I used to enjoy DED articles, but to be honest this constant bickering and "everyone else is wrong" is starting to get boring and monotonous.
At least the other writers here bring some variety in their articles.
I feel like I just stumble across The Onion.
If DED (and those who defend his editorials) were really confident about Apple’s place in the tech landscape he wouldn’t need to write these overly defensive and/or rah rah Apple’s the best (and everyone else is just copying them) articles all the time.
Sorry but that’s worthless bullshit. Apple is routinely pounded by nearly all news sources and portrayed as being a dying gasp away from utter failure. We’ve all seen these pieces, week after week. DED and PED are two of the few dissenting voices, and they’ve both made a niche in that space. It doesn’t mean they’re lacking confidence and really even saying such a thing only shows an incredibly naive and poor understanding of how publishing works. Don’t quit your day job.
Love how DED gets the usuals predictably butthurt.
It's come to the point where if DED writes something you know the competition is doing something right. Everything is just twisting the truth into lies to show that the competition is failing and Apple is winning.
You are seriously delusional. The Macalope has built a career around debunking all the nonsense DOOM narratives pushed about Apple. Their claims of Apple failure are legion. And yet, always wrong. Voices like the hoofed one an DED’s are a refreshing brief of fresh air and sanity.
I used to enjoy DED articles, but to be honest this constant bickering and "everyone else is wrong" is starting to get boring and monotonous.
At least the other writers here bring some variety in their articles.
I feel like I just stumble across The Onion.
If DED (and those who defend his editorials) were really confident about Apple’s place in the tech landscape he wouldn’t need to write these overly defensive and/or rah rah Apple’s the best (and everyone else is just copying them) articles all the time.
When facts about Apple are presented(rarely), the writer is "biased", "unconfident", "fanboy".
When those millions of anti-Apple articles based on rumors, opinion, speculation and made up crap are posted, "Apple is losing lol".
Meanwhile, in the real world, Google is setting the standard for autonomous cars, has the best assistant on the market, and keeps making advances in photos. It's still early days for all AI but to suggest they've squandered their lead is plain silly.
I think that the point of the article is that itisn't innovation if you aren't making money at it, and almost without fail, Apple, with a small share of the smartphone market is grabbing most of the revenue and profits comparative to Android OEM'a and developers.
Google itself is doing fine, excepting the scrutiny given it's near monopoly in search, and privacy issues, and it's persistent inability to generate much revenue off of consumer hardware. Google has noticeable leads in services and technologies that the OEM's and developers have, for the most part, been unable to leverage to enhance revenue and profit, and Google I/O doesn't appear to have accelerated that.
If that is the point of the article then I disagree with it. Google makes its money in advertising - much of it on mobile - and uses the profits to fund innovative technologies that won't be profitable in the R&D stage.
How are the OEM's doing? Which "innovative technologies" has Google released that have generated any income other than from search or advertising?
Some of Google's OEMs make money and some don't. Many of them have different business models to Apple, e.g. Samsung doesn't need to make as much profit off selling handsets because it has its components business and the scale and innovation they get from handsets benefits the components business. Huawei's carrier business benefits when more people get capable smartphones in their hands and use more data. Besides, I'm not terribly concerned in defending the OEMs.
The comment about search or advertising being Google's main source of income, well, yeah, that's its core business. It's like saying Apple only makes money from hardware. Its advertising business has evolved - it was previously all desktop search, now it's mobile and it's not just search - it's YouTube, Maps, Gmail. Imagine if it hadn't poured money into those three areas before the iPhone launched, it'd be stuck on a dwindling income from desktop search. Not to mention that it's third in the market for cloud, which makes >$1B/quarter and growing. It doesn't operate like Apple where it launches only a few products and wants them to be perfect on day one. Google tries its hand at plenty of things, knowing that if 7 things fail and 3 take off, it will be successful. And it's users are, or many of them are, happy to try things that are just beta releases. And yes, they are doing the world a service by helping to get technology to people at a low/no cost.
