Google Set to Roll Out eBook Sales as Early as Next Month

[cycomiko]

Wow, October 16th 2009? There were surely no rumors of Apple's tablet then now were there? I'm actually not surprised that this is the case considering Google has their hand up everyone's ass. But being so keen on everything that goes around I'm sure you already knew that it's only a matter of time until your beloved Google knows and owns everything you do on the internet just because they can.

to quote somebody else on this thread

Odd, I thought you actually needed a product in place to have officially entered a market.

 

[cycomiko]

Why? No reason they shouldn't improve their bottom line, however a GOOG statement that they intend to "inhale a company each month"
can and will lead to them choking on their new aquisition based 'innovation'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Apple

Apple have been busy themselves recently, even setting up their M&A team.

 

[cycomiko]

I said they COULD. They are getting 3% from all of these services just to have control on everything. They aren't making any revenue from this. They are just doing it to do it. Apple on the other hand, 60% of their revenue is from their mobile devices. There's no double standard here. Apple enterered the post-pc entertainment device business and has 60% of their revenue from it. Google has entered god knows how many things and has 3% revenue from it. You don't see a problem with this?

Keep making blanket statements such as "tunnel vision" when you have nothing to back yourself up with.

Hi, have you met kettle?

What was the sales percentage of Apples new developments in the early days, say 2002 with the iPod vs their normal market?

Wonder what happened year upon year

or shall i just go the APpleTV route?

 

[aiqw9182]

using that model of reasoning, everything google does will be tied into their integrated web model.

People keep loving the concept of reduced SKU's since TROSJ but the overall width of Apples activities has increased significantly, to Apples and shareholders benefits. If Apple had stuck at being a computer company, it would be stuck between a rock and a hardplace.

You're looking at two interchangeable models. One model in which the company can amazingly well doing one thing, and the other of which can't. Google has hardly any competition in ads and hardly any in search. They didn't need to branch out. Their products serve no point other than to just replace what was already there in a better form.

What, companies developing something from nothing? that sounds like a startup, oh wait, that couldnt happen, to anyone, unless its apple, tehn its good.

There's a difference between doing one thing well and 5,000 things terribly.

its a completely natural evolution for google. Google are developing methods to increase their advertising control. Moving into handsets, OS and the likes allows for this to occur. Apple moving into advertsiing is just as natural, but in your view of the world, should be unnatural

Completely natural? LMAO!

Google wanting to know your health records, where you shop, where you live, what your interests are and tons of other things is completely normal?

a foundation that was created when apple was a computer hardware/OS company. So apple had to evolve their model to a future that allows them to continue to make money. But of course, taht is only natural when apple does it, but not if any other company does it.

It's natural when the majority of your profits are now from the devices you've branched into. The same can not be said about Google. AT ALL.

to quote somebody else on this thread

Cool, so if you want to go by that then everything I said still stands seeing as how Google hasn't released their eBooks service. Smooth move.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Apple

Apple have been busy themselves recently, even setting up their M&A team.

You're comparing that list to this?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Google

LMAO!

Hi, have you met kettle?

What was the sales percentage of Apples new developments in the early days, say 2002 with the iPod vs their normal market?

Wonder what happened year upon year

or shall i just go the APpleTV route?

You can't be serious. Google has been pounding on services year after year and they still get 97% of their revenue from ads and search. Apple's profits have increased ten fold since the iPod.

 

[OzExige]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Apple

Apple have been busy themselves recently, even setting up their M&A team.

My apologies for not engaging further in this discussion, I'm stuck in morning traffic sending this from my iPhone.
However, quoting wiki to me doesn't excuse GOOGs blanket (and stupid) inhalation statement.

 

[cycomiko]

You're looking at two interchangeable models. One model in which the company can amazingly well doing one thing, and the other of which can't. Google has hardly any competition in ads and hardly any in search. They didn't need to branch out. Their products serve no point other than to just replace what was already there in a better form.

