Apple Poached Lala from Possible Google Acquisition?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/12/10/apple-poached-lala-from-possible-google-acquisition/)

The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703514404574588091065805108.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection) indicates that Apple and Google are becoming even more competitive than we had suspected. According to their sources, Google was also in serious negotiations with Lala Media for possible acquisition right before Apple won the bid. Meanwhile, we had previously reported that Apple was in serious talks with Admob immediately prior to Google's acquisition of that company.The twin pursuit of the start-ups reveal that the two tech titans have further plans to move deeper into each other's business: Apple wanted to get into advertising, while Google sought a music service.Apple and Google have become increasingly competitive which resulted (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/03/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-resigns-from-apple-board-of-directors/) in the resignation of Google CEO Eric Schmidt from the Apple Board of Directors. As Apple moves towards more web-based services and Google into the mobile phone market, the lines are continuing to blur.

The Wall Street Journal even indicates that Apple's interest in Admob may have been defensive, an attempt to prevent Google from learning details of the App Store economy. Apple is believed to be looking into more iPhone-related acquisitions.

Article Link: Apple Poached Lala from Possible Google Acquisition? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/12/10/apple-poached-lala-from-possible-google-acquisition/)

[ipedro]

fight fight! ;)

I think Google is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Search and make their revenue from their successful GoogleAds.

Building an OS for phones and PC's is something else entirely.

[Cynicalone]

I really don't like what I have read about this Lala deal. I have zero interest in a streaming iTunes they should have just let Google have it.

[primmstereo]

fight fight! ;)

I think Google is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Search and make their revenue from their successful GoogleAds.

Building an OS for phones and PC's is something else entirely.


That's like being in 2001 and saying "Apple should really stick to computers only; mp3 players and phones are something else entirely." Give them a shot, Im excited for what Google will produce in the coming year.

[NetScheduler]

fight fight! ;)

I think Google is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Search and make their revenue from their successful GoogleAds.

Building an OS for phones and PC's is something else entirely.

I think Apple is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Personal Conputers and make their revenue from their Mac Sales.

Building a Portable Music Player and mobile phones is something else entirely

[Peace]

I think BOTH of these companies are going to wind up in the same court one of these days.

[appleguy123]

That's like being in 2001 and saying "Apple should really stick to computers only; mp3 players and phones are something else entirely." Give them a shot, Im excited for what Google will produce in the coming year.

I think Apple is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Personal Conputers and make their revenue from their Mac Sales.

Building a Portable Music Player and mobile phones is something else entirely

De ja vu

[rwilliams]

fight fight! ;)

I think Google is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Search and make their revenue from their successful GoogleAds.

In all fairness, the same argument could have been made when Apple was first getting into digital media, music players, and smartphones. You never know how it will turn out.

Edit: this is what I get for replying before reading everybody else's posts :)

[Neotyguy40]

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple banned in-app ads. Or at least put a large royalty on it.

They make money from 30% of all revenue from apps. If a seperate company is making the apps free, but still getting profit, then that hurts Apple.

If I were them, I would put 40% royalties on all income generated by app ads. That way they would be able to kill Google's investment before they are able to gain the money back that they spent buying it.

[HiRez]

As Apple moves towards more web-based services and Google into the mobile phone market, the lines are continuing to blur.

Don't forget Chrome vs. Safari.

[Ljohnson72]

I'm glad Apple bought Lala. Interested to see what they do with streaming.

[nanofrog]

I actually figured Apple picked up Lala just to keep it out of Google's hands to make life a little more difficult for them. It's anti-competitive, but not illegal (assuming the FCC doesn't have an issue with the sale).

[DMann]

fight fight! ;)

I think Google is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Search and make their revenue from their successful GoogleAds.

Building an OS for phones and PC's is something else entirely.

True, however, Google seems to be somewhat more in touch with style, design, and focus on 'user experience' than other competitors who attempt to do it all.

Google's competitive endeavors appear to be genuine, with a primary focus on the development of innovative and useful apps, while placing less emphasis on copying, cloning, and trail chasing other's successful ideas.

Hopefully, they and Apple will continue to co-exist in a positive way - Maps, and Voice/Search are great apps on the iPhone.

Sensibly, one only hopes that they stop short of developing a gaming console, and a line of computers, laptops, and tablets.

Throw in a chain of retail stores, and you've got a winner.

[LagunaSol]

True, however, Google seems to be somewhat more in touch with style, design, and focus on 'user experience' than other competitors who attempt to do it all.

This is not evident from any of their software applications. The G1 phone (the design of which they were said to have collaborated on). Or, of course, their logo. :(

[dmayo1]

But this pretty much sums it up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqMiigy92qU

[knewsom]

I'm really quite happy to see a non-suck company squaring up to eventually go toe to toe with Apple. All Apple ever had to do was be better than MS and make pretty machines, which wasn't hard to do. Now Google is a lean, mean powerhouse, and the more they compete, the better it's gonna be for all of us, especially if they keep a "friendly" sorta tone to the competition, ensuring that their services and products work together, something which I actually believe probably WILL happen, since they've collaborated on so much, and invested so much into common technologies like HTML5.

[nanofrog]

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple banned in-app ads. Or at least put a large royalty on it.
Actually, I'd think the cell provider would have a problem with in-app ads, as it eats their bandwidth. To keep up, it would force faster updates to the cell systems, which is expensive.

