Yes it is. Google makes virtually zero off of Android, as they give it away. The only hopes that they have of making money with the OS is because Google gets to display ads on all Android devices
Yes it is. Google makes virtually zero off of Android, as they give it away. The only hopes that they have of making money with the OS is because Google gets to display ads on all Android devices
Actually it's worse than ZERO.
Google is spending $12.5 Billion to protect Android (Moto acquisition), not to mention the millions they're spending litigation, lawyer fees, etc. from all the Android-related Law suits.
so if you think about it Android is a LIABILITY. *NOT* an Asset for Google.
Android isn't a company... it's merely software provided by Google for manufacturers to put on their phone.
Why the need to state this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
But is Google getting revenue from Android? Of course. Google earns revenue from ads on Android.
In other words, those say repeat the mantra of zero revenue are indeed dishonest, ignorant or intransigent, or all of the above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
Interesting note... Google earns more revenue from ads on iOS.
I've made the same point myself, repeatedly. In reality, we don't truly know that as Google has made no official revelation. It's an observation extrapolated from a quote from Eric Schmidt as he addressed Congress. But it's a reasonable extrapolation. Regardless, to laugh at that is short-sighted. This is not a sprint and the smartphone industry is far more mature, and both companies are positioned to grow and profit more.
Google is spending $12.5 Billion to protect Android (Moto acquisition), not to mention the millions they're spending litigation, lawyer fees, etc. from all the Android-related Law suits.
so if you think about it Android is a LIABILITY. *NOT* an Asset for Google.
I understand you need to reduce everything Google to crap in your mind in order to worship Apple. But spouting nonsense like this discredits your intellect.
Both Apple and Google are successful, profitable, admirable companies populated by brilliant engineers, albeit in different ways. Anyone who goes to the extreme kissing the butt of one company and belittling the other is displaying pure ignorance. Do yourself a favor - it's not that hard to, once in a while, find something good to say about Google, and something bad about Apple. You will come across as more honest, balanced and intelligent. Take my word for it - these are good qualities.
Yes it is. Google makes virtually zero off of Android, as they give it away. The only hopes that they have of making money with the OS is because Google gets to display ads on all Android devices
You have contradicted yourself just in this post alone, and God knows how many times elsewhere.
I understand you need to reduce everything Google to crap in your mind in order to worship Apple. But spouting nonsense like this discredits your intellect.
Both Apple and Google are successful, profitable, admirable companies populated by brilliant engineers, albeit in different ways. Anyone who goes to the extreme kissing the butt of one company and belittling the other is displaying pure ignorance. Do yourself a favor - it's not that hard to, once in a while, find something good to say about Google, and something bad about Apple. You will come across as more honest, balanced and intelligent. Take my word for it - these are good qualities.
My arguments are backed by FACTS. You have not said a single thing that can counter my arguments.
Is Google spending $12.5 billion to protect Android? YES or NO?? ANSWER the question.
That's a phenomenal number - unbelievable. Assuming a 7 billion population and no repeat buyers, everyone on earth would have an android within 2.7 years (1,000 days).
700,000 cannot be true.
It reminds me of when Cabella's opened a store in my area. The state gov't said it would bring 4 million tourists per year - that's 10,958 tourists per day. Not gonna happen.
In other words, those say repeat the mantra of zero revenue are indeed dishonest, ignorant or intransigent, or all of the above.
I've made the same point myself, repeatedly. In reality, we don't truly know that as Google has made no official revelation. It's an observation extrapolated from a quote from Eric Schmidt as he addressed Congress. But it's a reasonable extrapolation. Regardless, to laugh at that is short-sighted. This is not a sprint and the smartphone industry is far more mature, and both companies are positioned to grow and profit more.
Oops... you're right.
Google does, in fact, make revenue from Android.
I misread that earlier comment, and thought it said near-zero profit.
Yes it is. Google makes virtually zero off of Android, as they give it away. The only hopes that they have of making money with the OS is because Google gets to display ads on all Android devices
You do know there are no ads on Android devices right?
I don't turn on my phone and see an ad...
I don't call someone and see an ad
hell I don't even go on the browser and see an ad
Certain apps have ads somewhere...ironically none of the Google apps do.
There are a lot less ads on Android than people think...and revenue suggests iOS has more ads on it than Android...
