Google has stated they will not give motorolla any special treatment. ...
Yeah, except they've subtly changed the story on what they are going to do with Moto a couple of times already. At first they weren't interested in hardware at all, now they are going to operate it at "arms length" instead for instance. And the whole "arm's length" thing is just an old business dodge anyway. Google is now a mobile hardware company regardless of how they want to spin it.
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung
...They were also as part of the deal as speculated by china Supposed to keep android free and open for the next 5 years. ...
This is an empty and easy to realise promise if ever there was one. Android is "free and open" now, (except it isn't).
This statement isn't worth the electrons to show it on your screen.
That's why I distinctly specified Android smartphone.
Some OEMs are already paying MS to use Android on their smartphones... why not just pay MS to use Windows 8 and, as a [very big] side benefit, not have to compete with your OS provider who also is a smart phone provider.
Then they'd have to compete with Nokia who have a special deal with Microsoft.
In addition manufacturers are not allowed to modify the look of the Windows Phone OS making it much harder to differentiate themselves from the competition.
Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.
Google gathers details of how you used their services, such as your search queries (1)
Google tracks cookies that may uniquely identify your browser or your Google Account (1)
Google collects telephony log information like your phone number, calling-party number, forwarding numbers, time and date of calls, duration of calls, SMS routing information and types of calls (1)
Google logs device event information such as crashes, system activity, hardware settings, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and referral URL (1)
Google collects device-specific information (such as your hardware model, operating system version, unique device identifiers, and mobile network information including phone number) Google may associate your device identifiers or phone number with your Google Account (1)
While such information is gathered by competing products and services, Google's vast range of "products and services" uniquely positions Google to collect more information about consumers than any other company. The problem with Google's vast network of information gathering is that Google has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of concern for consumers through their policies and practices. Furthermore, Google has consistently used very expedient methods to comply with or meet demands whether those of stockholders or governments. The vast amount of information collected by Google has arguably made Google the greatest threat to privacy ever known, a vast unsecured treasure trove of information that attracts hackers and online thieves, and; most worrisome; governments.
Google has done very little to protect Android users from malware. Considering that many people have significant amounts of personal information on their mobile devices, I find this completely unacceptable.
According to Sunnyvale, Calif., security firm Juniper Networks known instances of Android-related malware -- "virtually all" involving apps - have jumped steadily month by month from 400 in June 2011 to 15,507 in February 2012 (2)
"San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security reported In August 2011, that "an estimated half-million to one million people were affected by Android malware in the first half of 2011." (2)
Trend Micro of Japan, which has U.S. headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. - identified "more than 1,000 malicious Android apps" last year, 90 percent of them on Google's site and noted that the number of bad apps grew last year at 60 percent per month. Trend Micro has estimated the total this year "will grow to more than 120,000," (2)
Google proclaims that "Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible. Whether we’re designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage, we take great care to ensure that they will ultimately serve you, rather than our own internal goal or bottom line." (3)This is in direct conflict with Google's business model which serves advertisers and is a serious, undisclosed conflict of interest.
Google removed links to an anti-Scientology site after the Church of Scientology claimed copyright infringement in 2002. (4)
Google handed over the records of some users of its social-networking service, Orkut, to the Brazilian government, which was investigating alleged racist, homophobic, and pornographic content in September 2006. (4)
Google's mission statement "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" didn’t stop Google from censoring their Chinese search engine to gain access to a lucrative market. (4)
Privacy International has named Google the worst company in their 2007 survey and "hostile to privacy." (5)
Google has used their dominant position with Google Search to prefer Google+ search results and has published results that include personal data which doesn't provide an opt-out option. (6)
Google employees have vandalized OpenStreetMap by adding erroneous data. (7)
Then they'd have to compete with Nokia who have a special deal with Microsoft.
In addition manufacturers are not allowed to modify the look of the Windows Phone OS making it much harder to differentiate themselves from the competition.
HTC Titan sales are performing well and many reviewers have referred to the HTC Titan as the flagship phone for the Microsoft Windows Phone platform.
Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.