So they'd apply "pressure" to Apple, and Apple in turn would press the developers to prevent, or at least significantly reduce the band usage.

Ultimately, cell providers are likely going to go with use-based pricing, and the users will end up screaming about the ads costing them more in data rates, and rightly so. Users don't see a profit from streaming ads.

[DMann]

This is not evident from any of their software applications. The G1 phone (the design of which they were said to have collaborated on). Or, of course, their logo. :(

Good points, though Maps (their specialty) is really good. Chrome browser, as generic as it is, seems loads better and more streamlined than IE8.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Chrome OS eat away a small portion of their competitor's OS.

G1 is a clunker, for sure, as is the DROID - perhaps, they'll do better with the design of the Goog-Phone.

As for their logo, no contest:

http://www.logoogle.com/images/logooward/january%2005/hot-red-google-logo.gif


Ballmer's rendition:

http://jehanara.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/google_logo.jpg

[Thex1138]

Apple has more cash in bank...

[AUFan]

It makes sense from a strategic perspective for Apple to grab Lala before Google. I'm not a user of lala, but if it's as good as some have said, Google could have built a solid streaming service for android phones that would have rivaled iTunes and was similar to Zune pass. Buy it on Lala and have it on every android device you own via a special app. I think that's one of the big things working against Android (besides it having a rather ugly GUI) is it lacks the multimedia punch Apple has with iTunes. Google has no rival to iTunes for the Android platform and Lala would have let them incorporate web streaming directly into Android and Chrome OS to rival iTunes.

[BTW]

It is called the iTMS. People search for music, applications, movies etc all the time. Apple needs to harness this power and sell priority listings etc. Maybe they already do. :cool:

[canadan]

I can't wait to see what Apple does next with iTunes. I would be very happy if we have the opportunity to buy iTunes content on our hard drive as always yet have the option of all our content also available in a cloud for easy access from anywhere on our portable devices. Brilliant if you ask me.

[djgamble]

fight fight! ;)

I think Google is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Search and make their revenue from their successful GoogleAds.

Building an OS for phones and PC's is something else entirely.

True... I don't think they're all that smart or innovative...
Some dude created a search engine with no large ads that gets pretty good search results, so lots of people started using it (including me.)

Something's shonky with their books I think. Sure, their search engine's popular... but I don't think it makes THAT much money (it's not one of Apple's serious competitors... they have a lot more "real" money, infrastructure and products that definitely make money.) Google's setup HUGE headquarters' in random countries like Australia that achieve absolutely nothing (I'm from Oz + have worked for Google... quit because it felt like a shonky startup with all the pep talks...etc.) The Australian headquarters does NOTHING useful... it's just a big advertisement for Google where you give up your family life for free lunch trays, 10m from every office & a ping pong table in the board room. News: Sooooooo many startups will offer you the same, and just as much promise as Google...

I don't really care what Google does... they're not the new, creative, innovative company that so many people seem to think they are. All they've done is:
- Make an awesome search engine (I respect it)
- Made a weird advertising model that is in no way transparent, and keeps feeding less and less money to the people who make it happen. (To me this is proof it's not meeting profit targets.)
- Received a LOT and I mean LOT!!! (Billions) of VC money from people who want them to dent M$/Apple.
- Used this money to buy out a bunch of unprofitable startups... then re-named their products to "Google *****".
- Failed to produce any commercially viable "hard" products (sure Android... but c'mon... is it really selling? It's the iPhone's high-profile whipping boy... the iPhone's making REAL money... Android's either losing money or making some insignificant chump change.)

[jav6454]

So Google is now becoming a giant too big to ignore.

[Maserati7200]

The rumor about Apple making it's own maps application/getting a different one is now seeming more and more true. It's sad, really. Because they're both great companies and it was nice when they innovate together instead of going against each other. Remember the past keynotes where Eric was on stage, they seemed like they had a great relationship, but not for long.

[Unspeaked]

Called (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=8912988#post8912988) it.

:D

[Maserati7200]

True... I don't think they're all that smart or innovative...
Some dude created a search engine with no large ads that gets pretty good search results, so lots of people started using it (including me.)

Something's shonky with their books I think. Sure, their search engine's popular... but I don't think it makes THAT much money (it's not one of Apple's serious competitors... they have a lot more "real" money, infrastructure and products that definitely make money.) Google's setup HUGE headquarters' in random countries like Australia that achieve absolutely nothing (I'm from Oz + have worked for Google... quit because it felt like a shonky startup with all the pep talks...etc.) The Australian headquarters does NOTHING useful... it's just a big advertisement for Google where you give up your family life for free lunch trays, 10m from every office & a ping pong table in the board room. News: Sooooooo many startups will offer you the same, and just as much promise as Google...

I don't really care what Google does... they're not the new, creative, innovative company that so many people seem to think they are. All they've done is:
- Make an awesome search engine (I respect it)
- Made a weird advertising model that is in no way transparent, and keeps feeding less and less money to the people who make it happen. (To me this is proof it's not meeting profit targets.)
- Received a LOT and I mean LOT!!! (Billions) of VC money from people who want them to dent M$/Apple.
- Used this money to buy out a bunch of unprofitable startups... then re-named their products to "Google *****".
- Failed to produce any commercially viable "hard" products (sure Android... but c'mon... is it really selling? It's the iPhone's high-profile whipping boy... the iPhone's making REAL money... Android's either losing money or making some insignificant chump change.)