And Google won't benefit at all from Kindle Fire. Amazon has cut out the "profit layer" of Android 2.3 and replaced it with their own. Google gets absolutely nothing from the deal, other than a generic "activations per day" number for use in their marketing copy.
Come to think of it, there was no deal between Amazon and Google, was there? Google dumped Android onto the market. Free. Open. Amazon took the ball and ran with it, and now they have the only successful Android-based pad computer. And Google hates it.
Google hates the Kindle Fire and its fork of Android for many reasons. Amazon sends zero revenue to Google from direct e-book, media, and other sales. They send zero customer contact information, zero purchase history and product affinity data, and zero browsing history back to Google. Amazon even has a separate and incompatible App Store, so apps previously purchased from Android Market on other Android devices aren't allowed to run on Kindle Fire. And Amazon sells the Fire at a loss to achieve a low price point. They can do this because revenue earned from the device from content sales more than makes up for the initial loss. And it puts the hurt on any and all other Android-based pad makers because they're also going to be forced to sell their pads at a loss. Without Amazon's ecosystem to recoup the losses. Kindle Fire has locked up the low end (aka "The Android End") of the market. Apple locked up the high end in 2010. There's no niche left to sell into.
But worst of all, Amazon controls all ads on Kindle Fire. 96% of Google's revenue comes from ads. Do the math, Sergey.
Proprietary. Closed. The inevitable fate of Android in the pad space.
Hey guy...how are you...do you have these statements from Google that they hate Amazon for the Kindle Fire?
Also...I'm sure the ads on the fire are Google's ad services..
Also Google doesn't record a Fire sale as an activation (According to all known metrics)
Google makes little money from Anything on Android except mobile ad impressions on some apps and some webpages...
The top selling Android phones are all high end phones...
you're such a dishonest person it's sad.
Be nice. He might not be dishonest. Remember my post - there are 3 possibilities for the single-end-of-spectrum comments - dishonesty, ignorance or intransigence. So be nice and do not automatically assume it's door #1.
My arguments are backed by FACTS. You have not said a single thing that can counter my arguments.
Is Google spending $12.5 billion to protect Android? YES or NO?? ANSWER the question.
Yes. But that does not reduce their Android-based revenue to zero. Nor does it turn Android into a liability, either in accounting or speaking in the general sense of the word.
Man, no wonder they say the American education system has gone to hell.
Also Google doesn't record a Fire sale as an activation (According to all known metrics)
That's true. Even if they wanted to, they can't because they have no way of tracking Fire activation.
Based on other metrics (non-Google), however, Fire is doing quite well. The tablet market is no longer just an iPad market. (This should make me popular )
That's a phenomenal number - unbelievable. Assuming a 7 billion population and no repeat buyers, everyone on earth would have an android within 2.7 years (1,000 days).
This does not invalidate the 700k number in any shape, way or form.
Which one of the two claimed to be sterile, so he could get out of paying child support for his out-of-wedlock daughter who was on welfare? Oh wait, that was Steve Jobs.
If marketshare of an OS was the most important factor then why doesn't Apple give it away? They only include it with their smartphones, though it does dominate the smartphone market which no Android-based device comes close to beating.
If marketshare of the handset market was the most important factor then why only create a smartphone OS? Based on your faulty logic smartphones are doomed to fail because dumb phones dominate the handset market.
This kind of reasoning is exactly is wrong, gets pretty tiring hearing this argument over and over again. Yes, the single most number of devices sold is Apple. But do you think that is what it will be in the long run? In the end, this is so much like Windows vs Mac. Death by a thousand cuts. If it drops down to 10% and is still the single biggest handset by volume, it has bragging rights, but might not be anything more than that.
Comments
Near zero revenue? Is that really honest?
Yes it is. Google makes virtually zero off of Android, as they give it away. The only hopes that they have of making money with the OS is because Google gets to display ads on all Android devices
Yes it is. Google makes virtually zero off of Android, as they give it away. The only hopes that they have of making money with the OS is because Google gets to display ads on all Android devices
Actually it's worse than ZERO.
Google is spending $12.5 Billion to protect Android (Moto acquisition), not to mention the millions they're spending litigation, lawyer fees, etc. from all the Android-related Law suits.
so if you think about it Android is a LIABILITY. *NOT* an Asset for Google.
Near zero revenue? Is that really honest?
