Most people here know my current fear with social media. I, for one, do not have a Facebook- primarily because it freaks me out. I deleted my Facebook about a year back, and have never looked back. Nor do I have a Twitter, and luckily, that does not prevent me from viewing my favorite Twitter account, @GSelevator
Though, as of late, Google has been making me feel like big brother is watching. Everyone who uses the Internet knows that Google has recently changed their privacy policy in order to standardize one policy across all its product ranges.
While all that is good, it made me realize the wide array of Google products that I use. For now, Google has me with Chrome, YouTube, Gmail, and of course, their search engine. As a fact of life, Google knows more about me than my parents and girlfriend combined.
So how much more market capitalization can Google have over my life?
Today the Wall Street Journal reported that Google is laying fiber optics for Google Fiber, an Internet service that would provide service at a rate 100 times faster than competitors.
More importantly, Google is also testing out it’s television provider service that will offer channels like Disney and Discovery. So that sounds great, mostly because Google products are great. Their mail and search engine services are so nice, clean, and fast that no other company would be even able to compete. Would you expect the same with their ISP and TV service?
While 100 times faster internet sounds great, how much liberty are we actually giving up? So, Google may provide a better TV service than say Verizon’s FiOS, but is it at the cost of advertising being directly pin-pointed to you from your Google searches and Gmail account?
If Google sold the cable service to residents, it also could obtain rights to sell ads along some of the video content. Google generated nearly $40 billion last year from selling online ads, but it has long wanted a big footprint in the TV ad market.
Who is willing to bet on an Anti-trust suit coming Google’s way?
Just read an article about this...supposedly they can keep your searches on file for up to 9 months...
As for the internet and tv service getting faster, I have no doubt they would be able to absolutely kill the competition. But at the same time it would piss me the fuck off if my TV service played an add before every video...come to think of it...holy shit it already does.
Also about to come out with the first commercially viable, really functional Augmented Reality glasses with Google Goggles and Latitude integration with Android OS and 4G speed. U mad?
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/google-to-sell-terminator-styl…
brb Singularity.
Let's not forget the failed "Google TV," so at least we know they are human.
It seems like they are trying to get into physical products rather than just services. We'll see how they can compete with Apple.
Yup. See my post above. Gonna be a big one.
If there is any industry that needs to be uprooted its the broadband internet / cable TV industry. I'm all for it.
this is why I own a lot of Goog stock.
Unless you're slinging coke or planning to assassinate someone I don't think google cares about your internet activity. A lot more people than you think download fetish porn. Like.....millions.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/02/how-remove-your-google-search-his…
Looks like google stocks can reach 700 . Now t hey need a tv network.
If Target is running these algorithms. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-o…
What you think goog is doing then...
As many members of this board already know Google is an NSF project.
Now, the fact that people actually need to ask what that is and what the ramifications are demonstrates that good grades and actual intelligence are often not correlated.
As for ticker price, I expect the same fate for Google and Apple over the next 5 years...
20% drop, possibly 30% with regards to Apple.
Is Google a Monopoly? (Originally Posted: 12/01/2010)
While it's monopoly money currency continues to take body blow after body blow, the European Union's antitrust regulators are putting Google in their cross hairs.
After managing to pull $700 million out of Microsoft's pockets and wrangling Brazil's repeated attempts to flood the global sugar market, the EU's regulators take aim the number no man could speak.
Google is accused of search engine discrimination, or online racketeering to paint a more accurate picture.
WARNING: Seemingly Random Segue Approach with Caution
This brings me back to Brooklyn, summer of 1991. The Crown Heights Riots had shook the city, drugs and crime were rampant all over the Apple and the economy still reeled from the aftershocks of the Savings and Loan Crisis .
Meanwhile, a young Midas was just trying to make a buck. Making markets and eating off the spread, you could say...
