Google purchases IBM inventions as patent arms race looms

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 95
    bilbo63bilbo63 Posts: 285member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    I am ignoring the facts? Clearly, you are not aware of Google's innovations. At a high level, they have changed search, advertising and email with the same impact as iPhone and iPod in their respective categories. But it is really at a fundamental level that they have surpassed most companies (and I am speaking historically), consider what they have invented in database design, distributed computing, pattern recognition and computer science in general. I suggest you look up all of this yourself before criticizing one of the most inventive companies in history. Apple has never, ever innovated at this level. Instead, they have been very clever and inventive in industrial design, integration and UI design. All of this is important, but it is simply not moving computer science forward in the same fundamental way Google has done. This is not because Apple is not capable of it; it's simply not their business model.



    Sure Google is innovative, but I wouldn't say that they are more innovative than Apple. I wonder how Google would feel if another company ripped off their work and then under the guise of "open source" simply gave it away for free to compete with them. I'm guessing that they'd be pissed. Yet it's perfectly okay for them to do that.



    When you buy an Apple product, you are the customer. When you use one of Google's free services, they sell your soul to their true customers, the advertisers. I don't trust Google in any way shape or form when their entire revenue stream is based on selling us all out.
  • Reply 22 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Patranus View Post


    Everyone keeps calling Google innovative.google voice search as you type



    What exactly have they innovated since their page-rank patent?





    Google voice, search as you type, Google docs, Google books, youtube, gmail, chrome, and chrome os. Remember that innovate does not mean invent it means to improve on, and yes Google innovates a lot they are one of the most innovative technology companies in the world.
  • Reply 23 of 95
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bilbo63 View Post


    I wonder how Google would feel if another company ripped off their work and then under the guise of "open source" simply gave it away for free to compete with them. . .



    Hmmm...

    Perhaps like Mozilla's new Boot To Gecko project that uses Android underpinnings to compete with Android, and will be giving it away free? I'm sure Google will be suing Mozilla, aren't you?



    http://arstechnica.com/open-source/n...ko-project.ars
  • Reply 24 of 95
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member
    All of these Apple vs. Google arguments make me want to puke. It reminds me of the Apple vs. Microsoft crap.



    I know... I have a choice to read or not read... just saying...
  • Reply 25 of 95
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    All of these Apple vs. Google arguments make me want to puke. It reminds me of the Apple vs. Microsoft crap.



    I know... I have a choice to read or not read... just saying...



    Plus 1
  • Reply 26 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Patranus View Post


    Everyone keeps calling Google innovative.



    What exactly have they innovated since their page-rank patent?



    It obvious you know nothing about real tech behind the web. What else they did for starters look to their BigTable, GFS and MapReduce papers. The core behind FB, LinkedIn, Apache Hadoop (behind Yahoo, IBM, Oracle, MSFT) products and tech. You and Apple just care about shiny icons in a grid, ;-). Google cares about making computing better for society.
  • Reply 27 of 95
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by holy_steven View Post


    Google cares about making computing better for society.



    For real? My, my, here's a live one.
  • Reply 28 of 95
    Google is arguably one of the most agressive companies in buying up other smaller companies - here is a PARTIAL list of companies purchased and for what service:

    Google "Innovations":

    Search - supported by puchases of Outride/Akwan/Kaltix/Orion/Metaweb/ Like/Sparkbuy/PostRank

    AdWords (allegedly stolen from Ideaworks/Goto/Overture - settled in court), and Sprinks/Ignite Logic

    Analytics - bought from Urchin Software/Phatbits/Measure Map/Trendalyzer

    Chrome browser - bought from Skia/GreenBorder

    Blogger - bought from Pyra Labs/Genius Labs/TNC

    Earth - bought from Keyhole, Inc.

