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

761–770 of 784 posts

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#761

Post by scarface74 »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #752
scarface74 wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data is that a majority of iOS users are in fact using Apple Maps. Btw, you can trigger Google Maps with Siri by creating a simple shortcut and when you search for a place on google. It launches Google Maps.

> a majority of iOS users are in fact using Apple Maps. That does not contradict the fact that many people install Google Maps. Reread my comments. > Btw, you can trigger Google Maps with Siri by creating a simple shortcut and when you search for a place on google. That does not make it work in all apps. The app is crippled in iOS, yet people still go out of their way to use it to avoid the dumpster fire that is Appl…

People “go out of their way” to install the Yahoo Mail app. Is that indicative of anything?

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#762

Post by SurgeArrest »

ehsankia wrote: post #524
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…

I don't see any other company doing things as imaginative as Loon, Soli, Waymo or Duplex. What other company do you know with such a breadth of innovation? But yknow, they killed Reader 10 years ago so you're right, RIP FitBit I guess.

I'm not talking about Google Reader, that's long gone. The companies you mentioned are technically Alphabet, not Google. If you look at Google all their consumer software efforts are an abomination. WearOS/Android Wear is at best at a level of a basement hobby project. Google Fit app became usable only after many years of updates. Their phones, i.e. hardware are the worst android phones except for the camera and even that leads only in still imaging. Technical details of how they implemented Android support for chrome OS just horror story for users who want to use it on underpowered laptops running Chrome OS. Hardware horrors continue with Google Home Mini, where G. had to disable the top button just days after releasing the device. Their 2 microphones better than 7 in Echo show its weakness as soon as you try to use Google Home to make calls - their AI can understand somehow what you said but humans can't. Their hardware products all feel like MVP from a startup not something designed for regular humans to use. Software horror stories continue, I was quite an early adopter of Google Apps for the business, it definitely was way better than early Office 365, where it would take 5 or more minutes for email travel between co-workers, however, if you signed up directly via Google (a major mistake at that time) there was no way even to backup your company accounts. Once Vault was introduced companies that were set up prior to the introduction of Vault couldn't migration to use Vault, a new company should be set up with 0 user migration tools available. Admin could not even edit the global address book to enter phone extensions of the employees. This was Google's business product. Look at Google's current Nest offering, barely changed in years, took years to deliver even simple multi-room sensors and speakers (Max for example) is the ugliest device you can bring into your home, reminding plasticky Altec Lansing beige speakers from 1990s.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#763

Post by SurgeArrest »

tristanj wrote: post #492
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.

I know about the state of Fitbit, but I would have preferred any other company over Google to buy them, including Samsung or Amazon.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#764

Post by tooltalk »

scarface74 wrote: post #740
tooltalk wrote: post #618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, they got a good deal. Moto's wireless patents were second only (or maybe third) to Qualcomm's in term of quality and they generated a steady stream of licensing revenues before and after the acquisition. Unlike WeWork's unproven business model, the wireless industry's successful revenue generating licensing practices were in place for a decade and Moto's patents were worth quite a bit. Now let's not forget why…

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110831/01030115745/are-a... Still, the folks at M-CAM decided to put the Motorola Mobility patent portfolio to the test by using a variety of scoring techniques, and believes that the portfolio isn't all that valuable, both in the aggregate and at the specific level. It basically found that about 48% of the patents are probably worthless. At the specific level, the company looked a…

I'm guessing that they evaluated the patents before Motorola got preliminary injunction against Apple.

IIRC, fewer than 2-3% of all patents actually survive and are upheld in patent trials, so they are not probably wrong when they say 48% of Moto's patents are worthless, but that isn't saying much. Take for instance, Apple's design and utility patents asserted against Samsung in Germany. All, 100%, of their patent and claims were invalidated, and declared worthless. I guess Moto's 48% is far better than 100% worthless. The key questions re: Moto's patents were their applicability, not their validity. Moto had filed lawsuits against Apple and Microsoft before Google bought it -- the court had to address Moto's appropriate FRAND licensing fee for SEPs (802 wireless standards and H.264 video encoding standards) and proper court jurisdiction.

