Interesting, a partially cloud-based (for-pay) tablet?
That could be very interesting indeed, if they can do it like amazon and leverage their data center/cloud capacity. If they are serious about play and their content providing they can very easily make up some of the loss of the device via the store, and finally start competing with amazon and apple in terms of content sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Just like it was a certainty to many that the iPhone nano would come out. Because if there's one thing we all know, it's that the iPhone screen isn't small enough.
Never was even an option to me that apple would release an iphone nano. Not from an app store dev. requirements standpoint, not from a simplifying the line up standpoint, not from a cheapening the brand standpoint, not from a usability standpoint. Iphone nano was a stupid idea from the rumor mill and some apple fans, and apple I am sure never even considered it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And as the threat is insignificant, they've chosen to ignore it.
[/QUOTE]
It was insignificant a while back but as the market has matured it longer is imho. Now they know if they allow someone to create a viable brand name in the sub 9.8 category they will very soon be able to afford to come close to apple in price and sell a larger screen product as well. In a few months time amazon will very well be in position to sell a larger model and now that fire/amazon is an established brand name with guaranteed service providing they have more of a chance to carve their segment than say samsung, despite samsung's huge advantage in terms of hardware development.
Clever marketing btw that they didnt name it kindle "something" and separated it from the e-ink devices with another name.
I am convinced apple is very well aware of all that and they will come out with a smaller model, with the same resolution as the iphone at a larger screen size so they'll have apps ready for it too.
edit: btw a quick google search returned the following:
Quote:
Still anticipating the Kindle Fire's successor? Well, here's some gossip from the Far East for you Bezos fans. According to the well-connected China Times of Taiwan, it's been informed by parts suppliers that Amazon's next tablet does not yet have a finalized specification, though it hinted that a 10-inch OEM device from Foxconn could be a potential candidate. Amazon's chain of manufacturers -- including Quanta, ACES, Prime View, Singatron, CviLux and the newly added Foxconn -- is allegedly scheduled to supply sample parts in March, followed by mass production (assembled by Quanta and Foxconn, naturally) in May or June before releasing to market by the end of Q2.
I wonder how all the other Android tablet manufacturers like competing with their OS provider.
Google Schmoogle. I don't take Google seriously on any level when it comes to anything. It is a flawed business model. They don't have much experience with putting out Operating Systems and hardware so they'll learn very quickly to get out of that industry and to STAY out.
Google Schmoogle. I don't take Google seriously on any level when it comes to anything. It is a flawed business model. They don't have much experience with putting out Operating Systems and hardware so they'll learn very quickly to get out of that industry and to STAY out.
My thoughts almost exactly. I think they've already learned that they should have stayed out but hubris seems to be keeping them from leaving... either that or the BoD is completely flummoxed as to how to deal with a $12.5 billion purchase and they feel that staying the course is the only solution..
They can sell a lot of units at the $199 price point. Good for them. But, if as reported, Amazon sells their Kindle at a loss, does Google really expect to sell theirs at a profit? Volume unit sales mean nothing if they sell every unit at a loss. And, if their goal is to drive customers from the iPad, well, there are anti-trust laws about such predatory pricing strategies. Good luck with that Larry. Your business strategies are increasingly under fire.
Question: I wonder how secure (from Google's prying eyes) your personal information and browsing habits, etc., will be on a Tablet Google sells at a loss? After all, their primary business is selling information. Particularly your information to their customers.
Android has the same problems everyone else has, but I don't know what Google is doing about it. Their latest and greatest version of IceCreamSandwich has some signal problems running on Galaxy phones.
I see Google as a distraction in the industry, just like I see Kindle. The PC market is down to 2 US makers and the rest are overseas companies making garbage. Apple is gaining in the corporate world pretty darned fast.
I think Apple has gained a lot due to their ecosystem is far ahead of the rest and it will remain that way because they control more aspects of it than everyone else. Apple designs the OSs, hardware, and they have more consistency, plus their support strategy and being a world supplier of content (for Windows and Mac users) and apps.. They just know how to provide a more complete solution for desktop/laptop/mobile media/tablet/smartphone, no one else comes close.