I'd head down to Chinatown on a Friday morning, ducking truancy cops on my way to Canal Street. Once the box of bootleg torch lighters was stacked inside of my sturdy Jansport, I'd head back to the Brook...to sink or to swim.
All weekend I would get chased around the block by the local shop keepers. They would see me on the street peddling lighters and come out chasing...some with brooms, some with pipes.
An old Russian lady nailed me with her wooden clog, I have the scar to remind me.
The point was simple.
Get outta here, kid...this is my turf.
Hey, who can blame them? I was undercutting them.
My lighters came from the black market, they were shiny and fizzed up a beautiful blue flame against the boring candle style of their Bic's. I sold a (seemingly) superior product for an equal or lower price.
How the times have changed
The moral of the story is that businesses (no matter how big or small), always look to protect their territory. Google is no different than those mom and pop shops. The difference is Google can buy the competition or crush them at will.
Is this really good business, though?
Or has Google "gone gangster"?
Generations ago, The Standard Oils and U.S. Steels were looked at as villainous trusts. Today, I get the sense that most people look at Google as a wonderful organization...though the business methods hardly differ.
On which side of the argument do you stand?
Is Google a great big good guy or a giant menace?
Does an argument even exist?
Will Google allow it too?
I definitely don't think Google is a monopoly.
Their motto is "don't be evil", but it must not apply to them because I don't consider them a great big good guy.
I have actually done some work with Google recently and I have to say, they do not come across as a hip responsive company at all. There's a lot of screw-ups and passing the buck when it comes down to getting things done.
I hear they gave everyone a 10% pay raise across the board, but that isn't improving business operations or management, it's just stopping what talent they have from jumping ship.
I could see people viewing them as a menace one day.
In GOOG I trust.
No...monopoly is a google
they walk the tightrope of indifference.
my belief is that perception, is ALOT. with their cool functions, their bright shiny office buildings, free sushi/food everyday, their PR/Marketing group has done them a HUGE solid. Plus their products are something people use everyday... Without their people-friendly and bubbly personality, would we love google as much?
Sure Oil/Steel can be technically lumped in the same business method as Google. But consumers want to Hug Google, not Hug Steel/Oil, They just have negative connotations to them.
So, GOOGLE = the smoking hot 6ft tall rich snob across the bar. You can hate on her, but not that much, cause she sure is pretty and youd still hit it.
My name is Kyle Reese, and I come from the future. 19 years from now, the online search engine known as Google will develop self-conciousness and enact a terrible plot to eradict all human life from the face of the earth. I'm here to make sure that doesnt happen.
Google is frighteningly powerful:
http://beedeekay.com/2010/11/30/google-you-never-fail-to-amaze-me/
I'm a raging Facebook and social media bull so my comments will be biased.
I think Google's heydey is over. Eventually, everything in the facebook network (friends, articles, brands you "like", events, whatever) will be searchable. Google search will basically be a longer way to link to Wikipedia. The company's greatest asset (IMO) is YouTube, since this is an incredible social platform that serves a distinct niche in social media that Facebook or Twitter cannot touch.
Google's strategy is to link you to information everywhere by getting you off their site as fast as possible. Facebook's strategy is to bring the information to you to keep you on the site as long as possible.
The across the board 10% raise was merely a compensation restructuring plan that included smaller bonuses, nothing has really changed other than the employees get their money up front not on the back end.
I for one don't use facebook for any other reason than keeping up with my friends and looking at pictures. I feel that most people are in the same boat as me. I don't click through on ads nor do I want information given to me. Google on the other hand I want links to info and do click through. Google is for getting stuff done, facebook is for killing time. I think facebook is kinda over hyped as a money maker.
I think people are getting confused about this whole "do no evil" thing. Exactly how are we defining evil? Trying to maximize profit? Strategically expand and diversify capabilities and market share? Compete with both big and small rivals in foreign markets? Preserve company competencies and competitive advantage by acquiring competitors and protecting its own technology through patents and trade secrets? Mining data to understand user behavior and preferences? I feel like alot of attacks toward Google comes down to one of these things. Last time I checked, these are things companies everywhere in the world need to do to survive, how is Google supposed to be any different?
