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

Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 109 posts

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#61

Post by jimbokun »

dmnd wrote: post #49
rottencupcakes wrote: post #40

When did our culture shift to this point that everyone puts their problems on the government? Everyone complains about Apple's closed iPhone ecosystem, then pesters the government to condone jailbreaking and unlocking, which go against the iPhone's terms of service. Comcast is caught throttling bittorent, and instead of switching providers to satellite or Verizon or anything, everything goes to the government and dem…

> If high speed internet is so important to you and Comcast is the only carrier in your area This is usually due to a local monopoly having been granted by local government. I think contracts between corporations and government that have the result of reducing competition in the marketplace should be legislated against. Take a look at the competition that exists between ISPs in places like Europe or Australia to see…

"I think contracts between corporations and government that have the result of reducing competition in the marketplace should be legislated against."

Or just not legislated into existence in the first place, would have been a good start. But now we need more legislation to undo the damage of the monopoly granting legislation.

So it's not so simple as blaming it on just government or just corporations. It is the collusion of large corporations and government eliminating competition that is the real problem.

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#62

Post by mattmaroon »

The comments about phone exclusivity have nothing whatsoever to do with wireless net neutrality, but they do illustrate how everyone seems to want the wireless data and voice providers to turn themselves into valueless, interchangeable commodities fighting on margins much like major airlines. You really can't blame them for not wanting to play that game. Time and again other industries have shown that they will all lose. The exclusive phones and two year contracts are what's keeping their industry at a reasonable profit margin.

If I were running Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, etc, I probably would be pro net neutrality, as a lot of the consumers of wireless data will care about it and it will be a valuable feature, but I wouldn't be in a hurry to compete only on price and coverage either. If the people writing about this topic could only see past their loathing of the providers to be fair about it, and exclude off-topic rants about the providers trying to actually make a profit, they might further the discussion a lot better.

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#63

Post by wvenable »

etherael wrote: post #39
doron wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Clearly superior product" apparently require in the context of the market point 1, 2 to be present. Nevertheless your point is taken, and i agree with it overall. All these issues of late, this pact, Facebook privacy, Apple Locks on products, hinge on the premise of an uncaring public as long it gets its fix of the day. So many times you hear a commentator use the line "the regular user doesn't care". I saw many com…

Yeah, it's a clearly superior product for me because I haven't called tech support for about 17 years, that's why point 1 & 2 are utterly irrelevant to me. And yes, the average end users just don't care, they don't understand, they don't think, they don't even want to, as entrepreneurs we already know this through our own experiences most likely, letalone needing to see it demonstrated writ large in this particular i…

The problem is the lack of service starts right at the sales process rather than tech support. This is what a friend said about buying the Nexus One:

"Google really does have a TERRIBLE sales process. Firstly I meant to order a car dock with the first order. If you email them at all (including on your "order status") no one reads it -- based upon what category you choose they send you a stock response with zero way of escalating. So when I emailed saying "Could I add a dock to this order so I only get one shipping and one customs charge?" I instantly got the stock 'Nah go screw yourself' response claiming that their fulfillment is so super quick that it's impossible to make a change."

After hearing that, I think I'd rather get a nearly identical HTC phone from a local store where I can some recourse if something goes wrong.

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#64

Post by etherael »

wvenable wrote: post #63
etherael wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's a clearly superior product for me because I haven't called tech support for about 17 years, that's why point 1 & 2 are utterly irrelevant to me. And yes, the average end users just don't care, they don't understand, they don't think, they don't even want to, as entrepreneurs we already know this through our own experiences most likely, letalone needing to see it demonstrated writ large in this particular i…

The problem is the lack of service starts right at the sales process rather than tech support. This is what a friend said about buying the Nexus One: "Google really does have a TERRIBLE sales process. Firstly I meant to order a car dock with the first order. If you email them at all (including on your "order status") no one reads it -- based upon what category you choose they send you a stock response with zero way o…

I do agree that their sales, support, marketing are all not good. I'm just saying that on top of that you can see some engineer chanting mindlessly to himself "build it and they will come". It's like they focused only on the product itself and utterly disregarded the other components of the aforementioned 'consumer experience', and this resulted in a massive fail.

Would they have done better if they had focused on consumer experience a lot more? Almost definitely, but I think that's as far from their culture as it is for Microsoft to understand why an iPad is not just a PC in a new form factor. They just don't "get it" to use the common turn of phrase, I think maybe I didn't convey that so well because I'm sympathetic to the position and in the habit of dismissing the other components of the consumer experience myself.

