I don't know. Google seem to drop everything they start after a while. YouTube, Maps and Search being the exception so far and I suspect Chrome will stay the course.
Well YouTube was just a purchase and they have done little with it, so your argument is even better in that it's basically just Maps and Search. You could even argue that Maps is necessary for Search and therefore the only product they haven't dropped is the original one they started with. Search.
They are selling one system to cover mp3 player, phone, tablet, GPS system and even PC. Whereas Apple sells individual well defined items.
SO they have an mp3 player, a phone, a tablet, a GPS tablet, a laptop and a PC. They can sell 6 items all covered by one Android device. A far better way to 'do business' and one that all manufacturers want to emulate.
I don't think you will ever hear Google say they are dropping Android. Google will announce it as that they are merging the best parts of chrome and android in to a unified os when in fact it will be mostly chrome.
Well YouTube was just a purchase and they have done little with it, so your argument is even better in that it's basically just Maps and Search. You could even argue that Maps is necessary for Search and therefore the only product they haven't dropped is the original one they started with. Search.
Andy Rubin has been moved to a separate team where he manages no one. He's in google purgatory. He's on his way out the door. It's all about Chrome now which it should've been in the first place.
In examining the device, the group "concluded that it's more Android than ChromeOS,"
Yet according to this article,
Quote:
Evidence from multiple sources, including the design decisions behind Google's latest Chromecast product, support the idea that the company now sees more future potential and interest in investing in Chrome OS than in continuing to support Rubin's Android....
How does one reconcile these two apparently contradictory statements?
Daniel - just an FYI: if you have higher than usual influx of traffic on this post, I can assure you it's from outside outlets making fun of this link-bait fluff. Though, I must admit, I rather enjoyed it. Best piece of satire I've read in a while.
Interesting article and a good read for those not already aware of the details. Again, a bit long and wordy however for those of us that do already know.
I think it's clear that Android is being de-emphasised by Google lately, but I don't think the author really proves his case that its "on the way out." I find it to be more speculative and suggestive than based on any hard facts.
Rubin's ouster doesn't have to be about anything but the Motorola acquisition for example. It's one of the biggest most expensive blunders in tech history and if he was the head cheerleader, that's more than enough reason for him not to be around anymore. Similarly, the Chrome executive taking over need not be about anything more than him being the only senior executive with the right experience, or it could also really be about consolidation rather than Android's removal.
As for the premise, or the 'trigger' if you will for the whole piece, which is the apparent decision to use Chrome in the living room instead of Android, that might have nothing to do with anything other than the fact that Android is a bug-filled insecure nightmare. No media company is going to want to distribute content on Android in the living room. That would simply be insane.
In short, there are other explanations for most of the main points here and while the authors conclusion may be true, it need not necessarily be so. It's a colourful theory though.
Edit: I guess I should add that even if Google is moving away from Android, it doesn't come close to really proving it's main assertion that the reason for this are the issues with intellectual property.
I have to agree, one could come to this conclusion and there are many factors at play here which makes it hard to know what was the driving factor. However, I have to agree if Google made the Motorola decision based on Rubin, who honestly did not strike me as nothing more that a techie they deserve what they get then.
I have it from a good source that Google lack the business sophistication to take on a Motorola acquisition. First, Google did the deal in 4 days, this is from the time they walked in the door to make an offer to when Motorola say okay. Google did no due diligence on Motorola, they had no clue what they were getting themselves into. They did not need to do this since Motorola had no other interested parties at the time, Google was in a hurry fend off the war that Steve had now waged on them.
Motorola was plan B or maybe X after the screw up with trying to get the Nortel's Mobile patents which Apple happen to win. I believe Rubin was also involved in that screw up as well. Google got Motorola and all the headache of buying a company that has been around for 70+ years. The reason the deal took almost a yr to close is due to the fact that all the various governments, competitors, customers and such had a say about what Google could or could not due with Motorola. In the end Google's hands were tied, and tied hard to the point and Rubin said it the Motorola team no longer had access to the Android team as they had in the past.
Yes Google wanted the IP, and figure they would get it and shut all the operations of Motorola down and begin their counter war with their New found patents. Well good idea but they fail to understand there would be a huge number of people weight in on their plan.
My impressions are Google is licking their wounds, and trying to figure out how to get out of the mess they are now in. Everyone jokes about Steve's comment about thermonuclear war with Google, but even from the Grave Steve is exacting his wish. No, Apple did not drop a huge bomb on Google's Mountain View Campus, they just attacked at all their flanks. Remember you do not need to win the war by attacking your enemy straight on, you just need to make sure they can not fight back. I believe this exactly what Steve did, he is wounding them to the point where they can no longer fight and he did so by using any means available to him.
