Google builds very own Ethernet switches Google seems to be building its very own Ethernet switches. But you already knew that. We told you in June. On Friday, a blog post from telecom/datacom research outfit Nyquist Capital breathlessly announced that Google is using Google-designed switches to link servers inside its top-secret data centers. "It is our opinion …
"Our sources indicate that Google has purchased a mega 10GigE system capable of supporting thousands of ports from an as of yet undisclosed Silicon Valley start-up"
My guess this is a try and buy if they like what they get then they will probably buy the start up and claim the patents for later use. Now on to the flaming, but tell me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this seem like something we saw back in the late 80's and 90's with the beast from Redmond? This though appears to be the SUPER BEAST from Stanford?
This sounds like it's the second story you've ever broken, if The Reg could kind of mod down this sort of self congratulatory tripe I'm sure we'd all appreciate it,
1. "But you already knew that. We told you in June."
2. "But this is old news to The Reg. "
3. "As previously pointed out"
4. "he's jealous that we broke his news first"
Ok we get it already you had the story in June. A little less auto-fellatio, a bit more journalism and a lot less smugness would do the power of good to "The Reg"
IMHO
This post has been deleted by its author
I guess the US Navy and US special ops will now be peeved because of their specialized mission pods (go watch Discovery Channel...)
As to Ashlee's comment, if you got your ribs removed, why did you bother to get married? Or doesn't your wife service you?
(I am so going to hell for that one, but hey! You started it!)
Building their own switch might be newsworthy.
Building their own servers however, is that so surprising? It's quite common practice for even medium volume server users to build their own servers from off the shelf components. What's so surprising about Google doing this? Have they designed and built their own processor?
I just don't get what the news angle is here.
A thread that has degenerated into sex, instead of into Apple-vs-PC.
Fascinating as geek holy wars can be, I prefer sex. That said, I doubt that The Reg is the best place to find sexual tips - unless it's on how to get some despite being so drunk that you can't stand up, if you know what I mean. ;-)
"Just because Google built them, doesn't mean they will sell them"
True. And for why? Because you can do whatever you like in-house and not have to worry about patents at all - you could violate hundreds of patents in your switches, but if no-one knows about it, you're in the clear. It's only if you try selling switches yourself that you need to start thinking about patents. I'm betting there's pretty good patent reasons why these will never make it out of Google.
I'd wager that Google isn't really designing and building the switches from scratch - they are more likely to have sent specification and designs to South-East Asia and have found a boutique company that will build to that spec.
Lot of companies do this. For example, the new HP C Class blades are an ODM (the design is also being used by NEC). The older Dell 1855 blades were an ODM (Fujitsu also used a similar design).
P.S. Nice to see sex mentioned rather than the usual Microsoft bashing.
Google have reached the cost or technical limitations of off the shelf hardware - many years ago lots of companies R&D'd their own kit - the BBC, BT and AT&T to name a few, these days they buy in more and more off the shelf components, pushing the R&D back down into another company.
Google seem to have the approach of "it doesn't do what we want, let's make somthing which does" and i like that, it's the way i've always approached a problem, rather than just throwing money (and other resources, like power for example) at it.
Google may not want to commercially build switches, but they may want to patent ideas. Like the White Trash Data Centres, they won't want to compete with Sun or IBM - however, what they don't want is to be constrained by someone else's patent.
This is what the GPO (now know as BT) did in relation to the Franking machine. Rather than a manufacturer develop and hold the patent, which would throttle the market, in somewhat of a race GPO research designed and patented the device offered licenses it to several manufacturers. Of course, Google may not want to licence White Trash Data Centres or switches to anyone.
Sense of humour? - commercial sense to get free advertising for jobs !
Time and again I see mentions of stories that The Register broke months before a recent piece of news made it, er... , news.
I personally love seeing my favorite IT news source bobbing, weaving and throwing punches before the other news sites even know there's a fight to be had.
So I ask ye merry Vultures to take example from the recent liberties you have allowed us in the comments (I refer to the Icons we now have at our disposal) and create a new one for yourselves.
I propose a "Pat Ourselves on the Back" icon that would mark paragraphs containing unadulterated pride in having trounced the competition and in winning the love and respect of the readership.
This icon would shout boldly to the world "If you're looking for modesty, sod off! Here's a pint for me and the mates!!!"
Why is Ashlee responding to comments about Cade Metz's article? Could it be that Cade and Ashlee are one in the same? If so I have a few questions:
1) Why would someone choose the pseudonym 'Cade Metz', unless it is some personal reference - it's a silly name. (no offense is Cade is real)
2) If Cade=Ashlee it begs the question how many people actually write for El Reg? Are all my favorite hacks fake??!!
3) If Cade=Ashlee, does he get two paychecks?
Well, there's definitely a person-shaped entity in the SF office who calls himself Cade Metz, and he's quite convincing. Gives the impression of having been called that for quite a long time, does the work, so hey, why should I care?
But why am I responding to a post about Ashlee responding to posts about an article by Cade? And why am I responding to somebody with as obviously made-up a name as Solomon Grundy? It's a puzzle...
Oh God, not John Lettice too!!! As disappointing as it may be, it makes a lot of sense, I mean who else would name themselves after the lowest form of vegetable life? I'll tell you who - a virtualized Ash Johnmetz amalgamation would, that's who.
What's wrong with the name Solomon Grundy? Without him one of Canada's most treasured cultural exports would never have reached the civilized world and Superman would have had to fight "The Lettuce Man" or some other silly super-villain.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
