How asinine is it to assume he doesn't have a lot of Video?
About as asinine as considering the size of your video collection for a music service, maybe? I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here and assuming he actually read the article.
As Steve Jobs would say, "we didn't get into the search business..."
I wish Apple would get into the search business. Google is aping everything Apple does, why not strike back? I'm sure it would be easy: just buy a few small competitors, roll them into one, add a cute name, and roll in more cash from increasing iAd's visibility!
Also, I'm sure Apple could do a better job than the mess Google always gives you on a search!
I wish Apple would get into the search business. Google is aping everything Apple does, why not strike back? I'm sure it would be easy: just buy a few small competitors, roll them into one, add a cute name, and roll in more cash from increasing iAd's visibility!
Also, I'm sure Apple could do a better job than the mess Google always gives you on a search!
Google is becoming a "I-know-everything" company, starting from search engine, to a mobile phone system provider, and next is a full OS. Eh... As mentioned in an earlier post... tomorrow they will start giving us great user experience in how to cook! Google is taking our life over!
The closing lines of the article are also interesting.
"The company also showed off a new standard called Android Open Accessory. Using this, external can be connected to Android handsets and be supported by third-party software.
The search giant provided a demonstration of Android Open Accessory by connecting an Android phone to a stationary bike. It also demonstrated home automation integration called Android @ Home, with Android-compatible lightbulbs from Lighting Science set to go on sale by the end of the year."
Their Android Open Accessory and Android @ Home seem to be aimed at a wide variety of devices, from light bulbs to refrigerators, to cars, etc (perhaps even link to Smart Grid tech). Everything connected and talking to each other. If there's a point where many devices throughout your home are running Android, and by simply having an Android device on your person various things "automatically" happen (for example, lights turn on when you enter a room and off when you leave; your fridge "knows" how much milk you have and will notify you when its low (and perhaps offer a coupon to the nearest store)) - there may be a tipping point whereby it is more convenient for the average consumer to have an Android device that enables all these "benefits".
Perhaps by trying to get Android on as many varied devices (including things you don't normally consider when thinking about mobile OSs, e.g. cars, appliances, the electric grid), they hope that eventually this will create a massive "install base" and thereby encourage people to migrate toward other Android powered consumer products (some of which will generate ad revenue).
It's not just a phone/tablet war.
PS - Just curious, does Google charge licensing fees to device manufacturers for using Android? For example, does HTC pay Google a license fee for using Android on one of their phones? If so, then Google could reap a lot of licensing fees by getting Android on as many varied devices as possible. The subset of consumer electronic/mobile devices may not be the best designed or have the most polish, but that's not what really matters to Google anyways.
The closing lines of the article are also interesting.
"The company also showed off a new standard called Android Open Accessory. Using this, external can be connected to Android handsets and be supported by third-party software.
The search giant provided a demonstration of Android Open Accessory by connecting an Android phone to a stationary bike. It also demonstrated home automation integration called Android @ Home, with Android-compatible lightbulbs from Lighting Science set to go on sale by the end of the year."
Their Android Open Accessory and Android @ Home seem to be aimed at a wide variety of devices, from light bulbs to refrigerators, to cars, etc (perhaps even link to Smart Grid tech). Everything connected and talking to each other. If there's a point where many devices throughout your home are running Android, and by simply having an Android device on your person various things "automatically" happen (for example, lights turn on when you enter a room and off when you leave; your fridge "knows" how much milk you have and will notify you when its low (and perhaps offer a coupon to the nearest store)) - there may be a tipping
point whereby it is more convenient for the average consumer to have an Android device that enables all these "benefits".
Perhaps by trying to get Android on as many varied devices (including things you don't normally consider when thinking about mobile OSs, e.g. cars, appliances, the electric grid),
they hope that eventually this will create a massive "install base" and thereby encourage people to migrate toward other Android powered consumer products (some of which will generate ad revenue).