Use GMAIL for an hour. Your opinion would be changed instantly. Google translate, is the best online translator I've come across. It can detect languages for starters (which is good because sometimes I don't know what language I'm reading), you can upload a document for it to translate, and it can translate webpages. Not only that, but as you hover over text, it can give you the original text. I could give you a lot more examples.

Google has really good ideas, and are innovators.

[cumanzor]

True... I don't think they're all that smart or innovative...
Some dude created a search engine with no large ads that gets pretty good search results, so lots of people started using it (including me.)

Something's shonky with their books I think. Sure, their search engine's popular... but I don't think it makes THAT much money (it's not one of Apple's serious competitors... they have a lot more "real" money, infrastructure and products that definitely make money.) Google's setup HUGE headquarters' in random countries like Australia that achieve absolutely nothing (I'm from Oz + have worked for Google... quit because it felt like a shonky startup with all the pep talks...etc.) The Australian headquarters does NOTHING useful... it's just a big advertisement for Google where you give up your family life for free lunch trays, 10m from every office & a ping pong table in the board room. News: Sooooooo many startups will offer you the same, and just as much promise as Google...

I don't really care what Google does... they're not the new, creative, innovative company that so many people seem to think they are. All they've done is:
- Make an awesome search engine (I respect it)
- Made a weird advertising model that is in no way transparent, and keeps feeding less and less money to the people who make it happen. (To me this is proof it's not meeting profit targets.)
- Received a LOT and I mean LOT!!! (Billions) of VC money from people who want them to dent M$/Apple.
- Used this money to buy out a bunch of unprofitable startups... then re-named their products to "Google *****".
- Failed to produce any commercially viable "hard" products (sure Android... but c'mon... is it really selling? It's the iPhone's high-profile whipping boy... the iPhone's making REAL money... Android's either losing money or making some insignificant chump change.)

Ok, first of all, creating a search algorithm like the one Google uses is not something every moron getting into CS can do. There is a reason why you use google, there is a reason why google is now verb, there is a reason why most of the world uses google: The minds behind are brilliant.

And you are making a huge logical flaw. The fact that the iphone is selling the most, doesn't mean other competitors are making negative numbers or insignificant profits. Plus, what exactly do you mean by "android is losing money"? Android is just a platform. Saying something like "HTC is losing money" makes more sense (or actually makes sense).

The fact that you would hate such a successful (and innovate) company like Google, just to defend a company you like better (Apple) is just a very sad move. It's a shame people would rather live in a world controlled by one single corporation than allow competition to work for them.

The rumor about Apple making it's own maps application/getting a different one is now seeming more and more true. It's sad, really. Because they're both great companies and it was nice when they innovate together instead of going against each other. Remember the past keynotes where Eric was on stage, they seemed like they had a great relationship, but not for long.

You know what's sad? It might have all started with Apple rejecting the Google Voice App.

[CFreymarc]

While many have called me an idiot for this, I am betting against Android.

The same two company, software / hardware errors that Microsoft did with Windows Mobile is happening with Andriod. There is no one guidance looking over entire user experience from board layout to UI to network. It all is just thrown over a wall with poor feedback. As soon as Google sees a dip in search engine revenue, Android will become a redheaded stepchild.

My crystal ball says a flurry of sales for 36 months and then a flame-out.

[str1f3]

That's like being in 2001 and saying "Apple should really stick to computers only; mp3 players and phones are something else entirely." Give them a shot, Im excited for what Google will produce in the coming year.

Or the Microsoft of today. Google is slowly becoming that now. Android is a mediocre platform which really offers no real difference to Windows Mobile, especially when WM7 comes out. Chrome OS is a very shallow OS that is meant mostly for users with little computer knowledge which is becoming increasingly more rare as younger generations grow up with computers.

I don't think this acquisition was a defensive move as WSJ states because Apple has always competed with Google for talent. There are a ton of other companies that Google could have purchased and the contracts with the labels would not have held up with an acquisition.

[str1f3]

Use GMAIL for an hour. Your opinion would be changed instantly. Google translate, is the best online translator I've come across. It can detect languages for starters (which is good because sometimes I don't know what language I'm reading), you can upload a document for it to translate, and it can translate webpages. Not only that, but as you hover over text, it can give you the original text. I could give you a lot more examples.

Google has really good ideas, and are innovators.

Gmail is not that big of a deal unless you live out of your inbox. Threaded conversations and keyboard shortcuts are nice but it's not like it had never existed before. Google Translate is good but it's not what you're hyping it up to be. It can also give some screwy translations.

Googles weakness (and always will be) is that they are a company that is based on engineering and a lack of an understanding of a UI. I believe that a UI is far more important than features which is why I believe Google Wave will never take off. That is what makes Apple the rare company it is. I'm waiting for kdarling to disagree.

Google is an innovator but it's the kind of innovation only engineers can appreciate.

[TMar]

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple banned in-app ads. Or at least put a large royalty on it.

They make money from 30% of all revenue from apps. If a seperate company is making the apps free, but still getting profit, then that hurts Apple.

If I were them, I would put 40% royalties on all income generated by app ads. That way they would be able to kill Google's investment before they are able to gain the money back that they spent buying it.