OK, maybe I'm missing something here. But what's wrong with Bing? It seems to me that the different engines do things slightly differently, sure, but the fact of the matter remains: If you type "How do I make a pot roast?" into any of them, you'll more than likely get a decent set of results.
A search engine is a search engine, from what I can tell.
Exactly, and with Siri, Apple is developing its own search -
And, with a flick of the middle finger, all Googleshit can be extinguished from AppStore. Apple has a long memory, in a grand unforgivable indulgence.
As the great philosopher, Nelson, says: "Ha, ha"!
"And, with a flick of the middle finger, all Googleshit can be extinguished from AppStore. Ha, ha!"
Instead of killing the Android-based set-top box I personally think we'll see details leaked, if not publicly released, before the end of the year. More than one source indicates that's the endgame. IMO and that of others the holdup is agreements with the media providers for what is intended to be a streaming TV service offering subscription services including HBO. It's a tough negotiation as Apple has also reportedly learned. Chromecast very obviously isn't intended for that purpose or market.
"Chrome OS is also philosophically closer to everything else Google does because its based on web standards; Rubin's rejiggered Java VM platform is an oddball product that simply doesn't mesh with everything else the company does, on top of having exposed Google to intellectual property infringement liabilities and inciting its closest partners to become competitors."
The above key paragraph which needs to be said over and over until the Fandroids who can't see further than the end of their proverbial nose of having access to the file system.
Imagine if Google had worked WITH Apple rather than against them they would be in a far stronger position. WebOS might have been a success and Samsung would be history. Ruben singlehandeely caused more damage to the phone market than any individual known to man and we would NOT be at the mercy of Android hackers. Android is simply lipstick on a pig
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
I don't know. Google seem to drop everything they start after a while. YouTube, Maps and Search being the exception so far and I suspect Chrome will stay the course.
Well YouTube was just a purchase and they have done little with it, so your argument is even better in that it's basically just Maps and Search. You could even argue that Maps is necessary for Search and therefore the only product they haven't dropped is the original one they started with. Search.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikilok
Gwydion,
Are you missing the big picture here.. The article doesn't talk about Samsung Ditching Android, but the makers itself ditching it
It's what this article is trying to convey.
I have not missed anything, I was answering to one post that said that Samsung is leaving Android.
And talking about the big picture, Daniel is exactly right like it was in 2009 predicting the fall of Android.
They are selling one system to cover mp3 player, phone, tablet, GPS system and even PC.
Whereas Apple sells individual well defined items.
SO they have an mp3 player, a phone, a tablet, a GPS tablet, a laptop and a PC.
They can sell 6 items all covered by one Android device. A far better way to 'do business' and one that all manufacturers want to emulate.
They should, and most likely will, continue to distance themselves from Giggle in everything they do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by smiffy31
What is stopping you going into settings->safari->search engine and changing back to google ?With iOS 7 Apple's bringing unified search into the browser.
And I am on the beta at the moment. The default search engine that unified search searches is still Google Search.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion
I have not missed anything, I was answering to one post that said that Samsung is leaving Android.
And talking about the big picture, Daniel is exactly right like it was in 2009 predicting the fall of Android.
If Google abandoned Android, you think Samsung has any reason not to abandon it as well ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Well YouTube was just a purchase and they have done little with it, so your argument is even better in that it's basically just Maps and Search. You could even argue that Maps is necessary for Search and therefore the only product they haven't dropped is the original one they started with. Search.
They've only invested in some infrastructure to let YouTube to serve 15% of all North American internet traffic (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/why-youtube-buffers-the-secret-deals-that-make-and-break-online-video/).
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikilok
If Google abandoned Android, you think Samsung has any reason not to abandon it as well ?
Ein? The OP was talking about Samsung dropping Android independently of what Google may will do.
No big shock here. I was told my friends over at Google that this was happening months ago.
Remember when DED said that Oracle would "'impound and destroy' the heart of Google’s Android" ? Yeah... http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/08/14/how-oracle-might-kill-googles-android-and-software-patents-all-at-once/
In reality, this happened... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_v._Google
Just saying... Don't hold your breath, folks
Andy Rubin has been moved to a separate team where he manages no one. He's in google purgatory. He's on his way out the door. It's all about Chrome now which it should've been in the first place.
The purpose of the previous article (http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/158746/chromecast-hacked-uses-google-tv-code-stripped-of-android-features) was to refute the idea that Chromecast is based on ChromeOS. In fact the article states that
Quote:
In examining the device, the group "concluded that it's more Android than ChromeOS,"
Yet according to this article,
Quote:
Evidence from multiple sources, including the design decisions behind Google's latest Chromecast product, support the idea that the company now sees more future potential and interest in investing in Chrome OS than in continuing to support Rubin's Android....