It's not just a phone/tablet war.
PS - Just curious, does Google charge licensing fees to device manufacturers for using Android? For example, does HTC pay Google a license fee for using Android on one of their
phones? If so, then Google could reap a lot of licensing fees by getting Android on as many varied devices as possible. The subset of consumer electronic/mobile devices may not be the best designed or have the most polish, but that's not what really matters to Google anyways.
Man that just sounds scary lol. Talk about privacy issues if something like this happens!
Um, yeah but that's because Apple have increased their Market share in tablets and smartphones from 0%.
They need to keep growing.
Growing doesn?t mean they are focused on growing their market share like Android and Acer, it means focusing on growing their long term profits. This means more sales but with more profit per sale, not less. Something they have done so well that since entering an establish market just a few years prior they now have over 50% of all the entire world?s handset profits.
You seem to be woefully unaware of this repeated fact so I?ll state it again: You can dramatically increase your profit, your unit sales and/or your product dominance while losing marketshare.
The closing lines of the article are also interesting.
"The company also showed off a new standard called Android Open Accessory. Using this, external can be connected to Android handsets and be supported by third-party software.
The search giant provided a demonstration of Android Open Accessory by connecting an Android phone to a stationary bike. It also demonstrated home automation integration called Android @ Home, with Android-compatible lightbulbs from Lighting Science set to go on sale by the end of the year."
Their Android Open Accessory and Android @ Home seem to be aimed at a wide variety of devices, from light bulbs to refrigerators, to cars, etc (perhaps even link to Smart Grid tech). Everything connected and talking to each other. If there's a point where many devices throughout your home are running Android, and by simply having an Android device on your person various things "automatically" happen (for example, lights turn on when you enter a room and off when you leave; your fridge "knows" how much milk you have and will notify you when its low (and perhaps offer a coupon to the nearest store)) - there may be a tipping point whereby it is more convenient for the average consumer to have an Android device that enables all these "benefits".
Perhaps by trying to get Android on as many varied devices (including things you don't normally consider when thinking about mobile OSs, e.g. cars, appliances, the electric grid), they hope that eventually this will create a massive "install base" and thereby encourage people to migrate toward other Android powered consumer products (some of which will generate ad revenue).
It's not just a phone/tablet war.
PS - Just curious, does Google charge licensing fees to device manufacturers for using Android? For example, does HTC pay Google a license fee for using Android on one of their phones? If so, then Google could reap a lot of licensing fees by getting Android on as many varied devices as possible. The subset of consumer electronic/mobile devices may not be the best designed or have the most polish, but that's not what really matters to Google anyways.
Google doesn't charge licensing fees for Android, but they might (not positive on this) charge for access to their closed-source apps (Gmail, Android market, Google Talk, etc). But considering you can download most of those apps in the market I doubt they do. (they might charge for market)
And what I took away from Google@home was that the devices wouldn't be Running android, just compatible with the framework (aka, "made for ipod"). But if more companies adopt this, it could make Android (as a phone/tablet os) more attractive to consumers.
Imagine a coffee pot that you can activate when you turn off your alarm in the morning. That would be cool.
Side note: I'm really excited for the API that allows companies to make products that are compatible with any version of android (the bike demo). My brother just got a car that he can control his ipod directly from his steering wheel. it would be great being able to do that with an Android phone as well.
Perhaps by trying to get Android on as many varied devices (including things you don't normally consider when thinking about mobile OSs, e.g. cars, appliances, the electric grid), they hope that eventually this will create a massive "install base" and thereby encourage people to migrate toward other Android powered consumer products (some of which will generate ad revenue).
It's not just a phone/tablet war.
All good points, imo.
... and maybe this a reason why Steve J. has to leave Apple for Apple's sake. Although I'm sure that Steve can see the future, I'm not sure if he's the guy to take Apple to the next step. He's a personal computer guy and maybe, just maybe, that's where his mindset is placed. I think he'd be disgusted to envision Apple in the role set out above... but maybe that's where Apple needs to go.