Your right. At the current rate Google is earning revenue off of Android, it would be 20 years before this deal pays for itself. Given they already have roughly 45-50% of smart phones sales, I don't see how dropping 12 Bil on Moto will help them achieve more growth.
This is the simple, basic point that lots of folks are missing.
Thus far, Android had just about amounted to zilch by way of revenues and cash flows for Google.
Personally, I can't wait for iOS 6 "Sundance." If the rumors hold any truth, Apple will finally unveil their Map & Directions app with more than 17 years of collective development effort on June 11, 2012. Furthermore, rumors have suggested Apple has been developing application programming interfaces for Siri, Apple's "Do Engine." If Apple hits their target with both Map & Directions and Siri they may be able to effectively lock Google out of the iOS platform. As Google representatives have stated that the lion's share of mobile platform profits is from iOS versus Android this may be the death knell for Google Android. I certainly can't imagine stockholders are pleased with Android thus far since while platform growth is phenomenal their monetization of the Android platform is completely unsatisfactory.
So by your logic, people will buy cloner Windows Phones because Google bought Motorola? Never mind all the vendors which have cloner Windows Phones on the market right now, which are not selling because Windows Phone is garbage. I think you are going to see that your bluster is WAY off the the mark....forever.
It would be really helpful if you'd pay attention. No one said any such thing.
What I said was that Microsoft would benefit because the HANDSET MANUFACTURERS would be nervous about Google (and other reasons). That means that handset manufacturers will probably put more time and energy into Windows Mobile than they would otherwise. Perhaps more WM phones and fewer Android phones. Perhaps more polish on the WM phones. Today, if you buy an HTC or Samsung phone, it's probably Android. After this deal closes, HTC, Samsung, and others will probably have more WM options.
There is no doubt that Google purchased Motorola Mobility for its patents......cause their products suck and I don't believe they can start designing decent ones just because they have a new owner.
Lets assume that Motorola operate as a separate entity like Google says. The issue with Android OEM's is that Google is trying to gain more control of Android so they can make it a more consistent user experience. What that means is "get rid of the Android skins".
The problem is that to prevent their products from being commoditized the OEM's can only defferentiate on user feel (ie. skins and hardware). Already many Android handsets look the same and that is driving down their margins. As more and more OEMs fall in line with OEM to get a small leg up (smaller OEMs do this) the bigger OEMs are getting worried. So what can they do to stop their products from being commoditized. Well they can license multiple OSes such as WinMo and Tizen and Bada. It is not in the interests of the OEMs like Samsung for Android to be more important than their own brand so they need to make sure that Google is on notice that they will switch rather than lose profit margins.
Uh, Apple and many other companies "acquire" companies all the time to gain control of patents. Siri, emoji, and countless others. Didn't they purchase exclusive rights to that liquid metal for use in future products? How about that Israeli chip manufacturer? Let's even go back as far as the GUI from Xerox? And they didnt aquire that one
It's common-place in this industry. Just this time it came to a very multi-$B sum and two very large companies. So spare me the evil Google malarkey. And don't give me the "big brother" speech either. Apple gathers just as much personal data that google does.
Yes, except with Apple you are the customer and its hardware is the product. With Google advertisers are the customer, and your information obtained through its free services is the product. That difference in philosophy will translate into one company treating you better than the other. Further, Apple generally buys companies to incorporate the companies products into its own products. Siri is a prime example. Apple could have taken Google's approach and just steal Siri's technology, but it bought it instead.
It would be really helpful if you'd pay attention. No one said any such thing.
What I said was that Microsoft would benefit because the HANDSET MANUFACTURERS would be nervous about Google (and other reasons). That means that handset manufacturers will probably put more time and energy into Windows Mobile than they would otherwise. Perhaps more WM phones and fewer Android phones. Perhaps more polish on the WM phones. Today, if you buy an HTC or Samsung phone, it's probably Android. After this deal closes, HTC, Samsung, and others will probably have more WM options.
Hardware manufacturers probably would love to dump Android now. Except Motorola, every Android hardware manufacturer pays a royalty to Microsoft already which roughly translates to what they'd pay Microsoft for a OS license. Further, Microsoft indemnifies hardware partners from lawsuits over parents, something Google does not do. Manufacturers, however, aren't going to abandon Android unless they can get customers to use something else.
