Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google 'Supercharging Android' With Acquisition of Motorola Mobility
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not true. I never said that. You're assuming what I assume, and you assume incorrectly.
My argument is that the "obsessed, evangelical, incessantly angry" subset of the Android fan base currently makes more noise on the Web than any other fan base of any other technology product.
Wow, I didn't know that. So all those people at last week's DEF CON 19 were non-tech savvy people? Seriously, that's all I saw there, were Macbook Pros or Airs. When someone used something else, they stuck out like a sore thumb.
But I'll take your word for it. Those guys at that conference were obviously posers.
Like I said, I don't think any company can even exist if it doesn't own any of its own patents.
Again, Google's business model isn't like Apple's, where Apple's moneymaker is the hardware + software.
Google's main objective is to have AS MANY PHONES with Android OS on it.
Alienating other handset makers would only HARM Google. This is why Google released a series of Quotes from leading Android handset makers stating they endorse this move.
You don't understand how business works. Of course Google's licensees said this. What else are they supposed to say? If they speak up, their own stock takes a tumble (because investors fear for future sales and uncertainty as to OS), they alienate google (with possible reprisals being obvious to ascertain), etc.
Google didn't just pay $12B for patent protection they could have gotten for $4B. They paid $8B extra to compete with their own licensees.
Keywords = "very infrequent"
Compare and contrast with MacRumors, where a sizable group appears to make their living bashing all things Apple.
Hmm, you've never seen the "Android eating an apple" avatar or the "Android taking a leak (Calvin & Hobbes style) on an apple" avatar, eh? You must not spend much time on the Web.
There's more than plenty of that for Google as well.
I bet I'd be booted from XDA within a day or two if I acted like some of the regulars on MacRumors (who need not be named) who hold nothing but loathing for Apple; they are on many readers' ignore lists but not enough to prevent an all-out flame war from breaking out on every single thread.
i'm backing my statement with actual quotes from Android handset makers. You have 0 evidence to corroborate your claim. Nuff said.
your reasoning of 'what else are they gonna say' is not an argument at all.
Your evidence is actually evidence of MY point, not yours. Read what they said carefully. It's the Stepford Licensees. Hell, I bet Google wrote the press releases.
I also gave you further evidence - they could have bought at least one huge patent portfolio for only $4-$5M dollars. Why, instead, did they spend an actually $8M? Do you think Google just likes to throw away money?
Call me when you actually get a job in the electronics industry.
Look up Occam's Razor. You may find it helps you think more clearly.
Like I said, it's not normal.
They won't say anything even remotely critical of Apple. They'll make up excuses why the lack of common features is better.
This is an absurd statement. Motorola has made many fine phones in recent years. But if you wear Apple blinders, you won't see them.
Next time try leaving the coffee shop of the convention center, lol.
Or failing that, try actually finding out whats going on around you....
But to answer your question... yes. The vast bulk of Mac users are hipsters and soccer moms that don't know the difference between FAT16 or EXT3 (or even what they are)
Just out of curiosity, I checked out the XDA forums just because I've never been there before. Here's a great comment I saw in the very first thread I read:
Yep, you're right, no immaturity over there at all.
Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? The basic function of a phone is not important? Good RF and analog engineering is a black art, one that cannot be bought overnight. Apple has discovered this over and over again with every model iPhone so far, with the latest example being the disastrous antenna design and "gap" controversy.
But given that Google isn't in the business of making hardware, even after this purchase, it's of little consequence.
How? Certainly it wasn't to outbid Apple/Microsoft/etc to buy Nortel patents for even more. Any acquisition has to pay for itself. Sure they pay 12B for the company and patents, but at least that first part can pay for itself. Unless a company goes into the patent troll business, it is going to be tough to get more than a $1B back for buying a $1B of patents.
Or work out a reasonable patent exchange with Microsoft/Apple/oracle ? I don't expect that to happen either. All of them have reasons to kill off Android or to come up with unreasonable terms ( just because want cheap money to payoff their other acquisitions )
At the core, Google doesn't want to run away suing people to make money. they rather build something and make money off of what they built.
I wouldn't bet. The vast majority of Android is open source. There is only a short time to market window for exclusivity. After that it comes down to better service not hoarded software in open source.
Google makes more money off of Android bring more apps and viewers to the web as much as selling the hardware itself. It Google can make money as people use the Android phone it doesn't matter as much in selling it.