Google has reportedly delayed the launch of its forthcoming 7-inch tablet in an effort to copy Apple's rumored 7.85 inch iPad Mini.
Google attracts the younger kids in their 20 and early 30's that think it is hip and cool to be a wannabe, which is exactly what Google and their entire market is. They attract people that are into fads. Those fads only last so long. Apple attracts a wider audience and they are getting into corporations more and more and more, which makes them a much more stable player in the long run. It was just a matter of time until the Android user gives up and goes with Apple.
The average Google user downloads the free software and they are more into socializing and playing games and they want to act like they have the latest and greatest with 4G LTE, when reality is that 4G LTE isn't widely turned on and it isn't that big of a deal.
Yeah, it is great to have fast download speeds, but it isn't that compelling to buy into just yet. I don't spend a lot of time downloading tons of content to make a big enough difference. But the kids want to take pictures and videos and email it out to their social groups and eat up bandwidth because that's what some are into because they don't really do anything more than socializing because they don't have much of a life because they aren't sitting at home studying, or learning how to play a musical instrument or something constructive.
A $250 tablet from Google isn't going to phase Apple. Apple sells to Corporations, Google doesn't sell to the corporate environment, their story is not that great of a story to tell. in order to have some stability, they have to be able to attract the corporate crowd. I don't see Google desktop/laptops into any viable corporations. Apple is in major corporations now and that market is opening up for them BIG time.
Google's main problem is their OS is thrown on too many different products with too many companies and they are spreading themselves too thin.
I highly doubt Google can be taken seriously in corporate environment, they just look like amateurs.
I've heard rumours from some fairly well connected people that Android is being forked like crazy in the secret labs of almost every company that currently distributes it on their hardware.
Amazon's Kindle Fire opened the flood gates on this idea, and the fact that Google is probably abandoning the Android brand and obviously about to fork it themselves anyway just means it's going to happen sooner rather than later.
Later this year, or early next, you will be reading lots of articles about the bastard offspring of this "forking" with titles like "Is this even Android anymore?," "Whither Android?" or "Samsung's new Mobile OS."
My prediction is that it will turn into a four or five way race depending on which companies can get a media ecosystem in place soon enough. We will see these five entities battling each other with vertical integrated strategies (a la Apple), and the fact that "Android" (or what used to be Android), is part of the underpinnings of two or three of the entries won't even be relevant.
What do you mean by the term "forked"? I don't know which meaning of that term in this case. In terms of the ecosystem, Apple is further ahead than Microsoft and Microsoft is ahead of Google, and that's the three out there. Apple has already had their ecosystem further along due to their advances in iTunes, App store, retail stores, and support system that agument their hardware/software products. apple doesn't really rely on others to fragment out part of this system. Microsoft has to rely on hardware vendors to push their OS, same thing with Google. The hardware vendors are trying to juggle between Microsoft and Google and competing against others that are doing the same thing fighting for low margin hardware. Which would you rather have 50% of a pie of a small percentage of the remaining 50%?
Once one chooses Apple, they rarely look elsewhere. when one chooses Android, they can go from one hardware player to the other until they get fed up and leave. the same thing has been happening to Microsoft.
Why Google Tablet? Instead of, say, a Facebook Tablet or a Microsoft Tablet?
Facebook would be stupid to attempt a hand at the tablet market and Microsoft won't compete with Dell and HP since hardware typically lowers their profit margin.. The only reason I can think of why Microsoft still has XBox is because they bought up a lot of the gaming developers and that's how they make back some profit. Otherwise, they don't make much, if any, profit on the hardware. Microsoft's cash cow is Windows and Office and selling a low margin tablet doesn't make sense since they always have Apple to sell the tablet version of Office for them. I think Microsoft is holding back on development of Office for Android, which is smart.