How does one reconcile these two apparently contradictory statements?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Interesting article and a good read for those not already aware of the details. Again, a bit long and wordy however for those of us that do already know.
I think it's clear that Android is being de-emphasised by Google lately, but I don't think the author really proves his case that its "on the way out." I find it to be more speculative and suggestive than based on any hard facts.
Rubin's ouster doesn't have to be about anything but the Motorola acquisition for example. It's one of the biggest most expensive blunders in tech history and if he was the head cheerleader, that's more than enough reason for him not to be around anymore. Similarly, the Chrome executive taking over need not be about anything more than him being the only senior executive with the right experience, or it could also really be about consolidation rather than Android's removal.
As for the premise, or the 'trigger' if you will for the whole piece, which is the apparent decision to use Chrome in the living room instead of Android, that might have nothing to do with anything other than the fact that Android is a bug-filled insecure nightmare. No media company is going to want to distribute content on Android in the living room. That would simply be insane.
In short, there are other explanations for most of the main points here and while the authors conclusion may be true, it need not necessarily be so. It's a colourful theory though.
Edit: I guess I should add that even if Google is moving away from Android, it doesn't come close to really proving it's main assertion that the reason for this are the issues with intellectual property.
I have to agree, one could come to this conclusion and there are many factors at play here which makes it hard to know what was the driving factor. However, I have to agree if Google made the Motorola decision based on Rubin, who honestly did not strike me as nothing more that a techie they deserve what they get then.
I have it from a good source that Google lack the business sophistication to take on a Motorola acquisition. First, Google did the deal in 4 days, this is from the time they walked in the door to make an offer to when Motorola say okay. Google did no due diligence on Motorola, they had no clue what they were getting themselves into. They did not need to do this since Motorola had no other interested parties at the time, Google was in a hurry fend off the war that Steve had now waged on them.
Motorola was plan B or maybe X after the screw up with trying to get the Nortel's Mobile patents which Apple happen to win. I believe Rubin was also involved in that screw up as well. Google got Motorola and all the headache of buying a company that has been around for 70+ years. The reason the deal took almost a yr to close is due to the fact that all the various governments, competitors, customers and such had a say about what Google could or could not due with Motorola. In the end Google's hands were tied, and tied hard to the point and Rubin said it the Motorola team no longer had access to the Android team as they had in the past.
Yes Google wanted the IP, and figure they would get it and shut all the operations of Motorola down and begin their counter war with their New found patents. Well good idea but they fail to understand there would be a huge number of people weight in on their plan.
My impressions are Google is licking their wounds, and trying to figure out how to get out of the mess they are now in. Everyone jokes about Steve's comment about thermonuclear war with Google, but even from the Grave Steve is exacting his wish. No, Apple did not drop a huge bomb on Google's Mountain View Campus, they just attacked at all their flanks. Remember you do not need to win the war by attacking your enemy straight on, you just need to make sure they can not fight back. I believe this exactly what Steve did, he is wounding them to the point where they can no longer fight and he did so by using any means available to him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ
OK, maybe I'm missing something here. But what's wrong with Bing? It seems to me that the different engines do things slightly differently, sure, but the fact of the matter remains: If you type "How do I make a pot roast?" into any of them, you'll more than likely get a decent set of results.
A search engine is a search engine, from what I can tell.
Exactly, and with Siri, Apple is developing its own search -
And, with a flick of the middle finger, all Googleshit can be extinguished from AppStore. Apple has a long memory, in a grand unforgivable indulgence.
As the great philosopher, Nelson, says: "Ha, ha"!
"And, with a flick of the middle finger, all Googleshit can be extinguished from AppStore. Ha, ha!"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324348504578610050212447028.html
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Google-TV-streaming-TV-Black-Box-Project-iTV,news-17169.html
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/iTV-Apple-TV-Tim-Cook-Time-Warner-HBO,news-17180.html
lol, Huddler formatting. I wonder just how much HTML we could inject to screw up formatting…
The above key paragraph which needs to be said over and over until the Fandroids who can't see further than the end of their proverbial nose of having access to the file system.
Imagine if Google had worked WITH Apple rather than against them they would be in a far stronger position. WebOS might have been a success and Samsung would be history. Ruben singlehandeely caused more damage to the phone market than any individual known to man and we would NOT be at the mercy of Android hackers. Android is simply lipstick on a pig
Imagine a world in which Steve Jobs agreed to be Google's CEO, announcing it publicly alongside the first iPod…