First, Apple would never buy Yahoo. They don't believe in wasting money like that. And, the desktop search business is not interesting to them. They have iAds, but we don't know how successful they are compared to others like Google's AdMob.
Second, my guess is that Apple believes Android will not be much of a competitor in the long run.
Still, you make a good point (I think) that Google is able to spend (or waste) money because of its position in desktop search. If that comes under attack, Google will sink fast.
But didn't Yahoo! move to Bing for search which makes an Apple purchase even more pointless?
Why did they up their offer so much on the same day? Seems very odd.
This article (especially the headline) is oddly written. If I went to the car dealer and offered $3000 for used car and they said, no but but I'll take $4100 and I counter offered $4000, would I be "upping my bid by $1000 to close the deal?" Sure, but that's just called "negotiating" not "bidding against myself."
Interesting article. In the last paragraph is says "Google bought MMI to prevent the worst for Google's strategy, not to make things better for everyone else."
I'm still uncertain if this is a disaster for Google or such a genius move we are missing the big picture.
I was reading that Motorola has well over three billion in cash which Google now gets and because of Motorola's past loses there are also massive tax benefits for Google. It reduces Google's tax bill by $1.7 billion in the year of purchase and $700 million every year after that up to 2019. So rather than $12.5 billion it will really cost less than $3 billion. That is still a lot of money but it is a lot less insane than it previously sounded.
There is also the theory that Google was only really bidding on Nortel to raise the price Apple would eventually pay. Hence the weird bids like pi billion.
Yup. And provides an entirely reasonable explanation about the structure of the SEC filing. Hence my reply to your "Am I missing something?!" post.
Quote:
Mueller has so many "possiblys" and "could haves" in that article that you can see it is a made up piece of bunk. I honestly wonder sometimes if Florian and Daniel are the same two people.
Apple is not afraid of the MotoMobile patents... even your man Florian said as much... so does that mean that Google is so stupid as to believe that they have to buy MotoMobile to save Android.
So did you read the post, or even skim through it?
Quote:
Threats my ass.
Show me a passage in the filing that uses the word "threat" and then I'll agree with you.
Quote:
[on edit: Motomobile is such a small piece of the Android pie. Google had to worry about the reaction from the big guns, Samsung, HTC and LG, if they bought MMI. The MMI patnts [sic] weren't going to protect Google... Apple already proved that.]
So, they bought a loss-making also-ran that had already sold all truly valuable patents earlier for $12.5 billion to obtain the remaining patents (which several experts consider useless), just hours after a lot of public whining how the evil Apple and their accomplices destroyed free innoborrowvation for a fraction of the cost?
The more I digest it, the more the Brothers Rimm look like geniuses.
Now, if you report tomorrow, that the true story was really that they had Page on one and Brin on the other phone and they were outbidding each other... I'll buy it.
Yep, I like the last suggestion. Neither knew it was the other they were bidding against. Of course that leaves the question which one won ?
That or when they won the conversation went like this ...
Auctioneer: "Ok Google wins the bid at $12.5 billion" (hammer bang noise)
First, Apple would never buy Yahoo. They don't believe in wasting money like that. And, the desktop search business is not interesting to them. They have iAds, but we don't know how successful they are compared to others like Google's AdMob.
Second, my guess is that Apple believes Android will not be much of a competitor in the long run.
Still, you make a good point (I think) that Google is able to spend (or waste) money because of its position in desktop search. If that comes under attack, Google will sink fast.
Post edited....."stick IT to Google"....
I really don't think they will buy Yahoo. But it is a very intriguing thought. No one has been able to bring down the beast that is Google but it may happen one day. If any company can/could, it may as well be Apple. Think safe search results only. No B.S. sites listed. No malware/virus sites listed. A safe internet environment which can also work on the windows side.
And besides, "Isearch" has a nice ring to it. (trademark) lol......
Yup. And provides an entirely reasonable explanation about the structure of the SEC filing. Hence my reply to your "Am I missing something?!" post.
So did you read the post, or even skim through it?
Again, try reading the "op-ed" piece.
As I said, this is an op-ed piece that uses the word possibly one too many times. You said it's a "reasonable explanation" and that's about it, an explanation, one man's "opinion"... it doesn't have to be taken as the truth.