IMHO, there is no reason to believe that Moto acquisition was a waste of money and, considering Android's popularity and success of Android today, despite threats from Apple's patent trolling (and even Microsoft), Google's strategy patent strategy worked well.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#765

Post by kalleboo »

fasicle wrote: post #203
windexh8er wrote: post #63

Garmin and Apple have the fitness market covered. Fitbit never had the hardcore fitness market Garmin executed into and Apple has always had a product that works well across the wearable and fitness. Between these two companies I can't imagine there's much of a niche Fitbit does better. On the extreme hardcore triathlon user even Garmin has taken a lot of market from Suunto and the like. I've owned a handful of Garmi…

I recently purchased the Samsung Galaxy Active 2 and am loving it so far. Fitness tracking seems to be accurate too. Would be interesting to see the market share of Apple, Samsung and Garmin for smart watches.

Forbes says Apple 35%, Samsung 11%, Imoo 9%, Fitbit 5.5%, Amazfit 3.7%, Huawei 2.8%, Fossil 2.5%, Garmin 1.5%, "Others" 27%.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#767

Post by scarface74 »

tooltalk wrote: post #764
scarface74 wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110831/01030115745/are-a... Still, the folks at M-CAM decided to put the Motorola Mobility patent portfolio to the test by using a variety of scoring techniques, and believes that the portfolio isn't all that valuable, both in the aggregate and at the specific level. It basically found that about 48% of the patents are probably worthless. At the specific level, the company looked a…

I'm guessing that they evaluated the patents before Motorola got preliminary injunction against Apple. IIRC, fewer than 2-3% of all patents actually survive and are upheld in patent trials, so they are not probably wrong when they say 48% of Moto's patents are worthless, but that isn't saying much. Take for instance, Apple's design and utility patents asserted against Samsung in Germany. All, 100%, of their patent an…

It’s estimated that Microsoft made more from each Android phone sold via patent licenses than Google.

Apple sued Samsung not for the Android parts but for the design of the phones.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#768

Post by charles_f »

dragonwriter wrote: post #694
nkozyra wrote: post #693

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> America is not a democracy — it is a constitutional republic with democratic elements. People like to say this all the time like it's clever, but being a republic does not preclude being democratic. The United States is a democracy.

> being a republic does not preclude being democratic. No, but the particular form of the US republic does so in practice. > The United States is a democracy. The United States may have been built around an idea of representative democracy, but in function it is more of a plutocratic republic with quasi-democratic rituals.

> quasi-democratic rituals

"We're doing stand-ups and we use story points, we're agile"

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#769

Post by charles_f »

windexh8er wrote: post #157
ac1spkrbox wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused by this comment. To me, Garmin is the only company here that does a good job with the "hardcore fitness" market, but why does that matter in the first place? The better market to compete in is the "fitness amateur" market, which I see as being many times the former in size. Fitbit competes well here, and Google has no offering to speak of. Seems like a successful diversification move for Alphabet's portf…

I think the point you're missing is everyone levels up. Even amateur fitness users want a better fitness wearable. Which is why Garmin and Apple have the lion's share of the market. Fitbit is still seen as a step tracker level device, even if they do more. Garmin wearables are laser focused to the workout market and most buyers seem to lust over the idea of needing a more capable fitness device. Garmin and Apple both…

> Which is why Garmin and Apple have the lion's share of the market

Source? A simple search for "fitbit garmin market share" [0] seem to suggest that Garmin is ways behind Fitbit in adoption.

[0] https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/09/08/fitbit-loses-more-...

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#770

Post by Scarblac »

1000units wrote: post #729
wongarsu wrote: post #650

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The house of representatives is directly elected, same with the senate. While the laws are not directly voted on by the people, they are indirectly voted on by the people by their choice of representative. After all if direct democracy was the only valid form of democracy it wouldn't need the qualifier "direct". The constitution is an important part of limiting abuse and channeling everything, it can be changed with…

On the other hand, everything is a de facto democracy because revolution is always on the table. There's nothing wrong with being precise. In fact, it leads to fewer misunderstandings.

The problem is that preciseness seems to be something that all US people know (is it taught in high school?) and nobody else. Systems where the government is voted for by the people are democratic regardless of the details.
Post reply on HN