Android isn't a company... it's merely software provided by Google for manufacturers to put on their phone.
But is Google getting revenue from Android? Of course. Google earns revenue from ads on Android.
Interesting note... Google earns more revenue from ads on iOS.
So... getting back to the issue at hand... it doesn't look like all that Android market share is as amazing as it seems.
Android's incredible market share is a great bullet-point, though. It's certainly something to talk about!
Android isn't a company... it's merely software provided by Google for manufacturers to put on their phone.
Why the need to state this?
But is Google getting revenue from Android? Of course. Google earns revenue from ads on Android.
In other words, those say repeat the mantra of zero revenue are indeed dishonest, ignorant or intransigent, or all of the above.
Interesting note... Google earns more revenue from ads on iOS.
I've made the same point myself, repeatedly. In reality, we don't truly know that as Google has made no official revelation. It's an observation extrapolated from a quote from Eric Schmidt as he addressed Congress. But it's a reasonable extrapolation. Regardless, to laugh at that is short-sighted. This is not a sprint and the smartphone industry is far more mature, and both companies are positioned to grow and profit more.
Actually it's worse than ZERO.
Google is spending $12.5 Billion to protect Android (Moto acquisition), not to mention the millions they're spending litigation, lawyer fees, etc. from all the Android-related Law suits.
so if you think about it Android is a LIABILITY. *NOT* an Asset for Google.
I understand you need to reduce everything Google to crap in your mind in order to worship Apple. But spouting nonsense like this discredits your intellect.
Both Apple and Google are successful, profitable, admirable companies populated by brilliant engineers, albeit in different ways. Anyone who goes to the extreme kissing the butt of one company and belittling the other is displaying pure ignorance. Do yourself a favor - it's not that hard to, once in a while, find something good to say about Google, and something bad about Apple. You will come across as more honest, balanced and intelligent. Take my word for it - these are good qualities.
Yes it is. Google makes virtually zero off of Android, as they give it away. The only hopes that they have of making money with the OS is because Google gets to display ads on all Android devices
You have contradicted yourself just in this post alone, and God knows how many times elsewhere.
I understand you need to reduce everything Google to crap in your mind in order to worship Apple. But spouting nonsense like this discredits your intellect.
Both Apple and Google are successful, profitable, admirable companies populated by brilliant engineers, albeit in different ways. Anyone who goes to the extreme kissing the butt of one company and belittling the other is displaying pure ignorance. Do yourself a favor - it's not that hard to, once in a while, find something good to say about Google, and something bad about Apple. You will come across as more honest, balanced and intelligent. Take my word for it - these are good qualities.
My arguments are backed by FACTS. You have not said a single thing that can counter my arguments.
Is Google spending $12.5 billion to protect Android? YES or NO?? ANSWER the question.
700,000 cannot be true.
It reminds me of when Cabella's opened a store in my area. The state gov't said it would bring 4 million tourists per year - that's 10,958 tourists per day. Not gonna happen.
Why the need to state this?
In other words, those say repeat the mantra of zero revenue are indeed dishonest, ignorant or intransigent, or all of the above.
I've made the same point myself, repeatedly. In reality, we don't truly know that as Google has made no official revelation. It's an observation extrapolated from a quote from Eric Schmidt as he addressed Congress. But it's a reasonable extrapolation. Regardless, to laugh at that is short-sighted. This is not a sprint and the smartphone industry is far more mature, and both companies are positioned to grow and profit more.
Oops... you're right.
Google does, in fact, make revenue from Android.
I misread that earlier comment, and thought it said near-zero profit.
Yes it is. Google makes virtually zero off of Android, as they give it away. The only hopes that they have of making money with the OS is because Google gets to display ads on all Android devices
You do know there are no ads on Android devices right?
I don't turn on my phone and see an ad...
I don't call someone and see an ad
hell I don't even go on the browser and see an ad
Certain apps have ads somewhere...ironically none of the Google apps do.
There are a lot less ads on Android than people think...and revenue suggests iOS has more ads on it than Android...
These are
1) Junk FREE or $10 Android crap phones running Android 1.x
2) BUY ONE GET ONE DEALS
The top selling Android phones are all high end phones...
you're such a dishonest person it's sad.
Let's look at real world metrics.
