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

Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 784 posts

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#491

Post by trophycase »

CydeWeys wrote: post #367
qubex wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Argument by analogy is very powerful and utterly fallacious” — my high-school Theory Of Knowledge teacher (Mr Dawson you’re the best) That said, I’m really not enthused by this under either the business (relevant case history: Nest) or privacy perspective.

A common antipattern here in HN comments is someone using an analogy (which is almost always bad), and then the responses devolving into arguing over how the analogy isn't correct. I honestly think a "no analogies" rule for commenting would do more to facilitate good discussion than the existing "no jokes" rule. Analogies are almost never useful. Even the ancient Greeks realized this.

Analogies are like the electricity of communication.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#492

Post by tristanj »

SurgeArrest wrote: post #361

RIP FitBit. Google bought you, which means that a good lineup of products will be killed or infected with buggy, slow, limited and unimaginative software from Google. Prepare to reboot your Fitbits daily. Maybe those always on displays can display Coke or Pepsi ad or two while you are jogging and figure out that you are dehydrated and out of the water, as ad-tech is the only thing that works in the whole Google empir…

You have it backwards. Fitbit was already dead before Google bought them. They couldn't keep up with the competition, they laid off hundreds of employees, and their stock crashed 90%. Google is mopping up the pieces. Spending $2B for Fitbit is chump change for Google.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#493

Post by scarface74 »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #413
scarface74 wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to be a cold hard capitalist. But how has improving Google Maps helped its profitability? Would a competitor have taken market share away from Google Maps if they hadn’t acquired Waze? But more importantly, would it have decreased as revenue?

By keeping its competitors utterly uncompetitive. There remains no good alternative to Google's maps for consumers. Waze would have jumpstarted a competitor's mapping efforts. For stupid acquisitions, look no further than everything Andy Rubin bought, from Motorola to robotics companies.

Nokia Here maps and Apple Maps is larger than Google Maps on iOS.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#495

Post by papln »

peonicles wrote: post #369
braythwayt wrote: post #126

John Gruber^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Dan Lyons^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Steve Ballmer had another colourful analogy, he used it in response to companies claiming that a merger would create a powerhouse to challenge the market leader: "It’s like taking the two guys who finished second and third in a 100-yard dash and tying their legs together and asking for a rematch, believing that now they’ll run faster." (Thanks to "raldi" f…

I had to google for what "^H" meant. Found an interesting answer and backstory: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/386870.html

omg how is http://answers.google.com/ still up and running with a 2-generations obsolete UI framework.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#496

Post by Razengan »

wongarsu wrote: post #358
Razengan wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Growth" = ?

Growth implies success, but you can be successful without growth. Just running a profitable business that's not losing market share is enough for most people's definition of success.

> Growth implies

But what is growth? Making more money? More users? Happier users?

After attaining profitability I wish companies would focus on making existing users happy, instead of making more money by any means necessary. If they did that then more users + more money would follow naturally.

The sibling comment about cancer is so apt. When does "growth" become cancerous?

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#498

Post by [deleted] »

SirLotsaLocks wrote: post #481
cletus wrote: post #325

Oof. Goodbye Fitbit. Or, rather, welcome to the world where you're a pawn in internal politics. You may think you have a product but you don't. If your product survives (as in, Google didn't buy you just for the team), your product schedule will have to survive the interests of every other PA/team in Google. - You think you have software to run your products? Ha. The Android team will have a different opinion. - Even…

forgive my ignorance, but what's a xoogler

[deleted]

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#499

Post by AgloeDreams »

fragmede wrote: post #336
AgloeDreams wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean two turkey's don't make an eagle, but a gun and a bullet are not very lethal on their own. Fitbit's sales are good and it's platform is not, Google's platform is good and it's sales are not. Easy fix.

What do you mean by "platform", in this context? Google's wearOS hasn't proved popular with users.

That was exactly my point, capability of the software, from a technical standpoint WearOS is miles ahead of anything Fitbit will have for 5+ years, but lacks the user count and apps needed. (though by using existing Android notification reply functionality they are still really far ahead in some ways.) From a user quantity factor Fitbit is miles ahead. Mix the two and you get a great (and difficult to make popular without breakout products) WearOS platform with the great user base Fitbit brings.
Post reply on HN