Then they'd have to compete with Nokia who have a special deal with Microsoft.
In addition manufacturers are not allowed to modify the look of the Windows Phone OS making it much harder to differentiate themselves from the competition.
A license for Window Phone isn't much more then hardware manufactures already pay for a Microsoft Android license not to mention the cost of patent litigation costs to defend their use of Android. Going to Windows would be cheaper. Differentiating themselves from other Windows Phone licensees would be a problem, but that is still a problem for Android users. They don't advertise the customizations to Android, they just advertise their phones as being Android based. Moreover, the varying flavors of Android really aren't that different.
Further, most Android phones are cheaply made, even Samsung's top of the line Galaxy phones. The materials are cheap plastic. Nokia actually makes decent hardware, and if I weren't an iPhone user, I would go with Nokia.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung
Google has stated they will not give motorolla any special treatment. ...
Yeah, except they've subtly changed the story on what they are going to do with Moto a couple of times already. At first they weren't interested in hardware at all, now they are going to operate it at "arms length" instead for instance. And the whole "arm's length" thing is just an old business dodge anyway. Google is now a mobile hardware company regardless of how they want to spin it.
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung
...They were also as part of the deal as speculated by china Supposed to keep android free and open for the next 5 years. ...
This is an empty and easy to realise promise if ever there was one. Android is "free and open" now, (except it isn't).
This statement isn't worth the electrons to show it on your screen.
Welcome to the plaintiff side of a lot of patent lawsuits, Google.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga
Welcome to the plaintiff side of a lot of patent lawsuits, Google.
I think they get to be a defendant now.
What Larry said: "I'm excited to announce today that our Motorola Mobility deal has closed..."
What Larry thought: "...but why do I feel like such a sucker?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
That's why I distinctly specified Android smartphone.
Some OEMs are already paying MS to use Android on their smartphones... why not just pay MS to use Windows 8 and, as a [very big] side benefit, not have to compete with your OS provider who also is a smart phone provider.
Then they'd have to compete with Nokia who have a special deal with Microsoft.
In addition manufacturers are not allowed to modify the look of the Windows Phone OS making it much harder to differentiate themselves from the competition.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out with their cable box division.
If they start to push GoogleTV in cable boxes I fully suspect the government to step in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
To answer the personal data gathering policies of apple. Note the bit about becoming part of a human cent-iPad
[=http://www.apple.com/privacy/][/]
[=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703983704576277101723453610.html][/][/SPOILER]
Happy reading.
Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.
Google gathers details of how you used their services, such as your search queries (1)
Google tracks cookies that may uniquely identify your browser or your Google Account (1)
Google collects telephony log information like your phone number, calling-party number, forwarding numbers, time and date of calls, duration of calls, SMS routing information and types of calls (1)
Google logs device event information such as crashes, system activity, hardware settings, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and referral URL (1)
Google collects device-specific information (such as your hardware model, operating system version, unique device identifiers, and mobile network information including phone number) Google may associate your device identifiers or phone number with your Google Account (1)
While such information is gathered by competing products and services, Google's vast range of "products and services" uniquely positions Google to collect more information about consumers than any other company. The problem with Google's vast network of information gathering is that Google has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of concern for consumers through their policies and practices. Furthermore, Google has consistently used very expedient methods to comply with or meet demands whether those of stockholders or governments. The vast amount of information collected by Google has arguably made Google the greatest threat to privacy ever known, a vast unsecured treasure trove of information that attracts hackers and online thieves, and; most worrisome; governments.
Google has done very little to protect Android users from malware. Considering that many people have significant amounts of personal information on their mobile devices, I find this completely unacceptable.