God, I wish. I really hate the delayed one's that pop up right at the time you go to hit something. I can't remember what app it is at the moment, but it had a delayed pop up the cover the button to use the app and they had it timed perfectly.

[Terminal.app]

I really don't like what I have read about this Lala deal. I have zero interest in a streaming iTunes they should have just let Google have it.

Agreed 100%.

[retroneo]

The Australian headquarters does NOTHING useful...

So you reckon Google Maps and Street View is useless? Google Wave is an incredible concept in IMHO, just needs a little work before it is released.

They are just some of the Australian innovations.

[TMar]

Gmail is not that big of a deal unless you live out of your inbox. Threaded conversations and keyboard shortcuts are nice but it's not like it had never existed before. Google Translate is good but it's not what you're hyping it up to be. It can also give some screwy translations.

Googles weakness (and always will be) is that they are a company that is based on engineering and a lack of an understanding of a UI. I believe that a UI is far more important than features which is why I believe Google Wave will never take off. That is what makes Apple the rare company it is. I'm waiting for kdarling to disagree.

Google is an innovator but it's the kind of innovation only engineers can appreciate.

Picasa's UI is great as is chromes. I can see how on a Mac site people would shun it, but to each their own. Google doesn't have a UI problems it's just a different style. People don't deal with change well, so to most people will some something sucks before they ever get a chance to learn it. OSx is nice and shiny at first sight, but if your not use to it the UI sucks till you figure it out.

[retroneo]

It's so cool when your two most admired companies are competing with each other :-)

[tmt345]

but i need to post here

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!

the two are at it and only we can win! i want to see this grow into gigantic levels so apple can put google in their place vise versa

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAXTle-Elqc

apple's the hot one

[retroneo]

There is no one guidance looking over entire user experience from board layout to UI to network. It all is just thrown over a wall with poor feedback.

If it's anything like their web services, every part of their UI is designed by their users. Not everyone gets the same UI with Google's Web services and everyone's interactions are profiled. The most efficient UIs are then selected for the majority of users. Their policy is to only change their UI when it is proven with robust mathematics to be beneficial to their users.

[str1f3]

Picasa's UI is great as is chromes. I can see how on a Mac site people would shun it, but to each their own. Google doesn't have a UI problems it's just a different style. People don't deal with change well, so to most people will some something sucks before they ever get a chance to learn it. OSx is nice and shiny at first sight, but if your not use to it the UI sucks till you figure it out.

Ok, I agree with you about Picasa even though most don't use it. As for Chrome, if you mean the browser, it is well designed even though it has some inherent flaws that seem to make it "un-Mac like". These are not the typical Google apps. Search, Gmail, Translate, Maps, Wave & etc. are.

You cannot say that a Google app compares even remotely to an Apple app. Most, if not all, consider the Apple implementation of Google Maps to be better than Google's on the iPhone and iPhoto. That is why Google and Apple was considered the perfect relationship. If you compare it to the rest of the industry, it is the norm. If you compare it against Apple, it is severely lacking. It has always been the main advantage of Apple against the rest of the industry. They know how to build something that is easy on the eyes and to understand. That kind of value is priceless in this industry.

The problem for Google is that designers leave them because they are not listened to. Apple's engineers are not quite as good but their designers are leagues ahead of Google and are considered as important if not moreso.

[Terminal.app]

I can see how on a Mac site people would shun it, but to each their own.

How? It's not made by MS so it should be safe. :D

[str1f3]

So you reckon Google Maps and Street View is useless? Google Wave is an incredible concept in IMHO, just needs a little work before it is released.

They are just some of the Australian innovations.

Google Wave won't be used by anyone. Period. I watched many videos and read many Lifehacker posts and still can't get my head completely around it. If I can't you can bet that the majority of users can't. Granted I didn't care enough to learn it. This is meant for techies and not the end user whether Google realizes it or not.

[Bafflefish]

Duplicate. delete please

[Bafflefish]

Google Wave won't be used by anyone. Period. I watched many videos and read many Lifehacker posts and still can't get my head completely around it. If I can't you can bet that the majority of users can't. Granted I didn't care enough to learn it. This is meant for techies and not the end user whether Google realizes it or not.
You mean like how that "internet" thing was meant for universities, the government and research institutions, and how it would "never" filter down to the average member of society? :rolleyes:

Edit - And just to add, more and more institutions and universities are switching to Gmail and Google Apps for their employees or students. What happens when millions upon millions of students all get used to using Gmail for their email and Google Apps for their office app needs?

I think you vastly underestimate just how well Google is positioning themselves for the future.

[str1f3]

You mean like how that "internet" thing was meant for universities, the government and research institutions, and how it would "never" filter down to the average member of society? :rolleyes:

Edit - And just to add, more and more institutions and universities are switching to Gmail and Google Apps for their employees or students. What happens when millions upon millions of students all get used to using Gmail for their email and Google Apps for their office app needs?

I think you vastly underestimate just how well Google is positioning themselves for the future.

You're going overboard. Google Wave is not the same concept as the Internet and is replacing nothing, only consolidating information. Google isn't replacing any gov't institutions because they are all using private solutions.

BTW, it is not the question of "filtering" down, but understanding concepts. Wave is something completely different than anything that has come before it and I guarantee that no average person will be using it. If you can't see that then you are blind.