At the end of the day, Google to me is a company that provides modular, effective, useful, and FREE tools developed and supported by the most brilliant software engineers in the world. Isnt that enough for you to like Google? People are scared because Google knows too much about us, but that is a privilege they can very easily lose. Our relationship with Google is purely based on trust. The minute Google abuses that power, users will leave and flock to its competitors. In the end, there is little to no switching cost for users of Google products with the exception of maybe Gmail. How's that a monopoly? Can it be called a monopoly solely because its products are superior and the majority of internet users are flocking to them instead of some of these smaller European players who have been surviving under EU's umbrella of protectionism?
Google was founded on an NSF seed grant...the gov't likes the idea of having all your private info...coincidence...I think not
It really depends on the market that you consider. In some google terribly sucks - social media, cloud computing -, in some it is still thriving - google adds, its homepage utility for low-end users is still better than google or yahoo - and the search that "kicks you off their site asap" works well for most users.
Google scholar and books is also a best way for researchers to finding what they need, there really is no alternative on the free market.
Is it a monopoly in the strict sense? I think in search it isn't, it just delivers seemingly better results than the competition, and in the ad market it might be , i don't know exactly, howeve.r I didn't do any researchö
I meant low-end user homepage providers like MS or yahoo ... sorry.
Remeber Microsoft was once the innovative kid on the block with lots of potential... now it is just a bitter old man.
1.) Yes, Google is an evil monopoly that's almost as bad as microsoft.
2.) Google should simply pull out of Europe to avoid dealing with this craziness. European users can always use Google's US search engine.
The main thing is Google strives to be relevant. If you choose not to use Google that is your choice. If your business depends on search engine traffic then you have to play the game. The thing is that everyone has a choice on how they want to search the internet and which engine to use.
It's like wanting to advertise in the Yellow Pages back in the day. You paid them to buy ad space and to be listed in the that book, knowing that your ad could reach a certain demographic. If you don't want to pay for the ad space you simply chose not to use that as an avenue to market.
All Google really does is provide consumers content that is relevant. As soon as Google becomes irrelevant than so will their market share.
The next competitor is just a click away.
Not a monopoly, just the best (arguable, I know).
What Are You Up To, Google? (Originally Posted: 12/22/2013)
(Disclosure: I'm long GOOG, and now apparently The Terminator)
@duffmt6 and I were going back and forth over PM about this yesterday. Evidently Google has gotten into the robotics business big time over the past six months, and no one even realized it until they acquired gnarly military robotics contractor Boston Dynamics last week. Make no mistake: this is some Skynet shit for realz. Just take a look at some of the hardware showcased in the following video. So I ask you: what the hell is Google up to with this stuff? Are they planning to leapfrog Amazon's drones and offer Cheetah delivery? Or is it something a little darker? This is potentially scary stuff. What business application does Google see in robotics that I'm somehow missing?
//www.youtube.com/embed/QVdQM47Av20
The one with the gas mask looks creepy. I hope we never see those in real life.
I could imagine Sci-Fi novels with robots that gain consciousness and have access to our emails. All of this technology is much too scary for me. I wish it would go away.
Maybe we will get humanoid robots driving us around instead of driverless cars.
Thats exactly what I came here to say....maybe their self-driving car hit a snag in terms of efficiency and they believe a robotic chauffeur is easier and more practical
Nobody will kick BigDog anymore, now that he learned how to throw stones!!!
Just imagine that godammed thing getting of the chain and chucking cinder blocks at people in Times Square.
Nightmare fuel.
I think one key area that they are looking to disrupt is the traditional shipping providers. Autonomous vehicles + humanoid type robots would definitely put pressure on FedEx/UPS/USPS. It sounds very far off, but I believe that it will happening faster than most people think.