[I like Steve J. as much as any person could... so I really don't want to hear the bitching but get at 'er... ]
My brother just got a car that he can control his ipod directly from his steering wheel. it would be great being able to do that with an Android phone as well.
You can. The Ford Sync system integrates Android smartphones. Control all Pandora features with voice commands thru the Sync system, with streaming audio over bluetooth from your smartphone. Even interrupts Pandora to announce navigation instructions over the car audio if using Google Nav.
Did you read your own link?! Here, let me quote from the engadget.com blurb:
"Of course, it doesn't make all that money from Android directly, but Schmidt says that Android-based phones are already generating enough advertising revenue to cover the cost of development. What's more, while he doesn't provide any current specific numbers, Schmidt did say that he expects there to someday be one billion Android phones in the world, and that if each one generated just $10 per user per year it would be a $10 billion business....."
Cover the 'cost of development'? Plus some fairy tale hopes (if we can sell a billion, and if we can get get $10 per user per year) that pass for a forecast? 'Nuff said.
(Come back and post some numbers if/when Google actually provides you with some audited segment data that actually says 'we are making some money that is more than chump change'. Until then, it's cheap talk.)
Schimdt spoke about revenue not profit plus there is a known unknown missing from his equation.
Android has displaced OSs such as Symbian and Windows Mobile whose users also get to see Google's adverts. Assuming that Android has expanded the market for smartphones the question would be does the profit from the additional adverts Google shows to new users exceed the cost of Android.
You can. The Ford Sync system integrates Android smartphones. Control all Pandora features with voice commands thru the Sync system, with streaming audio over bluetooth from your smartphone. Even interrupts Pandora to announce navigation instructions over the car audio if using Google Nav.
The car manufacturers are getting there.
Well, Pandora is getting there... I'm talking about native library. The problem before this is that certain skins could mess with those libraries. by creating a specific API for it, it allows manufacturers to make hardware that will be compatible, no matter what Skin the customer is running. Also the "intents" ability to launch compatible applications is crazy.
Though the Demo with Ford tonight was cool... based on your habits, the car will ask you if you're going to work at a certain time, and route you accordingly (with real time traffic info)
Schimdt spoke about revenue not profit plus there is a known unknown missing from his equation.
Android has displaced OSs such as Symbian and Windows Mobile whose users also get to see Google's adverts. Assuming that Android has expanded the market for smartphones the question would be does the profit from the additional adverts Google shows to new users exceed the cost of Android.
I suspect at this time that is no.
Windows Mobile and Symbian had inferior browsing experiences. If you look at the data for smartphone usage, iOS and Android users typically browse a LOT more than their counterparts on competing systems.
I used to do google searches on my old EnV2 all the time, but Google didn't really get much ad revenue from it since it was a WAP browser.
So rolling all of this around and donning my tinfoil beanie for good measure. Schmidt and Jobs concoct this cute little plan to undermine the "big player" in the room based in Redmond. They stage a falling out, Schmidt goes back to Google and sez, "OK boys we are taking on Apple with our Android purchase. Oh yeah it will help us pull in mobile for ad stuff, but Apple is our target - go get 'em!!!" Google unleashes the fandroids en mass and stokes them at I/O just to keep it sticky.
Meanwhile somewhere in Cupertino a Jobsian rave takes place and is leaked to the press about how Google "moved into our smartphone arena" and declares "it's on!!!!" against Google. The troops are frothed up nicely, and in Redmond a certain CEO watches the acts play out with glee (and not a little relief - glancing at the Windows mobile develop snaffu report on his desk). In Helsinki, a certain CEO suddenly realizing that his operations are hanging some serious collateral damage decides he needs a vacation. He's sweating and its not in the sauna either.