Apple is not afraid of the MMI patents. Google should have realized this. Google would have been better off letting MMI shop their portfolio around because the SEC sure as hell would not let the Rockstar consortium buy the patents and that was obvious from the alarm bells that were set off with just the Nortel purchase.
IMO it's stupid to think that Google could be threatened by MMI. If I had been Page I would have told MMI to fuck off and let them try to sell the patents to Apple or whoever and then let MMI know that Google would send $ billion dollars worth of lawyers after MMI the minute the patent sale was announced.
Jobs would have shoved the entire Motomobile organization up Sanjay's ass if he had tried to threaten Apple as you're suggesting Sanjay did to Google. What??!! Google is a wimp as well as completely stupid?!
I noticed that nearly every post you made so far contributes absolutely nothing to the topic at hand, all the time while spouting hate and other BS about Google/Samsung/<Insert non-Apple company here>. Did Google had someone murder your entire family or something? Just curious. These kind of hate and anger are not normal, even for an extermely obsessed fanboy.
On topic, Google does seem desperate to obtain Moto's Mobility Division and avoiding a public auction. I still believe it's mainly for the patents. They missed out on the earlier Nortel patent sale to Microsoft/Apple consortium and would be at a significant disadvantage otherwise.
As I said, this is an op-ed piece that uses the word possibly one too many times. You said it's a "reasonable explanation" and that's about it, an explanation, one man's "opinion"... it doesn't have to be taken as the truth.
Apple is not afraid of the MMI patents. Google should have realized this. Google would have been better off letting MMI shop their portfolio around because the SEC sure as hell would not let the Rockstar consortium buy the patents and that was obvious from the alarm bells that were set off with just the Nortel purchase.
IMO it's stupid to think that Google could be threatened by MMI. If I had been Page I would have told MMI to fuck off and let them try to sell the patents to Apple or whoever and then let MMI know that Google would send $ billion dollars worth of lawyers after MMI the minute the patent sale was announced.
The patent threat wasn't against Google, it was against Android licensees like HTC that don't really have anything to fight back with. It also included the threat of settling with Apple and signing a license agreement with Microsoft and potentially shifting towards Windows phone production. Google's main competition is Microsoft, not Apple, so this is a big deal to them.
Quote:
Jobs would have shoved the entire Motomobile organization up Sanjay's ass if he had tried to threaten Apple as you're suggesting Sanjay did to Google. What??!! Google is a wimp as well as completely stupid?!
The preponderance of evidence is that Google is completely stupid at the management level, yes.
The patent threat wasn't against Google, it was against Android licensees like HTC that don't really have anything to fight back with. It also included the threat of settling with Apple and signing a license agreement with Microsoft and potentially shifting towards Windows phone production. Google's main competition is Microsoft, not Apple, so this is a big deal to them.
Which (as I stated earlier), in my mind, is absolutely assinine. MMI shifting towards MS?! Huh?! A company that is in trouble like Nokia shifting over to the 50:1 shot. Shit... they'd be dead before the first Win phone hit the street. So what if MMI goes after HTC and Samsung? How is that going to change the landscape any more than the purchase of MMI has changed the landscape. Mueller just doesn't make sense to me.
Quote:
The preponderance of evidence is that Google is completely stupid at the management level, yes.
There is the reason for the purchase... not threats.
________________
... and now a tip for you:
You read Mueller's piece and this is what you got out of it:
"Yes. MMI came to Google and said "buy us or we will destroy Android." Google said "um, ok" and made the offer that they thought was necessary to prevent Android's death. The SEC report was written after the fact in such a way as to head off MMI shareholder lawsuits about the sale."
At this point it wouldn't matter if I had read the piece or not (which I had, btw), you've already summarized your take on the piece and that is all I have to argue.... your take.
Using FOSS to support your argument is like me using one of Daniel's arguments to support my case... lots of fluff, not much substance. That's why I asked for a direct reference to these supposed threats.
the anti-Google/Android/Anything non Apple on Apple sites is stronger than the anti-Apple on anything non Apple sites...well at least Google and Android as I'm not sure how Microsoft fanboys are or if they truly exist in such a capacity.