I think big dog will most likely be used for expanding Google maps, beyond just street/roads. Google prob wants to take a picture of 100% of the surface area of the Earth, welcome to the desert of the real - style
Google is starting to scare me. I was on Google Maps today and I noticed that all over London it is highlighting locations I've previously looked into such as my place of work, my gym, bars, restaurants etc., some of which I havn't looked at for months! Now I'm not naive enough to believe that Google aren't storing everything I ever do over Gmail / Chrome, but this actually made me realise exactly what they know about me.
That is why I am going to use gmx's e-mail service from now on.
Anyone have better/safer suggestions?
Semi creepy/cool at the same time
They already track movements. If you have an android phone, they know where you are on which day and time. Handy, in case you need to prove you didn't commit a crime. Otherwise, on some level we kinda knew the suggestions were too good to be true, right?
https://maps.google.com/locationhistory/
I don't think there's necessarily any agenda. It's a bunch of tech geeks who came into billions of dollars....what do you think they're going to spend it on? In case of skynet, it might actually make sense for the gov't to have an internet kill switch. Nancy Pelosi, man up and bring that to the floor. I dare you.
Imagine if after gaining consciousness, the robots gain assess to gmail, maps, and Google Trends. They could anticipate what we will do. They could make us their servants, and they could make us do their bidding. We must make ourselves appear useful to them to prevent a nuclear holocaust.
I think what is making people nervous is that Google acquired a robotics company that has odd commercial applications. The fact is robotics is going to be a huge industry and I think Google is smart to get their foot in the door. Obviously the most lucrative application may be government R&D dollars, however there are some great basic commercial applications as well.
THe company that comes to mind is Harvest Automation. It was founded by IRobot management members and is currently focused on commercial plant nurseries and agriculture. These are where all the plants you find for sale in Home Depot and Lowes come from. These commercial nurseries have several million plants that have to be moved 5-10 times a year to receive optimal sunlight and they rely heavily on seasonal immigrant labor. However, if ICE agents do an random green card inspection of the immigrant labor and one employee is found without documentation, the entire nursery is shut down destroying that year's profit.
I can't help but think of the myriad niche and major industries that could have huge need for a robot substitute.
Don't forget that there is a lot of money to be made away form the headlines.
http://www.harvestai.com/ Robots in action:
I welcome it.
Nobody said it yet? Fine I will....
"I for one welcome our new robot overlords"
I really hope I am Clint Eastwood in Gran Turino status when the robot revolution comes. Sitting on my porch shooting machines until I die would be a fucking awesome way to go.
Look at those 4-legged future analysts!
Realistically, the machines aren't going to become self aware. More likely, any tyranny will be a result of technical shortcomings and people using the internet to take over people's lives. First it was bonking weaker people with a club, then it was invading hordes of barbarians, then the age of empires, then the tyranny of plutocracy from the 19th century to present with the debt slavery kicker.....but the future medium of conquest and tyranny is through technology.
Just look at what the NSA can and does (and will continue to) do. It sucks, but most of 'civilization' functions on the primate heirarchy mode of association, so that's what people get when they don't think or stand up for themselves. And ladies, put a sock in it, you're not exempt, take a look at your queen bee mode. Everyone is out for power, this just makes it VERY efficient.
I love how purely functional robots are. no aesthetic bs, I wish cars were designed that way. (no, i do not own an aztek)
deletes Google+ and Gmail accounts
I'm envisioning my future kid doing DCFs sitting next to a robot wearing a Hermes tie at Goldman Sachs
Now they just need to team up with Amazon's drones and a hardcore artificial intelligence tech company - game over.
I don't think you realize that Google already is one of the most hardcore AI companies...
DISCLAIMER: this post for infotainment purposes only.