    Gmail - bought from Neotonic Software/Postini/reMail/Plannr

    Groups - bought from Deja

    Picasa - bought from Picasa/Neven Vision/Picnik

    SketchUp - bought from @Last Software

    Talk - bought from Marratech/Gizmo5

    Android - bought from Android, Inc., supported by additional purchases of Skia/allPAY/bruNET/BumpTop/Reqwireless/Simplify/Zetawire/Blindtype/TalkBin

    ChromeOS - includes purchases of PhatBits

    Wallet - bought from Punchd

    Books - bought from eBook Technologies

    Feedburner - bought from Feedburner

    Latitude - bought from Dodgeball

    Maps - bought from ZipDash/Where2/Keyhole, Inc./Endoxon/Image America/Quiksee

    Voice - bought from GrandCentral/Phonetic Arts/SayNow

    Youtube - bought from Youtube/Omnisio/On2/Episodic/fflick/NewNextNetworks/Green Parrot Pictures

    Goggles - bought from Neven Vision Germany/PlinkArt/PittPatt

    iGoogle - bought from Outride

    Translate - bought from Phonetic Arts

    Admob - bought from Admob

    AdSense - bought from Applied Semantics/Adscape/DoubleClick/Teracent/Invite Media/Admeld

    Google+ - bought from Zinku/Jaiku/Aardvark/Angstro/Fridge

    Wave - bought from AppJet

    Docs - bought from Upstartle/2Web Technologies/JotSpot/Xunlei/Tonic Systems/Zenter/Appjet/DocVerse

    TV - bought from Widevine Technologies



    rather Borg-like I think...
  • Reply 29 of 95
    It's not about Google vs. Apple in some big patent showdown. That would be pointless and both sides know it.



    It's about defending against the patent trolls who distract and drain a company's resources with endless lawsuits in a badly broken intellectual property system.
  • Reply 30 of 95
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,583member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Hmmm...

    Perhaps like Mozilla's new Boot To Gecko project that uses Android underpinnings to compete with Android, and will be giving it away free? I'm sure Google will be suing Mozilla, aren't you?



    http://arstechnica.com/open-source/n...ko-project.ars



    Most of Mozilla's funding comes from Google...
  • Reply 31 of 95
    gmcalpingmcalpin Posts: 266member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post


    Google is arguably one of the most agressive companies in buying up other smaller companies - here is a PARTIAL list of companies purchased and for what service...



    Apple v. Samsung hit the name on the head. Innovation doesn't ONLY mean invention, it also means "to make changes in something established, esp. by introducing new methods, ideas, or products."



    Absolutely, Google does this with the stuff they buy — or, at least some of it. (Feedburner, not so much.)



    This pissing contest going on in here of which company innovates "more" is juvenile and entirely subjective.



    They both innovate. Period.
  • Reply 32 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post


    Most of Mozilla's funding comes from Google...



    ...according to the article Mozilla is seeking to use as little of Android code as they can, ignoring the Java side entirely if possible. OTOH, you have Google who is now trying to make peace with the Linux org into order to legitimize it's open claims and by trying to get all the drivers and APIs they built independently included in Linux. It's kind of like having a gangster walk into your lovely little co-op and say" you know there's been a lot of problems in the neighborhood, let me help you make your business get more customers and I'll protect the premises - no cost, cuz we just LOVE small businesses!"
  • Reply 33 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post


    Apple v. Samsung hit the name on the head. Innovation doesn't ONLY mean invention, it also means "to make changes in something established, esp. by introducing new methods, ideas, or products."



    Absolutely, Google does this with the stuff they buy — or, at least some of it. (Feedburner, not so much.)



    This pissing contest going on in here of which company innovates "more" is juvenile and entirely subjective.



    They both innovate. Period.



    You can argue the point, and I won't necessarily disagree with you, but when Google has since 2001 bought over 80 companies (compare that to Microsoft that has purchased over 128 companies since 1987), and then you bring into the the mix the stated intent of Google is, in their own words, "organize the world‘s information and make it universally accessible and useful". Every acquisition plays into this stated goal, "innovation" as such only works for Google when it directs work towards this stated goal. You cannot emphasize this concept strongly enough - every product they produce (or purchase) is designed specifically to give them better access to and control over the world's information. This is not characteristically innovative as it is strongly directed and incremental development towards that stated end.