A fork is a fork unless of course, that fork is the not fork of the fork, then it's not the fork of the fork you expect to be forked since only the fork of the fork can be forked. Capisce?
To summarize: the fork of the fork is the only fork and cannot be any other fork that forked!
If you're still confused, just ask an android guy since they know what's it's like to be forked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure. the other question is how is it getting forked over in these labs of the hardware mfg?
What evidence do you have that's what they do? My understanding is that Google does the ad placements, with the data itself allowing for targeted ads never leaving their control. That's why they're valuable to advertiser's. If they simply sold "the list" then the value to the chain would drop fast just like it did with the old mailing lists that ended up used several times and shared with other departments.
Do you have some link showing Google's really selling the data itself instead of placing/delivering the ads? I'm happy to be corrected if I've misunderstood.
I'll butt in here again just quickly.
I'm personally unaware of documented instances of google directly selling their personal info. That doesn't mean they aren't doing it indirectly or in tricky ways, and I'd love to hear about it if they are.
But they ARE BUYING this data, and they are almost certainly the largest owner of personally-identifiable data in the world. Note I didn't say identified, but identifiable. There is a technical difference, but from a practical standpoint it's the same.
Read down the page a ways and you'll see InviteMedia (a Google company) mentioned:
Quote:
In Mrs. Twombly's case, RapLeaf transmitted data about her to at least 23 data and advertising companies after she logged into Pingg, according to the analysis of the computer code.
Twenty-two companies, including Google's Invite Media, confirmed receiving data from RapLeaf. RapLeaf declined to comment on its relationships with the companies.
Google may or may not be actively selling personal data, but they are definitely part of the ecosystem, and they are buyers of this data, which isn't really any better or worse than selling. If legislation isn't in place they can decide overnight that the benefits of carefully selling access to their treasure trove of data outweighs the benefits of keeping it for their own private use.
If you think this is silly because Page/Brin/et. al are generally "good guys" at heart (and I agree), remember that any or all of them could get hit by a bus next week and management would change. In fact, it's guaranteed that management will eventually change, but the data stores will continue to grow over time. The data they are gathering will never, ever, EVER go away.
I'm personally unaware of documented instances of google directly selling their personal info...
But they ARE BUYING this data, and they are almost certainly the largest owner of personally-identifiable data in the world...
Google may or may not be actively selling personal data, but they are definitely part of the ecosystem... If legislation isn't in place they can decide overnight that the benefits of carefully selling access to their treasure trove of data outweighs the benefits of keeping it for their own private use.
Perhaps if it was Apple or Amazon, but not in Google's case. They're audited by an independent 3rd party under the direction of the FTC, assuring they keep to the requirements and obligations under their stated privacy policy. It prohibits what you're worried about happening and audited yearly to be sure it doesn't.
I don't think Andriod is going to last long anyway. The Microsoft OEM hardware mfg will have to decide which side of the bread is going to get the most butter. Microsoft or Android. Obviously, it will be the Microsoft side. I think some of these so-called hardware makers won't be able to make enough profit by selling and supporting two OSs. Plus, Android doesn't know how to make a good GUI and it just isn't a consistent OS for corporations to buy into. It just doesn't attract the corporate market which Apple is making lots of inroads.
Just some of the corporations that are buying Apple. Mercedes Benz (switched from Dell to Apple), Cisco 25 to 30% usage), GE is starting, several banks, several airlines, etc. Android is for the 20 to 30 year old crowd that likes to socialize, play games is what their biggest demographic is.
If Android loses momentum and an Android user decides to switch. Which platform would that person most likely switch to? Apple or Microsoft? Personally, I think the majority will most likely switch to Apple since the two platforms are very similar in appearance, Metro has too many mixed reviews. Plus, Apple has the most apps 500,000 and counting than Windows 70,000 and counting.
Comments
Interesting, a partially cloud-based (for-pay) tablet?
