How much does Google earn from Maps anyway? Remember it was free till last year.
[deleted]
Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
31–40 of 42 posts
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#32How much is Apple's market share these days? I thought Android was still the major platform and I didn't think Google would be lying awake at night from this.
Android may have a bigger install base but they also seem to have a much bigger group of "low power users". These are the people such as my step-dad and some of their friends who bought a cheap Android phone as it was the same price as a old style candy bar or flip Nokia but it had a much bigger screen with adjustable text size (superb for their aging eyes) but they do nothing on the phone that would be considered "s…
Note that Google counts activations, not devices, so if those friends really don't have a Google account (more plausible than I'd thought - I was recently surprised how easy it is to skip that step of the setup wizard these days, even on stock Android. That's a change from the G1 days, IIRC), they wouldn't be counted.
On the other side, I suppose you could ask how many people use iPod Touches as pure music/video players, though the music player market is getting less important with time, unlike feature phone conversions.
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, this is just some random writer at Forbes who doesn't really know what he's talking about to write a totally informed 'article' and is basing his 'article' on some quotes he found and his view of joining the dots. The dots being pretty obvious as least to the Hacker News crowd. So yes, agreed, his connecting of dots come across poorly but it didn't stop him from gathering 38k views.
Agreed. And splitting hairs here, but he's a Forbes contributor, not a writer there. Forbes is using its magazine's name to make its federated/outsourced blog system sound more credible. forbes.com has a lot of blogspam.
What are examples of what you consider blogspam on forbes.com?
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a dangerous line of thought (there's a saying, "people who forget history are doomed to repeat it"): it is this awesomeness that allowed Google back in 2000 to overthrow the market incumbents at that time, Altavista, Hotbot and so on. Don't underestimate the power of "awesomeness", in search at least a significant number of users are ready to jump ship whenever something better and with less junk appears.
I agree - many people are waiting for Google's replacement. People were laughing at Bing's quality, but it is really on par with Google right now. It's just that people are habituated to use Google's search. You can test this with this tool: http://blekko.com/ws/+/monte Truth to be told, Google search results are worse than few years ago. At the same time, they look more and more like a christmas tree - ads and other…
Quality isn't just about search results. I recently wanted to try Bing for a week or so because people keep claiming it has gotten better, but I ran into a dealbreaker: no working search add-on for Firefox Mobile (even though Microsoft was trying to get the Firefox default last year). Plus the Bing search app/widget was disappointing: it kept trying to keep me in the app instead of integrating with the rest of my phone
In the bigger picture, Bing still has a long way to go.
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. And splitting hairs here, but he's a Forbes contributor, not a writer there. Forbes is using its magazine's name to make its federated/outsourced blog system sound more credible. forbes.com has a lot of blogspam.
What are examples of what you consider blogspam on forbes.com?
Here's one (but by no means the only) example: http://nickoneill.com/how-fortune-stole-a-new-york-times-art...
From what I've seen, articles on forbes.com are mostly low-quality - often blogspam or tabloid-style journalism. They seem to have a good reputation in society which isn't represented by their articles.
I would be a happier living in a filter bubble with "forbes.com" removed from my life.
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are examples of what you consider blogspam on forbes.com?
Here's one (but by no means the only) example: http://nickoneill.com/how-fortune-stole-a-new-york-times-art... From what I've seen, articles on forbes.com are mostly low-quality - often blogspam or tabloid-style journalism. They seem to have a good reputation in society which isn't represented by their articles. I would be a happier living in a filter bubble with "forbes.com" removed from my life.
I noticed that the other day, with the submission comparing Facebook to Enron. I was suprised how poorly thought out the article was, coming from a name like Forbes.
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Android may have a bigger install base but they also seem to have a much bigger group of "low power users". These are the people such as my step-dad and some of their friends who bought a cheap Android phone as it was the same price as a old style candy bar or flip Nokia but it had a much bigger screen with adjustable text size (superb for their aging eyes) but they do nothing on the phone that would be considered "s…
Note that Google counts activations, not devices, so if those friends really don't have a Google account (more plausible than I'd thought - I was recently surprised how easy it is to skip that step of the setup wizard these days, even on stock Android. That's a change from the G1 days, IIRC), they wouldn't be counted. On the other side, I suppose you could ask how many people use iPod Touches as pure music/video play…
I don't think it's "Google Account" activations, but cell phone activations.
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are examples of what you consider blogspam on forbes.com?
Here's one (but by no means the only) example: http://nickoneill.com/how-fortune-stole-a-new-york-times-art... From what I've seen, articles on forbes.com are mostly low-quality - often blogspam or tabloid-style journalism. They seem to have a good reputation in society which isn't represented by their articles. I would be a happier living in a filter bubble with "forbes.com" removed from my life.
I'm not saying there are no examples. In the one you bring up, though, I recall the piece and ensuing hullaballoo: The original NYT author, Charles Duhigg, basically admired and defended the Forbes writer's job (re taking the story in a different direction; providing more exposure to an audience outside his own; providing a prominent book plug), and then O'Neill backed off his own "link-baity" headline.
http://jimromenesko.com/2012/02/21/nyt-reporter-defends-forb...
In general (though, agreed, ~off-topic here), more can be done w/r/t quality assurance of a distributed content network. Something like "report blogspam" is highly subjective and rife with abuse potential. Slashdot's moderation / meta moderation, in combination with straight up and down votes by the wider community, can be effective. Relying on a "central editorial functions" to handle it all is inefficient and doesn't scale well.
This - reputation, rewards, quality (of writers, content, community) - has been an area of interest for me for years. I'm actively working on same currently. I'll put an Ask HN together and see if it gets any traction.
(Disclaimer: I work at Forbes and speak here only for myself)
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#39Guys checkout how much Apple is paying to it employees http://www.visasquare.com/visa-greencard/salary/apple-inc-20...
Re: Apple is About to Reduce Google's Revenues
#40At one point he states: "Google charges Apple for having Maps loaded onto that Apple hardware. And as I’ve noted before, this is a substantial sum: rather more than Google currently makes from Android for example." but the quote he uses (his own) to support this actually combines search and maps with no indication of the proportion of revenue between the two products: "The figures also suggest that Apple devices such…
I remember there was a lot of misunderstanding about Google's revenues from Android when everyone started writing articles about it a few months ago. Most of their "facts" came from 2010, when Google still had like 4% of the US market, and Apple had like 20-23%. And somehow they extrapolated that to mean that Google also makes 4x less from Android right now . But Google has grown much faster than Apple since then, an…
While you make good points, iOS apps currently make significantly more than android apps. My guess would be at least 2-1 if not more.