    Google is not a grand beneficent friend whose best interest is necessarily yours. They are a commercial interest, supporting stockholders and generating revenue directly from their ability to access, associate and control the delivery of the world's information. The fact that they create a collaborative work environment, that they seek out and try to employ the best and the brightest is coincidental to their stated goal, not because it's fun, or cool or anything else.



    This is also true of Microsoft and Apple - but they don't try to cloud the issue with moralistic nonsense like "do no evil". I am thoroughly wearied of those cupidic supporters of Google who believe in the face of all contrary evidence that Google is the greatest good that open source has ever had, that they are this magnificent unicorn-like loving mythical beast that grants endless wishes to worshipful geeks.
  • Reply 34 of 95
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sticknick View Post


    Google walked away from that auction empty handed and stated bashing Apple et all stating that those companies would rather buy patents than innovate. And Google kept this chirping up for a good few days at least; blowing their own horn saying how much better they were than those that beat them in the auction.



    NOW they go out and buy a bunch of patents from IBM and their song has changed?



    Google has some cool stuff out there but when they open their mouths they sound like Microsoft or Adobe: "wonk wonk wonk".



    Reluctant player, indeed. Google is only acting like a spoiled hippy who didn't win the Nortel patents.



    since when is larry and brinn 'hippies'? Steve Jobs is from the hippie generation. get an education.
  • Reply 35 of 95
    cambocambo Posts: 38member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Google announced on Thursday that it had acquired a group of patents from IBM, even as growing interest in intellectual property suggests a coming legal face-off between Apple and Google.



    Bloomberg reports that Google struck a deal with IBM earlier this month to bolster its IP portfolio with a batch of patents. ?Like many tech companies, at times we?ll acquire patents that are relevant to our business,? the company said Thursday in an e-mailed statement.



    The Mountain View, Calif., search giant has cast itself as a reluctant player in the patent market. ?The tech industry has a significant problem,? Kent Walker, who serves as general counsel for the company, said earlier this week. ?Software patents are kind of gumming up the works of innovation.?



    The company is calling for large-scale patent reform, even as its Android mobile operating system faces infringement suits on at least six fronts. But, competitors assert that Google is critical of the patent system because it finds itself outmatched by larger, more established technology companies with bigger patent portfolios.



    Google is said to be interested in acquiring InterDigital, a Pennsylvania-based company with patents related to high-speed mobile phone networks. Reports that Apple and Google may bid on the company drove its value up more than 50 percent to $3.2 billion earlier this week.



    Photography pioneer Kodak has revealed that it is shopping its digital imaging patents around after seeing the high level of interest, and subsequent bidding, in the Nortel auction.



    Late last month, Apple and six other companies, including Microsoft, Research in Motion and Sony, faced off against Google and Intel in a bidding war that drove up the price for Nortel's 6,000 patents to an unprecedented $4.5 billion.



    Walker called the deal the "biggest patents sale in the history of the world," adding that his company is looking into "other opportunities" to expand its portfolio. Nortel's patents were said to be of high-value to Apple and Google because they contained vital inventions related to the 4G Long-Term Evolution wireless networking standard.



    Google's interest in intellectual property may also have been piqued by a recent ITC ruling that found HTC had violated two of Apple's patents. Patent experts have suggested that the violations in question may be part of the Android architecture and could extend to "every Android device out there."



    Meanwhile, Google executive Eric Schmidt has promised that his company will "make sure" that HTC does not lose its suit with Apple.



    Walker has compared the current patent situation to a nuclear arms race that will eventually "settle into mutual assured destruction,? noting that ?these fights are an arduous and expensive way to do it."



    they'll make a decent keyboard, instead of one's that just look pretty. I think form should follow functions in this case. I make SO many mistakes on the current flat-keyed wireless white thing it's not funny. The way the IBM keyboards grip your fingers makes it difficult to make a mistake on those things.