That could be very interesting indeed, if they can do it like amazon and leverage their data center/cloud capacity. If they are serious about play and their content providing they can very easily make up some of the loss of the device via the store, and finally start competing with amazon and apple in terms of content sales.
Just like it was a certainty to many that the iPhone nano would come out. Because if there's one thing we all know, it's that the iPhone screen isn't small enough.
Never was even an option to me that apple would release an iphone nano. Not from an app store dev. requirements standpoint, not from a simplifying the line up standpoint, not from a cheapening the brand standpoint, not from a usability standpoint. Iphone nano was a stupid idea from the rumor mill and some apple fans, and apple I am sure never even considered it.
And as the threat is insignificant, they've chosen to ignore it.
[/QUOTE]
It was insignificant a while back but as the market has matured it longer is imho. Now they know if they allow someone to create a viable brand name in the sub 9.8 category they will very soon be able to afford to come close to apple in price and sell a larger screen product as well. In a few months time amazon will very well be in position to sell a larger model and now that fire/amazon is an established brand name with guaranteed service providing they have more of a chance to carve their segment than say samsung, despite samsung's huge advantage in terms of hardware development.
Clever marketing btw that they didnt name it kindle "something" and separated it from the e-ink devices with another name.
I am convinced apple is very well aware of all that and they will come out with a smaller model, with the same resolution as the iphone at a larger screen size so they'll have apps ready for it too.
edit: btw a quick google search returned the following:
Still anticipating the Kindle Fire's successor? Well, here's some gossip from the Far East for you Bezos fans. According to the well-connected China Times of Taiwan, it's been informed by parts suppliers that Amazon's next tablet does not yet have a finalized specification, though it hinted that a 10-inch OEM device from Foxconn could be a potential candidate. Amazon's chain of manufacturers -- including Quanta, ACES, Prime View, Singatron, CviLux and the newly added Foxconn -- is allegedly scheduled to supply sample parts in March, followed by mass production (assembled by Quanta and Foxconn, naturally) in May or June before releasing to market by the end of Q2.
I wonder how all the other Android tablet manufacturers like competing with their OS provider.
Focus Daniel-san!
Comment from Apple fan: "Apple sold 15 million iPads in the last quarter."
Reply to comment from Android fan: "There are 15 thousand trees in Central Park and they are beautiful in the fall."
Google has reportedly delayed the launch of its forthcoming 7-inch tablet in an effort to copy Apple's rumored 7.85 inch iPad Mini.
I wonder how all the other Android tablet manufacturers like competing with their OS provider.
Google Schmoogle. I don't take Google seriously on any level when it comes to anything. It is a flawed business model. They don't have much experience with putting out Operating Systems and hardware so they'll learn very quickly to get out of that industry and to STAY out.
Google Schmoogle. I don't take Google seriously on any level when it comes to anything. It is a flawed business model. They don't have much experience with putting out Operating Systems and hardware so they'll learn very quickly to get out of that industry and to STAY out.
My thoughts almost exactly. I think they've already learned that they should have stayed out but hubris seems to be keeping them from leaving... either that or the BoD is completely flummoxed as to how to deal with a $12.5 billion purchase and they feel that staying the course is the only solution..
They can sell a lot of units at the $199 price point. Good for them. But, if as reported, Amazon sells their Kindle at a loss, does Google really expect to sell theirs at a profit? Volume unit sales mean nothing if they sell every unit at a loss. And, if their goal is to drive customers from the iPad, well, there are anti-trust laws about such predatory pricing strategies. Good luck with that Larry. Your business strategies are increasingly under fire.
Question: I wonder how secure (from Google's prying eyes) your personal information and browsing habits, etc., will be on a Tablet Google sells at a loss? After all, their primary business is selling information. Particularly your information to their customers.
Android has the same problems everyone else has, but I don't know what Google is doing about it. Their latest and greatest version of IceCreamSandwich has some signal problems running on Galaxy phones.
I see Google as a distraction in the industry, just like I see Kindle. The PC market is down to 2 US makers and the rest are overseas companies making garbage. Apple is gaining in the corporate world pretty darned fast.