Redmond distracted by the noise misses the initial hits it takes on the mobile front, but once aware lashes out quickly with its well-aimed lawsuits and activates its mole in Helsinki. Realising that the mobile train has left the station, Redmond, now seriously eroding consumer marketshare at slowly increasing rates puts together an arranged marriage with poor but plucky Skype, hoping to have her deliver additional consumer value to it's only growing consumer platform left, XBox.
Schmidt suckers the handset makers into adopting Android in place of the other OSes and cleverly undermines the whole handset cartel without them even realizing it. Apple meanwhile continues to make boatloads of money and really attractive and in demand products. Google continues to make boatloads of money on ad delivery fed by it's nearly decade old search algorithms.
Jobs and Schmidt, having dismantled the handset cartel, started the US cell carriers down the road to commoditization, leveraged the mobile revolution to draw computing away from the desktop and the large shadow still cast from Redmond, sit down for a chat over coffee and to compare notes.
Schmidt goes back, checks to make sure Sergy and Larry are steering the right course, and sez "I'll be in my cabin if you need me" and sits back to watch the revolution unfold. Jobs having garnered Schmidt's cooperation, takes off some time to enjoy life, secure in the knowledge that in spite of appearances, everything is going according to plan. Redmond is compromised, but the bleeding is so slight that it will not be taken seriously until it is too late. Google continues to hire engineers at an alarming rate only to show them how to throw pancakes at the wall to determine the next project, but secretly planning the second assault on Redmond's foundations with a shiny silver OS.
Meanwhile back in Redmond, a certain CEO practices his developer dance in front of his Kinnect, blissfully unaware. And his lackeys run around sprucing up resumes and slipping quietly out the backdoor.
Comments
How asinine is it to assume he doesn't have a lot of Video?
About as asinine as considering the size of your video collection for a music service, maybe? I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here and assuming he actually read the article.
rockstheparty just got SERVED.
It's a music service.
Google wishes desperatedly they were Apple...
As Steve Jobs would say, "we didn't get into the search business..."
I wish Apple would get into the search business. Google is aping everything Apple does, why not strike back? I'm sure it would be easy: just buy a few small competitors, roll them into one, add a cute name, and roll in more cash from increasing iAd's visibility!
Also, I'm sure Apple could do a better job than the mess Google always gives you on a search!
Um, yeah but that's because Apple have increased their Market share in tablets and smartphones from 0%.
They need to keep growing.
They are.
I wish Apple would get into the search business. Google is aping everything Apple does, why not strike back? I'm sure it would be easy: just buy a few small competitors, roll them into one, add a cute name, and roll in more cash from increasing iAd's visibility!
Also, I'm sure Apple could do a better job than the mess Google always gives you on a search!
Google is becoming a "I-know-everything" company, starting from search engine, to a mobile phone system provider, and next is a full OS. Eh... As mentioned in an earlier post... tomorrow they will start giving us great user experience in how to cook! Google is taking our life over!
Um, yeah but that's because Apple have increased their Market share in tablets and smartphones from 0%.
They need to keep growing.
Yes, we know...
Apple is doomed! ?
"The company also showed off a new standard called Android Open Accessory. Using this, external can be connected to Android handsets and be supported by third-party software.
The search giant provided a demonstration of Android Open Accessory by connecting an Android phone to a stationary bike. It also demonstrated home automation integration called Android @ Home, with Android-compatible lightbulbs from Lighting Science set to go on sale by the end of the year."
Their Android Open Accessory and Android @ Home seem to be aimed at a wide variety of devices, from light bulbs to refrigerators, to cars, etc (perhaps even link to Smart Grid tech). Everything connected and talking to each other. If there's a point where many devices throughout your home are running Android, and by simply having an Android device on your person various things "automatically" happen (for example, lights turn on when you enter a room and off when you leave; your fridge "knows" how much milk you have and will notify you when its low (and perhaps offer a coupon to the nearest store)) - there may be a tipping point whereby it is more convenient for the average consumer to have an Android device that enables all these "benefits".
