Slashdot Mirror


Google and Facebook Cancel Satellite Plans

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."

7 of 33 comments (clear)

  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.
  2. 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.

  3. 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
  4. 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.

  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion