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

601–610 of 784 posts

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#601

Post by alexis_fr »

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #566
cletus wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, no. I find this whole "they're selling your data" trope to be trite and just annoying at this point. I actually expect this more a reaction to Apple's pivot into health with the Apple Watch (people seem to forget the ex-Burberry CEO positioned the Apple Watch 1 as a luxury product--anyone remember the Apple Watch Edition for $10k?--health came later).

While I sort of agree, I think the problem is that "they're selling your data" misstates what actually happens. Facebook and Google want to collect your data and keep it. What they're selling is indirect access to you: the more information they have on you, the more precisely they can theoretically target advertising and content to you. Keeping the data they have on you to themselves is literally their business model…

Google also wants to meddle with the elections (Numerous quotes here, but the most relevant is certainly Youtube’s CEO). Anyway, you are right for the collect-and-keep-my-data part, but I think in their idea they want to use this data to build some sort of utopia. That is the most benevolent appreciation on it, because it is one that explains all of “Do no evil”, election “influence”, use of AI and exhaustive data collection.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#602

Post by asp_hornet »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #429
taurath wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don’t care about the product in so much as they care about the avenue to suck up more data, no?

The data isn't very valuable, and it's even less valuable without users. They care about the product but are just incompetent at making hardware that people will buy, even if they eventually make the the product have useful features like identity assertion.

I don’t know about that. People’s daily fitness activity, weight, entire diet and sleep patterns aren’t valuable?

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#603

Post by dgacmu »

ceejayoz wrote: post #462
dgacmu wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a continuation of the trite bit. What's missing is recognizing that Alphabet (not Google) is very focused on diversifying its revenue stream beyond search advertising, ideally in a way that takes advantage of the things it's already good at. GCP is a good example. No search. No ads. No using of customer data. Just a desire for a really big potential revenue stream that builds on Google's expertise in managing…

Very focused, but not very good at it thus far. Their revenue is still 80-90% advertising revenue.

No disagreement.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#604

Post by broknbottle »

machinecoffee wrote: post #324
qzx_pierri wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple Watch battery lasts a day at most. My Fitbit can go without a charge for 6 days. Fitbit offers sleep tracking.. Apple Watch doesn’t natively, and even if it did, you still have to charge it at night. Fitbits are more minimalistic. They’re so nice. I don’t want a Garmin wearable. A lot of people who use Fitbits don’t use them for the fitness aspect. We use them to avoid the sedentary lifestyle by viewing our ste…

>Apple Watch doesn’t natively, and even if it did, you still have to charge it at night The way around that is to charge it earlier in the evening before bed - I do that and it lasts me easily until the following evening. But it's a shame the device doesn't cover sleep natively.

It does sleep analysis natively. You just need to enable a bed time and it’ll track it.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208655

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#605

Post by dgacmu »

zapita wrote: post #529
dgacmu wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a continuation of the trite bit. What's missing is recognizing that Alphabet (not Google) is very focused on diversifying its revenue stream beyond search advertising, ideally in a way that takes advantage of the things it's already good at. GCP is a good example. No search. No ads. No using of customer data. Just a desire for a really big potential revenue stream that builds on Google's expertise in managing…

GCP is the exception in that it’s the only Google business that does not rely on data aggregation and profiling.

That's not true. I think @ceejayoz below pointed out the situation well: they've made many attempts (waymo, for another still-unprofitable example). Just not many of them have turned into significant revenue -- particularly compared to the sustained ~24% YoY growth that Google managed for so long. That's a hard business to beat.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#606

Post by DesiLurker »

Mortiffer wrote: post #11

I can see them linking this data to medical data and getting sued again. Like last June https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/technology/google-univers...

sued just means they overplayed their hand and got a slap on the write. in a sinister way it validates their business model

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#607

Post by dastbe »

paulddraper wrote: post #534
clairity wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “I actually agree with other commenters: Google just doesn't know what it's about anymore. It has no overriding vision.” it’s pretty apparent to me that after google finally got over wanting to be facebook, google now wants to be apple. and they’re desperately trying not to be microsoft, even though that’s what they mostly are. in the beginning, google had a unique identity (quirky & clever) and vision (organize th…

> small town high school football star That's odd thing to call the biggest software company* in the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_software_c... * Alphabet

That wiki doesn't justify your statement. It's leveraging a list from 2017, but using Alphabet's market cap from 2019? And regardless, the actual market caps on that page would say Microsoft is the biggest software company in the world.

I have no idea what Forbes is using for its ranking but it is obviously not by valuation.

EDIT: And it should arguably be Apple, but for some reason neither Apple nor Amazon are software companies?

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#609

Post by GrumpyNl »

unlinked_dll wrote: post #563

Maybe someone can explain this to me. Why does Google want to compete in wearables? Why do companies feel the need to spend time/money investing in a product for no apparent reason besides the fact they aren't? Google (and tech) has always found its success in developing new markets, not chasing existing ones. That's some Balmer era Microsoft group-think. Is it just investor pressure?

They want the data.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#610

Post by Toury2d »

sixstringtheory wrote: post #393
gniv wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how this analogy is apropos. Here's another analogy that works the other way: Adding an extra tube to a single-tube tunnel improves the efficiency of the tunnel greatly. Why is the runner analogy better than this one?

Tunnels are passive, people are creative. Adding a second tunnel doesn’t require interplay from the first. Adding a company of people is subject to whatever the sociological equivalent is of Amdahl’s law, whereby there is extra overhead to coordinating their work with your current employees, and don’t forget cultural integration.

I wouldn't exactly say running a 100 yard dash is creative.
Post reply on HN