I couldn't care less if "other institutions" are using it because more than likely they are using it like any other email service. Do the majority of people you know use the shortcuts in Gmail or use Google Experiments?

If anything people would say I'm overestimating what Google is doing. At this point, if you are using all of Google services, they have the potential of knowing what books you have read and to what page, where you are and where you're going, who you know & how often you speak to them, the contents of your emails, your searches and the sites you visit.

[Bennieboy©]

sounds good, theres nothing wrong with competition, and people always love having choice, look forward to see what happens next :)

[ImperialX]

I've honestly never been interested in Lala in the first place. They should have just let Google have it.

[mabaker]

Competition is amazing, especially as incentive for Apple but we must not forget that the more dispersion of their focus the LESS quality we will get. It'S a fact.

[dreadkid08]

I actually figured Apple picked up Lala just to keep it out of Google's hands to make life a little more difficult for them. It's anti-competitive, but not illegal (assuming the FCC doesn't have an issue with the sale).

Actually it is competitive. Google wanted it Apple bought it, happens all the time. Sell goes to the highest bidder. Would you say it was anticompetitive if Google bought it and Apple wanted it?

[inkswamp]

That's like being in 2001 and saying "Apple should really stick to computers only; mp3 players and phones are something else entirely." Give them a shot, Im excited for what Google will produce in the coming year.

I think Apple is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Personal Conputers and make their revenue from their Mac Sales.

Building a Portable Music Player and mobile phones is something else entirely

It's a much shorter stretch for a company with experience in computer software and hardware to create a handheld gadget than it is for a company whose primary success comes from delivering Web services and information to get into operating systems and phone software. Apple has extended itself but it never goes too far from their core competencies (the iPod is heavily tied into iTunes software and the iPhone runs OS X.) Google is starting to look a little like the late-90s/early-2000 Microsoft, maybe too giddy with their success and getting into all sorts of business ventures that have nothing to do with what they're really good at.

Who know, maybe they'll have some success, but history is not on their side. Companies who stretch themselves out into areas they don't understand usually pay for it in a big way.

[djgamble]

Use GMAIL for an hour. Your opinion would be changed instantly. Google translate, is the best online translator I've come across. It can detect languages for starters (which is good because sometimes I don't know what language I'm reading), you can upload a document for it to translate, and it can translate webpages. Not only that, but as you hover over text, it can give you the original text. I could give you a lot more examples.

Google has really good ideas, and are innovators.

- I've got a gmail account.
- Yes translation is useful... I speak both Japanese and Italian... translate between 3 languages on a daily basis for personal reasons. Many translators (both software and online) do what you're talking about.
- None of these services are anything new.

[iphones4evry1]

I really don't like what I have read about this Lala deal. I have zero interest in a streaming iTunes they should have just let Google have it.

The problem with that is that Google will make it FREE to users. Good for us, bad for iTunes and Apple and iPod sales.

[djgamble]

The problem with that is that Google will make it FREE to users. Good for us, bad for iTunes and Apple and iPod sales.

Naah Google's screwy like all other companies, they'd charge for it (that or plaster it with ads 1/2 way through your tune.)

Google has this secretive adsense gig going. Nobody knows the rates paid per click... but they keep getting lower and lower... most sites offer Google's 1 source of cash for FREE (or almost free.)

So you say "oh but this is Google giving people money?" Again... Google's charging businesses MORE per click, and giving LESS to the advertisers. To me this smells of Google not making much money.

40 billion a year from clicks? Nah...
40 billion a year from VC's & anti M$ fans donators. Maybe a few million max from ads...

Apple makes more how? By selling SOLID products! Millions of computers, iPods, tunes, photo books...etc! M$ has Bing... it's just as popular as google with regard to advertisers (usually if you advertise a site, you'll do it with Google, Yahoo, M$... the whole range), but Bing isn't giving M$ an extra 40 billion! They make their money from sales (OEM in particular.)

Google... is backed to be the next best Apple/M$... but so-far its continued to disappoint. One day the VC's/donations will stop and they'll be Google History.

[Compile 'em all]

I think Apple is spreading itself too far. They should stick to Personal Conputers and make their revenue from their Mac Sales.

Building a Portable Music Player and mobile phones is something else entirely

This is a very very short sighted view. People said the exact same thing when the iPhone rumors were gaining steam. The web is the future, whether you like it or not. Ignoring it would be a very bad move.

[gnasher729]

I actually figured Apple picked up Lala just to keep it out of Google's hands to make life a little more difficult for them. It's anti-competitive, but not illegal (assuming the FCC doesn't have an issue with the sale).

Explain how this is anti-competitive. Apparently Apple is competing with Google. Making life a little more difficult for competitors is a normal thing to do when you are competing. Laws against anti-competitive actions are against actions that _prevent_ competition.

[knewsom]

This is a very very short sighted view. People said the exact same thing when the iPhone rumors were gaining steam. The web is the future, whether you like it or not. Ignoring it would be a very bad move.

You're referring to a post that was written in sarcasm as a response to the notion that Google was spreading itself too thin.

[Azmordean]

Good points, though Maps (their specialty) is really good. Chrome browser, as generic as it is, seems loads better and more streamlined than IE8.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Chrome OS eat away a small portion of their competitor's OS.

G1 is a clunker, for sure, as is the DROID - perhaps, they'll do better with the design of the Goog-Phone.

