This article seems to imply that Google is introducing 45 degree view today. What I understand is that it is adding some new cities to their already existing feature. I have seen it for Bay area atleast a couple of months back. Today's addition has nothing to do with Cook's apology.
Q: Why compare Google's iOS mobile revenue to its entire business rather than Android?
A: Because the claim was made that Google is going to suffer massive revenue shortages as a result. Fact remains it's not true. According to my investment portfolio (which is paid and can't link to sadly) they claim Apple's overall contract for Google services is worth just under 100m annually. With revenue north of 10b a QUARTER, you may compare it to whatever you like, but it's a small amount regardless.
No one cares what percentage of Google's total revenue comes from iOS. Mobile devices are a small portion of Google's total revenue overall. Your comparison is like saying that GM should never try to make the Corvette competitive with Porsche because the Corvette is only a small portion of their revenues.
A much more relevant question is what percentage of mobile revenues come from iOS. That is, how do revenues from Android, RIM, WIndows mobile, etc stack up against iOS revenues? And by that analysis, iOS had something like 80% of Google's total mobile revenues.
I think that the entire premise of this article raises some interesting questions:
1. If Google has already implemented this, it negates their claim that Apple caught them by surprise. They clearly had some advance idea that Apple was going to do this and had the response almost ready to go.
2. Why in the world did they pick the remote cities that they did? While Apple is offering flyover for New York, San Francisco, etc, Google is offering Kankakee, IL and Gulfport, MS.
3. OTOH, if Google had this ready to go previously and only released it because of Apple, why? Do they not care enough about their customers to improve their apps until Apple forces them to? We already know that they don't care about iOS customers because they've left out important features there, but it seems like they don't care about any of their customers.
Looks to me like it's a very good thing for customers that Apple has done this.
BTW, anyone else notice the typical hypocrisy of the Apple hater? When they're defending Android's fragmentation, choice is good. The consumer benefits from thousands of different devices and OS variety that's so confusing that even the experts can't keep it straight. But when it comes to Apple introducing a new product into the market place that gives consumers another choice, they're the paragon of evil.
A: Because the claim was made that Google is going to suffer massive revenue shortages as a result. Fact remains it's not true. According to my investment portfolio (which is paid and can't link to sadly) they claim Apple's overall contract for Google services is worth just under 100m annually. With revenue north of 10b a QUARTER, you may compare it to whatever you like, but it's a small amount regardless.
You are both right and wrong.
You are right that direct revenues from Apple to Google are minimal. Whoever said it would be a massive revenue shortage was wrong.
OTOH, you're underestimating the value to Google. Mobile is a rapidly growing market and losing presence in mobile is important. One source said that iOS was worth 4 times what Android was to Google, so weakening their position with iOS is likely to be quite expensive in the long run. Second, you are only looking at direct payments rather than ad revenues. The ad revenues are much, much larger and that's where loss of presence in iOS will hurt them (but not critically, of course).
2. Why in the world did they pick the remote cities that they did? While Apple is offering flyover for New York, San Francisco, etc, Google is offering Kankakee, IL and Gulfport, MS.
Because the article is wrong. They are adding these remote cities to their already existing feature.
3. OTOH, if Google had this ready to go previously and only released it because of Apple, why?
No one cares what percentage of Google's total revenue comes from iOS. Mobile devices are a small portion of Google's total revenue overall.
Why is it meaningless? Perhaps you could explain how in the context of the original comment I replied to.
Digitalclips thought that Google maps on iOS was contributing massive revenues to Google. He's probably not the only one who believes that. I think it's far from meaningless and certainly more honest to point out the more likely current impact, including a citation, rather than let imaginations run wild that Google has already been mortally injured by Apple Maps.
No one cares what percentage of Google's total revenue comes from iOS. Mobile devices are a small portion of Google's total revenue overall.
You just negated your own point.
Quote:
A much more relevant question is what percentage of mobile revenues come from iOS. That is, how do revenues from Android, RIM, WIndows mobile, etc stack up against iOS revenues? And by that analysis, iOS had something like 80% of Google's total mobile revenues.
Relevant to obsessed fanatics looking for a talking point, perhaps. Shareholders and investors? Not so much. The only relevant question is what hits the bottom line, and that answer is not much.
How many times do you need to be told Apple was in charge for Maps for iOS. Don't blame Google, they did not write the app, merely provided the API for the information. When Apple asked for the other features, like turn by turn, negotiations broke down between the two and Apple went their own way. That simple.
And actually Apple is still using Google Maps partly. Share a pin on your iPhone and click it in Messages on OSX and see where it immediately goes.
I understood that the pin data is completely separate from the mapping data, hence Google Maps as well.
Either way, compared to Flyover, the 45 degree view is like lipstick on a hog. If viewed from a different direction then photographed it's just as ugly as using the satellite view in 3D (Apple Maps). And who picked the launch cities? Sioux Falls, SD, really? At least Apple picked major cities for their flyover.
Second, you are only looking at direct payments rather than ad revenues. The ad revenues are much, much larger and that's where loss of presence in iOS will hurt them (but not critically, of course).
