Google patents datacentre-in-a-crate
Will it move into services?
GOOGLE HAS gained a US patent for a modular datacentre, suggesting a possible move into IT services, or perhaps more likely, a way to build internal efficiency.
According to the patent, “The modular design enables the modules to be cost effectively built at a factory and easily transported to and deployed at a data center site.”
As noted by Ars Technica, which wrote the first report on this as far as we can see, this makes it sound a lot like other big boxes that basically cram the guts of a server room into a freight crate so that compute capacity can be delivered on an ad hoc basis. These crates are transported to wherever auxiliary IT is needed, for example where main datacentres are maxed out, or because there is a pressing need for systems out on the road. Think of them as analogous to the way fairground operators plug in generator capacity wherever they go. Or something like that.
Sun’s Blackbox got a lot of press last year as an elegant, branded crate (or as elegant a crate as a crate can be) but these things have been around for a long time with big IT firms offering similar services on customer demand.
So how come Google got the patent? Maybe because it’s working with Sun so closely that it was involved in Blackbox design? Maybe because others saw the concept as not patent-able? Or because they felt that other patents will have predated it? One of these, a combination or some, or, quite possibly, none of the above would appear to be the answer.
The intriguing long-shot possibility is that Google will make a stealth move into IT services. Disguised by the infinite riches of search and ad-related revenue, Google is already building a sizeable enterprise business with search appliances, Google Docs productivity programs, and geospatial software. It recently signed a deal with services giant Capgemini to push Docs to big business.
But the bottom line with these datacentre crates are that no significant commercial demand has been sniffed out yet and so, as Ars Technica suggests, it is more likely that this is about adding to the G-men's own enormous demand for internal capacity.

Comments
Patent Office
It is also a good example of why the patent office needs a major overhaulGoogle datacentre in a crate
It depends on what the specific claims are in the patent. If Google made the mistake of merely patenting a datacentre-in-the-box, that patent could, and will be, readily challenged on the basis of prior art, if nothing else, so why would Google go through the expense, and time, to do so?Their patent must contain something new and unique to be worth anything.
Unless they believe they can just outspend opponents to get a favorable decision, which is bad judgement on their part.
Hasn't IBM already done something like that ?
I've heard subdued voices whispering about IBM support contracts and some hidden location from where a complete mainframe could be heliported to any point in Europe in under six hours - ready to be plugged into the customer's infrastructure and pre-configured with all the customer's parameters.Isn't that enough for prior art ? If it's true, obviously, and not just some enthusiastic elaboration of an AS400 support contract (less impressive, no need to heliport, but still rather important).
who cares?
I have designed and run large computer centers, but I don't really understand why this idea is so appealing. the premise is that a site experiences a massive but brief increase in computing or storage demand. how often does that actually happen? it would have to be for significantly less than a year to justify not simply building the appropriate machineroom. a whole c-van full of racked computers does indeed involve less plug-wrangling on delivery, but the same amount of wrangling has to happen _some_ time. currently any significant-sized install will arrive on preconfigured, skid-mounted racks, which involve only about 1/40th the wrangling of bare nodes. a c-van is probably good for about 10 such racks, but wrangling the racks is not any kind of big deal (couple guys for a few days.)maybe the idea is that you'd take permanent delivery of a containerized cluster, and just build a slab with roof, power and chilled water. I guess that could be done, but it seems quite dubious to me, cost-wise. also, PHB's love to be able to point at and/or tour an impressive machineroom. something that looks like a freightyard doesn't have the same appeal...
Sun already did this...
Um ... Sun did this last year how can google patent it!?http://www.betanews.com/article/Sun_Unveils_Portable_Datacenter/1161116189
By having requested the patent earlier
than Sun had any documentable plans for such a beast.U.S. patents go to the first who had the idea, not the first who implemented it.
Filed Date
Some of you may be over looking the filed date of the patent. December 30th, 2004. That's enough time for a lot of things to change.I do agree that the patent office needs an overhaul though.