According to Sunnyvale, Calif., security firm Juniper Networks known instances of Android-related malware -- "virtually all" involving apps - have jumped steadily month by month from 400 in June 2011 to 15,507 in February 2012 (2)
"San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security reported In August 2011, that "an estimated half-million to one million people were affected by Android malware in the first half of 2011." (2)
Trend Micro of Japan, which has U.S. headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. - identified "more than 1,000 malicious Android apps" last year, 90 percent of them on Google's site and noted that the number of bad apps grew last year at 60 percent per month. Trend Micro has estimated the total this year "will grow to more than 120,000," (2)
Google proclaims that "Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible. Whether we’re designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage, we take great care to ensure that they will ultimately serve you, rather than our own internal goal or bottom line." (3) This is in direct conflict with Google's business model which serves advertisers and is a serious, undisclosed conflict of interest.
Google removed links to an anti-Scientology site after the Church of Scientology claimed copyright infringement in 2002. (4)
Google handed over the records of some users of its social-networking service, Orkut, to the Brazilian government, which was investigating alleged racist, homophobic, and pornographic content in September 2006. (4)
Google's mission statement "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" didn’t stop Google from censoring their Chinese search engine to gain access to a lucrative market. (4)
Privacy International has named Google the worst company in their 2007 survey and "hostile to privacy." (5)
Google has used their dominant position with Google Search to prefer Google+ search results and has published results that include personal data which doesn't provide an opt-out option. (6)
Google employees have vandalized OpenStreetMap by adding erroneous data. (7)
1. http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
2. Steve Johnson. Posted March 17, 2012. Updated March 23, 2012. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_20182226/android-apps-targeted-by-malware?source=rss_viewed. San Jose Mercury News. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
3. http://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
4. Adam L. Penenberg. October 10, 2006. http://motherjones.com/politics/2006/10/google-evil. MotherJones. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
5. Unattributed. June 8, 2007. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/race-bottom-privacy-ranking-internet-service-companies. Privacy International. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
6. John Fontana. January 12, 2012 ZDNet. Retrieved May 22, 2012. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/identity/ftc-asked-to-probe-google-search-integration/143
7. Lucian Parfeni. January 17, 2012. Softpedia. Retrieved May 22, 2012. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-Accused-of-Vandalizing-OpenStreetMap-Data-246965.shtml
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando
Then they'd have to compete with Nokia who have a special deal with Microsoft.
In addition manufacturers are not allowed to modify the look of the Windows Phone OS making it much harder to differentiate themselves from the competition.
HTC Titan sales are performing well and many reviewers have referred to the HTC Titan as the flagship phone for the Microsoft Windows Phone platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov
So Android so far has cost Google billions with nothing to show for it. I wait for Google to collapse under its own weight.
This is the simple, basic point that lots of folks are missing.
Thus far, Android had just about amounted to zilch by way of revenues and cash flows for Google.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. Thus, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.
........ETC ETC.....
1. http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
2. Steve Johnson. Posted March 17, 2012. Updated March 23, 2012. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_20182226/android-apps-targeted-by-malware?source=rss_viewed. San Jose Mercury News. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
3. http://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
4. Adam L. Penenberg. October 10, 2006. http://motherjones.com/politics/2006/10/google-evil. MotherJones. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
5. Unattributed. June 8, 2007. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/race-bottom-privacy-ranking-internet-service-companies. Privacy International. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
6. John Fontana. January 12, 2012 ZDNet. Retrieved May 22, 2012. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/identity/ftc-asked-to-probe-google-search-integration/143
7. Lucian Parfeni. January 17, 2012. Softpedia. Retrieved May 22, 2012. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-Accused-of-Vandalizing-OpenStreetMap-Data-246965.shtml
Superb post. Thanks.
Your right. At the current rate Google is earning revenue off of Android, it would be 20 years before this deal pays for itself. Given they already have roughly 45-50% of smart phones sales, I don't see how dropping 12 Bil on Moto will help them achieve more growth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
This is the simple, basic point that lots of folks are missing.
Thus far, Android had just about amounted to zilch by way of revenues and cash flows for Google.
Personally, I can't wait for iOS 6 "Sundance." If the rumors hold any truth, Apple will finally unveil their Map & Directions app with more than 17 years of collective development effort on June 11, 2012. Furthermore, rumors have suggested Apple has been developing application programming interfaces for Siri, Apple's "Do Engine." If Apple hits their target with both Map & Directions and Siri they may be able to effectively lock Google out of the iOS platform. As Google representatives have stated that the lion's share of mobile platform profits is from iOS versus Android this may be the death knell for Google Android. I certainly can't imagine stockholders are pleased with Android thus far since while platform growth is phenomenal their monetization of the Android platform is completely unsatisfactory.