That's not accurate. The article I linked includes estimated ad revenue flowing from mobile devices in that 2% contribution figure.
...Google will generate about $4.5 billion in gross mobile revenue in 2012, the lion's share ($4 billion) from search ads and the rest ($500 million) from display. He believes that iOS is likely to remain the biggest or close to the biggest source of that revenue, generating roughly 40% of the total (or $1.6 billion). Assuming Google keeps half (after subtracting so-called acquisition costs), iOS would generate about 2% of Google's total revenue in 2012.
The maps.google.com imagery of most of the SF Bay area is about 3-4 years old. I know this because I have checked several locations which show old features still there. My house for example has a picture from 4 years ago before (streetview and satellite) I repainted the outside and the previous owner's car is still in the driveway from 2007!. So go take a hike google, I'm not impressed I can't wait until my iPhone 5 arrives in a few weeks.
... someday in the future unless they develop (if they haven't already) an effective mobile plan that relies very little on Apple's cooperation.
For now any loss of revenue's from Google' Maps not being the default on iOS devices is probably a minor blip and all but unnoticeable in the big picture. The total revenue from ALL Google services on iOS are estimated to contribute just 2.5% of Google overall revenues, and maps is is just a percentage of that 2.5%. IMO it's unlikely to be more than a few hundred million if the estimates of iOS contributions were correct.
I think you are taking what I said the wrong way and I probably worded it badly. I am saying Google has very little presence on mobile web period and it just got a whole lot less ....how is that not a problem?
They said they loved all their customers yet Google maps for iOS was never updated with any significant features in 5 years.. OTOH, Android saw frequent updates. Screw this and screw street view. It's Apple maps all the way for me. And I at least know it will receive regular updates.
That's the most telling aspect. That bias was a tad nasty.
I've been using the Apple version and it's speed is welcome (the vectoring no doubt) and the audible turn-by-turn directions (with corrections for the actual route!) are likely useful for longer trips.
Why is it meaningless? Perhaps you could explain how in the context of the original comment I replied to.
Digitalclips thought that Google maps on iOS was contributing massive revenues to Google. He's probably not the only one who believes that. I think it's far from meaningless and certainly more honest to point out the more likely current impact, including a citation, rather than let imaginations run wild that Google has already been mortally injured by Apple Maps.
See my last post.
Don't forget we are in the post PC era, Macs aside, so over time with no mobile web business worth talking about and PCs declining (and it is web traffic we are talking about so let's not quote number of PCs out there not on the web) I'd take Apple's growth potential over Google's any day.
Say what you will about iOS Maps, the fact is that millions (10s of millions, in fact) of existing iPhone/iPodT/iPad users are converting to iOS6 despite the maps problem. This must irk Google something fierce. The fact that more than 5 million people have purchased iPhone 5 despite the misleading maps must bug Samsung and Motorola to no end. Imagine how many more would be sold if Apple fanboys were correctly guided to the stores by their maps.
Comments
This article seems to imply that Google is introducing 45 degree view today. What I understand is that it is adding some new cities to their already existing feature. I have seen it for Bay area atleast a couple of months back. Today's addition has nothing to do with Cook's apology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
Q: Why compare Google's iOS mobile revenue to its entire business rather than Android?
A: Because the claim was made that Google is going to suffer massive revenue shortages as a result. Fact remains it's not true. According to my investment portfolio (which is paid and can't link to sadly) they claim Apple's overall contract for Google services is worth just under 100m annually. With revenue north of 10b a QUARTER, you may compare it to whatever you like, but it's a small amount regardless.
As usual, you're using a meaningless figure.
No one cares what percentage of Google's total revenue comes from iOS. Mobile devices are a small portion of Google's total revenue overall. Your comparison is like saying that GM should never try to make the Corvette competitive with Porsche because the Corvette is only a small portion of their revenues.
A much more relevant question is what percentage of mobile revenues come from iOS. That is, how do revenues from Android, RIM, WIndows mobile, etc stack up against iOS revenues? And by that analysis, iOS had something like 80% of Google's total mobile revenues.
I think that the entire premise of this article raises some interesting questions:
1. If Google has already implemented this, it negates their claim that Apple caught them by surprise. They clearly had some advance idea that Apple was going to do this and had the response almost ready to go.
2. Why in the world did they pick the remote cities that they did? While Apple is offering flyover for New York, San Francisco, etc, Google is offering Kankakee, IL and Gulfport, MS.
3. OTOH, if Google had this ready to go previously and only released it because of Apple, why? Do they not care enough about their customers to improve their apps until Apple forces them to? We already know that they don't care about iOS customers because they've left out important features there, but it seems like they don't care about any of their customers.
Looks to me like it's a very good thing for customers that Apple has done this.
BTW, anyone else notice the typical hypocrisy of the Apple hater? When they're defending Android's fragmentation, choice is good. The consumer benefits from thousands of different devices and OS variety that's so confusing that even the experts can't keep it straight. But when it comes to Apple introducing a new product into the market place that gives consumers another choice, they're the paragon of evil.