I think Apple has gained a lot due to their ecosystem is far ahead of the rest and it will remain that way because they control more aspects of it than everyone else. Apple designs the OSs, hardware, and they have more consistency, plus their support strategy and being a world supplier of content (for Windows and Mac users) and apps.. They just know how to provide a more complete solution for desktop/laptop/mobile media/tablet/smartphone, no one else comes close.
Shouldn't that be
Google has reportedly delayed the launch of its forthcoming 7-inch tablet in an effort to copy Apple's rumored 7.85 inch iPad Mini.
Google attracts the younger kids in their 20 and early 30's that think it is hip and cool to be a wannabe, which is exactly what Google and their entire market is. They attract people that are into fads. Those fads only last so long. Apple attracts a wider audience and they are getting into corporations more and more and more, which makes them a much more stable player in the long run. It was just a matter of time until the Android user gives up and goes with Apple.
The average Google user downloads the free software and they are more into socializing and playing games and they want to act like they have the latest and greatest with 4G LTE, when reality is that 4G LTE isn't widely turned on and it isn't that big of a deal.
Yeah, it is great to have fast download speeds, but it isn't that compelling to buy into just yet. I don't spend a lot of time downloading tons of content to make a big enough difference. But the kids want to take pictures and videos and email it out to their social groups and eat up bandwidth because that's what some are into because they don't really do anything more than socializing because they don't have much of a life because they aren't sitting at home studying, or learning how to play a musical instrument or something constructive.
Yes, Apple is indeed doomed! DOOMED I SAY!!!
A $250 tablet from Google isn't going to phase Apple. Apple sells to Corporations, Google doesn't sell to the corporate environment, their story is not that great of a story to tell. in order to have some stability, they have to be able to attract the corporate crowd. I don't see Google desktop/laptops into any viable corporations. Apple is in major corporations now and that market is opening up for them BIG time.
Google's main problem is their OS is thrown on too many different products with too many companies and they are spreading themselves too thin.
I highly doubt Google can be taken seriously in corporate environment, they just look like amateurs.
Focus Daniel-san!
they still have a 1-2 week wait on line.
I am sure we'll hear more about everything at the quarterly report.
I've heard rumours from some fairly well connected people that Android is being forked like crazy in the secret labs of almost every company that currently distributes it on their hardware.
Amazon's Kindle Fire opened the flood gates on this idea, and the fact that Google is probably abandoning the Android brand and obviously about to fork it themselves anyway just means it's going to happen sooner rather than later.
Later this year, or early next, you will be reading lots of articles about the bastard offspring of this "forking" with titles like "Is this even Android anymore?," "Whither Android?" or "Samsung's new Mobile OS."
My prediction is that it will turn into a four or five way race depending on which companies can get a media ecosystem in place soon enough. We will see these five entities battling each other with vertical integrated strategies (a la Apple), and the fact that "Android" (or what used to be Android), is part of the underpinnings of two or three of the entries won't even be relevant.
What do you mean by the term "forked"? I don't know which meaning of that term in this case. In terms of the ecosystem, Apple is further ahead than Microsoft and Microsoft is ahead of Google, and that's the three out there. Apple has already had their ecosystem further along due to their advances in iTunes, App store, retail stores, and support system that agument their hardware/software products. apple doesn't really rely on others to fragment out part of this system. Microsoft has to rely on hardware vendors to push their OS, same thing with Google. The hardware vendors are trying to juggle between Microsoft and Google and competing against others that are doing the same thing fighting for low margin hardware. Which would you rather have 50% of a pie of a small percentage of the remaining 50%?
Once one chooses Apple, they rarely look elsewhere. when one chooses Android, they can go from one hardware player to the other until they get fed up and leave. the same thing has been happening to Microsoft.
What do you mean by the term "forked"?
As in... forked up, forked over, for forks sake, forked off, etc.
As in... forked up, forked over, for forks sake, forked off, etc.
