Yeah, motorola products have completely gone down the toilet after that acquisition. They were so great before with fast updates and a wonderful skin of android, and now they're either non-innovative or way too overpriced for the value.
1) http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/11/19/hell-freezes-over-th...
2) http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/09/13/motorola-droid-razr-...
3) https://www.abiresearch.com/press/googlemotorola-mobilitys-m...
4) http://www.anandtech.com/show/7586/motorola-moto-g-review/8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_PowerMeter
http://mobilesyrup.com/2013/12/17/google-dipping-its-toe-int...
To acquire home statistics. Can you imagine the personal data gathering? And the $ value attached to that data?
All sweetened with sugar for you to buy the product, connect, and give your data for free.
Oh how I would love to be a fly on the wall and look at who exactly is pulling these strings.
Government? - Which ones Private equity? - Which sticky hands Other Countries? - Which ones & what would the data be worth to them?
This is why I disapprove of services such as: Google glass, Home automation data gathering, Car & transport data gathering.
I'm not an 'all-or-nothing' kind of guy, but sheesh....
And that 23andMe DNA gathering product: https://www.23andme.com/ It's like a totalitarian wet dream.
I can't help but feel that this is a funded attempt to subvert power away from OPEC nations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC
If so, could be to help these guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Sisters_(oil_companies)
It says in this article:http://ow.ly/syrfO "Google is a widely-known proponent of “green” energy, promoting low-power data centres and clean grid-based power whenever possible."
Excluding "It is good for mankind & the Earth", Why is it important to 'reduce' in western nations, when so many developing/upcoming/industrial/manufacturing/oil nations are laughing at this policy?
Something's up. And it isn't share price. Sorry for my conspiracy feelings -My instinct tells me there will be comments about being overly-conspiratorial (If so, this will suggest my instincts are correct), but I'm more than worried about my children's children and their future.
For some reason in these Austere times, there's a squeeze going on which is being driven by more than you and I are presently being told.
The analogy here is something like the OnStar system in recent cars. I don't think that many people who made it happen primarily did so to give the banks a way to find and repo cars, but once a large percentage of cars have this system it does enable banks to do it much more efficiently. Not to mention what the authorities can do with these same systems.
If you are so afraid of data gathering it's pretty much impossible to do a lot of technologies. I can understand being against centralization and sending that data over a network to third parties. But even that is necessary in order to improve the product. You want your self driving car to have billions of hours of experience behind it, right?
Seriously? Lifestyle information is a gold mine for advertisers. If someone is diabetic, they need drugs, so I'm sure going to serve up more pharmaceutical ads (and those pay very well). If they're running the heater, they're almost certainly in the market for a jacket, blanket, or similar. Suddenly using "auto away" for stretches at a time? I bet they're traveling for work, and could use some luggage or a vacation to throw mileage points at.
Waay more profitable than just throwing random crap out there and seeing what sticks.
>Yeah, motorola products have completely gone down the toilet after that acquisition. They were so great before with fast updates and a wonderful skin of android, and now they're either non-innovative or way too overpriced for the value. /s
it would have saved http://imgur.com/2iha7bO
He could have told us why he doesn't like this, or give us an example of another company that was acquired by Google where the result was bad for consumers, then at least we could have had a discussion about this.
But this way it's only "I don't like this" vs "I like it" and there are definitely more interesting discussions with more information in this thread that could have been upvoted.
While I am not upset by this acquisition, I can certainly understand the sentiment.
I can't speak to validity of the top comment being only that aforementioned opinion, nor am I suggesting that sarcasm was inappropriate, but I think this only highlights the upvote/downvote mechanism as an I agree/disagree button more than a add to/ doesn't add to the discussion button.
You can see the list in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisition...
I just don't want to see Google dominating the world. Competition is nice.
On consideration, I'm a big fan of Google, Apple and Amazon. The thing that makes me (and probably others) nervous about all three is that they are too big. For instance, a monopolist strategy (Microsoft style) might appear someday.
There are parallels to the Internet Explorer/Netscape issue. Google provided a free service to everyone, killing any good paid services/products (which didn't integrate with Google Reader), except instead of taking advantage of their monopoly they just threw it away.
Now you have companies like Reeder, with a sufficiently large user base, who have to not only scramble to provide their own backend (or integrate with someone else's), but also scale it to the appropriate number of users literally overnight, which is not necessarily an easy task for a company which has, so far, only needed to have client-side developers (which is why most client apps, like Reeder, moved to using some other company for their backend instead of writing their own).
There was certainly no malicious intent, but they basically crushed an entire market and then abandoned it.
3.5 months.
Also, you'll be hard-pressed to find much upward pressure beyond free on this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_feed_aggregators
"except instead of taking advantage of their monopoly". Woww way to telegraph the fact that you completely misunderstood the Internet Explorer/Netscape issue. Parallels with IE/Netscape are meaningless if the monopoly _gets thrown away_.
Sounds like the case.
Android would have gone nowhere without being acquired, since OEMs and carriers wouldn't talk to such a small company.
(
Oh, not Y! (although some have speculated that Mayer move was a reverse-acquisition)
I can't feel that we'd be much better off if MS had decided to lose billions on YouTube along with Bing and Google had pressed ahead with Google Video as a legitimate competitor.
But what I'm unable to accept is why the client won't let me buffer a video and erases everything just as soon as it's diplayed on the screen. It does not make downloading the content any harder - all it does is making me download the videos, whatch them and delete, because the official player sucks.
comments, ads, channels, even the way the video buffers is annoying smfh
Could they get any worse? Seriously does any normal thinking person really participate and contribute comments in that quagmire? I sometimes I thank Google and Yahoo for creating those honey pots for the internet brain-dead to vent their steam and vitriol, keeping them well away from stuff I like to constructively participate in.
Coincidence? No clue... Still, all the "OMG G+ will destroy youtube!1!" whining is looking pretty stupid...
"OMG LOL your house is burning down."
With specific regards to Foursquare: note that the founder left to do Foursquare, and they're floundering right now. Maybe the vision was never sound to begin with.
I immediately thought 'google will tie this into your google phone for you. That could be pretty nice.'
"Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to
create a parody of extremism or fundamentalism that
someone won't mistake for the real thing." [1]
(edit: Poe's Law always reminds me of this SNL skit where Fred Armisen tells Jimmy Fallon that the right way to tell a joke is to use a "catch phrase": http://video.tvguide.com/Saturday+Night+Live/Weekend+Update+...)
2) end your comment with '/s' [most people know this means the previous comment was meant as sarcasm. it should be the preferred method of communicating sarcasm and the sentiment that the referenced recipient is obviously wrong]