Meanwhile, in the real world, Google is setting the standard for autonomous cars, has the best assistant on the market, and keeps making advances in photos. It's still early days for all AI but to suggest they've squandered their lead is plain silly.
I think that the point of the article is that itisn't innovation if you aren't making money at it, and almost without fail, Apple, with a small share of the smartphone market is grabbing most of the revenue and profits comparative to Android OEM'a and developers.
Google itself is doing fine, excepting the scrutiny given it's near monopoly in search, and privacy issues, and it's persistent inability to generate much revenue off of consumer hardware. Google has noticeable leads in services and technologies that the OEM's and developers have, for the most part, been unable to leverage to enhance revenue and profit, and Google I/O doesn't appear to have accelerated that.
If that is the point of the article then I disagree with it. Google makes its money in advertising - much of it on mobile - and uses the profits to fund innovative technologies that won't be profitable in the R&D stage.
Or proftable in the production stage, or the launch stage or really any stage. If not for search revenues Google would have gone out of business more times than our glorious leader.
Meanwhile, in the real world, Google is setting the standard for autonomous cars, has the best assistant on the market, and keeps making advances in photos. It's still early days for all AI but to suggest they've squandered their lead is plain silly.
I think that the point of the article is that itisn't innovation if you aren't making money at it, and almost without fail, Apple, with a small share of the smartphone market is grabbing most of the revenue and profits comparative to Android OEM'a and developers.
Google itself is doing fine, excepting the scrutiny given it's near monopoly in search, and privacy issues, and it's persistent inability to generate much revenue off of consumer hardware. Google has noticeable leads in services and technologies that the OEM's and developers have, for the most part, been unable to leverage to enhance revenue and profit, and Google I/O doesn't appear to have accelerated that.
If that is the point of the article then I disagree with it. Google makes its money in advertising - much of it on mobile - and uses the profits to fund innovative technologies that won't be profitable in the R&D stage.
Google is almost 20 years old. But in two decades it still makes almost all of its money from one thing — selling ads. When will these “innovative technologies” bear fruit? Inversely the Apple of today has completely different, new, innovative, and profitable products than from 20 years ago.
I should have tagged you both in my response above
I used to enjoy DED articles, but to be honest this constant bickering and "everyone else is wrong" is starting to get boring and monotonous.
At least the other writers here bring some variety in their articles.
Dilger specializes in exposing/countering anti-Apple propaganda with splashes of cold, hard, reality. If that's not your thing, move on to the next article. I myself find it immensely enjoyable.
It's come to the point where if DED writes something you know the competition is doing something right. Everything is just twisting the truth into lies to show that the competition is failing and Apple is winning. ...
When the numbers come in, and the allegedly disappointing iPhone X turns out to be the most successful single model of smartphone ever made, while Google's Pixel phone is a much worse flop than the now-completely-cancelled Windows Phone — what truth do you need to twist into what lie, to make it look like Apple is winning and its competition is failing?
IIRC, he said he's going to avoid "deliberate baiting" that DED does. I don't think he's going to get into a discussion/ argument on a DED thread.
I could be wrong.
I don't think GatorGuy said that he will avoid ALL DED articles. He mentioned it in a specific article, which was mostly "spin"/"alternate facts". Coming to the specific questions from @raderthekat, the biggest mistake both of you are making is an assumption - An assumption that GatorGuy will DEFEND Google at any cost. Far from it. Whenever he has a different point of view (mostly about lies against Google which are presented by MANY people as facts in this forum time and again), he will present his views by sharing additional information which we are NOT aware of. I won't be surprised if GatorGuy accepts most of the Google's failings called out by @Raderthekat. And share additional information about points (if any) which he disagrees with.