Besides Google needs to keep Moto on a completely separate books because the advertising business doesn't have margins like the hardware businesss does. Moto is going to need to make lots of money on its own two feet or else this whole acquistion is a bust. Moto needs to make that $12B back with more than just the latest bleeding edge Android phone as a product base.
IBM, Oracle , HP, etc all put millions into Linux and that doesn't disrupt their more closed source business lines. It will be even clearer in Moto's case since it is will be a in a subsidiarity and the Andriod team will still be in Google. it shouldn't be hard to construct IP firewalls. They needed them already when Google didn't have a hardware division but worked with multiple vendors.
I'm quoting this for 2 reasons:
1. *LTD* made it fit so well to what the topic subject is. If Google want to play in the vertical integration game, they'd better be prepared to go the whole way. All or nothing.
2. Tim Cook's little speech so sums up Apple's ethos. And the competition need to understand it's this you need to copy from Apple. And not their products per sé. Copy Apple's excellence in your own products and you win. But they just clone the Apple product and fail.
Explain precisely HOW this will be good for consumers.
All of a sudden Google has $12 billion LESS that they can invest in better search algorithms, faster servers, or pay in salaries to Google software engineers.
If Google really "cared" about Android consumers, it would pay half a million Android developers ten grand each to write decent Apps for its tablets. Then it might have a chance competing against the iPad. Instead, $12 billion gets paid out to Motorola shareholders, and neither the Google nor the Motorola experience gets one whit better.
Its very difficult for any sane person to see this as anything other than a purely defensive move on the part of Google.
You work in the 'electronics' industry. Wow! Cookie for you good sir.
Your points, actually, have not corroborated with my own evidence to support my claim that Android OS's objective is to give out OS to as many handset makers as possible.
Now you're claiming that Google put words in HTC, Samsung, LG's mouth now? What else are you going to say next?
Do me favor, lets return to this discussion some months later, when newer Motorola phones come out. It will be business as usual, with minor changes. Motorola will still be selling phones, and so will HTC/Samsung/LG, etc.
Google will not be putting exclusive features on Moto phones over their partners, to screw over their existing partnerships/alliances.
We'll know whose right then. As for now, you're claiming that Motorola will get extreme preferential treatment over HTC and the likes, when this will most likely not be the case. Its quite clear you do not know the basics of Android's business model.
It would have paid for itself in that Apple/MS/etc would have a hard time suing google and its licensees.
Or they could have bought Moto's (or a chunk of Moto's) patents and licensed them back to Moto, for a lot less than $12B.
Precisely. And the best way to do that is to lock out the licensees.
Google controls how long that market window is. And they can always make future versions closed source.
Moto is not going to be "completely separate books." In the end moto is part of google and moto's margins will be reflected in the price of google's stock.
No, your reasoning is bogus. Android hasn't been proven to violate any patents and all patents are valid until proven otherwise. Seeing as Motorola is a pioneer in wireless technology I'd say their patents will be pretty strong.
I think Google HQ needs to move to Utah
Yea, I hear you can have Multiple Operating Systems with one phone out there.
"Most likely not be the case?" Based on what? You still haven't even tried to explain why Google spent $12B for just patent protection. You haven't explained why the "statements" are all nearly identical. You haven't explained why Google won't try to earn value for its $12B purchase. You are committing the logical fallacy of assuming that "android's business model" is perpetually static, and will never change. And you provide no basis for why your viewpoint is superior to mine - unlike me, you also have no documented history on these boards of actually being right about anything.
Yes, they are, they are, and will remain, a separate company and will be doing exactly that. Seeing as Google make most of their money in advertising, MM's profitability or otherwise will have little influence on the share price.
The sad part about it is Steve (Apple) convinced the iSheep that they didn't need those things and they believed him. I remember when the first iPhone came and people asked why it wasn't 3G and Steve said it didn't need it. Low and behold what was the next version of the iPhone. What about video recorder on a $700 phone?Bravo! Your list happens to match mine! Looks like you can be objective! Who else wants to join in?
Not necessarily. Firstly, as I understand, Motorola has more patents than Nortel and those patents are much more relevant to mobile domain. So, they probably should be valued at $8B right away. Secondly, it's not like Google had many options. Even if they did not want to compete with Android licensees they kind of had to buy Motorola anyway. It does create an "interesting" situation though. They said that they will provide equal access to Android to both Motorola subsidiary and licensees. Perhaps they will try to sell Motorola assets eventually.