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

Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 73 posts

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#51

Post by recoiledsnake »

sek wrote: post #49
sriramk wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfair is all relative - people think it is unfair Google is giving away Android for free by funding it with its search revenue. I don't agree with what MSFT is doing with Android patents but they have a stock answer which I'm sure they'll repeat.

What are you doing on Hacker news? This is all about disrupting industries trough a better product. Android is free so this is obviously an improvement to something you have to pay for, or do you call Linux unfair? When Microsoft can't build a product that justifies a higher price that is their problem, Apple figured that out so it isn't impossible. Unfair (or use another word) is in my eyes trying to beat Google in…

Your example, Apple is suing many more companies than MS is.

>What are you doing on Hacker news? This is all about disrupting industries trough a better product. Android is free so this is obviously an improvement to something you have to pay for, or do you call Linux unfair?

Erm... HN has LEGIONS of Apple fans who believe Android illegally ripped off Apple's IP and that it is a plain copy. Gruber gets a LOT of traction on HN on this topic. Are we even reading the same HN?

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#52

Post by joebadmo »

sriramk wrote: post #50
sek wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you doing on Hacker news? This is all about disrupting industries trough a better product. Android is free so this is obviously an improvement to something you have to pay for, or do you call Linux unfair? When Microsoft can't build a product that justifies a higher price that is their problem, Apple figured that out so it isn't impossible. Unfair (or use another word) is in my eyes trying to beat Google in…

First, minor nitpick - Apple is going after Android with various lawsuits as well. But let's keep that aside. Contrast these arguments - back in the 90s, MSFT was accused of killing off Netscape by essentially giving away a browser for free using the revenue from Windows and Office. One could argue that Google is doing the same thing, funding Android with its revenues from ads. Let's forget Android for a second -look…

But Google's products aren't artificially free the way IE was, they just have different revenue sources. Android turns a profit for Google, so it's not really subsidized by its other revenues.

And another important part of the MS antitrust lawsuits were that they were bundled with the OS, which they had a monopoly on in the market. Google's closest thing to a monopoly is in search, and you can use search without using Android.

The two cases are only superficially similar.

I notice, though, that you don't seem to actually advocate any position; you merely attribute accusations of unfairness to "people." If these positions aren't yours or you don't agree with them, why bring them up? If they are your positions, why not state that clearly? Your slippery lack of position just makes me trust your arguments less.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#53

Post by recoiledsnake »

sriramk wrote: post #50
sek wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you doing on Hacker news? This is all about disrupting industries trough a better product. Android is free so this is obviously an improvement to something you have to pay for, or do you call Linux unfair? When Microsoft can't build a product that justifies a higher price that is their problem, Apple figured that out so it isn't impossible. Unfair (or use another word) is in my eyes trying to beat Google in…

First, minor nitpick - Apple is going after Android with various lawsuits as well. But let's keep that aside. Contrast these arguments - back in the 90s, MSFT was accused of killing off Netscape by essentially giving away a browser for free using the revenue from Windows and Office. One could argue that Google is doing the same thing, funding Android with its revenues from ads. Let's forget Android for a second -look…

Even worse than Android and turn-by-turn navigation is the example of the Google search pages pushing people towards Google Maps, Finance, Local and other services.

I am sure products like MapQuest etc. have been hurt by the leveraging of monopoly in the same way that Netscape was, but techies seem to believe it's ok since they Google's services. But IE was better than Netscape in those days anyway. It's just that many techies are heavily biased against MS and towards Google and Apple, regardless of the merits of the arguments.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#54

Post by joebadmo »

kenjackson wrote: post #39
patrickaljord wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HW patents are useless against Android. Android is just software. If Apple want to attack OEM on hardware patents, good luck to them. Samsung, Motorola and even HTC (with S3 and even their own) have tons of HW patents, this is a game Apple cannot win as all OEM could block Apple from shipping their devices, remember, only only one patent from these OEM has to be valid to block Apple from shipping. Actually, the same…

HW patents are useless against Android. Android is just software. It's HW patents against devices running Android. If Apple want to attack OEM on hardware patents, good luck to them. If? Those patents I shown are part of actual lawsuits against Samsung/Motorola in court now. This isn't a hypothetical -- I'm telling you what is happening. Samsung, Motorola and even HTC (with S3 and even their own) have tons of HW pate…

You're right. I never liked when Apple started waging war on Android over IP, especially in light of their wholesale copying of Android's notification system, for example, but it didn't seem particularly out of character, and it seemed in line with Steve Jobs being offended by Android.

