Editorial: Apple's market disruption savvy is bad news for Android

1234579

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 167
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,268member
    tzeshan wrote: »
    Google Now is different from Wikipedia.  Google Now only gets information related to me.  Wikipedia collects facts that are universal.  

    ,,,, and recent changes to voice searches.

    if I ask how old Jimmy Carter is I'm verbally given the answer instead of just offered a list of written links. Other questions like "what time is sunset today", "what is Arrmageddon", "what is a compound bow" and "When was the iPhone first released" are other questions that all got verbal answers instead of just links to the answer.
  • Reply 122 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by igriv View Post


     


    Search algorithms are important, but Google also has AdSense and, even more importantly, the best infrastructure in the world. It would take Apple a LONG time to duplicate this, and given the lousy implementation of their current cloud services, the sun might well go nova before then.



    Google is good, I will give them that. They are also very de-focused with Android and all the hardware investments that goes with that. By not sticking to their knitting, they could lose out in the search arena. It could happen. I remember when Motorola Mobil reigned supreme, now they are a money-losing brand circling the drain...

  • Reply 123 of 167

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by igriv View Post


     


    Is this so different from Google's ecosystem?



    Apple's ecosystem is solid and highly used.


     


    Google's ecosystem comes and goes in strange patterns and is by tire kickers looking for a free app.

  • Reply 124 of 167
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,047member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    ,,,, and recent changes to voice searches.



    if I ask how old Jimmy Carter is I'm verbally given the answer instead of just offered a list of written links. Other questions like "what time is sunset today", "what is Arrmageddon", "what is a compound bow" and "When was the iPhone first released" are other questions that all got verbal answers instead of just links to the answer.


    Will it verbally tell me what is a nuclear power plant? 

  • Reply 125 of 167
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,127member
    I just read the entire article and I have to say that it is nothing more than clickbait/fanboism/wishful thinking. 

    Apple blew a huge lead in the phone industry and there's nothing to prevent the same thing happening to the tablet industry. iOS is so very very stagnant and locked down. In 2007/8 it was awesome. Now? Meh.

    Reality check: Apple never had a huge lead in the handset or smartphone sector.
  • Reply 126 of 167
    igrivigriv Posts: 1,177member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sumjuan View Post




    I find iTunes to be superior to those me too, half-baked services. iTunes works as advertised. Those others make you jump through hoops to use them.


    What lock in are you referring to? I can use my mp3s with any of these services.



     


    Suppose you have an iTunes library of music. Good luck playing it on an android device. Of course, you can export the mp3s, but that's a pain. If you have a better way, do tell.

  • Reply 127 of 167
    igrivigriv Posts: 1,177member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post


    Apple's ecosystem is solid and highly used.


     


    Google's ecosystem comes and goes in strange patterns and is by tire kickers looking for a free app.



     


    My point was simply that Google offers all the same functionality. You might not like the implementation (from what I gather, many people prefer Google Now to Siri, for example, but I am sure some don't), but the functionality being implemented is more-or-less the same, and in some cases more extensive.

  • Reply 128 of 167
    igrivigriv Posts: 1,177member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post


    Google is good, I will give them that. They are also very de-focused with Android and all the hardware investments that goes with that. By not sticking to their knitting, they could lose out in the search arena. It could happen. I remember when Motorola Mobil reigned supreme, now they are a money-losing brand circling the drain...



     


    One way to rephrase what you say is: Google's search superiority is Google's to lose. Not a very encouraging (to competitors) statement.

  • Reply 129 of 167
    igrivigriv Posts: 1,177member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post





    What kind if logic is that? If I'm spending that much money (although the iDevice prices are comparable to other non-Apple devices) it better be good. No margins for error there. Cheap crap gets easily replaced if there's a problem while higher priced items don't.


     


    I am not sure what you are saying, but if I scrape up my pennies and by a Porsche Carrera 4, it is psychologically very difficult for me to decide that I would have been happier with a Camry.

  • Reply 130 of 167
    igrivigriv Posts: 1,177member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    A look at the link I provided will show you it's different.


    How? Which of the services on your link does google NOT provide?

  • Reply 131 of 167
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    igriv wrote: »
    How? Which of the services on your link does google NOT provide?

    You really know so little about Apple and Google's cloud services that you can't see any variances between the two?
  • Reply 132 of 167
    igrivigriv Posts: 1,177member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post


     


    Now, I haven't watched TV in a long time, but not too long ago people hated commercials and advertising. And yet here we are living in a world where the company with the largest share of the mobile phone OS market is in fact an advertising company. And to even further baffle my mind, here is someone excited about that! However, I guess without advertising the free-loaders wouldn't have anything to do on the Internet.


     


    Gee, I sure hope Apple DOESN'T want to duplicate that!


     


    So you're saying Apple's NEW service sucks, even though it is NEW, you agree it takes a long time to build up infrastructure. But you're not going to give Apple time and just assume it won't EVER get any better just because some of those services currently don't live up to YOUR expectations?



