minisu1980

franklinjackcon said:

tmay said:

franklinjackcon said:

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 it isn'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. 

jimh2 said:

I feel for the fired employees who have done their time working hard on the SONOS products only to be crapped on just prior to the IPO. Hopefully any share awards/options they were granted will stay with them. I do think they, like Spotify, are a slow sinking ship. My prediction is Spotify's stock will be near worthless a year from now as Apple is on the fast track to pass them in paid subscriptions.

macxpress said:

I'm seeing a pattern with every single new Apple release. Apple releases something, the same people put it down as crap, overpriced, doesn't work, doesn't do anything something else already does, etc, etc and it will fail (or its already failed). They give it a month or two, maybe six, continue to push how much of a failure it is. About a year goes by, Apple keeps improving the product with software updates and it starts to sell and push others out of the market. Two, three years down the road, some of the major players are now struggling if not out of existence. A new Apple product is announced in the mean time and the cycle starts all over again for that product.

Maybe I'm just failing to see the point, but this is a cycle that I've experienced a few times:

-iPod-Certain Macs (Depends on the category/audience)

-iPhone

-iPad

-iCloud

-Apple Watch

-HomePod

I'm sure I'm missing some.

Does HomePod need work? Of course it does. I think everyone knows that, including Apple. Some are just too impatient and give Apple no more than 6 months before they start calling something a failure.

I think there's a strategy with these products. People at Apple don't just sit in an office and say, we need to make a speaker. They have an idea of yes, we could make a speaker. Then I think they start planning from there and its not just planning of 6 months out...its planning of sometimes several years out. It takes time to get a product to market from design, production, to sale. It also takes time to get the strategy out...it can be years before its complete. Just look at iPhone! People just didn't sit in an office and say where gonna make a phone!

SpamSandwich said:

minisu1980 said:

badmonk said:

Personally, if NN rules are repealed than my hope is that Apple, Google and Amazon will pool their resourses and build out true high speed internet services without throttling of any service throughout the country and the world.

Most of us would jump on it and abandon the price gouging ISPs like Comcast etc.

With NN out of the way, we will pay more and get less no matter what the free market zealots say...

I just moved to an urban adjacent neighborhood and I enquired about fiberoptic internet.  None was available.  I only had the choice of an adequate internet service with Comcast or shitty DSL with AT&T.  To get adequate speed on Comcast, they forced me to accept a bundle I did not want or need.

For those of you that oppose NN for your idealism of true markets, come down to the real world.

Agreed, those companies were free to do that before net neutrality, and Google even tried to do it, however the regional monopolies that have been given to the encumbants (for political donations?) made entering the market not profitable for competitors even one with pockets as deep as Google’s. Truthfully, I can only lay part of the blame on the broken ISP market place, Goggle has a almost uncanny knack for just giving up on all their “change the world ideas” and a pretty poor track record of be able to run a profitable business outside of search.

You're on the right track. The companies most dependent on high-speed or widespread Internet services, such as Facebook, Netflix, Google, etc. could very easily start buying up cable or fiber systems in cooperation or in competition.

kerpow said:

badmonk said:

I just moved to an urban adjacent neighborhood and I enquired about fiberoptic internet.  None was available.  I only had the choice of an adequate internet service with Comcast or shitty DSL with AT&T.  To get adequate speed on Comcast, they forced me to accept a bundle I did not want or need.

For those of you that oppose NN for your idealism of true markets, come down to the real world.

You're not forced to accept a bundled package from Comcast. You can opt for Internet only and choose the speed you want to pay for. You can get somewhat better prices if you bundle services, but you are not forced to do so. 

https://www.cabletv.com/xfinity/internet