Google rumored to be working on 'Made for Google' accessory program mirroring Apple's MFi ...

Posted:
in General Discussion
Google is allegedly creating a "Made for Google" certification system resembling Apple's "Made for iPhone/iPad/iPod" program, known as MFi for short.

A leaked image of the Google Pixel 2 XL. Image Credit: <a href=@evleaks on Twitter" height="660" />
A leaked image of the Google Pixel 2 XL. Image Credit: @evleaks on Twitter


Like Apple's initiative the Google one will set standards for third-party accessories, according to a pair of 9to5Google sources. A third person said that the program could be announced soon.

One possibility is that MfG will be launched on Oct. 4 alongside new Google phones, namely the "Pixel 2" and "Pixel 2 XL." If so, it would presumably cover gear like cases, docks, and batteries. The company is also rumored to be preparing a "Pixelbook" laptop and a "Mini" version of its Home smartspeaker, although the latter isn't expected to include swappable bases like its sibling.

The MFi program sets base requirements for each kind of accessory, such as drop resistance for cases. In some instances it has also mandated authentication chips, the lack of which may for example trigger alerts if an unauthorized Lightning cable is plugged into an iPhone.

An "unverfied tipster" for 9to5Google claimed that consistency and compliance with USB-C charging is a major part of MfG. Most modern Android phones support some form of fast charging, but it's possible that setting standards would ensure minimum speeds.

Google has increasingly ventured into the hardware realm, putting it in more direct competition with Apple. Although advertising and cloud services are still its bread and butter, Google now has self-branded phones, tablets, smartspeakers, streaming dongles, and VR headsets.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 25
    Always a follower, never a leader
    jbdragoncalilkruppMacProericthehalfbeewatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 2 of 25
    I don't see it working very well. Consumer confusion will limit it to Google products since Samsung will, I'm sure, come out with Made for Samsung followed by HTC's Made for HTC, and on an on and on. Made for Android might work better but the sheer number of Android products will either make the number of products limited or have lots of exclusions. 
    StrangeDaysjbdragoncaliwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 3 of 25
    staticx57 said:
    Always a follower, never a leader
    That is what true leaders and innovators do. Ask Samsung.
    It works something like this:
    1) Come up with something relatively useful and helpful if it were to work as intended.
    2) Create a half-arsed implementation of that idea that simply does not deliver on the promise.
    3) When that idea is actually implemented properly by a competitor, if possible - update your product to match that implementation.
    4) Claim that you "pioneered" that.
    edited October 2017 tmaybadmonkjbdragoncalilkruppstaticx57harrykatsarosairnerdericthehalfbeewatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 25
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 4,050member
    staticx57 said:
    Always a follower, never a leader
    Simple to understand: Google doesn’t make both hardware and software. That’s why they can’t really pioneer anything.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 25
    I think Google's ad revenue is so easy...that they view it as 'free money.' And that's why it feels ok to throw money at anything.

    cornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 25
    GG1GG1 Posts: 483member
    I don't see it working very well. Consumer confusion will limit it to Google products since Samsung will, I'm sure, come out with Made for Samsung followed by HTC's Made for HTC, and on an on and on. Made for Android might work better but the sheer number of Android products will either make the number of products limited or have lots of exclusions. 
    I don’t see it working out well for a different reason. Android is an open hardware platform, and Samsung is the hardware leader. MfG could further annoy Samsung, and Google can’t afford that.

    For example, what if MfG required using the Qi wireless charging spec from the Qualcomm chipset? Would Huwai, Samsung, and others with their own chipsets with Qi get on board? I thought I read somewhere that each implemented the Qi standard a bit differently from each other, making compatibility an issue
    .
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 25
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member
    staticx57 said:
    Always a follower, never a leader
    Google has been a leader in several other areas like Google Glass, autonomous driving, satellite internet, gigabit wifi. Unfortunately most of them are not very successful. What Google, Samsung, and many Chinese companies found out is following Apple footsteps is most cost effective and no risk business.  Actually this is true for all business. And this is why we have a patent system. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 25
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member
    And Apple failed to compete with Microsoft Windows.  The single reason is Apple lacks the volume of sales thus cannot effectively compete. This time is different!
  • Reply 9 of 25
    Wasn't the Apple MFi program supposed to be a money grab by Apple for licensing fees? I recall that narrative from forum discussions years ago led by Apple critics.
    jbdragonlkruppairnerdwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 25
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,389member
    tzeshan said:
    staticx57 said:
    Always a follower, never a leader
    Google has been a leader in several other areas like Google Glass, autonomous driving, satellite internet, gigabit wifi. Unfortunately most of them are not very successful. What Google, Samsung, and many Chinese companies found out is following Apple footsteps is most cost effective and no risk business.  Actually this is true for all business. And this is why we have a patent system. 
    Failing at several things is not being a leader...its just simply throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. This is Google's favorite past time. 
    jbdragoncaliStrangeDayspatchythepirateericthehalfbeewatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 25
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,840member
    False and ineffective product differentiation.
    Google product planners probably never heard of the Cadillac Cimarron.
    edited October 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 25
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,246member
    tzeshan said:
    staticx57 said:
    Always a follower, never a leader
    Google has been a leader in several other areas like Google Glass, autonomous driving, satellite internet, gigabit wifi. Unfortunately most of them are not very successful. What Google, Samsung, and many Chinese companies found out is following Apple footsteps is most cost effective and no risk business.  Actually this is true for all business. And this is why we have a patent system. 
    Google glass?.  It's a HUD running Android.  There not a single thing new about that. Google search is really just a copy of Yahoo.  Satellite internet?. Been around for years by other company's.  Gigabit wifi?.  Hahaha, where do you cine yoo with this crap? 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 25
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 5,990member
    Since Google has no real control on others that uses its craptastic Android software, this "program" is pretty much dead before it left the gate.

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 25
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,038member
    Wasn't the Apple MFi program supposed to be a money grab by Apple for licensing fees? I recall that narrative from forum discussions years ago led by Apple critics.
    Yep, and now that Google is doing it is suddenly okay and beneficial to customers. Gotta love the critics walking around with a permanent coating of egg on their faces.
    suddenly newtonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 25
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,246member
    More of Google trying to be more like Apple!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 25
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,424member
    lkrupp said:
    Wasn't the Apple MFi program supposed to be a money grab by Apple for licensing fees? I recall that narrative from forum discussions years ago led by Apple critics.
    Yep, and now that Google is doing it is suddenly okay and beneficial to customers. Gotta love the critics walking around with a permanent coating of egg on their faces.
    I hadn't read that Google was rumored to be charging licensing fees to be part of the rumored "Made for Google" program but you could be right. 
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 17 of 25
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,500member
    jbdragon said:
    More of Google trying to be more like Apple!
    In their dreams.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 25
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    They want our cables to spy on us now?!?!

    gatorguy said:
    lkrupp said:
    Wasn't the Apple MFi program supposed to be a money grab by Apple for licensing fees? I recall that narrative from forum discussions years ago led by Apple critics.
    Yep, and now that Google is doing it is suddenly okay and beneficial to customers. Gotta love the critics walking around with a permanent coating of egg on their faces.
    I hadn't read that Google was rumored to be charging licensing fees to be part of the rumored "Made for Google" program but you could be right. 

    It’ll be free alright. As long as they collect and sell our data. 
    patchythepiratetmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 25
    Hey, I'm seeing that the walls are getting higher and higher in that open garden.
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 25
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Shouldn’t that be “Made for Android”? Google is incompetent everywhere but in search.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.