It’s apparently not too bad in the US, but go outside of the US, and discover the appalling quality of Siri, of Maps, and the many Apple services that are not working (News) or half-working or not culturally adapted (Apple Music is super US-English-centric). After that, even if you continue to argue that “Apple is the Best”, you have a serious blindness problem. Remember, a week or two ago, when AppleInsider ran a story about how Apple’s lead was only in English-speaking areas ? Well, the finding didn’t surprise me. And even if DED repeatedly states that “Apple is better and Google is doomed”, what I see in real life is that people are using Google’s services because Google gives them the culturally and geographically-adapted information they need for their daily activities and leisure. I’m not implying that Google’s services are perfect, but they are at least usable and trustable. In my corner of the world, for instance, Apple Maps is still fraught with blatant errors after all these years. Do you seriously believe people around here are still using Apple Maps ? No way ! So dis as much as you want over Google (they certainly have their hardware continuity problem), the fact remains that Apple itself has major problems. Even if DED keeps on yelling that the others (Google, Microsoft and Nokia) have problems, it doesn’t settle or diminish Apple’s sirious problems.
I used to enjoy DED articles, but to be honest this constant bickering and "everyone else is wrong" is starting to get boring and monotonous.
At least the other writers here bring some variety in their articles.
I feel like I just stumble across The Onion.
If DED (and those who defend his editorials) were really confident about Apple’s place in the tech landscape he wouldn’t need to write these overly defensive and/or rah rah Apple’s the best (and everyone else is just copying them) articles all the time.
Apple hating is a lot like politics right now. There are plenty of people attacking Apple. Heck, I’ve even seen Apple insider articles that poopoo Apple for some of the reasons DED disputes in this article.
The proportions are heavily stacked against Apple when it comes to media, so I’m totally fine with DED beating the same drum over and over. that drum is: Apple is doing way better than people give them credit for
So you’re like a Trump supporter where all that matters is bashingn the media.
I agree that some of the hysteria around Apple is ridiculous, especially right before an earnings release with all these stupid doom and gloom iPhone supply chain rumors. But Apple leadership is also responsible for the narrative and sentiment around the company and I think there’s lots to be desired there. The biggest thing Apple lost when Steve died was their salesman and story teller. The current leadership at Apple is good at giving us the what and how by the why is often lacking. The why was never lacking when Steve Jobs was on stage.
I used to enjoy DED articles, but to be honest this constant bickering and "everyone else is wrong" is starting to get boring and monotonous.
At least the other writers here bring some variety in their articles.
I feel like I just stumble across The Onion.
If DED (and those who defend his editorials) were really confident about Apple’s place in the tech landscape he wouldn’t need to write these overly defensive and/or rah rah Apple’s the best (and everyone else is just copying them) articles all the time.
Well, it’s better than listening to people like you who constantly run the company down.
Ah so I see this is just to make certain Apple fans feel better. Btw, I don’t think I run the company down I’m just not a mindless cheerleader who thinks Apple can never do wrong.
It’s apparently not too bad in the US, but go outside of the US, and discover the appalling quality of Siri, of Maps, and the many Apple services that are not working (News) or half-working or not culturally adapted (Apple Music is super US-English-centric). After that, even if you continue to argue that “Apple is the Best”, you have a serious blindness problem. Remember, a week or two ago, when AppleInsider ran a story about how Apple’s lead was only in English-speaking areas ? Well, the finding didn’t surprise me. And even if DED repeatedly states that “Apple is better and Google is doomed”, what I see in real life is that people are using Google’s services because Google gives them the culturally and geographically-adapted information they need for their daily activities and leisure. I’m not implying that Google’s services are perfect, but they are at least usable and trustable. In my corner of the world, for instance, Apple Maps is still fraught with blatant errors after all these years. Do you seriously believe people around here are still using Apple Maps ? No way ! So dis as much as you want over Google (they certainly have their hardware continuity problem), the fact remains that Apple itself has major problems. Even if DED keeps on yelling that the others (Google, Microsoft and Nokia) have problems, it doesn’t settle or diminish Apple’s sirious problems.
(And, no, I am not a Google fan.)
Agreed. I also live in an area where Apple Maps is largely unusable but Google covers every nook and cranny and throws in lots of secondary information too.