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#65

Post by eonwe »

etherael wrote: post #19

Google gave the market the option to go for a completely open environment with the Nexus One, and in the words of this wired article what did it get in return? "Not cool enough." The phone is brilliant, but the market went elsewhere with it's carrier locked subsidised junk models. That's just a market reality, like it or not. Google tried to "do the right thing" and the market went somewhere else. Making all these po…

Sadly, N1 was not widely available internationally. Where it was, it was tied to a specific carrier and only available through their shops.

At least for me and few of my friends N1 would've been god-send given that you could use SIM from the carrier your employer chose to use and thus use it as a work-and-freetime phone and you could've received new versions of the platform on time.

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#66

Post by tvon »

etherael wrote: post #39
doron wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Clearly superior product" apparently require in the context of the market point 1, 2 to be present. Nevertheless your point is taken, and i agree with it overall. All these issues of late, this pact, Facebook privacy, Apple Locks on products, hinge on the premise of an uncaring public as long it gets its fix of the day. So many times you hear a commentator use the line "the regular user doesn't care". I saw many com…

Yeah, it's a clearly superior product for me because I haven't called tech support for about 17 years, that's why point 1 & 2 are utterly irrelevant to me. And yes, the average end users just don't care, they don't understand, they don't think, they don't even want to, as entrepreneurs we already know this through our own experiences most likely, letalone needing to see it demonstrated writ large in this particular i…

> the average end users just don't care, they don't understand, they don't think, they don't even want to,

They shouldn't have to.

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#67

Post by huangm »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #48
rottencupcakes wrote: post #40

When did our culture shift to this point that everyone puts their problems on the government? Everyone complains about Apple's closed iPhone ecosystem, then pesters the government to condone jailbreaking and unlocking, which go against the iPhone's terms of service. Comcast is caught throttling bittorent, and instead of switching providers to satellite or Verizon or anything, everything goes to the government and dem…

> If you disagree with me and believe that legislation limiting the contacts that can be signed between two parties is necessary, please reply and explain why instead of downvoting an alternate point of view. It's perfectly legimate to downvote people who post without thinking. If you want criticisms of anarcho-capitalism, go find them on Wikipedia. The article was not about the problems you have with human behavior.

There is a big difference between believing that government ought not be involved in certain things and believing in anarcho-capitalism. Your comment seems to be just unnecessary adhominem. If you disagree with the parent, then why not provide a reasoned response that would be more likely to convince?

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#68

Post by ergo98 »

metachor wrote: post #13
moultano wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They succeeded in getting Verizon to agree to net neutrality on the wired internet. Isn't that a strict improvement over the status quo?

No it is not. The status quo is that no one has yet made any binding decisions, and the telecom operators will try to get away with what they can until the FCC slaps them down. Google just succeeded in getting Verizon to agree to net neutrality on the wired internet in exchange for removing any possibility of net neutrality on the wireless internet (which Google claims is the future of internet).

Google is not the government. Google is just one company. The way people are talking about this you would legitimately think that Google ran the tubes, or something. They don't.

Google is at least getting a discussion going.

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#69

Post by nitrogen »

tvon wrote: post #66
etherael wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's a clearly superior product for me because I haven't called tech support for about 17 years, that's why point 1 & 2 are utterly irrelevant to me. And yes, the average end users just don't care, they don't understand, they don't think, they don't even want to, as entrepreneurs we already know this through our own experiences most likely, letalone needing to see it demonstrated writ large in this particular i…

> the average end users just don't care, they don't understand, they don't think, they don't even want to, They shouldn't have to.

I'd say that's a debatable point. In the current market, I'd agree with you -- there are plenty of people willing to spoon feed consumers, so if you don't, you'll be left in the cold. Whether it's good for society's long-term prospects, however, is another matter. I believe that widespread apathy and general ignorance will be among the primary causes of the demise of western civilization.

Note, however, that I am not arguing against specialization. I'll be first in line to encourage people not to care too much about details in one area in order to focus on another, but if they don't care about anything, I take exception.

Re: Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey

#70

Post by ergo98 »

mralbie wrote: post #46

Is anyone honestly surprised by this? Google played into the telecoms' hands, they created the first viable competitor to the iPhone and gave it to the telecoms saying "do whatever you want with this, feel free to modify it any way you want". Google's vision of a market in which handsets are independent from carriers is absolutely poisonous to the industry's business model. Even though the iPhone is very successful I…

I'm not quite understanding the "gave it to telecoms" part - The telecoms don't make phones. Companies like Motorola, Samsung, and HTC do.

And while Google "gave" it to them, they've all dumped incredible amounts of engineering hours into Android and their derivatives -- any illusion that they just ran a Ubuntu install on their Galaxy S and that was it is utterly asinine around parts like this.

Seriously, the "giving it away" bit is dumb, and while it sells on the non-technical sites, it is an embarrassment on HN.

Post reply on HN