     


    What are you talking about? Google is in business to make money, as is Apple. What would Apple's business model be? To use search to sell devices? Which means that on a PC or an android device you wouldn't be able to use it? Yeah, that's going to work great. 


     


    As for your other point, I am not saying it is impossible, merely that it will take time at best and so far Apple has not shown much competence in this space. Of course, things COULD change, but some might argue that Apple should stick to what they are good at.

  • Reply 133 of 167
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,268member
    tzeshan wrote: »
    Will it verbally tell me what is a nuclear power plant? 

    Of course not. I guess you miss the point. Rather than just offering the link to someone else's answer Google is trying to supply the actual answer itself in some cases. It all likelihood it will only get better at doing so. It's already a great deal faster than competing services when Google has the verbal answer available.
  • Reply 134 of 167
    igrivigriv Posts: 1,177member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post


     


    iTunes is far superior to those other offerings. You're not looking hard enough, or you're fine with settling for what those other lack.


     


    The thing most people miss with Apple's services is... Apple doesn't create and build services for the public at large, they offer these services to their customers - meaning you have to buy an Apple product to use that service. This is the same argument that people used to make about not being able to install Mac OS X on a generic PC... That argument is quickly shot down because Apple doesn't sell their operating system to the public at large, they sell their operating system to their existing customers - meaning you have to buy an Apple product. You can't compare Windows and Mac OS X just as you can't compare services like Dropbox and iCloud. Windows and Dropbox ARE the products. Mac OS X and iCloud are features of a product. Windows and Dropbox are of course going to be in as many places as possible, if not, those companies aren't making money. On the other hand... Apple makes money selling devices and if they can add unique features to those devices, then they'll have a leg up on their competition.



     


    Yes, repeat after me "vendor lock-in is evil". Apple does it big-time, and people resent it, even while using Apple devices and Apple services.

  • Reply 135 of 167
    igrivigriv Posts: 1,177member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    You really know so little about Apple and Google's cloud services that you can't see any variances between the two?


     


    Why don't you just answer the fucking question?

  • Reply 136 of 167
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,047member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Of course not. I guess you miss the point. Rather than just offering the link to someone else's answer Google is trying to supply the actual answer itself in some cases. It all likelihood it will only get better at doing so. It's already a great deal faster than competing services when Google has the verbal answer available.


    Do you know Google Now is catching up to Siri which is first?  

  • Reply 137 of 167
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    igriv wrote: »
    Why don't you just answer the fucking question?

    I already did in my initial response which clearly shows services that Apple provides than Google does not, and have eluded to Google supplying cloud services that Apple does not. If you can't see there is absolutely no variation between Apple and Google's cloud services then the question is: What is "fucking" wrong with comprehension.
  • Reply 138 of 167
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,268member
    tzeshan wrote: »
    Do you know Google Now is catching up to Siri which is that first?  

    I'm not sure what you mean by "catching up to Siri which is that first". Could you be a little more specific? To me they look like two different beasts. There's thing's things Google Now and Google Voice Search does that Siri does not and vice-versa. In what way is Siri first?
  • Reply 139 of 167
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    tzeshan wrote: »
    Do you know Google Now is catching up to Siri which is first?  

    It's never good to play the "first" card as that has no bearing on quality. Google Now and Samsung S Voice are playing catch-up to Siri as a well rounded integrated digital personal assistance but in many ways Google has jumped in with foundations of Google Now years before Apple with GOOG-411. That was over 3 years of getting voice patterns and queries. On top of that search suggestions in Google are more than enough proof that Google has long since understood what users likely want from a search.

    That said, I don't think many knew about it and therefore it's usage was probably considerably less than what experiences with Siri on any given day. Apple also bought Siri which is based off of decades of AI development from SRI, that used and uses Nuance voice-to-text.

    The bottom line is each have their pros and cons. What Apple has done in a short time is impressive but what Google has done to catch up with Siri the service is also impressive. I prefer Siri overall but there are aspects of Google Now I like. For instance, the text-to-speech seems more natural and not having to click a link that then opens up in Safari (assuming you don't need to first input your PIN) if a web page for the service needs to be shown is a huge gaffe, IMO. Outside of that I think Apple's is cleaner, smoother, and overall more accurately. I've seen speed vary widely between Google Now and Siri so it's hard to examine where the issue for that resides as there are too many variables.
  • Reply 140 of 167
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    I'm not sure what you mean by "catching up to Siri which is that first". Could you be a little more specific? To me they look like two different beasts. There's thing's things Google Now and Google Voice Search does that Siri does not and vice-versa. In what way is Siri first?

    It's pretty obvious that Google Now, Samsung S-Voice, and MS TellMe are direct competitors to Siri. Siri was first and the others raced to get their own service to their respective OSes, or in the UI shell of Android in the case of Samsung. As I stated previously, only Google Now seems to have anything that resembles a competent competitor to Siri and in some ways appears better, but they are direct competitors.
Sign In or Register to comment.