But Apple teaming up with Microsoft is what made the issue cross some threshold for me. Individual corporations acting in independent self-interest is one thing, but industry incumbents forming a cartel to shut out competition, even if it still counts as self-interest, for me crosses a line.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#55

Post by recoiledsnake »

joebadmo wrote: post #52
sriramk wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, minor nitpick - Apple is going after Android with various lawsuits as well. But let's keep that aside. Contrast these arguments - back in the 90s, MSFT was accused of killing off Netscape by essentially giving away a browser for free using the revenue from Windows and Office. One could argue that Google is doing the same thing, funding Android with its revenues from ads. Let's forget Android for a second -look…

But Google's products aren't artificially free the way IE was, they just have different revenue sources. Android turns a profit for Google, so it's not really subsidized by its other revenues. And another important part of the MS antitrust lawsuits were that they were bundled with the OS, which they had a monopoly on in the market. Google's closest thing to a monopoly is in search, and you can use search without usin…

>But Google's products aren't artificially free the way IE was, they just different revenue sources. Android turns a profit for Google, so it's not really subsidized by its other revenues.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat/

>And another important part of the MS antitrust lawsuits were that they were bundled with the OS, which they had a monopoly on in the market. Google's closest thing to a monopoly is in search, and you can use search without using Android. >The two cases are only superficially similar.

What about this then? http://www.webanalyticsworld.net/2008/01/mapquest-vs-google-...

Or Google finance and other Google services?

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#56

Post by rbanffy »

kenjackson wrote: post #39
patrickaljord wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HW patents are useless against Android. Android is just software. If Apple want to attack OEM on hardware patents, good luck to them. Samsung, Motorola and even HTC (with S3 and even their own) have tons of HW patents, this is a game Apple cannot win as all OEM could block Apple from shipping their devices, remember, only only one patent from these OEM has to be valid to block Apple from shipping. Actually, the same…

HW patents are useless against Android. Android is just software. It's HW patents against devices running Android. If Apple want to attack OEM on hardware patents, good luck to them. If? Those patents I shown are part of actual lawsuits against Samsung/Motorola in court now. This isn't a hypothetical -- I'm telling you what is happening. Samsung, Motorola and even HTC (with S3 and even their own) have tons of HW pate…

> If? Those patents I shown are part of actual lawsuits against Samsung/Motorola in court now

Apple would use the patents regardless of the OS the phones were running. It's not Google's job to defend Motorola from any kind of patent problem - and Motorola owns quite a lot of patents in the mobile segment they can use to get cross-licensing from Apple. I doubt HTC and Samsung have the same luck.

> They're using HW and SW patents and trade dress, and trademark to go after Android

The only reason Apple is not going against WP7 phones is because WP7 doesn't represent a threat. If it ever does, Apple will use their prodigious legal to provide an excuse to phone makers to stop wasting money making the WP7 phones they have to make in order to reduce the Microsoft tax on Android phones.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#57

Post by abraham »

sriramk wrote: post #44
potatolicious wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like this MSFT better. Not that I enjoy seeing huge mega-companies acting like children and pointing fingers, but the candidness is refreshing. There's a fine line to be walked between "caked in corporate-speak" and "tries to be your best buddy", I think MSFT is doing well walking it.

Also note how responsive he is on Twitter (MG Siegler just tweeted him a question and got back an answer instantly). Somehow, we are in this weird world where MSFT is talking to everyone through a human face and Google has disappeared behind PR statements. That's quite a change.

It depends on which aspect of MSFT and Google you are enquiring about. In this instance MSFT is very responsive but ask about something where it doesn't benefit them to be responsive and you will likely get a cold shoulder. Just like how Google has been very responsive and personal with Google+ but to other requests there is crickets.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#58

Post by [deleted] »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #55
joebadmo wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Google's products aren't artificially free the way IE was, they just have different revenue sources. Android turns a profit for Google, so it's not really subsidized by its other revenues. And another important part of the MS antitrust lawsuits were that they were bundled with the OS, which they had a monopoly on in the market. Google's closest thing to a monopoly is in search, and you can use search without usin…