Don't need to branch out? Are you that naive? Competition grows. Ask Apple how assing around the competition did for them in the 80s?

Yeah, its best to stick your corporate head in the ground and ignore the potential challanges.

There's a difference between doing one thing well and 5,000 things terribly.

Completely natural? LMAO!

yes, we have learnt that well from apple. Now they are spreading themselves too thin, they are starting to have more and more issues. From hardware to software. Oh... you are talking about google.

Google wanting to know your health records, where you shop, where you live, what your interests are and tons of other things is completely normal?

we already know you are paranoid about google. how about posting the funny abc thing again>?

It's natural when the majority of your profits are now from the devices you've branched into. The same can not be said about Google. AT ALL.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth

Cool, so if you want to go by that then everything I said still stands seeing as how Google hasn't released their eBooks service. Smooth move.

Nice strawman

You're comparing that list to this?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Google

LMAO!

again with the strawmen, do you have shares in those?

You can't be serious. Google has been pounding on services year after year and they still get 97% of their revenue from ads and search. Apple's profits have increased ten fold since the iPod.

for the slow, aka you, What was the sales percentage of Apples new developments in the early days, say 2002 with the iPod vs their normal market?

 

[cycomiko]

My apologies for not engaging further in this discussion, I'm stuck in morning traffic sending this from my iPhone.
However, quoting wiki to me doesn't excuse GOOGs blanket (and stupid) inhalation statement.

Dont worry, sometimes companies plans are best left unsaid. Apple just show what htey plan by hiring.

 

[aiqw9182]

Don't need to branch out? Are you that naive? Competition grows. Ask Apple how assing around the competition did for them in the 80s?

Yeah, its best to stick your corporate head in the ground and ignore the potential challanges.

Did you actually read through this thread or are you just illiterate? Steve Jobs did not work at the company in the 80's and they had no real footing. We've been over this. It's irrelevant. This is today, not yesterday. Oh and competition does grow, but Google is not making any revenue from this ****, all they are doing this for is to put more of their ads on their "me too" services. They want a monopoly and they have one, which you are apparently supporting.

yes, we have learnt that well from apple. Now they are spreading themselves too thin, they are starting to have more and more issues. From hardware to software. Oh... you are talking about google.

Apple spreading themselves to thin? LMAO! They have two primary device categories. God knows how many Google has.

we already know you are paranoid about google. how about posting the funny abc thing again>?

Funny because you are drinking the Google kool-aid or funny because it's the truth but you are too blind to realize it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth

Which Google isn't doing with any of their "products", they just send whatever out there possible to put their name on it and make ads off of it.

Nice strawman

Strawman? LOL!

It really starts getting sad when you can't even respond with anything but one word. The quote you posted talked about having a device or place in the market, Google has no place in selling books online so you shot yourself in the foot by posting that.

again with the strawmen, do you have shares in those?

Again with the strawman? Again with you not being able to come up with anything to reply with. Apple has obtained 15 companies in the past decade. Google has acquired over 60. What's the matter, can't take what you dished out?

for the slow, aka you, What was the sales percentage of Apples new developments in the early days, say 2002 with the iPod vs their normal market?

Not much but you apparently don't understand the fact that Google has been doing this for the same amount of time and has 3% revenue off of it.

 

[CalebD]

I'm sorry, but you guys are all a bunch of hypocrites.

So Amazon selling books online is evil. Barne & Noble selling books online is evil. Now Google selling books online is evil. But Apple selling books online is fine and dandy.

So much for "competition is good for the market", eh?

 

[DMann]

Don't need to branch out? Are you that naive? Competition grows. Ask Apple how assing around the competition did for them in the 80s?

Yeah, its best to stick your corporate head in the ground and ignore the potential challanges.

LOL.

As aiqw9182 stated, the difference here is that Google has made piddly-squat with their vast plethora of peripheral 'endeavors.'