Perhaps by trying to get Android on as many varied devices (including things you don't normally consider when thinking about mobile OSs, e.g. cars, appliances, the electric grid), they hope that eventually this will create a massive "install base" and thereby encourage people to migrate toward other Android powered consumer products (some of which will generate ad revenue).
It's not just a phone/tablet war.
PS - Just curious, does Google charge licensing fees to device manufacturers for using Android? For example, does HTC pay Google a license fee for using Android on one of their phones? If so, then Google could reap a lot of licensing fees by getting Android on as many varied devices as possible. The subset of consumer electronic/mobile devices may not be the best designed or have the most polish, but that's not what really matters to Google anyways.
The closing lines of the article are also interesting.
"The company also showed off a new standard called Android Open Accessory. Using this, external can be connected to Android handsets and be supported by third-party software.
The search giant provided a demonstration of Android Open Accessory by connecting an Android phone to a stationary bike. It also demonstrated home automation integration called Android @ Home, with Android-compatible lightbulbs from Lighting Science set to go on sale by the end of the year."
Their Android Open Accessory and Android @ Home seem to be aimed at a wide variety of devices, from light bulbs to refrigerators, to cars, etc (perhaps even link to Smart Grid tech). Everything connected and talking to each other. If there's a point where many devices throughout your home are running Android, and by simply having an Android device on your person various things "automatically" happen (for example, lights turn on when you enter a room and off when you leave; your fridge "knows" how much milk you have and will notify you when its low (and perhaps offer a coupon to the nearest store)) - there may be a tipping
point whereby it is more convenient for the average consumer to have an Android device that enables all these "benefits".
Perhaps by trying to get Android on as many varied devices (including things you don't normally consider when thinking about mobile OSs, e.g. cars, appliances, the electric grid),
they hope that eventually this will create a massive "install base" and thereby encourage people to migrate toward other Android powered consumer products (some of which will generate ad revenue).
It's not just a phone/tablet war.
PS - Just curious, does Google charge licensing fees to device manufacturers for using Android? For example, does HTC pay Google a license fee for using Android on one of their
phones? If so, then Google could reap a lot of licensing fees by getting Android on as many varied devices as possible. The subset of consumer electronic/mobile devices may not be the best designed or have the most polish, but that's not what really matters to Google anyways.
Man that just sounds scary lol. Talk about privacy issues if something like this happens!
That's just my opinion though lol
Um, yeah but that's because Apple have increased their Market share in tablets and smartphones from 0%.
They need to keep growing.
Growing doesn?t mean they are focused on growing their market share like Android and Acer, it means focusing on growing their long term profits. This means more sales but with more profit per sale, not less. Something they have done so well that since entering an establish market just a few years prior they now have over 50% of all the entire world?s handset profits.
You seem to be woefully unaware of this repeated fact so I?ll state it again: You can dramatically increase your profit, your unit sales and/or your product dominance while losing marketshare.
The closing lines of the article are also interesting.
"The company also showed off a new standard called Android Open Accessory. Using this, external can be connected to Android handsets and be supported by third-party software.
The search giant provided a demonstration of Android Open Accessory by connecting an Android phone to a stationary bike. It also demonstrated home automation integration called Android @ Home, with Android-compatible lightbulbs from Lighting Science set to go on sale by the end of the year."
Their Android Open Accessory and Android @ Home seem to be aimed at a wide variety of devices, from light bulbs to refrigerators, to cars, etc (perhaps even link to Smart Grid tech). Everything connected and talking to each other. If there's a point where many devices throughout your home are running Android, and by simply having an Android device on your person various things "automatically" happen (for example, lights turn on when you enter a room and off when you leave; your fridge "knows" how much milk you have and will notify you when its low (and perhaps offer a coupon to the nearest store)) - there may be a tipping point whereby it is more convenient for the average consumer to have an Android device that enables all these "benefits".
