Apple buys controlling stake in Facebook to deal Android it's Ultimate Blow.

What does Facebook have to do with killing Google?

I hate Facebook. I'll never use it. I'd hate to see iOS integration. Apple's killing blow to Google would be buying Wolfram|Alpha.

Oh, and having Oracle win their Android suits and Apple win enough to bring their fight to the US.

Taking very high-level concepts and putting them together hoping it makes something better doesn't always work e.g:

Facebook (popular) + iOS (popular) = iOS/Facebook (more popular)

You have to consider how the two would integrate to make something better. Twitter integration works because it's a messaging app so you can tweet pics and comments. They could offer Facebook links that do the same but it's not innovative.

Apple also doesn't have the best history working with Facebook:

http://allthingsd.com/20100902/faceb...-after-launch/

You never really hear much about Ping in their keynotes. This article is fairly anti-Apple but makes some points about their social network isolation:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/20993...for_users.html

I'd say that Ping as a brand should be done away with and simply replaced with some Twitter feature. You have TwitPics but they can use TwitTunes.

Artists can post a TwitTune, which could be a music track sample hosted on iTunes and links back to iTunes.

Social integration has to have a purpose or people won't use it.

I don't see how this would affect google much, if at all.

Look, google is primarily a services company, whereas apple is primarily a products company. I don't think enough people truly understand this. Having deep facebook integration will negatively affect one minor google service (google+) and leave the major ones untouched.

If Apple wants to kill Google, they can't do it via products. No matter how good the iPhone is, google will win. Why? because google's services runs ON the iPhone. Every time someone does a google search on their iPhone, or check their gmail account, or watch a youtube video, or checks their location in maps, Google is making money.

To kill Google, Apple has to either:
1) Disable or prevent Google's services from running on the iPhone (unlikely) or
2) Develop their own alternative services to Google, and make them the defacto standard ones to use on the iPhone (much more likely).

Of those 2 choices, 1 is not going to happen, as it will pretty much neuter the iPhone. 2 is possible, but I find it unlikely that Apple will create more widely used search, video, maps, and e-mail services (and those are just the big ones) than google's; nor do I think it will make financial sense for them to do so.

So what is Android to Google? Android serves two purposes.
First and foremost, it is a means to an end to get as many people using Google's services on mobile as possible. Why do you think Google gives Android away for free, and continue to brag about activation numbers? Because every person using Android is also using (at least one of) google's services, and that is where they make their real money.
Secondly Android serves as a contingency plan in case Apple ever decides to pursue either choices 1 or 2. In either case, even if Google loses the entire iOS market, they wont' be completely locked out of the mobile world altogether.

In the end, it doesn't matter to Google if Apple kills Android. Hell, a while back, it was revealed that Google makes more off iOS than they do off Android (don't know if that's still true). If every single Android user went out and replaced their phones with an iPhone tomorrow, Google will be just as happy in the short term; though the same can't be said about Samsung, Motorola, and HTC.

Why not just integrate Ping with Facebook and/or Twitter? Hell why not surprise everyone and even tie in to Google+!

Microsoft is invested in Facebook. This will be good for MS. Bad for Google and Apple. Sometimes it pays for companies to work together, and they both profit, and the consumer wins, too. Odd that Microsoft is such a good example. But look at how they integrated skype, Bing search, etc. They are upgrades in my opinion. I also assume MS is helping FB with running the servers and infrastructure behind the scenes. That was a smart MSFT investment.

This has troll thread written all over it.

Too cute by half. Google owns Android. That is not the real problem with your OP, however. The real problem is that your OP flys in the face of how Apple does business. Your OP as reiterated in the post to which this is responding is monopolistic behavior with a monopolistic motive.

You suggested that Apple leverage its dominance in smart phones to limit the ability of another compete to compete with Apple's own iPhone. However, Apple can't just go out and buy an up-and-coming company like Facebook with impunity. A purchase of this sort must pass antitrust muster with the Department of Justice. Even during the Bush Administration, the purchasing company would have to sacrifice certain related elements of its current business or divest components of the business to be purchased. They also must guarantee that competitors like Android have full access to Facebook. There is no guarantee that the Obama Administration would allow such a purchase to go forward.

At the end of the day, the purchase would ensure the very thing that it was intended to prevent in the best case. In the worst case, the purchase would sully Apple's reputation.

All phones are inherently social devices. This is not at issue. What is at issue is the prospect of Apple buying Facebook. You do not make a business case for the purchase. You only state that it should be as a defensive measure to forestall Google's Android. I am aware no instance in Apple's history when it behaved in this way. Now that it is the world's richest corporation with a dominant position in smart phones, I contend that it is too late to start acting in such a predatory manner.

Earth to HyteProsector--Apple is well known for retaining an armies of attorneys which it uses to battle its enemies in courts of law. It does not take the law into its own hands. Apple has suffers losses in court. On balance, however, Apple has done well by staying within the law. Your suggestion runs the risk of having Apple add the U. S. Government and other governments to its list of adversaries. IMHO, that would be dumb in the extreme.

Say what? Apple does not own Twitter And what did Apple include Twitter in?

What law is that breaking?

Funny you should mention that, because the one phone I know of that specializes in Facebook integration, the htc chacha, runs Android: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAyrZiFC2V4

I agree that its unlikely that GOOG will able to get full blown FB integration considering they have a competing service, but they've been taking steps towards that direction.

I know they just introduced a new contact app with the gnexus that can sync contact information directly from facebook, and I think their gallery app can pull your albums from FB as well.

I don't know about calendars or facebook chat, but it seems GOOG is definitely working towards FB and other social media integration.

ArsTechnica has put up a very well-grounded article discussing just that. No hint of fanboy-ism for either side. Just a balanced (IMO) discussion of facts and timelines, with opinion on the way the market has developed and why.

Highly recommended reading to put things into perspective.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...the-iphone.ars