    Cheers,

    Cameron
  • Reply 36 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,865member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by moustache View Post


    There is no creativity in buying other people's ideas and suing anyone that infringes what they buy up.

    Its just wrong, there should be a law to stop this. Its simply a devil's way of working.



    There are a number of good reasons for a company to sell of patents. For example:
    1. To get rid of IP they are no longer concerned with.

    2. To finance new development work.

    3. To add cash to the coffers

    4. To fund retirement at the cessation of business.

    5. To pay your taxes. In other words keep a company operating through tough times.

    Patents are no different than anything else a company owns. If they can gain by selling off the IP all the better for them. In some cases the companies doing these sales are in effect saving jobs which isn't a bad thing at the moment.



    You call it the devils way of working to which I have to reply that that is simply ignorant. Some patents can encompass man years of work, which implies value right there. Frankly it is just as valuable as the effort put into building a plant or physical device. So if you are in need of money why not sell off the work that went into that IP?



    From the buyers standpoint it is no different than buying a canned process or building ready to go. In effect you pay for the effort that went into that IP and the right to use it exclusively. It is a business transaction nothing more.
  • Reply 37 of 95
    bsgincbsginc Posts: 78member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post


    Remember that innovate does not mean invent it means to improve on, and yes Google innovates a lot they are one of the most innovative technology companies in the world.



    Ha! By that definition, Apple is at least as and probably more innovative than Google. Besides all of the patents that Apple has birthed, they are responsible for completely redesigning the desktop, smartphone, and tablet computing paradigms both at the gross level as well as the detailed level.



    Were it not for Apple's innovations based upon their licensing of Xerox's original work, computing may well still be stuck at the CLI and the web as we now know it may not exist...much less Google.



    And, less you and others claiming the Google has done more for computing that Apple, computing at home and in the office is way ahead of where it would otherwise be were it not for companies like Apple and it's Apple I computer.



    No doubt Google has been responsible for innovative extensions based on others work, and new work of their own, but: to paraphrase... I know Apple, and you Google are no Apple!
  • Reply 38 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,865member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    I have mentioned it before and gotten flak for it, but the truth is that, at a fundamental level, Google has been far more innovative than Apple. Anyone who says otherwise is arguing blindly and purely out of passion and completely ignoring the facts.



    How do you figure?
  • Reply 39 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,865member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    I am ignoring the facts? I am sorry you are not aware of Google's innovations; I had expected a higher level of knowledge here since everyone writes with such condescension and derision (after all, arrogance is only tolerable if backed by real knowledge). At a high level, they have changed search, advertising and email with the same impact as iPhone and iPod in their respective categories. But it is really at a fundamental level that they have surpassed most companies (and I am speaking historically), consider what they have invented in database design, distributed computing, pattern recognition and computer science in general. I suggest you look up all of this yourself before criticizing one of the most inventive companies in history. Apple has never, ever innovated at this level. Instead, they have been very clever and inventive in industrial design, integration and UI design. All of this is important, but it is simply not moving computer science forward in the same fundamental way Google has done. This is not because Apple is not capable of it; it's simply not their business model.



    Obviously you don't know what you are talking about.
  • Reply 40 of 95
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bsginc View Post


    No doubt Google has been responsible for innovative extensions based on others work, and new work of their own, but: to paraphrase... I know Apple, and you Google are no Apple!



    Sure, Google is no Apple, it's never brought complete disruption to a consumer market the way Apple has. But Apple is also no Google, they've never brought the same levels of disruption to server side or datacenter that Google have.



    Google is, from a comp-sci perspective, the most interesting firm today. They're pushing concurrency and distributed computing to a level that nobody else is even close to. Maybe as a consumer you don't see that, maybe as a consumer you don't care, but it's still true.



    Google is following in the footsteps of firms like Thinking Machines, who you probably also never heard of. Apple is following in the footsteps of Sony.
Sign In or Register to comment.