters giveth or threatened to taketh?

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  9. Supriselevel: 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An absolute shock to nobody.

  10. Dwindling market? by Kjella · · Score: 2

    At least globally speaking we're seeing an absolutely massive growth in cell phone use and coverage. According to the last figures from the ITU (pdf) some 95% of the world's population will live in range of a 2G network by the end of this year and 69% in 3G. With the rapid transition towards smartphones in low-cost markets as well even more 3G/4G coverage will be built out and the less room is it for satellite internet to fill in the cracks. I have a friend of mine who used to have it, between the caps and latency he switched the moment he could get something better than dial-up. Even if this is a less crappy alternative, I don't think it'll be competitive when you have other choices.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  11. Very expensive lack of interest by Dereck1701 · · Score: 2

    Earlier this year Google and Fidelity national invested $1 Billion in SpaceX, presumably to help support their efforts to bring a satellite based ISP to fruition. Sounds like a rather odd way to express a lack of interest in a business venture. OneWeb seems to be the focus of the article, and that is only one of two major efforts. I wonder if Google is choosing sides? OneWeb I believe is a Qualcomm/Virgin effort whereas SpaceX is the other.

  12. Re: SpaceX and Iridium Next by rwa2 · · Score: 1

    This whole thing kinda smacks of hardline negotiating... suddenly everyone and their dog was going to launch another LEO constellation, just when Iridium was about to launch the next generation of their product via SpaceX:
    http://spacenews.com/iridium-n...

    From one side, I can sorta see this posturing as SpaceX trying to negotiate better rates from Iridium by says "hey, if you don't want to pay us more to launch your stuff, we'll just partner with Google / Facebook and launch our own LEO constellation."

    Then there was also that guy who got the FCC license that expires in 2019, except the consortium he was working with weren't going to have their launches scheduled in time, so he took his license and ran to Richard Branson's Virgin.

    Anyway, it seems like the LEO constellation thing is a mess right now, and I can't really tell who's working together and who's working against each other. But it seems moderately interesting from a cloak-n-dagger story.
    http://spacenews.com/signs-of-...

  13. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  14. Google and Facebook call off the wedding by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    yeah, the wedding was to different partners for different reasons... i've seen this before.

  15. Re:flying high only needs a single satelite by Dereck1701 · · Score: 1

    Geostationary satellites have their advantages, but when you're dealing with internet communications they also have some pretty significant disadvantages. First off is latency, the proposed LEO satellites would only have to bounce the signal about 1,500 miles as compared to 52,400 miles for GEO satellites. While the speed of light is pretty fast that distance along with the hardware required usually introduce 500-700 MS of latency in GEO systems. Secondly I think there are some significant bandwidth issues with having tens of thousands or even millions of users trying to transmit signals to a few dozen GEO satellites instead of using multiple lower orbits, dish positioning and far more satellites to distribute the load along with some possibly near term communications technologies that may allow this kind of system to use the spectrum far more efficiently.

  16. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  17. Re: SpaceX and Iridium Next by bledri · · Score: 1

    This whole thing kinda smacks of hardline negotiating... suddenly everyone and their dog was going to launch another LEO constellation, just when Iridium was about to launch the next generation of their product via SpaceX: http://spacenews.com/iridium-n...

    From one side, I can sorta see this posturing as SpaceX trying to negotiate better rates from Iridium by says "hey, if you don't want to pay us more to launch your stuff, we'll just partner with Google / Facebook and launch our own LEO constellation."

    Then there was also that guy who got the FCC license that expires in 2019, except the consortium he was working with weren't going to have their launches scheduled in time, so he took his license and ran to Richard Branson's Virgin.

    Anyway, it seems like the LEO constellation thing is a mess right now, and I can't really tell who's working together and who's working against each other. But it seems moderately interesting from a cloak-n-dagger story. http://spacenews.com/signs-of-...

    There is nothing cloak and dagger going on and no strong arming. Iridium is in the satellite handset business. SpaceX is building a satellite based Internet backbone. Google and Fidelity have invested a billion dollars in SpaceX specifically to develop the LEO constellation and SpaceX has opened an office in Seattle and is hiring people to develop the satellites. Google gets access to a satellite based Internet backbone that will help expand access to the developing world, without having to develop it themselves. SpaceX gets a recurring income source to fund it's R&D. Iridium is irrelevant to the deal.

    P.S. Iridium would not delay launches as a threat to SpaceX. Delayed deployment is delayed income. SpaceX doesn't "need" to strong arm Iridium, they have a backlog of over 50 launches.

    --
    Some privacy policy Slashdot.
  18. Re: SpaceX and Iridium Next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would have worked too, if the dog had not eaten his own maths homework

    It was only later on, when the homework had completed its journey, that they realized "This shit just doesn't add up."

  19. Re: SpaceX and Iridium Next by rwa2 · · Score: 1

    Cool, thanks for the clarification! It's been tricky trying to piece this together, since no one ever seems to mention Iridium and Google in the same article, even though it looks like they're all working on the same constellation. Is (well, was) Facebook piling in with them as well? And what kind of shot does the competing Virgin / Qualcomm group have?

  20. Bill Gates did it first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    including the cancellation part.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teledesic

  21. SpaceX founder is going to give it a go by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

    SpaceX founder files with government to provide Internet service from space

    "The plan calls for launching a constellation of 4,000 small and cheap satellites that would beam high-speed Internet signals to all parts of the globe, including its most remote regions. Musk has said the effort “would be like rebuilding the Internet in space.”"
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/...