That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure. the other question is how is it getting forked over in these labs of the hardware mfg?
Amazon don't even sell the Kindle outside of the US, so theres no decent tablets apart from the iPad, so a Google Tablet would be a instant hit.
Why Google Tablet? Instead of, say, a Facebook Tablet or a Microsoft Tablet?
Why Google Tablet? Instead of, say, a Facebook Tablet or a Microsoft Tablet?
Facebook would be stupid to attempt a hand at the tablet market and Microsoft won't compete with Dell and HP since hardware typically lowers their profit margin.. The only reason I can think of why Microsoft still has XBox is because they bought up a lot of the gaming developers and that's how they make back some profit. Otherwise, they don't make much, if any, profit on the hardware. Microsoft's cash cow is Windows and Office and selling a low margin tablet doesn't make sense since they always have Apple to sell the tablet version of Office for them. I think Microsoft is holding back on development of Office for Android, which is smart.
To summarize: the fork of the fork is the only fork and cannot be any other fork that forked!
If you're still confused, just ask an android guy since they know what's it's like to be forked.
That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure. the other question is how is it getting forked over in these labs of the hardware mfg?
What evidence do you have that's what they do? My understanding is that Google does the ad placements, with the data itself allowing for targeted ads never leaving their control. That's why they're valuable to advertiser's. If they simply sold "the list" then the value to the chain would drop fast just like it did with the old mailing lists that ended up used several times and shared with other departments.
Do you have some link showing Google's really selling the data itself instead of placing/delivering the ads? I'm happy to be corrected if I've misunderstood.
I'll butt in here again just quickly.
I'm personally unaware of documented instances of google directly selling their personal info. That doesn't mean they aren't doing it indirectly or in tricky ways, and I'd love to hear about it if they are.
But they ARE BUYING this data, and they are almost certainly the largest owner of personally-identifiable data in the world. Note I didn't say identified, but identifiable. There is a technical difference, but from a practical standpoint it's the same.
I'm not going to dig out a bunch of references, but here's one from a pretty reputable source (the Wall Street Journal) talking about marrying online profiles with offline names.
Read down the page a ways and you'll see InviteMedia (a Google company) mentioned:
In Mrs. Twombly's case, RapLeaf transmitted data about her to at least 23 data and advertising companies after she logged into Pingg, according to the analysis of the computer code.
Twenty-two companies, including Google's Invite Media, confirmed receiving data from RapLeaf. RapLeaf declined to comment on its relationships with the companies.
Google may or may not be actively selling personal data, but they are definitely part of the ecosystem, and they are buyers of this data, which isn't really any better or worse than selling. If legislation isn't in place they can decide overnight that the benefits of carefully selling access to their treasure trove of data outweighs the benefits of keeping it for their own private use.
If you think this is silly because Page/Brin/et. al are generally "good guys" at heart (and I agree), remember that any or all of them could get hit by a bus next week and management would change. In fact, it's guaranteed that management will eventually change, but the data stores will continue to grow over time. The data they are gathering will never, ever, EVER go away.
I'm personally unaware of documented instances of google directly selling their personal info...
But they ARE BUYING this data, and they are almost certainly the largest owner of personally-identifiable data in the world...
Google may or may not be actively selling personal data, but they are definitely part of the ecosystem... If legislation isn't in place they can decide overnight that the benefits of carefully selling access to their treasure trove of data outweighs the benefits of keeping it for their own private use.
Perhaps if it was Apple or Amazon, but not in Google's case. They're audited by an independent 3rd party under the direction of the FTC, assuring they keep to the requirements and obligations under their stated privacy policy. It prohibits what you're worried about happening and audited yearly to be sure it doesn't.
Just some of the corporations that are buying Apple. Mercedes Benz (switched from Dell to Apple), Cisco 25 to 30% usage), GE is starting, several banks, several airlines, etc. Android is for the 20 to 30 year old crowd that likes to socialize, play games is what their biggest demographic is.