As for their logo, no contest:

http://www.logoogle.com/images/logooward/january%2005/hot-red-google-logo.gif


Ballmer's rendition:

http://jehanara.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/google_logo.jpg

A lot of what you posted here is pure opinion. The Droid is anything but a "clunker" - in fact I am posting from my droid right now. I personally much prefer my droid to the iPhone and I am not the only one by a longshot.

Android isn't quite as elegant as the iPhone just yet (which isn't surprising since it is comparatively new) but it is already far more functional, especially for folks who are "powerusers" or want non basic functionality.

To some degree, there may be different target audiences. iPhone is very mainstream but among the technically adept the Droid is making a huge impact.

[cumanzor]

You're going overboard. Google Wave is not the same concept as the Internet and is replacing nothing, only consolidating information. Google isn't replacing any gov't institutions because they are all using private solutions.

BTW, it is not the question of "filtering" down, but understanding concepts. Wave is something completely different than anything that has come before it and I guarantee that no average person will be using it. If you can't see that then you are blind.

I couldn't care less if "other institutions" are using it because more than likely they are using it like any other email service. Do the majority of people you know use the shortcuts in Gmail or use Google Experiments?

If anything people would say I'm overestimating what Google is doing. At this point, if you are using all of Google services, they have the potential of knowing what books you have read and to what page, where you are and where you're going, who you know & how often you speak to them, the contents of your emails, your searches and the sites you visit.

Whaaaat? No it isn't, Google wave is just a new implementation of something that already exists; collaboration tools.

Sharepoint, for example, is used extensively in many corporations. And it's incredibly useful. The problem is, just like you mentioned, Google somehow seems to be trying to aim Wave to the average user, and for the average user, Wave is useful.

For a group of classmates working on a project, it's incredibly awesome.

[LagunaSol]

A lot of what you posted here is pure opinion.

I personally much prefer my droid to the iPhone and I am not the only one by a longshot.

Android isn't quite as elegant as the iPhone just yet (which isn't surprising since it is comparatively new) but it is already far more functional, especially for folks who are "powerusers" or want non basic functionality.

iPhone is very mainstream but among the technically adept the Droid is making a huge impact.

Hmm, aren't your points also "pure opinion," or do you have some statistical data to back them up?

[xIGmanIx]

apple the wolf in sheeps clothing strikes again. If this had been microsoft, this forum would have erupted, but instead its apple being "strategic". I personally don't always agree with google's interface, but i would switch to the droid from a BB or iPhone 3GS in a heart beat if my company would keep me on their plan.

I can't think the last time one of your posts didn't contain pure opinionated data

Hmm, aren't your points also "pure opinion," or do you have some statistical data to back them up?

[LagunaSol]

I can't think the last time one of your posts didn't contain pure opinionated data

Did I ever claim otherwise? :rolleyes:

[bestb3284]

I totally called this! Apple and Google are starting to be real rivals!

[xIGmanIx]

Finally something you said i agree with, *inserts mandatory smiley face in retaliation :D*

Did I ever claim otherwise? :rolleyes:

[Azmordean]

While many have called me an idiot for this, I am betting against Android.

The same two company, software / hardware errors that Microsoft did with Windows Mobile is happening with Andriod. There is no one guidance looking over entire user experience from board layout to UI to network. It all is just thrown over a wall with poor feedback. As soon as Google sees a dip in search engine revenue, Android will become a redheaded stepchild.

My crystal ball says a flurry of sales for 36 months and then a flame-out.

You have just summed up why I don't like the iPhone. I don't need some corporation interested solely in money "controlling the experience". I want a platform that is open not one with an approval process. These phones are computers, I want them to be treated as such and have similar flexibility. Some users want a controlled, coddled experience but a lot don't.

To suggest android will fail because its open is ridiculous. Closed is the problem with the cell industry as a whole. A dictator, however benevolent, is still a dictator.

Plus, a lot has been made of different devices onb android, but the google experience branding solves a lot of that anyway.

[LagunaSol]

To suggest android will fail because its open is ridiculous. Closed is the problem with the cell industry as a whole.

Consumers ultimately care about one thing when it comes to mobile devices: that they provide a great user experience. Consumers don't care about "open," they don't care about app approval processes. They want a device that works for them in an effortless way.

I'm rooting for Android to put the death dagger in Windows Mobile, but ultimately I see an integrated system (a la the iPhone, BlackBerry, Palm model) coming out on top. Android fragmentation is going to be horrendous. Dozens and dozens of devices from different manufacturers with different model names running different variations of Android with different skins and different UI experiences. Consumers don't want that grief.

If your philosophy is correct, why did the iPod become the dominant player and not "Plays For Sure?" And why has Linux been a complete flop in the consumer space?

Does not compute.

And the small minority of buyers who care about the things you do can easily jailbreak the iPhone and have the best of both worlds (and many of them are doing just that).

Oh, and you seem to be forgetting that there is a "corporation interested solely in money" ruling over the Android empire: it's called Google. Or do you believe Android is a little charity project they're running on the side? :rolleyes:

[Azmordean]

Hmm, aren't your points also "pure opinion," or do you have some statistical data to back them up?

Yes, my points are opinions as well. My point is just because someone thinks the droid is a clunker or that the iPhone is an overpriced cheerleader fisher-price piece of junk does not mean either view is "right." There will be people in both camps and everywhere in between.