Google isn't perfect though but I can live with voice navigation changing 'TV' (as part of a road name) into 'television' as long as it:
A. Gets me to my destination
And
B. Does so without trying to guide me up a road that is 'no entry'.
Also, Siri's Spanish Spanish voice has got worse, not better.
And of course Siri can't can't handle bi or tri lingual situations well. I hope this sees a boost at WWDC. Some things should be extremely easy to solve, like tagging street with different pronunciation options.
If I'm using Siri in Spanish but I'm in Catalonia, Siri should ask how I want to hear street names.
I used to enjoy DED articles, but to be honest this constant bickering and "everyone else is wrong" is starting to get boring and monotonous.
At least the other writers here bring some variety in their articles.
I feel like I just stumble across The Onion.
If DED (and those who defend his editorials) were really confident about Apple’s place in the tech landscape he wouldn’t need to write these overly defensive and/or rah rah Apple’s the best (and everyone else is jut copying them) articles all the time.
Not really, but i'm just calling someone up about their opinions about an article, when their comments are quite clearly biased against the topic in the first place
This is probably DED burner account.
I wish I was that eloquent in writing articles, whereas you just come onto these forums to post anything negative. Well done!
Because I do not agree with the commentary and I really meant ridiculous commentary, it's now a matter of me coming on "these forums" with negativity? You do know the coverage in the piece was essentially ALL negative towards a competitor right? Also, let me be clear, I do not care either way if you're for or against Google or Apple and their products and services. I for one live in an Apple ecosystem but I can also be objective and call BS, and this piece was straight BS. So I suggest you read the oh so eloquent piece that you consider as such and not come at individuals because you simply do not see the piece the same way others do and call it negative. Stop being a millennial.
Meanwhile, in the real world, Google is setting the standard for autonomous cars, has the best assistant on the market, and keeps making advances in photos. It's still early days for all AI but to suggest they've squandered their lead is plain silly.
I think that the point of the article is that itisn't innovation if you aren't making money at it, and almost without fail, Apple, with a small share of the smartphone market is grabbing most of the revenue and profits comparative to Android OEM'a and developers.
Google itself is doing fine, excepting the scrutiny given it's near monopoly in search, and privacy issues, and it's persistent inability to generate much revenue off of consumer hardware. Google has noticeable leads in services and technologies that the OEM's and developers have, for the most part, been unable to leverage to enhance revenue and profit, and Google I/O doesn't appear to have accelerated that.
If that is the point of the article then I disagree with it. Google makes its money in advertising - much of it on mobile - and uses the profits to fund innovative technologies that won't be profitable in the R&D stage.
How are the OEM's doing? Which "innovative technologies" has Google released that have generated any income other than from search or advertising?
Google technologies generate a lot of social surplus even if the benefit does not go always to Google.
Kubernetes is the standard for container orchestration and was donated by Google to an open source foundation. It's the standard now for everyone including azure, aws, even Oracle cloud.
Tensorflow is the most popular ml framework both in production and for teaching. Donated by Google.
Hadoop and all its countless derivatives are built a set of papers from 2005 on MapReduce that essentially tool Google's system as a blueprint.
Angular is one of the most popular web dev frameworks. By Google.
Go is a fast growing system programming language. Also by Google.
This is an eclectic list which is easy to continue. Google has been great about open sourcing high quality frameworks or published enough about their production systems so that others could copy it.
Apple also did great things such as webkit. Microsoft has been fantastic recently as well.
There is no reason to view this as a zero sum game. We live in great times where many companies produce great tech that is open sourced from the start.
You just moved the goalposts. We were discussing innovative technology that leads to profits, since profit is the air corporations breathe and how we measure them, but now you’re citing their charitable donations. Irrelevant to the topic at hand.
And most of these technologies are those that contribute to their single core business...meaning they are built to support search technology and revenue...
By far the worst article DED wrote in the last couple years. He completely misses the ball
Google I/O and AI is about software not about hardware. If DED wants to make article about that, that's fine, but here he only talks about hardware. It only proves that DED has no clue whatsoever about AI and the strategy of Google.