You are both right and wrong.
You are right that direct revenues from Apple to Google are minimal. Whoever said it would be a massive revenue shortage was wrong.
OTOH, you're underestimating the value to Google. Mobile is a rapidly growing market and losing presence in mobile is important. One source said that iOS was worth 4 times what Android was to Google, so weakening their position with iOS is likely to be quite expensive in the long run. Second, you are only looking at direct payments rather than ad revenues. The ad revenues are much, much larger and that's where loss of presence in iOS will hurt them (but not critically, of course).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
2. Why in the world did they pick the remote cities that they did? While Apple is offering flyover for New York, San Francisco, etc, Google is offering Kankakee, IL and Gulfport, MS.
Because the article is wrong. They are adding these remote cities to their already existing feature.
3. OTOH, if Google had this ready to go previously and only released it because of Apple, why?
The feature is not new. Just adding newer cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Google are facing massive losses in revenue.
Have you seen Google stock lately? Like them or not, their stock is not doing bad at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
As usual, you're using a meaningless figure.
No one cares what percentage of Google's total revenue comes from iOS. Mobile devices are a small portion of Google's total revenue overall.
Why is it meaningless? Perhaps you could explain how in the context of the original comment I replied to.
Digitalclips thought that Google maps on iOS was contributing massive revenues to Google. He's probably not the only one who believes that. I think it's far from meaningless and certainly more honest to point out the more likely current impact, including a citation, rather than let imaginations run wild that Google has already been mortally injured by Apple Maps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
No one cares what percentage of Google's total revenue comes from iOS. Mobile devices are a small portion of Google's total revenue overall.
You just negated your own point.
Quote:
A much more relevant question is what percentage of mobile revenues come from iOS. That is, how do revenues from Android, RIM, WIndows mobile, etc stack up against iOS revenues? And by that analysis, iOS had something like 80% of Google's total mobile revenues.
Relevant to obsessed fanatics looking for a talking point, perhaps. Shareholders and investors? Not so much. The only relevant question is what hits the bottom line, and that answer is not much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe
How many times do you need to be told Apple was in charge for Maps for iOS. Don't blame Google, they did not write the app, merely provided the API for the information. When Apple asked for the other features, like turn by turn, negotiations broke down between the two and Apple went their own way. That simple.
And actually Apple is still using Google Maps partly. Share a pin on your iPhone and click it in Messages on OSX and see where it immediately goes.
I understood that the pin data is completely separate from the mapping data, hence Google Maps as well.
Either way, compared to Flyover, the 45 degree view is like lipstick on a hog. If viewed from a different direction then photographed it's just as ugly as using the satellite view in 3D (Apple Maps). And who picked the launch cities? Sioux Falls, SD, really? At least Apple picked major cities for their flyover.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pt123
Have you seen Google stock lately? Like them or not, their stock is not doing bad at all.
I think you actually would have made more money over the last several months by investing in Google stock over Apple
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Second, you are only looking at direct payments rather than ad revenues. The ad revenues are much, much larger and that's where loss of presence in iOS will hurt them (but not critically, of course).
That's not accurate. The article I linked includes estimated ad revenue flowing from mobile devices in that 2% contribution figure.
...Google will generate about $4.5 billion in gross mobile revenue in 2012, the lion's share ($4 billion) from search ads and the rest ($500 million) from display. He believes that iOS is likely to remain the biggest or close to the biggest source of that revenue, generating roughly 40% of the total (or $1.6 billion). Assuming Google keeps half (after subtracting so-called acquisition costs), iOS would generate about 2% of Google's total revenue in 2012.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/07/iphone-and-ipad-to-account-for-2-of-googles-2012-revenue/
GOOG's relatively good performance recently has a lot to do with people migrating their portfolio from FB to GOOG, and very little to do with AAPL.
I think you are taking what I said the wrong way and I probably worded it badly. I am saying Google has very little presence on mobile web period and it just got a whole lot less ....how is that not a problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant
They said they loved all their customers yet Google maps for iOS was never updated with any significant features in 5 years.. OTOH, Android saw frequent updates. Screw this and screw street view. It's Apple maps all the way for me. And I at least know it will receive regular updates.
That's the most telling aspect. That bias was a tad nasty.
I've been using the Apple version and it's speed is welcome (the vectoring no doubt) and the audible turn-by-turn directions (with corrections for the actual route!) are likely useful for longer trips.
See my last post.
Don't forget we are in the post PC era, Macs aside, so over time with no mobile web business worth talking about and PCs declining (and it is web traffic we are talking about so let's not quote number of PCs out there not on the web) I'd take Apple's growth potential over Google's any day.
Say what you will about iOS Maps, the fact is that millions (10s of millions, in fact) of existing iPhone/iPodT/iPad users are converting to iOS6 despite the maps problem. This must irk Google something fierce. The fact that more than 5 million people have purchased iPhone 5 despite the misleading maps must bug Samsung and Motorola to no end. Imagine how many more would be sold if Apple fanboys were correctly guided to the stores by their maps.