Expanding and streamlining a concise number of things exceptionally well vs. recklessly branching out while performing poorly at that, once again, hardly constitutes a worthy comparison.

yes, we have learnt that well from apple. Now they are spreading themselves too thin, they are starting to have more and more issues. From hardware to software. Oh... you are talking about google.

Spreading themselves too thin? How so?

In regard to Google, seems you've met the kettle.

we already know you are paranoid about google.

"The toll road of denial is a long and dangerous one." J.Peterman

Nice strawman

Strawman? Not even close.

again with the strawmen, do you have shares in those?

Apparently, you lack a clear understanding as to the meaning and implication of the term 'Strawman.'

for the slow, aka you, What was the sales percentage of Apples new developments in the early days, say 2002 with the iPod vs their normal market?

Speaking of slow.

 

[senseless]

Pad devices are very suited for quick read, disposables like magazines and newspapers. I just don't get the Ebook thing.

 

[RawBert]

C'mon, Google... Why?
It's not like you need the money.

 

[GQB]

Does Google have an original thought in it's collective head anymore?
They're getting as bad as MS with it's photocopier engineering.

 

[GQB]

Pad devices are very suited for quick read, disposables like magazines and newspapers. I just don't get the Ebook thing.

Having just finished my first large book on the iPad, I have to say that I'm now a convert.

 

[theBB]

C'mon, Google... Why?
It's not like you need the money.

Android based tablets cannot be that far away. They might as well sell books for those.

 

[digitalbiker]

No, I am not...in fact, pretty much everything that I've said and predicted over the last 3 years has happened, even when I seem to exaggerate my claims in order to make them more "graphic"...

What are you talking about? You have been spouting off about MS being dead for the last 5 years. Yet, last I heard MS still has a much much larger market share than Apple.

Now you are including Google as being dead. You are delusional! If you haven't noticed Google is growing exponentially and may soon own the world if they keep it up.

In fact, I don't remember reading one of your so-called predictions over the last 3 years that has come to pass other than predicting success for Apple. However even a deaf, dumb, and blind trained ape could predict success for Apple over the last 3 years.

 

[LethalWolfe]

I absolutely love how condescending someone can be when they clearly have no grasp as to what the conversation is about.

Funny I was thinking the exact same thing. At least that's one thing we agree on.

You are trying to make this way simpler than they really are.

Just trying to illustrate the point that Apple is rarely first to market and has expanded into areas that are well beyond the company's roots. That's neither here nor there it's just a matter of fact.

Wow, October 16th 2009? There were surely no rumors of Apple's tablet then now were there? I'm actually not surprised that this is the case considering Google has their hand up everyone's ass.

So which one are we gonna go with?
A. Google is "me-too" because they created Edition as a knee-jerk reaction to the release of the iPad.
B. Google is "me-too" because they created Edition based on rumors of the iPad from last fall.
C. Google creating Edition was inevitable since Google, like a college freshman, is going to try everything at least once.
D. Google Edition is a logical progression of the Google Books project they started back in '04.

Here's a NYTimes article from June of '09 talking about Google's plans for eBooks. Another thing that happened last year was Google partnering w/Sony to provide eBooks for the Sony Reader Digital Book.

But being so keen on everything that goes around I'm sure you already knew that it's only a matter of time until your beloved Google knows and owns everything you do on the internet just because they can.

Speaking of condescending... Google isn't my beloved anymore than any other multinational corporation is.

Yes, because everyone knows you can easily sell post-pc devices without any software that benefits from the features they can do.

Companies can create software and hardware w/o creating a walled garden.


And I'm pretty sure Steve Jobs did work at Apple during the 80's.

The foundation of Apple's integrated model makes the business of distributing media not so much of a stretch, if not a no brainer.

And a big part of my point is that Apple's integrated business model is a relatively *new* thing. Apple during the '70's, '80's, '90's and early '00's was not heavily invested in consumer electronics and media distribution like they are now. It was Apple Computer, Inc. before Apple, Inc. and while Apple's evolution from product to product and service to service definitely feels more deliberate and methodical than Google's that doesn't change the fact that Apple's area of interest is much broader now than it ever has been in the history of the company.