Apple has a clear strategy: putting premium hardware on the market. Apple is very successful in its hardware business and Apple tries to maximize its revenues by adding complementary SW and services to that excellent hardware. And Apple is succeeding here as well, as the last quarterly figures show. But the main focus of Apple remains always on the hardware. The Homepod is the best illustration of it. Excellent speaker quality but Airplay2 is lacking and Siri is facing an uphill battle to compete.
Google has also a clear strategy, but a different one. Googles main focus is services (Selling ads, Google Cloud Platform, ...). Google is very successful with its services offering (like Apple with its hardware). On top of that Google tries to expand its services with some hardware (Pixel, wifi routers, ...)., but here Google is not that successful (you can't win them all).
DED considers that the last point is the important issue in the strategy of Google, but it isn't. Googles main focus remains on services, like Apples main focus is on hardware.
And that's why in terms of AI Google has overtaken Apple in the voice assistant business, because the voice assistant of Google is crucial in its services portfolio, while for Apple Siri would become strategically important only if its poor performance would lead to loss of hardware sales. I hope Siri will get a serious upgrade in WWDC, but I don't see Siri competing in the next 5 years with any AI driven service of Google. Just because the strategic focus is not the same
Let's hope that DED eventually understands that AI is about software, so he can start writing a more decent article about it.
IIRC, he said he's going to avoid "deliberate baiting" that DED does. I don't think he's going to get into a discussion/ argument on a DED thread.
I could be wrong.
I don't think GatorGuy said that he will avoid ALL DED articles. He mentioned it in a specific article, which was mostly "spin"/"alternate facts". Coming to the specific questions from @raderthekat, the biggest mistake both of you are making is an assumption - An assumption that GatorGuy will DEFEND Google at any cost. Far from it. Whenever he has a different point of view (mostly about lies against Google which are presented by MANY people as facts in this forum time and again), he will present his views by sharing additional information which we are NOT aware of. I won't be surprised if GatorGuy accepts most of the Google's failings called out by @Raderthekat. And share additional information about points (if any) which he disagrees with.
What makes you believe I have such an assumption? I merely saw an opportunity to invite him to shed light on a bunch of things Google has dine over the years. That doesn’t imply an assumption of his defending google at all costs. It implies an assumption that he’s conversant in many things Google. And as a point of fact, i didn’t call out those projects as failures, DED did; I pulled the list directly from a read of the article. I invited GatorGuy to give an update on them, indicate if they are failures or not and if so, give his take on what happened.
By far the worst article DED wrote in the last couple years. He completely misses the ball
I felt the exact opposite In this article, DED has included few lines about where Apple has been behind. I also see few lines praising Google where they have succeeded. I don't remember seeing any of these (highlighting Apple's failings/Google's successes) in ANY of the articles from DED for last 2 years.
Meanwhile, in the real world, Google is setting the standard for autonomous cars, has the best assistant on the market, and keeps making advances in photos. It's still early days for all AI but to suggest they've squandered their lead is plain silly.
I think that the point of the article is that itisn't innovation if you aren't making money at it, and almost without fail, Apple, with a small share of the smartphone market is grabbing most of the revenue and profits comparative to Android OEM'a and developers.
Google itself is doing fine, excepting the scrutiny given it's near monopoly in search, and privacy issues, and it's persistent inability to generate much revenue off of consumer hardware. Google has noticeable leads in services and technologies that the OEM's and developers have, for the most part, been unable to leverage to enhance revenue and profit, and Google I/O doesn't appear to have accelerated that.
If that is the point of the article then I disagree with it. Google makes its money in advertising - much of it on mobile - and uses the profits to fund innovative technologies that won't be profitable in the R&D stage.
How are the OEM's doing? Which "innovative technologies" has Google released that have generated any income other than from search or advertising?
