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

Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 99 posts

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#71

Post by ax0n »

chrischen wrote: post #69
bbuffone wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone complains about the mobile industry but if I listed the industries that have or are currently screwing me mobile isn't even in the top 10. Health-care, Insurance, Oil, Headphones, Government, Credit cards, Banking, Financial, Video Games, Cable then maybe mobile. My mobile plan is one of the lowest monthly bills that I have based on amount of usage. To my knowledge it is one of the least subsidized industrie…

I find it interesting when people trash the government. In the US atleast, you have some control over it. If you are getting screwed by the government, you have various outlets to mobilize change and if you don't act on them it's no ones fault but your, since the government answers to it's shareholders: you.

I didn't vote this guy into office. But I did vote. And I knew going into it that either candidate would've screwed us over in his own way. Most of us have come to terms with the fact that all candidates are for bigger government, it's just whose pork barrels will be filled for the next 4-8 years.

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#72

Post by ax0n »

bbuffone wrote: post #45
SwellJoe wrote: post #9

Since we've all been screwed by the mobile industry for the entirety of its existence, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel indignant towards Google for pissing off said industry. There are very few industries more arrogant and abusive than the telcos (at least in the US; I dunno about the UK), and if Google wants to take their place, I'm all for it. Instead of playing the consumer-screwing game better (like Apple d…

Everyone complains about the mobile industry but if I listed the industries that have or are currently screwing me mobile isn't even in the top 10. Health-care, Insurance, Oil, Headphones, Government, Credit cards, Banking, Financial, Video Games, Cable then maybe mobile. My mobile plan is one of the lowest monthly bills that I have based on amount of usage. To my knowledge it is one of the least subsidized industrie…

Care to tell me why you listed banking, creditr cards and financial? Also, I think I can speak for most of us in saying that the communications industry as a whole is pretty much one big cartel. Cable, landline, long-distance, voip, mobile, ISPs... the lines are getting blurred more and more by the day, and none of them have our best interests in mind. Bandwidth caps on mobile data plans, ISPs and net neutrality all hearken back to the days of anti-competitive practices with phone billing. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Health care, Big Pharm and insurance are indifferentiable, as well. It's all one big cash party with price fixing, tax write-offs, and lots of customer-screwing to go around. Government is getting tied up in there as well.

Sucks about your headphones. That's why I never spend more than $60 or so on a pair.

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#73

Post by btilly »

gaius wrote: post #31
btilly wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly. The relationship you have with T-mobile is that they have signed you to a contract that locks you in to their service. At every turn T-mobile's goal is to lock you in, and once you're locked in they don't care about you. By contrast Google sets things up so that you can switch at any time, and they constantly have to keep you happy.

That's not really true, tho'. Come contract renewal time they are very accomodating. Or call them up and get through to Customer Retention and again, they'll bend over backwards. But my point stands. T-mobile is interested in keeping me happy, over the long term. Google is interested in keeping its advertisers happy. Given the choice between you or I and them, it will always choose them. That's why it wants all your…

You are oversimplifying Google. Google's philosophy is that doing right by their users is always the best thing to do.

Remember, Google got where it is by doing what they think is right for users, not by doing what advertisers asked for. That philosophy is pretty deeply embedded in the corporate DNA. Humans being human that is sure to change over time, but I think it will take a long time. And until it does, I wouldn't worry about it much.

(Disclaimer, I started at Google about a week ago. This gives me both insight and a predictable amount of enthusiasm.)

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#74

Post by s3graham »

ubernostrum wrote: post #58
btilly wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see the second wrong. What did Google do? They built their own unlocked phone following the open reference platform that they helped create. And now they are trying to sell that phone on the open market. How is this wrong?

Fairly frequently, stories come up of a software vendor whose product was doing well until, one day, (Apple/Microsoft, depending on which OS it was for) comes out with their own bundled or free/cheap software which does the same thing. People often get upset at this potentially business-destroying transformation from "they provide my platform" to "they're my competition". Often there's a round of followup posts which…

I think the difference in perception comes from Google "screwing" large companies rather than small-to-medium sized ISVs. In fact, they're mostly improving things for small vendors and consumers (at least in the short term), which is why there's positive perception.

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#75

Post by nostrademons »

ubernostrum wrote: post #58
btilly wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see the second wrong. What did Google do? They built their own unlocked phone following the open reference platform that they helped create. And now they are trying to sell that phone on the open market. How is this wrong?

Fairly frequently, stories come up of a software vendor whose product was doing well until, one day, (Apple/Microsoft, depending on which OS it was for) comes out with their own bundled or free/cheap software which does the same thing. People often get upset at this potentially business-destroying transformation from "they provide my platform" to "they're my competition". Often there's a round of followup posts which…

Because we're consumers here. Always remember that the economy exists to serve consumers. Hell, our regulators tend to forget.

I'd argue that Google's in the right here, and that we ought to remember it when, as software developers, we complain about some big new competitor moving into our market. The end goal of business is to serve consumers. If some bigger business can serve consumers better, that's the why we have competition in a market economy. Either compete, or get out of the way and find something else to do.