Lethal

 

[Cousin Dirk]

Just yesterday, Apple announced as part of a press release celebrating one million iPads sold that customers have already downloaded over 1.5 million eBooks in the 28 days since launch.

Is no-one else picking up on this? Obviously the millionth iPad came a while after the 28 day mark, but this still shows that the average iPad owner has downloaded only one and a half eBooks. That's not a wide level of adoption.


I still find it intriguing that, since Google and Apple have gone their separate ways, they seem to be putting a lot of effort into competing with each other. Maybe it's a front to get the FTC off their collective backs.

 

[Ubuntu]

O.K now google is starting to be a very annoying company.

Is like every move they make is a copy from other PRODUCTS.
They hire "GENIUSES" to copy other companies ideas.

Name one thing google is fully credited for creating? Im not talking about improving like what the ydid with google maps or gmail.

I MEAN IN HOUSE INNOVATION/CREATION.

Yes, because Apple never copies at all. Never.

 

[macsmurf]

As the internet evolves, new markets emerge. Until now, Amazon has been the driving force behind ebooks. Now Apple tries to get a piece of the market and Google as well. There is nothing wrong with that.

Competition is good. Apple is not somehow exempt from that.

 

[Liam8]

they would

 

[aiqw9182]

Funny I was thinking the exact same thing. At least that's one thing we agree on.

Funny how you ignore the actual part of the post that matters. What's the problem, can't come up with anything to reply with?

Just trying to illustrate the point that Apple is rarely first to market and has expanded into areas that are well beyond the company's roots. That's neither here nor there it's just a matter of fact.

That's not my problem with Google. My problem is that they have too many of these "me too" services and they never come to fruition. Like I said, they just want to replace everything on the internet that already exists in better form so they can put their ads on more of these "free" services.

So which one are we gonna go with?
A. Google is "me-too" because they created Edition as a knee-jerk reaction to the release of the iPad.
B. Google is "me-too" because they created Edition based on rumors of the iPad from last fall.
C. Google creating Edition was inevitable since Google, like a college freshman, is going to try everything at least once.
D. Google Edition is a logical progression of the Google Books project they started back in '04.

Here's a NYTimes article from June of '09 talking about Google's plans for eBooks. Another thing that happened last year was Google partnering w/Sony to provide eBooks for the Sony Reader Digital Book.

We're going to go with what I already stated in the last post. That I'm not surprised that Google has announced it, I wouldn't be surprised if they made an announcement to make their own porto-potty service at this point. If you can put ads on it, you can bet Google has made an announcement about it.

Speaking of condescending... Google isn't my beloved anymore than any other multinational corporation is.

Yet you are defending them like they are your mother.

Companies can create software and hardware w/o creating a walled garden.

Walled garden? What does making software that works with a product have to do with a walled garden? So is Microsoft's Zune a walled garden because you have to use it with their software that only works on windows? Give me a break. I can avoid what Apple does if I want to. The same can't be done with Google.

And I'm pretty sure Steve Jobs did work at Apple during the 80's.

So is late 80's is that better for you? Is that still not specific enough?

And a big part of my point is that Apple's integrated business model is a relatively *new* thing. Apple during the '70's, '80's, '90's and early '00's was not heavily invested in consumer electronics and media distribution like they are now. It was Apple Computer, Inc. before Apple, Inc. and while Apple's evolution from product to product and service to service definitely feels more deliberate and methodical than Google's that doesn't change the fact that Apple's area of interest is much broader now than it ever has been in the history of the company.

But that's what you don't understand. Apple has two main product lines and has made 60% profit off of their newer one. You are trying to compare Google to this? What a joke. Google has god knows how many "services" and has 3% profit margin from them. Again, they just want to replace everything on the internet with their own mediocre "services" so they can put their own ads on them without having any competition. Enjoy supporting the Google monopoly.