You read Mueller's piece and this is what you got out of it:
"Yes. MMI came to Google and said "buy us or we will destroy Android." Google said "um, ok" and made the offer that they thought was necessary to prevent Android's death. The SEC report was written after the fact in such a way as to head off MMI shareholder lawsuits about the sale."
At this point it wouldn't matter if I had read the piece or not (which I had, btw), you've already summarized your take on the piece and that is all I have to argue.... your take.
right
Quote:
Using FOSS to support your argument is like me using one of Daniel's arguments to support my case... lots of fluff, not much substance. That's why I asked for a direct reference to these supposed threats.
My experience is that FOSS is a step up from Daniel's fluff. It's speculation from an expert as opposed to gossip. Speculation none-the-less.
the anti-Google/Android/Anything non Apple on Apple sites is stronger than the anti-Apple on anything non Apple sites...well at least Google and Android as I'm not sure how Microsoft fanboys are or if they truly exist in such a capacity.
Apparently you haven't read the "Masochist me?" article over at Arstechnica today then. The anti-Apple in there is pretty ridiculous. I'm sure some will debate about Ars being an Apple or non-Apple site, but Apple coverage is only one of many things they do there.
I noticed that nearly every post you made so far contributes absolutely nothing to the topic at hand, all the time while spouting hate and other BS about Google/Samsung/<Insert non-Apple company here>. Did Google had someone murder your entire family or something? Just curious. These kind of hate and anger are not normal, even for an extermely obsessed fanboy.
On topic, Google does seem desperate to obtain Moto's Mobility Division and avoiding a public auction. I still believe it's mainly for the patents. They missed out on the earlier Nortel patent sale to Microsoft/Apple consortium and would be at a significant disadvantage otherwise.
Comments
You mean "stick it to Google."
First, Apple would never buy Yahoo. They don't believe in wasting money like that. And, the desktop search business is not interesting to them. They have iAds, but we don't know how successful they are compared to others like Google's AdMob.
Second, my guess is that Apple believes Android will not be much of a competitor in the long run.
Still, you make a good point (I think) that Google is able to spend (or waste) money because of its position in desktop search. If that comes under attack, Google will sink fast.
But didn't Yahoo! move to Bing for search which makes an Apple purchase even more pointless?
Threats my ass.
That might be the greatest sentence ever written.
That might be the greatest sentence ever written.
Punctuation and I have not always been friends.
YOU'VE JUST REPLACED NOKIA
AS THE MOST
POPULAR
UN-PROFITABLE
UN-IMPORTANT
CRAPPIEST
MOBILE PLATFORM
IN THE WORLD
ANDROID is the new NOKIA
Why did they up their offer so much on the same day? Seems very odd.
This article (especially the headline) is oddly written. If I went to the car dealer and offered $3000 for used car and they said, no but but I'll take $4100 and I counter offered $4000, would I be "upping my bid by $1000 to close the deal?" Sure, but that's just called "negotiating" not "bidding against myself."
FOSS patents
Interesting article. In the last paragraph is says "Google bought MMI to prevent the worst for Google's strategy, not to make things better for everyone else."
I was reading that Motorola has well over three billion in cash which Google now gets and because of Motorola's past loses there are also massive tax benefits for Google. It reduces Google's tax bill by $1.7 billion in the year of purchase and $700 million every year after that up to 2019. So rather than $12.5 billion it will really cost less than $3 billion. That is still a lot of money but it is a lot less insane than it previously sounded.
There is also the theory that Google was only really bidding on Nortel to raise the price Apple would eventually pay. Hence the weird bids like pi billion.
Oh give me a break.
This is an op-ed piece.
Yup. And provides an entirely reasonable explanation about the structure of the SEC filing. Hence my reply to your "Am I missing something?!" post.
Mueller has so many "possiblys" and "could haves" in that article that you can see it is a made up piece of bunk. I honestly wonder sometimes if Florian and Daniel are the same two people.
Apple is not afraid of the MotoMobile patents... even your man Florian said as much... so does that mean that Google is so stupid as to believe that they have to buy MotoMobile to save Android.
So did you read the post, or even skim through it?
Threats my ass.
Show me a passage in the filing that uses the word "threat" and then I'll agree with you.