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#76

Post by orangecat »

skywalker wrote: post #63
SwellJoe wrote: post #9

Since we've all been screwed by the mobile industry for the entirety of its existence, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel indignant towards Google for pissing off said industry. There are very few industries more arrogant and abusive than the telcos (at least in the US; I dunno about the UK), and if Google wants to take their place, I'm all for it. Instead of playing the consumer-screwing game better (like Apple d…

"...Google looked... the way they were being sold (exclusive to specific carriers, and used to lock consumers in, just like all prior phones) and felt that it just wasn't doing the job the way they'd planned. Android had a reason for existing, and it was to break the logjam in the mobile industry". If that was their intention, they failed at it. The Nexus One costs about the same as the iPhone to produce, yet the unl…

The Nexus One costs about the same as the iPhone to produce, yet the unlocked version is sold by the the same price that what an unlocked iPhone would be.

You can't buy an unlocked iPhone from Apple in the US. You can buy a contract-free iPhone for $600, which is more than the Nexus One and still locked to AT&T. Yes you may be able to unlock the iPhone yourself, but that gets you in a constant cat-and-mouse game with Apple who considers you a criminal at that point.

No non-technical user in his sane mind would pay $330 more for an unlocked phone.

T-Mobile's plans are $20/month cheaper if you're not paying off a subsidized phone, so you'll more than recoup the cost difference of the unsubsidized N1 over two years.

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#77

Post by joe_the_user »

SwellJoe wrote: post #9

Since we've all been screwed by the mobile industry for the entirety of its existence, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel indignant towards Google for pissing off said industry. There are very few industries more arrogant and abusive than the telcos (at least in the US; I dunno about the UK), and if Google wants to take their place, I'm all for it. Instead of playing the consumer-screwing game better (like Apple d…

The article is kind-of trolling against Google really.

The idea that Googlenet means Google isn't respecting net neutrality is a sham. Other operators could create something like Googlenet for some internal purpose. They just extract rent from the public switching networking their operating.

Sure, Google is very much about making money, it's just it makes money providing value-added-services (search+advertising) rather than extracting rent on anything that travels through it's pipes.

It has the means to be the one who provides these value-add-services and it intends to keep those means. But the way it does this is increasing the quality and quantity of products - a good thing for us.

A story where Google is preventing someone else from providing more would get my attention.

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#78

Post by joe_the_user »

ubernostrum wrote: post #58
btilly wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see the second wrong. What did Google do? They built their own unlocked phone following the open reference platform that they helped create. And now they are trying to sell that phone on the open market. How is this wrong?

Fairly frequently, stories come up of a software vendor whose product was doing well until, one day, (Apple/Microsoft, depending on which OS it was for) comes out with their own bundled or free/cheap software which does the same thing. People often get upset at this potentially business-destroying transformation from "they provide my platform" to "they're my competition". Often there's a round of followup posts which…

It's also worth remembering that Android is open source.

Theoretically, that levels the playing field. Microsoft often was accused of "cheating" in their product by using private APIs. Theoretically Google shouldn't be able to do this. I'd be interested in whether that's really the case.

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#79

Post by SwellJoe »

skywalker wrote: post #63
SwellJoe wrote: post #9

Since we've all been screwed by the mobile industry for the entirety of its existence, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel indignant towards Google for pissing off said industry. There are very few industries more arrogant and abusive than the telcos (at least in the US; I dunno about the UK), and if Google wants to take their place, I'm all for it. Instead of playing the consumer-screwing game better (like Apple d…

"...Google looked... the way they were being sold (exclusive to specific carriers, and used to lock consumers in, just like all prior phones) and felt that it just wasn't doing the job the way they'd planned. Android had a reason for existing, and it was to break the logjam in the mobile industry". If that was their intention, they failed at it. The Nexus One costs about the same as the iPhone to produce, yet the unl…

The Nexus One costs about the same as the iPhone to produce, yet the unlocked version is sold by the the same price that what an unlocked iPhone would be. That means their are getting Apple like obscene margins.

The point: You missed it.

The Nexus One is officially unlocked, and usable on just about any carrier. The carriers are the problem here, and breaking the hold they have over consumers in order to allow competition on price and quality is the goal. The Nexus One isn't magic. It doesn't fix the carriers; but it is one more thing to allow consumers to escape without having to break the EULA, hack their phone, possibly bricking it, etc. Apple is the enemy of this idea, not a friend, and the iPhone is among the best servants the old guard (well, the oldest guard, AT&T, anyway) has in their fight to maintain a stranglehold over consumers communications.

Re: Google to mobile industry: 'F*** you very much'

#80

Post by padmanabhan01 »

chrischen wrote: post #69
bbuffone wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone complains about the mobile industry but if I listed the industries that have or are currently screwing me mobile isn't even in the top 10. Health-care, Insurance, Oil, Headphones, Government, Credit cards, Banking, Financial, Video Games, Cable then maybe mobile. My mobile plan is one of the lowest monthly bills that I have based on amount of usage. To my knowledge it is one of the least subsidized industrie…

I find it interesting when people trash the government. In the US atleast, you have some control over it. If you are getting screwed by the government, you have various outlets to mobilize change and if you don't act on them it's no ones fault but your, since the government answers to it's shareholders: you.

//you have various outlets to mobilize change and if you don't act on them it's no ones fault but yours

I disagree. I should not need to mobilize change or act on it to be able to have certain things. Mobilizing change has a cost (time, effort, money etc) and I should not be forced to pay those costs for things an individual in a civilized society ought to be entitled to.

Post reply on HN