>But Google's products aren't artificially free the way IE was, they just different revenue sources. Android turns a profit for Google, so it's not really subsidized by its other revenues. http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat/ >And another important part of the MS antitrust lawsuits were that they were bundled with the OS, which they had a monopoly on in the market. Google's closest thing to a…

[deleted]

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#59

Post by joebadmo »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #55
joebadmo wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Google's products aren't artificially free the way IE was, they just have different revenue sources. Android turns a profit for Google, so it's not really subsidized by its other revenues. And another important part of the MS antitrust lawsuits were that they were bundled with the OS, which they had a monopoly on in the market. Google's closest thing to a monopoly is in search, and you can use search without usin…

>But Google's products aren't artificially free the way IE was, they just different revenue sources. Android turns a profit for Google, so it's not really subsidized by its other revenues. http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat/ >And another important part of the MS antitrust lawsuits were that they were bundled with the OS, which they had a monopoly on in the market. Google's closest thing to a…

re moat: That's certainly an interesting way to look at it, but it doesn't change the fact that Android does make money, both for Google and for carriers/manufacturers. So, again, it's not an artificially lowered price, and while it certainly augments search, it's not subsidized by search.

Your argument for maps and finance is stronger, but the analogy isn't great. For one, Google doesn't have close to the monopoly that MS had. For another, it's really hard to draw the line between the products, and equally hard to say whether Google's use of its search engine to point to its own services is unfair, if it really believes its own products are better. I would characterize their position on this issue as still some distance from MS + IE on the 'fair' to 'unfair' spectrum, but still in 'fair' territory. Of course, I never found the bundling line of argument against IE to be particularly compelling.

Re: Google Responds To Microsoft’s "Gotcha": They’re Diverting Attention

#60

Post by recoiledsnake »

joebadmo wrote: post #59
recoiledsnake wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But Google's products aren't artificially free the way IE was, they just different revenue sources. Android turns a profit for Google, so it's not really subsidized by its other revenues. http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat/ >And another important part of the MS antitrust lawsuits were that they were bundled with the OS, which they had a monopoly on in the market. Google's closest thing to a…

re moat: That's certainly an interesting way to look at it, but it doesn't change the fact that Android does make money, both for Google and for carriers/manufacturers. So, again, it's not an artificially lowered price, and while it certainly augments search, it's not subsidized by search. Your argument for maps and finance is stronger, but the analogy isn't great. For one, Google doesn't have close to the monopoly t…

Thanks for the downvotes, HN!

>That's certainly an interesting way to look at it, but it doesn't change the fact that Android does make money, both for Google and for carriers/manufacturers. So, again, it's not an artificially lowered price, and while it certainly augments search, it's not subsidized by search.

Google's revenue sources from Android are mostly mobile searches that would happen anyway. I bet they make as much if not more from iOS devices.

http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/15/google-android-money/

http://www.mobilespoon.net/2011/07/can-microsoft-generate-mo...

It's a moat because Google was afraid that it might get locked out of mobile search default (eg. WP7) and while iOS uses Google, what if Apple changes the default to iSearch or Bing? Remember how Apple didn't approve Google voice for iOS for a whole year? Google would be screwed out of mobile search revenue in a big way, esp. if Bing/iSearch/xyz are close enough to Google.

>Your argument for maps and finance is stronger, but the analogy isn't great. For one, Google doesn't have close to the monopoly that MS had. For another, it's really hard to draw the line between the products, and equally hard to say whether Google's use of its search engine to point to its own services is unfair, if it really believes its own products are better. I would characterize their position on this issue as still some distance from MS + IE on the 'fair' to 'unfair' spectrum, but still in 'fair' territory. Of course, I never found the bundling line of argument against IE to be particularly compelling.

Google has a LOT of marketshare, esp in many non US regions. Eg 91% in UK.

http://www.chandlernguyen.com/2011/03/search-engine-market-s...

IE was actually better than Netscape in the late 90s, early 2000s. Netscape screwed itself by not releasing a new version during the dotcom boom between 1997 and 2007. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html

So the point about Google really believing that it's product was superior doesn't matter. A maps startup would need to be 10x better than Google maps out the game to even get funding since searching on Google for the name of a city doesn't even mention MapQuest, Bing Maps or Yahoo Maps. Would you support a forced default map choice on Google like the one for browsers in EU on Windows?

Post reply on HN