Perhaps by trying to get Android on as many varied devices (including things you don't normally consider when thinking about mobile OSs, e.g. cars, appliances, the electric grid), they hope that eventually this will create a massive "install base" and thereby encourage people to migrate toward other Android powered consumer products (some of which will generate ad revenue).
It's not just a phone/tablet war.
PS - Just curious, does Google charge licensing fees to device manufacturers for using Android? For example, does HTC pay Google a license fee for using Android on one of their phones? If so, then Google could reap a lot of licensing fees by getting Android on as many varied devices as possible. The subset of consumer electronic/mobile devices may not be the best designed or have the most polish, but that's not what really matters to Google anyways.
Google doesn't charge licensing fees for Android, but they might (not positive on this) charge for access to their closed-source apps (Gmail, Android market, Google Talk, etc). But considering you can download most of those apps in the market I doubt they do. (they might charge for market)
And what I took away from Google@home was that the devices wouldn't be Running android, just compatible with the framework (aka, "made for ipod"). But if more companies adopt this, it could make Android (as a phone/tablet os) more attractive to consumers.
Imagine a coffee pot that you can activate when you turn off your alarm in the morning. That would be cool.
Side note: I'm really excited for the API that allows companies to make products that are compatible with any version of android (the bike demo). My brother just got a car that he can control his ipod directly from his steering wheel. it would be great being able to do that with an Android phone as well.
Perhaps by trying to get Android on as many varied devices (including things you don't normally consider when thinking about mobile OSs, e.g. cars, appliances, the electric grid), they hope that eventually this will create a massive "install base" and thereby encourage people to migrate toward other Android powered consumer products (some of which will generate ad revenue).
It's not just a phone/tablet war.
All good points, imo.
... and maybe this a reason why Steve J. has to leave Apple for Apple's sake. Although I'm sure that Steve can see the future, I'm not sure if he's the guy to take Apple to the next step. He's a personal computer guy and maybe, just maybe, that's where his mindset is placed. I think he'd be disgusted to envision Apple in the role set out above... but maybe that's where Apple needs to go.
[I like Steve J. as much as any person could... so I really don't want to hear the bitching but get at 'er... ]
Controlled by one man. Andy Rubin, of course. Open until you mess with it too much, then Google will use compatibility as a "club":
http://www.electronista.com/articles...ogle.pressure/
So true.
My brother just got a car that he can control his ipod directly from his steering wheel. it would be great being able to do that with an Android phone as well.
You can. The Ford Sync system integrates Android smartphones. Control all Pandora features with voice commands thru the Sync system, with streaming audio over bluetooth from your smartphone. Even interrupts Pandora to announce navigation instructions over the car audio if using Google Nav.
The car manufacturers are getting there.
"Of course, it doesn't make all that money from Android directly, but Schmidt says that Android-based phones are already generating enough advertising revenue to cover the cost of development. What's more, while he doesn't provide any current specific numbers, Schmidt did say that he expects there to someday be one billion Android phones in the world, and that if each one generated just $10 per user per year it would be a $10 billion business....."
Cover the 'cost of development'? Plus some fairy tale hopes (if we can sell a billion, and if we can get get $10 per user per year) that pass for a forecast? 'Nuff said.
(Come back and post some numbers if/when Google actually provides you with some audited segment data that actually says 'we are making some money that is more than chump change'. Until then, it's cheap talk.)
Schimdt spoke about revenue not profit plus there is a known unknown missing from his equation.
Android has displaced OSs such as Symbian and Windows Mobile whose users also get to see Google's adverts. Assuming that Android has expanded the market for smartphones the question would be does the profit from the additional adverts Google shows to new users exceed the cost of Android.
I suspect at this time that is no.