In reality there is room for both devices. But to say the droid has failed is pure fanboyism and flat untrue - ready any review by a non-apple site.

I will say jailbreaking the iphone makes it better. But its my opinion I shouldn't have to hack my phone to get basic functionality. Imagine if apple only allowed you to download programs to your MBP from a controlled store and turned off multitasking. You'd be pissed. I see this as no different - these phones are mini computers.

[Azmordean]

Consumers ultimately care about one thing when it comes to mobile devices: that they provide a great user experience. Consumers don't care about "open," they don't care about app approval processes. They want a device that works for them in an effortless way.

I'm rooting for Android to put the death dagger in Windows Mobile, but ultimately I see an integrated system (a la the iPhone, BlackBerry, Palm model) coming out on top. Android fragmentation is going to be horrendous. Dozens and dozens of devices from different manufacturers with different model names running different variations of Android with different skins and different UI experiences. Consumers don't want that grief.

If your philosophy is correct, why did the iPod become the dominant player and not "Plays For Sure?" And why has Linux been a complete flop in the consumer space?

Does not compute.

And the small minority of buyers who care about the things you do can easily jailbreak the iPhone and have the best of both worlds (and many of them are doing just that).

Oh, and you seem to be forgetting that there is a "corporation interested solely in money" ruling over the Android empire: it's called Google. Or do you believe Android is a little charity project they're running on the side? :rolleyes:

Of course google wants to make money, I did not say otherwise. I was merely debunking the idea that the app store model is a matter of purely benevolence. Itsnot, its dollars and cents.

I think the diconnect though is that you see these phones as "mobile devices" while I see them as computers and expect them to be open similarly. Personally, I think in time my view will prevail but for now yours is the majority perspective.

Apple has always had the same model - if you like the experience they provide, great. If you don't, too bad. That's why there is an will always be room for android and other alternatives.

In terms of devices and UI fragmentation, you have a point, but as I explained before google experience labeling will help with that.
As an aside blackberry is also open in that you can get any apps you want and can multitask. I used BB prior to my droid.

[LagunaSol]

I was merely debunking the idea that the app store model is a matter of purely benevolence.

You're debunking a nonexistent idea.

In terms of devices and UI fragmentation, you have a point, but as I explained before google experience labeling will help with that.

The problem is the "Google experience" has been anything but user friendly. They rule the Web search world, but their software design sucks compared to anything by Apple or even (ack!) Microsoft.

Google experience labeling will be about as meaningful as those "Intel Inside" stickers on PC laptops.

[Azmordean]

You're debunking a nonexistent idea.



The problem is the "Google experience" has been anything but user friendly. They rule the Web search world, but their software design sucks compared to anything by Apple or even (ack!) Microsoft.

Google experience labeling will be about as meaningful as those "Intel Inside" stickers on PC laptops.

I'm not sure where you get that... my understanding is google expereince means default unadulterated Android OS. Thus, users are insured they get the standard google UI, immediate access to new updates, etc. This is in contrast to say HTC devices with SenseUI.

As for software design, again, that's opinion. My opinion is that android and chrome for example are very usable.

Anyway, wayy off topic now, maybe we should agree to disagree?

[LagunaSol]

I'm not sure where you get that... my understanding is google expereince means default unadulterated Android OS. Thus, users are insured they get the standard google UI, immediate access to new updates, etc. This is in contrast to say HTC devices with SenseUI.

Yes, so consumers will have to choose between "unadulterated Android OS" and who knows how many flavors of "adulterated Android OS" spread across countless devices with countless names from countless manufacturers sporting countless form factors. They're predicting 50 devices in 2010 alone (http://www.macworld.com/article/145048/2009/12/android.html?lsrc=rss_main).

Sounds like a serious mess in the making to me.

Anyway, wayy off topic now, maybe we should agree to disagree?

That's what discussion forums are all about. ;)

[FearNo1]

I agree...but this is macrumors, e.g. mac fanboy central... :rolleyes: One thing that is interesting: it looks like M$ can't keep up with google or apple. It is normally google or apple making headlines, not M$

apple the wolf in sheeps clothing strikes again. If this had been microsoft, this forum would have erupted, but instead its apple being "strategic". I personally don't always agree with google's interface, but i would switch to the droid from a BB or iPhone 3GS in a heart beat if my company would keep me on their plan.

[Azmordean]

Yes, so consumers will have to choose between "unadulterated Android OS" and who knows how many flavors of "adulterated Android OS" spread across countless devices with countless names from countless manufacturers sporting countless form factors. They're predicting 50 devices in 2010 alone (http://www.macworld.com/article/145048/2009/12/android.html?lsrc=rss_main).

Sounds like a serious mess in the making to me.


Serious mess to you, choice to me. Why should there only be one device with one form factor? How many different kinds of devices are running BlackBerry OS? Sure, RIM makes them all, but still - that's a lot of devices!

And I don't see how it's that confusing. You want a genuine Android phone - look for "Google Experience." If you don't, then you know what you are getting is BASED on Android but has been modified for that handset's particular purpose. Personally I will stick to the former - but some may prefer a more customized solution and will pick a device that works for them.

Again, choices. It is important to note that Android is NOT a phone, it is a *platform.* iPhone is both a phone AND a platform. Google has decided to provide software while allowing existing handset makers to create hardware, Apple has decided to provide both. There are plusses and minuses to each approach, but one BIG plus is a variety of form factors and devices to fit individual needs as well as Android phones on every carrier.