November 2011 mobile device statistics as compiled by Mellenia Media research:
Top 5 Device Manufacturers:
1 - Apple
2 - Samsung
3 - RIM
4 - HTC
5 - Motorola
Top Mobile Phones:
1 - Apple iPhone
2 - Blackberry Curve
3 - Motorola Droid X
4 - HTC Evo
5 - LG Optimus
Looks like Apple's doing just fine.
What does that have to do with anything? At all?
And Google won't benefit at all from Kindle Fire. Amazon has cut out the "profit layer" of Android 2.3 and replaced it with their own. Google gets absolutely nothing from the deal, other than a generic "activations per day" number for use in their marketing copy.
Come to think of it, there was no deal between Amazon and Google, was there? Google dumped Android onto the market. Free. Open. Amazon took the ball and ran with it, and now they have the only successful Android-based pad computer. And Google hates it.
Google hates the Kindle Fire and its fork of Android for many reasons. Amazon sends zero revenue to Google from direct e-book, media, and other sales. They send zero customer contact information, zero purchase history and product affinity data, and zero browsing history back to Google. Amazon even has a separate and incompatible App Store, so apps previously purchased from Android Market on other Android devices aren't allowed to run on Kindle Fire. And Amazon sells the Fire at a loss to achieve a low price point. They can do this because revenue earned from the device from content sales more than makes up for the initial loss. And it puts the hurt on any and all other Android-based pad makers because they're also going to be forced to sell their pads at a loss. Without Amazon's ecosystem to recoup the losses. Kindle Fire has locked up the low end (aka "The Android End") of the market. Apple locked up the high end in 2010. There's no niche left to sell into.
But worst of all, Amazon controls all ads on Kindle Fire. 96% of Google's revenue comes from ads. Do the math, Sergey.
Proprietary. Closed. The inevitable fate of Android in the pad space.
Hey guy...how are you...do you have these statements from Google that they hate Amazon for the Kindle Fire?
Also...I'm sure the ads on the fire are Google's ad services..
Also Google doesn't record a Fire sale as an activation (According to all known metrics)
Google makes little money from Anything on Android except mobile ad impressions on some apps and some webpages...
The top selling Android phones are all high end phones...
you're such a dishonest person it's sad.
Be nice. He might not be dishonest. Remember my post - there are 3 possibilities for the single-end-of-spectrum comments - dishonesty, ignorance or intransigence. So be nice and do not automatically assume it's door #1.
Oops... you're right.
Google does, in fact, make revenue from Android.
I misread that earlier comment, and thought it said near-zero profit.
Making a concession or admission of any kind around here is rare. You're cool, dude.
My arguments are backed by FACTS. You have not said a single thing that can counter my arguments.
Is Google spending $12.5 billion to protect Android? YES or NO?? ANSWER the question.
Yes. But that does not reduce their Android-based revenue to zero. Nor does it turn Android into a liability, either in accounting or speaking in the general sense of the word.
Man, no wonder they say the American education system has gone to hell.
Also Google doesn't record a Fire sale as an activation (According to all known metrics)
That's true. Even if they wanted to, they can't because they have no way of tracking Fire activation.
Based on other metrics (non-Google), however, Fire is doing quite well. The tablet market is no longer just an iPad market. (This should make me popular
That's a phenomenal number - unbelievable. Assuming a 7 billion population and no repeat buyers, everyone on earth would have an android within 2.7 years (1,000 days).
This does not invalidate the 700k number in any shape, way or form.
Which one of the two claimed to be sterile, so he could get out of paying child support for his out-of-wedlock daughter who was on welfare? Oh wait, that was Steve Jobs.
Who made you the morality police?
Fallacious reasoning on every count.
If marketshare of an OS was the most important factor then why doesn't Apple give it away? They only include it with their smartphones, though it does dominate the smartphone market which no Android-based device comes close to beating.
If marketshare of the handset market was the most important factor then why only create a smartphone OS? Based on your faulty logic smartphones are doomed to fail because dumb phones dominate the handset market.
This kind of reasoning is exactly is wrong, gets pretty tiring hearing this argument over and over again. Yes, the single most number of devices sold is Apple. But do you think that is what it will be in the long run? In the end, this is so much like Windows vs Mac. Death by a thousand cuts. If it drops down to 10% and is still the single biggest handset by volume, it has bragging rights, but might not be anything more than that.