The comment about search or advertising being Google's main source of income, well, yeah, that's its core business. It's like saying Apple only makes money from hardware. Its advertising business has evolved - it was previously all desktop search, now it's mobile and it's not just search - it's YouTube, Maps, Gmail. Imagine if it hadn't poured money into those three areas before the iPhone launched, it'd be stuck on a dwindling income from desktop search. Not to mention that it's third in the market for cloud, which makes >$1B/quarter and growing. It doesn't operate like Apple where it launches only a few products and wants them to be perfect on day one. Google tries its hand at plenty of things, knowing that if 7 things fail and 3 take off, it will be successful. And it's users are, or many of them are, happy to try things that are just beta releases. And yes, they are doing the world a service by helping to get technology to people at a low/no cost.
google derives 87% of revenue based on advertising.
apple derives 79% of revenue based on hardware.
Google's cloud is a very distant 7th in cloud revenue and the $1B includes revenue from SaaS revenue from the G suite...gmail, docs, and PaaS revenue from Google App Engine.
Google may be a distant third for IaaS but that's not where the money is and frankly, for an internet centric company, Google is really disappointing from a cloud revenue perspective.
Comments
If you have been reading AI long enough, you'd know about DED's articles and the resulting troll protests on AI.
If you are new here, you'll just have to sit back a bit and watch it to realise what StrangeDays is saying.
If you do know and are still commenting, you are deliberately being obtuse. Apologies if you aren't.
IIRC, he said he's going to avoid "deliberate baiting" that DED does. I don't think he's going to get into a discussion/ argument on a DED thread.
I could be wrong.
When facts about Apple are presented(rarely), the writer is "biased", "unconfident", "fanboy".
When those millions of anti-Apple articles based on rumors, opinion, speculation and made up crap are posted, "Apple is losing lol".
Hypocrisy.
The comment about search or advertising being Google's main source of income, well, yeah, that's its core business. It's like saying Apple only makes money from hardware. Its advertising business has evolved - it was previously all desktop search, now it's mobile and it's not just search - it's YouTube, Maps, Gmail. Imagine if it hadn't poured money into those three areas before the iPhone launched, it'd be stuck on a dwindling income from desktop search. Not to mention that it's third in the market for cloud, which makes >$1B/quarter and growing. It doesn't operate like Apple where it launches only a few products and wants them to be perfect on day one. Google tries its hand at plenty of things, knowing that if 7 things fail and 3 take off, it will be successful. And it's users are, or many of them are, happy to try things that are just beta releases. And yes, they are doing the world a service by helping to get technology to people at a low/no cost.
I agree that some of the hysteria around Apple is ridiculous, especially right before an earnings release with all these stupid doom and gloom iPhone supply chain rumors. But Apple leadership is also responsible for the narrative and sentiment around the company and I think there’s lots to be desired there. The biggest thing Apple lost when Steve died was their salesman and story teller. The current leadership at Apple is good at giving us the what and how by the why is often lacking. The why was never lacking when Steve Jobs was on stage.
Google isn't perfect though but I can live with voice navigation changing 'TV' (as part of a road name) into 'television' as long as it:
A. Gets me to my destination
And
B. Does so without trying to guide me up a road that is 'no entry'.
Also, Siri's Spanish Spanish voice has got worse, not better.
And of course Siri can't can't handle bi or tri lingual situations well. I hope this sees a boost at WWDC. Some things should be extremely easy to solve, like tagging street with different pronunciation options.
If I'm using Siri in Spanish but I'm in Catalonia, Siri should ask how I want to hear street names.
apple derives 79% of revenue based on hardware.
Google's cloud is a very distant 7th in cloud revenue and the $1B includes revenue from SaaS revenue from the G suite...gmail, docs, and PaaS revenue from Google App Engine.
The top three for 2017 are:
MS $18.6B
Amazon $17.5B
IBM $17B
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobevans1/2018/02/05/why-microsoft-is-ruling-the-cloud-ibm-is-matching-amazon-and-google-is-15-billion-behind/#2f28927d1dc1
Google may be a distant third for IaaS but that's not where the money is and frankly, for an internet centric company, Google is really disappointing from a cloud revenue perspective.