You can. The Ford Sync system integrates Android smartphones. Control all Pandora features with voice commands thru the Sync system, with streaming audio over bluetooth from your smartphone. Even interrupts Pandora to announce navigation instructions over the car audio if using Google Nav.
The car manufacturers are getting there.
Well, Pandora is getting there... I'm talking about native library. The problem before this is that certain skins could mess with those libraries. by creating a specific API for it, it allows manufacturers to make hardware that will be compatible, no matter what Skin the customer is running. Also the "intents" ability to launch compatible applications is crazy.
Though the Demo with Ford tonight was cool... based on your habits, the car will ask you if you're going to work at a certain time, and route you accordingly (with real time traffic info)
Schimdt spoke about revenue not profit plus there is a known unknown missing from his equation.
Android has displaced OSs such as Symbian and Windows Mobile whose users also get to see Google's adverts. Assuming that Android has expanded the market for smartphones the question would be does the profit from the additional adverts Google shows to new users exceed the cost of Android.
I suspect at this time that is no.
Windows Mobile and Symbian had inferior browsing experiences. If you look at the data for smartphone usage, iOS and Android users typically browse a LOT more than their counterparts on competing systems.
I used to do google searches on my old EnV2 all the time, but Google didn't really get much ad revenue from it since it was a WAP browser.
Google does make money off Android: http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/05/g...ould-eventual/
I don't trust anything Schmidt said.
I don't trust anything Schmidt said.
Then it's pretty pointless discussing the issue isn't it? If you don't trust what the company itself says, why bother arguing?
...but it beats Apple TV with no widgets...
The last update to Apple TV put some baseball thing on it with these icons with numbers that change.
I don't know what they mean and I don't really care but isn't that a widget?
P.S. It would be better if it was something relevant to my location such as Cricket, NRL or AFL.
Meanwhile somewhere in Cupertino a Jobsian rave takes place and is leaked to the press about how Google "moved into our smartphone arena" and declares "it's on!!!!" against Google. The troops are frothed up nicely, and in Redmond a certain CEO watches the acts play out with glee (and not a little relief - glancing at the Windows mobile develop snaffu report on his desk). In Helsinki, a certain CEO suddenly realizing that his operations are hanging some serious collateral damage decides he needs a vacation. He's sweating and its not in the sauna either.
Redmond distracted by the noise misses the initial hits it takes on the mobile front, but once aware lashes out quickly with its well-aimed lawsuits and activates its mole in Helsinki. Realising that the mobile train has left the station, Redmond, now seriously eroding consumer marketshare at slowly increasing rates puts together an arranged marriage with poor but plucky Skype, hoping to have her deliver additional consumer value to it's only growing consumer platform left, XBox.
Schmidt suckers the handset makers into adopting Android in place of the other OSes and cleverly undermines the whole handset cartel without them even realizing it. Apple meanwhile continues to make boatloads of money and really attractive and in demand products. Google continues to make boatloads of money on ad delivery fed by it's nearly decade old search algorithms.
Jobs and Schmidt, having dismantled the handset cartel, started the US cell carriers down the road to commoditization, leveraged the mobile revolution to draw computing away from the desktop and the large shadow still cast from Redmond, sit down for a chat over coffee and to compare notes.
Schmidt goes back, checks to make sure Sergy and Larry are steering the right course, and sez "I'll be in my cabin if you need me" and sits back to watch the revolution unfold. Jobs having garnered Schmidt's cooperation, takes off some time to enjoy life, secure in the knowledge that in spite of appearances, everything is going according to plan. Redmond is compromised, but the bleeding is so slight that it will not be taken seriously until it is too late. Google continues to hire engineers at an alarming rate only to show them how to throw pancakes at the wall to determine the next project, but secretly planning the second assault on Redmond's foundations with a shiny silver OS.
Meanwhile back in Redmond, a certain CEO practices his developer dance in front of his Kinnect, blissfully unaware. And his lackeys run around sprucing up resumes and slipping quietly out the backdoor.