I don't see either device going anywhere anytime soon. I think Android will basically kill WinMo for all but certain business users. Likewise I think a lot of the consumers on BlackBerry will move toward Android (much as I like BlackBerry, Android is superior for non-business use). iPhone will continue to grow in its current market segment.

For people who like what iPhone provides, its a great device. But for people who want something more, or something different, or something more customizable, or something in a different form factor, or something with a physical keyboard (I could go on), or something without AT&T, there are other better choices.

My point is not that "the iPhone sucks" (though for MY personal uses, it does). My point is that Android is a excellent platform that I see being around long term.

[*LTD*]

Serious mess to you, choice to me.

Same thing Windows Mobile users said in 2007.

Apple has proven tht one form factor/one device can be successful, and is currently the way to go.

[*LTD*]

apple the wolf in sheeps clothing strikes again. If this had been microsoft, this forum would have erupted, but instead its apple being "strategic". I personally don't always agree with google's interface, but i would switch to the droid from a BB or iPhone 3GS in a heart beat if my company would keep me on their plan.

I can't think the last time one of your posts didn't contain pure opinionated data

MS f's up strategy. Apple exploits it. Look at Apple in the last decade. THAT is strategy.

Whenever MS "acquires" something, there's an equal chance they will fail to exploit the idea, ruin the idea, or otherwise run the acquisition into the ground. When it comes to consumer market, MS perpetually have their heads up their collective rear. News of accquisitions understandably draw groans and roll-eyes.

[sinsin07]

Google Wave won't be used by anyone. Period. I watched many videos and read many Lifehacker posts and still can't get my head completely around it. If I can't you can bet that the majority of users can't. Granted I didn't care enough to learn it. This is meant for techies and not the end user whether Google realizes it or not.

Opinion not fact. Because you can't "get your head around it" means nothing. This is what happens when users sit around and wait for Apple to spoon feed them.

[QUOTE] If anything people would say I'm overestimating what Google is doing. At this point, if you are using all of Google services, they have the potential of knowing what books you have read and to what page, where you are and where you're going, who you know & how often you speak to them, the contents of your emails, your searches and the sites you visit. [QUOTE]

Sounds a little bit like iTunes and iPhone.

[DMann]

A lot of what you posted here is pure opinion. The Droid is anything but a "clunker" - in fact I am posting from my droid right now. I personally much prefer my droid to the iPhone and I am not the only one by a longshot.

Android isn't quite as elegant as the iPhone just yet (which isn't surprising since it is comparatively new) but it is already far more functional, especially for folks who are "powerusers" or want non basic functionality.

To some degree, there may be different target audiences. iPhone is very mainstream but among the technically adept the Droid is making a huge impact.

This is true, how perceptive. ;)

The Droid is certainly capable of performing tasks, no one here has dissed it from that perspective.

However, as you stated, it is not nearly as elegant as the iPhone, which will, no doubt, continue to evolve and transform as well.

The Droid seems poised to succeed in taking a significant share from the WinMo platform, in time.

From the perspective of design and interface, though, I do feel that the Droid, in its present form, is a clunker.

Pure opinion - shared by many, power users as well as non-power users, who have actually used it side by side with the iPhone 3GS.

Go figure.

[sinsin07]

This is true, how perceptive. ;)

Pure opinion - shared by many, power users as well as non-power users, who have actually used it side by side with the iPhone 3GS.

Go figure.

How do you define many in a manor which is verifiable by others who are not part of your mind?

[DMann]

How do you define many in a manor which is verifiable by others who are not part of your mind?

I happen to work for, and collaborate with, several recording, media, and independent film companies, ad agencies, and learning institutions - clients who, collectively, for the most part of any given day, are "on my mind."

Product reviews, from a wide range of sources, provide collective points of view as well.

Does this manner of garnering opinions, somehow, seem unreasonable to you?

[sinsin07]

I happen to work for, and collaborate with, several recording, media, and independent film companies, ad agencies, and learning institutions - clients who, collectively, for the most part of any given day, are "on my mind."

For the rest of us, its still in your mind, not verifiable, therefore for its fiction for us.

[DMann]

For the rest of us, its still in your mind, not verifiable, there for its fiction for us.

Opinion is neither fact nor fiction - so what is your point?

[CQd44]

This is true, how perceptive. ;)

The Droid is certainly capable of performing tasks, no one here has dissed it from that perspective.

However, as you stated, it is not nearly as elegant as the iPhone, which will, no doubt, continue to evolve and transform as well.

The Droid seems poised to succeed in taking a significant share from the WinMo platform, in time.

From the perspective of design and interface, though, I do feel that the Droid, in its present form, is a clunker.

Pure opinion - shared by many, power users as well as non-power users, who have actually used it side by side with the iPhone 3GS.

Go figure.

G1 user here. I will admit the UI is a bit clunky.

I guess I would be considered a "power user." I rooted my G1, installed a custom ROM, and then installed a custom theme. Result? My G1 is kind of personalized and looks and operates a little differently than other android phones.

The process wasn't pretty, but hey it worked.
I just wish the "Back" button wasn't so finicky.

[sinsin07]

Opinion is neither fact nor fiction - so what is your point?

Oh OK. From what you posted I did not get the impression it was an opinion. My Bad.