[on edit: Motomobile is such a small piece of the Android pie. Google had to worry about the reaction from the big guns, Samsung, HTC and LG, if they bought MMI. The MMI patnts [sic] weren't going to protect Google... Apple already proved that.]
Again, try reading the "op-ed" piece.
So, they bought a loss-making also-ran that had already sold all truly valuable patents earlier for $12.5 billion to obtain the remaining patents (which several experts consider useless), just hours after a lot of public whining how the evil Apple and their accomplices destroyed free innoborrowvation for a fraction of the cost?
The more I digest it, the more the Brothers Rimm look like geniuses.
Now, if you report tomorrow, that the true story was really that they had Page on one and Brin on the other phone and they were outbidding each other... I'll buy it.
Yep, I like the last suggestion. Neither knew it was the other they were bidding against. Of course that leaves the question which one won ?
That or when they won the conversation went like this ...
Auctioneer: "Ok Google wins the bid at $12.5 billion" (hammer bang noise)
Page: "Did you say BILLION?"
You mean "stick it to Google."
First, Apple would never buy Yahoo. They don't believe in wasting money like that. And, the desktop search business is not interesting to them. They have iAds, but we don't know how successful they are compared to others like Google's AdMob.
Second, my guess is that Apple believes Android will not be much of a competitor in the long run.
Still, you make a good point (I think) that Google is able to spend (or waste) money because of its position in desktop search. If that comes under attack, Google will sink fast.
Post edited....."stick IT to Google"....
I really don't think they will buy Yahoo. But it is a very intriguing thought. No one has been able to bring down the beast that is Google but it may happen one day. If any company can/could, it may as well be Apple. Think safe search results only. No B.S. sites listed. No malware/virus sites listed. A safe internet environment which can also work on the windows side.
And besides, "Isearch" has a nice ring to it. (trademark) lol......
Yup. And provides an entirely reasonable explanation about the structure of the SEC filing. Hence my reply to your "Am I missing something?!" post.
So did you read the post, or even skim through it?
Again, try reading the "op-ed" piece.
As I said, this is an op-ed piece that uses the word possibly one too many times. You said it's a "reasonable explanation" and that's about it, an explanation, one man's "opinion"... it doesn't have to be taken as the truth.
Apple is not afraid of the MMI patents. Google should have realized this. Google would have been better off letting MMI shop their portfolio around because the SEC sure as hell would not let the Rockstar consortium buy the patents and that was obvious from the alarm bells that were set off with just the Nortel purchase.
IMO it's stupid to think that Google could be threatened by MMI. If I had been Page I would have told MMI to fuck off and let them try to sell the patents to Apple or whoever and then let MMI know that Google would send $ billion dollars worth of lawyers after MMI the minute the patent sale was announced.
Jobs would have shoved the entire Motomobile organization up Sanjay's ass if he had tried to threaten Apple as you're suggesting Sanjay did to Google. What??!! Google is a wimp as well as completely stupid?!
GOOD JOB GOOGLE.
YOU'VE JUST REPLACED NOKIA
AS THE MOST
POPULAR
UN-PROFITABLE
CRAPPIEST
MOBILE PLATFORM
IN THE WORLD
ANDROID is the new NOKIA
I noticed that nearly every post you made so far contributes absolutely nothing to the topic at hand, all the time while spouting hate and other BS about Google/Samsung/<Insert non-Apple company here>. Did Google had someone murder your entire family or something? Just curious. These kind of hate and anger are not normal, even for an extermely obsessed fanboy.
On topic, Google does seem desperate to obtain Moto's Mobility Division and avoiding a public auction. I still believe it's mainly for the patents. They missed out on the earlier Nortel patent sale to Microsoft/Apple consortium and would be at a significant disadvantage otherwise.
As I said, this is an op-ed piece that uses the word possibly one too many times. You said it's a "reasonable explanation" and that's about it, an explanation, one man's "opinion"... it doesn't have to be taken as the truth.
Apple is not afraid of the MMI patents. Google should have realized this. Google would have been better off letting MMI shop their portfolio around because the SEC sure as hell would not let the Rockstar consortium buy the patents and that was obvious from the alarm bells that were set off with just the Nortel purchase.