It would be really helpful if you'd pay attention. No one said any such thing.
What I said was that Microsoft would benefit because the HANDSET MANUFACTURERS would be nervous about Google (and other reasons). That means that handset manufacturers will probably put more time and energy into Windows Mobile than they would otherwise. Perhaps more WM phones and fewer Android phones. Perhaps more polish on the WM phones. Today, if you buy an HTC or Samsung phone, it's probably Android. After this deal closes, HTC, Samsung, and others will probably have more WM options.
"Hello Go Go." (Sounds like Hello Moto? You get the idea...)
There is no doubt that Google purchased Motorola Mobility for its patents......cause their products suck and I don't believe they can start designing decent ones just because they have a new owner.
Lets assume that Motorola operate as a separate entity like Google says. The issue with Android OEM's is that Google is trying to gain more control of Android so they can make it a more consistent user experience. What that means is "get rid of the Android skins".
The problem is that to prevent their products from being commoditized the OEM's can only defferentiate on user feel (ie. skins and hardware). Already many Android handsets look the same and that is driving down their margins. As more and more OEMs fall in line with OEM to get a small leg up (smaller OEMs do this) the bigger OEMs are getting worried. So what can they do to stop their products from being commoditized. Well they can license multiple OSes such as WinMo and Tizen and Bada. It is not in the interests of the OEMs like Samsung for Android to be more important than their own brand so they need to make sure that Google is on notice that they will switch rather than lose profit margins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
Uh, Apple and many other companies "acquire" companies all the time to gain control of patents. Siri, emoji, and countless others. Didn't they purchase exclusive rights to that liquid metal for use in future products? How about that Israeli chip manufacturer? Let's even go back as far as the GUI from Xerox? And they didnt aquire that one
It's common-place in this industry. Just this time it came to a very multi-$B sum and two very large companies. So spare me the evil Google malarkey. And don't give me the "big brother" speech either. Apple gathers just as much personal data that google does.
Yes, except with Apple you are the customer and its hardware is the product. With Google advertisers are the customer, and your information obtained through its free services is the product. That difference in philosophy will translate into one company treating you better than the other. Further, Apple generally buys companies to incorporate the companies products into its own products. Siri is a prime example. Apple could have taken Google's approach and just steal Siri's technology, but it bought it instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
It would be really helpful if you'd pay attention. No one said any such thing.
What I said was that Microsoft would benefit because the HANDSET MANUFACTURERS would be nervous about Google (and other reasons). That means that handset manufacturers will probably put more time and energy into Windows Mobile than they would otherwise. Perhaps more WM phones and fewer Android phones. Perhaps more polish on the WM phones. Today, if you buy an HTC or Samsung phone, it's probably Android. After this deal closes, HTC, Samsung, and others will probably have more WM options.
Hardware manufacturers probably would love to dump Android now. Except Motorola, every Android hardware manufacturer pays a royalty to Microsoft already which roughly translates to what they'd pay Microsoft for a OS license. Further, Microsoft indemnifies hardware partners from lawsuits over parents, something Google does not do. Manufacturers, however, aren't going to abandon Android unless they can get customers to use something else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando
Then they'd have to compete with Nokia who have a special deal with Microsoft.
In addition manufacturers are not allowed to modify the look of the Windows Phone OS making it much harder to differentiate themselves from the competition.
A license for Window Phone isn't much more then hardware manufactures already pay for a Microsoft Android license not to mention the cost of patent litigation costs to defend their use of Android. Going to Windows would be cheaper. Differentiating themselves from other Windows Phone licensees would be a problem, but that is still a problem for Android users. They don't advertise the customizations to Android, they just advertise their phones as being Android based. Moreover, the varying flavors of Android really aren't that different.
Further, most Android phones are cheaply made, even Samsung's top of the line Galaxy phones. The materials are cheap plastic. Nokia actually makes decent hardware, and if I weren't an iPhone user, I would go with Nokia.