Lethal

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1-update1; en-gb; Nexus One Build/ERE27) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)

Why is there such hate for Google expanding here at MR?

As a consumer I prefer various avenues to get my content and Google will be another choice when weighing up my choices.

For instance, instead of mobileme I am able to choose to use alternatives that are either cheaper or free compared to Apple.

I use Google Calendar, GMail, Google Contacts for my mail/sync solution and I also use Dropbox for online storage which is all free to use or ad supported. These ad supported services are no different than the many Android and iPhone apps I use where the developers are paid via ads and I will give developers ad clicks if their ad supported app is of a high standard.

I know that Google do collect data to serve better ads but I made the decision to let them do that and have no qualms with that. Why people complain about Google's practices when people willingly sign up for their services is also a mystery to me.

What genuine difference does it make that Apple have to compete with Google in some services that would have a detrimental effect on consumers? The only people i see who really stand to lose are those who have money invested in Apple if Google do steal marketshare from them.

 

[aiqw9182]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1-update1; en-gb; Nexus One Build/ERE27) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)

Why is there such hate for Google expanding here at MR?

Sorry I don't support and endorse companies with a monopolistic hold on the internet.

As a consumer I prefer various avenues to get my content and Google will be another choice when weighing up my choices.

I bet you do. I bet you want to use Buzz instead of Twitter. I bet you want to use Google for your internet ISP instead of any other ISP. I bet you want to use Google for your electricity. I bet you want to use Google for you health records. I bet you want to use Google every time you buy something online. The list goes on and on.

For instance, instead of mobileme I am able to choose to use alternatives that are either cheaper or free compared to Apple.

But it's possible to avoid everything Apple does. It's getting harder and harder to avoid anything Google does.

I use Google Calendar, GMail, Google Contacts for my mail/sync solution and I also use Dropbox for online storage which is all free to use or ad supported. These ad supported services are no different than the many Android and iPhone apps I use where the developers are paid via ads and I will give developers ad clicks if their ad supported app is of a high standard.

But Google could be fine with just putting their ads on services that already exist. They don't need to make all of these variations which there are already plenty of available. They just want to know everything you are doing and want to be your one stop shop on the internet. They are trying to rule out competition at all costs and the fact that people are actually supporting what they do is amazing to me.

I know that Google do collect data to serve better ads but I made the decision to let them do that and have no qualms with that. Why people complain about Google's practices when people willingly sign up for their services is also a mystery to me.

They also don't explain how these "services" work. Do they read through my e-mails? Do they follow what I search? Do they know everyone on my contacts list? Why does Google need to keep info on me for 18 months?

What genuine difference does it make that Apple have to compete with Google in some services that would have a detrimental effect on consumers? The only people i see who really stand to lose are those who have money invested in Apple if Google do steal marketshare from them.

The fact of the matter is that Google has their hand up everyone's ass in every corner of the internet. Apple does not. We don't need these Google variations. All they want you to do is use them so they have all of the control over the ads. These new "services" Google is shoving down everyone's throat month after month is just their way of trying to screw over their competition. If not they just buy them out. Look at Google Video, that sucked ass so they bought out YouTube.

Oh and I find this rather amusing coming from a guy posting from a Nexus One with an Android in his icon.

 

[Gakboi]

i can't believe what i'm reading on this thread. a bit of an apple circle jerk going on.

the more choice you have the better. apple isn't exactly the most innovative company in the world either ... note that they also buy other innovative companies (and then close them down lol)

the only really good core product apple has is osx the rest is just fancy packaging for the same old bs except that they tie you into their app store/itunes....

google has a lot of quality products provided to us for free (ok we indirectly pay for them but at least they don't double dip apple style) on the back of their ridiculous ad revenues. real value which benefits many of us everyday

and (for those of you doing it) please stop referring to apple as 'we'. remember apple own you not the other way 'round