Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

G is for Google

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 607 posts

Re: G is for Google

#171

Post by hobs »

noelsusman wrote: post #144
coldtea wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wave, Plus, Glasses at least. If we are to include less ambitious stuff, Google Video, Orkut, Chromebooks (never went far), Reader, Google Code, Dart, nothing much came out of Morotola, etc. And let's see were those "self driving cars" will go, market-wise...

Chromebooks are pretty popular. The first generation wasn't very good but the more recent ones are selling well. Reader was very popular relative to the size of the RSS reader market. Google bought Motorola for the patent portfolio and sold off the rest, so I'm not sure how that was a failure. Motorola also turned around their mobile division with the Moto X under Google (over 100% increase in mobile sales due to the…

All of that I wont argue with, except the characterization that reader was a success because Google owned the market.

I dont see how G closing down reader could have that count in the success column, especially considering how much bad blood it bred for G (and how little effort it would have likely meant to maintain it.)

Re: G is for Google

#175

Post by twright »

0x4a42 wrote: post #59

So I guess A is Adsense.

This is what I'm really wondering about, how much will things get split up?

- Y for YouTube (easy)

- C for Chrome (probably not)

- ? for Gmail

- ? for Analytics (or does that stick with AdSense?)

Re: G is for Google

#177

Post by untog »

dragonwriter wrote: post #136
loteck wrote: post #17

To summarize (correct me if I'm wrong): - Google will now be operated as a subsidiary of a new company called Alphabet. - Alphabet will be publicly traded under the same symbols as Google is now traded. - Stock will just transfer as-is. - Sundar Pichai is now the CEO of Google. - Larry and Sergey will run Alphabet as CEO and President, respectively.

Its probably simpler to think of it this way: * What was called "Google" will now be called "Alphabet", with Larry and Sergey as CEO and President. * Much of the core business of the old Google will be operated in a division/subsidiary of the new Alphabet called "Google", of which Sundar Pichai will be CEO. * The rest of the old Google's business will be in other units of Alphabet.

That is in no way simpler.

Re: G is for Google

#178

Post by jaredsohn »

coldtea wrote: post #103
10098 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't Chromebooks the best selling laptop on amazon or something?

Yes, they sell decently, but do no represent any profit for Google (which gives the OS for free). It's around 5-6 million units sold anually, but, as Google themselves said, Google don't make any money of off them. Samsung, Acer, etc, who produce the units do, but again, in total it represents a tiny slither of laptop profits due to the small margins. Most Chromebooks (70%) go to the education market as cheapo laptop…

I would imagine that Google indirectly profits by having more users using Google as their default search engine and by encouraging the world to rely more on the web.

Edit: Also, in the past Google would pay Firefox to have its users use Google as the default search engine and Google gets the equivalent of this for free with each Chromebook sold.

Re: G is for Google

#179

Post by josuedev »

rbinv wrote: post #35

From the abc.xyz source code: Sergey and I are seriously in the business of starting new things. Alphabet will also include our X lab, which incubates new efforts like Wing, our drone delivery effort http://www.hooli.xyz/" target="_blank" class="hidden-link">.

Keep an eye on this:

https://abc.xyz/jobs -> https://abc.xyz/about/careers/

Re: G is for Google

#180

Post by cma »

dragonwriter wrote: post #123
vonmoltke wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The danger of conglomerates that give so much freedom to their subsidiaries is that said subsidiaries start actually competing against each other and hurting the business overall.

> The danger of conglomerates that give so much freedom to their subsidiaries is that said subsidiaries start actually competing against each other and hurting the business overall. Google seems to like competing against themselves, so I'm not sure that's something that they are particularly worried about.

Stack ranking is already this times 10.
Post reply on HN