The Flaw in Cloud Search: No Connectivity, No Access
August 21, 2012
Sitting in Fairbanks, Alaska, I realized that the cloud does not work. I had my trusty laptop, an iPad, and my smartphone. The only device which allowed me to work was the laptop with its local storage. The wireless connections were unusable due to insufficient network capacity and latency. The iPad was a glorified book reader. The mobile phone simply did not work. My T Mobile hot spot said it was device 330336 and refused to do anything except run down its battery.
Unusual situation? For me, no. For the poobahs, mavens, and self-appointed wizards formerly known as “real” journalists? Yes. Impossible.
Let me assure you that the world contains many places which render mobile devices mostly useless. However, when I read such articles as “Will Google Fiber Waste $28 Billion”, I perceive a disconnect. Google is investing in a high speed demonstration network in Kansas City, a metropolis with what I consider adequate connectivity. WiFi works from Boingo.com hot spots. My mobile phone allows voice and data access. My iPad displays Pulse headlines.
A happy quack to http://athenspio.posterous.com/athens-co-is-under-a-severe-thunderstorm-warn
The New York centric Forbes’ article asserts:
At a societal level, Cioffi [an expert in telco matters] argues that the benefit of Google Fiber would be way below its costs. After all, if a billion phone lines were replaced by fiber, the cost would be $3 trillion. But DSL and shared WiFi — currently in use by 400 million subscribers according to research firm Point Topic — could boost the speed by a factor of two or three — to between 200 megabits/second (Mbps) and 400 Mbps. If Cioffi is right, it does not look likely that Google Fiber will reach the critical mass needed to get the additional advertising revenues from faster Internet access it would need to come close to justifying its enormous investment.
If Google cannot deploy high speed connections in Kansas City, who will be able to foot the bill for providing basic high speed connectivity in smaller communities.
So what?
First, with the shift to the promise of the cloud, individuals may find themselves like me without access to basic communications for considerable periods of time. The fact that those in New York City or Los Angeles have the resources and connectivity does not help those in underserved areas. Perhaps this is not a big deal because the real money comes from customers in densely populated areas. For those outside those areas, tough luck.
Second, as people become less dependent on local storage both magnetic and paper, access to information decreases. The yap about information overload is a problem for those with access and the money to pay for bandwidth. For those just relying on cloud services, a certain segment of the population may be information starved.
Third, the models for pricing such as the analysis summarized in the Forbes’ article don’t work where there are too few people or geographic locations which cannot be economically served with today’s technology. Forget the next generation technology, more primitive methods are not part of the equipment for living.
Little surprise, then, that there is investor panic setting in with regard to online services such as Facebook, Groupon, and even Google. When the models don’t work in densely populated areas, it does not take much thinking to realize that the shift to the cloud will deliver big bucks from the hinterlands.
I can’t search if I can’t connect. What’s this mean for cloud search? A potential hurdle?
Stephen E Arnold, August 22, 2012
Sponsored by Augmentext
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
