Live data from Hacker News

Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

androidrookies.com

21–28 of 28 posts

Re: Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

#21
post #9

Would it be worse if they didn’t acquire it, but crushed it in the market? Obviously we won’t know.

Google can't crush shit when it comes to hardware.

Software either (outside of vanilla Android) - They can't make a consistent "ecosystem" to save their lives.

Re: Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

#22
This is a bizarre article. North was unsuccessful in the market and basically ran out of money and time. Google picked up the people and IP and those efforts are now being directed elsewhere within Google. The idea that Google killed off a competitor is not accurate, as North had already failed to succeed. It was a good effort, and like most consumer hardware attempts, brutally hard.

Re: Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

#23
"Google has far worse compared to Amazon." how is this worst? Google bought the company and owners were compensated for their product. Google can do whatever they want to with it afterwards. Amazon stole ideas and made their own. People's sense of fairness is completely f'd up these days

Re: Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

#24

What? This article makes absolutely no sense. How is buying a company that clearly was not doing well financially (acquisition price at $150m, ~$200m raised with the last $40m being a debt financing, so it is a bail out), in what is clearly messaged as an acqui-hire for talent, in any way comparable to Amazon using its investment arm to acquire confidential information and replicate company products? Respectfully, th…

Personally I don't see a lack of ethics - the people aren't owned by the company. They have no obligation to the shareholders. Now any IP the shareholders do own and they would have an obligation towads if they want to use it as an IP holder in the system.

(Hypothetical Alpha Centuarians observing and pirating the tech would have no ethical issues at all, there is no social contract, they aren't even accessible and couldn't pay even if they wanted to being lightyears away but that is a silly tangent.)

Re: Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

#25
post #2

In the article it says this move by Google is worse than Amazon investing in businesses and stealing info. How is this worse? Google bought the whole company, didn't make partial investment. They can do whatever they want with the company.

"Worse" doesn't just mean "worse for the companies involved", it can also mean "worse for society". The net result of Google continually buying startups and shutting down the projects is that fewer products receive long-term support, receive any iterative improvements, or can be relied upon to exist later.

How so? The company was already dying on its own, Google only vultured and bailed them out from bankruptcy. The product was a "mutant" trying new things that wasn't viable in the end.

Re: Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

#26
Would anyone have any direction on what kind of projectors North was using for this product? I have no idea where to start searching.

In the same way, I would also be very interested in any further info on Ellsworth's Tilt Five projectors, bottom right-right of [1] (full text of interview [2]). Interesting video with info on the (retroreflective) optics system here [3].

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20200722042213im_/https://i0.wp.... presumably shows three generations of the product. From left to right board, camera and projector.

[2] https://skarredghost.com/2019/09/24/interview-jeri-ellsworth...

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AB4NjMWKV0s

Re: Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

#27
post #20

This article seems to completely miss the point. Google paid the founders a lot of money to acquire their IP and know how which they will integrate into Glass. Why would google run two identical products? Nonsense article.

founders probably made nothing actually. Investors and Debt have priority and they got bought for less than was raised. I definitely still agree the article is garbage.

Re: Google killed a small smart glass maker after acquiring it

#28
post #11
post #2

In the article it says this move by Google is worse than Amazon investing in businesses and stealing info. How is this worse? Google bought the whole company, didn't make partial investment. They can do whatever they want with the company.

It’s a terrible article, but I wasn’t aware that they were bought. This is very expensive R&D, and being bought out by the FAANG is one of the very few positive outcomes for a hardware startup. Hopefully they did it for the money.

iirc North did not make any money off the aquisition, as they were failing and Google bought them out for roughly the amount of capital previously invested.
Post reply on HN