Live data from Hacker News

The war between Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple

medium.com

101–110 of 118 posts

Re: The war between Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment is talking about paid monthly services as YouTube Red vs Netflix. Sure Google has the worlds most popular (mostly free) video site, monetized by advertising, but it can't seem to beat Netflix at paid subscriptions. It hasn't been able to beat Facebook at social networking either. Keep in mind that YouTube was a purchase for Google, as was Instagram for Facebook. Both probably very important for them long…

I'm loving Google Play Music, although the branding really sucks.

Don't you mean "Google Play Music All Access / YouTube Red bundle"?

Re: The war between Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple

#102
post #6

I'm genuinely unsure how I feel about this article. First, the internet itself is only in danger if net neutrality is genuinely threatened by ISPs. Until then, the network itself is as open as it ever was. As for the services on top, the meta-layer of products and infrastructure we rely on--social media, content sources, smartphones and smart devices, etc--there's a lot of reason to be concerned. But Amazon's markets…

> And as a random aside, modern theories suggest that pyramid builders were paid employees and not slaves.

This distinction is not terribly meaningful especially for bronze age manual laborers. One could argue that slavery might have been better than getting paid for this kind of work. A slave is at least a nominal investment. A worker is infinitely replaceable.

Re: The war between Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple

#103
post #6

I'm genuinely unsure how I feel about this article. First, the internet itself is only in danger if net neutrality is genuinely threatened by ISPs. Until then, the network itself is as open as it ever was. As for the services on top, the meta-layer of products and infrastructure we rely on--social media, content sources, smartphones and smart devices, etc--there's a lot of reason to be concerned. But Amazon's markets…

[Warning: semi-tangential deep dive on your point about Amazon not being a monopoly] Amazon isn't in the retail business. Amazon isn't in the cloud computing business. Amazon isn't in the logistics business. Amazon is in the business business. It is no longer The Everything Store; it is now the Everything Everything. It wants to be the platform around which all of the world's businesses depend. This is about as ambit…

Last year, online retail sales amounted to 8.6% of all retail sales.

Re: The war between Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple

#104
post #6

I'm genuinely unsure how I feel about this article. First, the internet itself is only in danger if net neutrality is genuinely threatened by ISPs. Until then, the network itself is as open as it ever was. As for the services on top, the meta-layer of products and infrastructure we rely on--social media, content sources, smartphones and smart devices, etc--there's a lot of reason to be concerned. But Amazon's markets…

> And as a random aside, modern theories suggest that pyramid builders were paid employees and not slaves. This distinction is not terribly meaningful especially for bronze age manual laborers. One could argue that slavery might have been better than getting paid for this kind of work. A slave is at least a nominal investment. A worker is infinitely replaceable.

Huh... can't say I ever anticipated running into someone who would seriously put forward the claim that slavery might be better than voluntarily working for pay...

Re: The war between Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple

#105
There's an effect here that this article doesn't mention and that most don't mention.

Large scale innovation happens in one of two ways: a strong industry leader, or via government. The latter is relatively rare because government is necessarily usually more conservative; the former happens more easily, especially because industry leaders often are either formed or maintained because a private venture was able to move fast enough to develop a technology in a way that has large societal implications.

The side effect, though, is that people who work at those private industries that have innovated and developer something new (which may or may not have short term deleterious effects) eventually leave and either diffuse their knowledge or start their own ventures. When this happens, as time passes, many other new ventures - which can often have an effect directly opposite to said deleterious effects, or otherwise have positive effects - spring up and take hold. And that's a net positive.

There are people who worked at (or currently work at and will leave) Google and Facebook, advertising companies that have disproportionately much power, but will use the knowledge they gained from those places to put into effects efforts that they might not have known how to otherwise and that may make the world better, long term.

Articles like the one posted here are passionate and persuasive, but they also focus on the short term (if not solely the present); it is worthwhile to remember these sorts of long term effects.

Re: The war between Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and you don't think all the free marketing is a large part of that? It's a little quieter lately, but they have a huge fan-base in the media world due to them using Apple kit for both audio and video editing for years. How many other phone manufacturers get multiple articles in the news when a new model is released?

... and you don't think all the free marketing is a large part of that? Ummm, no. It is people who are willing to pay more for the extra service, strong integration, and a business model that does not build on pushing advertising. I pay the premium for a MacBook every 1 1/2 year or so, because if there is a problem, I can go to the Apple store and they'll typically have it fixed in two hours, no questions asked. I ha…

So, I built a Hackintosh recently, and in researching software recommendations, one thing stood out: even die-hard Apple fans had to admit that PCs were catching up (or, maybe more honestly, in a lot of ways Apple is losing momentum).

Windows 10 has come a long way from its roots. Windows laptops are getting remarkably good (the latest line of Dell and HP laptops are excellent, and Lenovo always stands out). And the smartphone gap has been rapidly closing for years, both the hardware and software. I think you can lay this at the feet of Apple elevating customer expectations.

Meanwhile, Apple hardware refreshes have been lackluster at best, particularly in the pro category. The OS doesn't feel like it has the edge it once had. And top notch software exclusives are increasingly rare as software goes cross platform or moves to the web.

Now, by all accounts Apple's support is still some of the best in the business. And the overall platform integration across devices is excellent. So a lot of the benefits you cite are still present.

But you have to wonder how long that'll last...

Re: The war between Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple

#110
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook: Twitter is a decent competitor for network effects. I've moved my photo sharing to Google Photos as it trumps anything Facebook offers. For me, the biggest Facebook benefit is sharing photos with family on Facebook. Everything else on there is pretty much noise or garbage you can find on any other site. The one recent thing that Facebook does better than anyone that I get value out of are "local events". Go…

Suggesting Facebook and Google and Amazon as serious replacements for Facebook and Google and Amazon really drives the point home.

Nicely said. I did do that for 1.5 out of the 4. While I didn't state it well, my argument was meant to be for replacing one or two of them, not all of them.

Voice is probably the hardest one to replace all 4 of them on.

For Facebook's network effects, I mentioned Twitter which is not one of the four. I did mention that my main use I've replaced with Google Photos. I did that because it's free & great. If I hated Google, I could use several paid services that offer similar benefits. Snapchat is becoming more popular with the older people I know. Instagram was great before getting bought out by Facebook so we can't count them now.

I think maybe one point that needs to be made, is if you want a "free service" you must be willing to let your data be sold. That is the big problem that many people have with a lot of the above free services.

Post reply on HN