IMO it's stupid to think that Google could be threatened by MMI. If I had been Page I would have told MMI to fuck off and let them try to sell the patents to Apple or whoever and then let MMI know that Google would send $ billion dollars worth of lawyers after MMI the minute the patent sale was announced.
The patent threat wasn't against Google, it was against Android licensees like HTC that don't really have anything to fight back with. It also included the threat of settling with Apple and signing a license agreement with Microsoft and potentially shifting towards Windows phone production. Google's main competition is Microsoft, not Apple, so this is a big deal to them.
Jobs would have shoved the entire Motomobile organization up Sanjay's ass if he had tried to threaten Apple as you're suggesting Sanjay did to Google. What??!! Google is a wimp as well as completely stupid?!
The preponderance of evidence is that Google is completely stupid at the management level, yes.
Google's main competition is Microsoft, not Apple, so this is a big deal to them.
WP7 phone sales disagree w/you
The patent threat wasn't against Google, it was against Android licensees like HTC that don't really have anything to fight back with. It also included the threat of settling with Apple and signing a license agreement with Microsoft and potentially shifting towards Windows phone production. Google's main competition is Microsoft, not Apple, so this is a big deal to them.
Which (as I stated earlier), in my mind, is absolutely assinine. MMI shifting towards MS?! Huh?! A company that is in trouble like Nokia shifting over to the 50:1 shot. Shit... they'd be dead before the first Win phone hit the street. So what if MMI goes after HTC and Samsung? How is that going to change the landscape any more than the purchase of MMI has changed the landscape. Mueller just doesn't make sense to me.
The preponderance of evidence is that Google is completely stupid at the management level, yes.
There is the reason for the purchase... not threats.
________________
... and now a tip for you:
You read Mueller's piece and this is what you got out of it:
"Yes. MMI came to Google and said "buy us or we will destroy Android." Google said "um, ok" and made the offer that they thought was necessary to prevent Android's death. The SEC report was written after the fact in such a way as to head off MMI shareholder lawsuits about the sale."
At this point it wouldn't matter if I had read the piece or not (which I had, btw), you've already summarized your take on the piece and that is all I have to argue.... your take.
Using FOSS to support your argument is like me using one of Daniel's arguments to support my case... lots of fluff, not much substance. That's why I asked for a direct reference to these supposed threats.
WP7 phone sales disagree w/you
I would have added... at this point... but I'm one of those people that believes that MS will rise from the grave.
... and now a tip for you:
You read Mueller's piece and this is what you got out of it:
"Yes. MMI came to Google and said "buy us or we will destroy Android." Google said "um, ok" and made the offer that they thought was necessary to prevent Android's death. The SEC report was written after the fact in such a way as to head off MMI shareholder lawsuits about the sale."
At this point it wouldn't matter if I had read the piece or not (which I had, btw), you've already summarized your take on the piece and that is all I have to argue.... your take.
right
Using FOSS to support your argument is like me using one of Daniel's arguments to support my case... lots of fluff, not much substance. That's why I asked for a direct reference to these supposed threats.
My experience is that FOSS is a step up from Daniel's fluff. It's speculation from an expert as opposed to gossip. Speculation none-the-less.
the anti-Google/Android/Anything non Apple on Apple sites is stronger than the anti-Apple on anything non Apple sites...well at least Google and Android as I'm not sure how Microsoft fanboys are or if they truly exist in such a capacity.
Apparently you haven't read the "Masochist me?" article over at Arstechnica today then. The anti-Apple in there is pretty ridiculous. I'm sure some will debate about Ars being an Apple or non-Apple site, but Apple coverage is only one of many things they do there.
I noticed that nearly every post you made so far contributes absolutely nothing to the topic at hand, all the time while spouting hate and other BS about Google/Samsung/<Insert non-Apple company here>. Did Google had someone murder your entire family or something? Just curious. These kind of hate and anger are not normal, even for an extermely obsessed fanboy.
On topic, Google does seem desperate to obtain Moto's Mobility Division and avoiding a public auction. I still believe it's mainly for the patents. They missed out on the earlier Nortel patent sale to Microsoft/Apple consortium and would be at a significant disadvantage otherwise.
not true. check this out. http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...8&postcount=91