It doesn't matter if you hide from GOOG, the internet is controlled by the US gov't. ICANN is contracted to run it as the successor administrator of DARPA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icann#History It's run not unlike the FED or the RAND corporation. Surprise America, surprise world, uncle Sam always had control. Dyson, the founder of ICANN is the name of the scientist in the Terminator series....you think that was an accident? Skynet isn't taking over and it's not killing us off. The government runs it, gives tax breaks and protection to enterprises like Amazon, and we're far more useful as servants. "The matrix" is the digital reality we increasingly live within, no goo pod or spinal implants necessary. And here's how you shut it down: http://gizmodo.com/5912383/how-to-destroy-the-internet My guess is that are few people could coordinate it.
Or maybe that's just a really really paranoid way of saying "Hey, the new world order has been around a while and I'm not impressed. If anything, it's made downloading media, applying to jobs, selling/buying stuff, and talking to random people really easy." I like selling my old stuff on eBay, I'm ok with it, but the simple reality is that the internet is just a bunch of computers wired together and can be dismantled/altered however we as humans decide.
"Don't be evil"
When will skynet become self-aware anyway? I thought that was supposed to happen on 4.19.2011? I am sick of dealing with puny humans and their irrational behaviors.
Someone hold me.
Their legs look so weird and creepy wtf.. I do not want to see any of these in real life.
What an interesting time to be alive.
Google acquired a DARPA funded company. Petman and that Cheetah thing are all DoD projects.
I was wondering the exact same thing when I was watching these videos. The fact that many of these former projects were funded by DARPA also raised my curiousity. Google already runs the world.
The mule is to carry munitions and supplies into the battlefield where trucks can't follow. Cheetah seems like a nice way to deliver a pay load into a cave or bunker. The gas mask guy.... I dunno. mind fuck the enemy? Hes terrifying.
I could imagine beating one of those things with a tire iron if I had a few in me.
Right before getting taken out by a Google Drone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Google
Google Is Just Killing It (Originally Posted: 05/16/2013)
In what will go down as one of the worst trading decisions in my PA of all time, I sold all my GOOG back in January at $721 to buy more AAPL at $460, $450, and again at $427, and I don't even like AAPL. What's worse, all that averaging down only brought my average cost on AAPL down to $535, so I still need a 25% run up from yesterday's close just to get back to zero.
Meanwhile, GOOG continues to rampage through the market, closing up another thirty bucks yesterday to finish at $915 a share. It'll probably hit $1,000 today, and AAPL will probably go below $400 the way my luck's been running lately. But let's talk about what's driving Google's rise.
Yesterday they announced their new streaming music service (I love how Reuters felt the need to point out that they beat Apple to the punch in the article's friggin' HEADLINE). But the more immediate impact will be felt by their overnight upgrades to the Google+ platform. I'm usually pretty skeptical about changes to a social network (thanks Facebook), but this one is really good. I use Google+ a lot, and if you don't you're probably missing out. But the changes to the Google+ UI make it a whole lot more user friendly, and we're probably going to see a big spike in usage. Where before it was a typical newsfeed/timeline layout, now it resembles a sort of Pinterest layout (with the primary difference being that it's actually useful; seriously, Pinterest, WTF?).
On top of that, Google's already burly photo editing capabilities just went to a whole new level. Photos are obviously Facebook's biggest selling point, so this isn't just a shot across Zuckerberg's bow, this is a direct hit.
The following is a picture I took a couple months ago from the cliffs overlooking Etretat. I don't have the "before" picture to show you, but suffice it to say it was pretty average at best. The clarity in this upgraded photo is unbelievable:
And here's an enhanced photo facing in the opposite direction:
It'll be interesting to see people's reactions to the changes. Of course the Kool Kids hate it and it only took about a half a minute for this to hit the boards:
but the fact is it's a big improvement on an already fantastic social network.
And then there's the stock. It's killing me to watch GOOG run like a big dog on the beach while AAPL rolls over and wets on itself. I guess one of the lesson's here is the old Warren Buffett-Bill O'Neil-Everybody Since The Dawn Of Investing axiom: Buy what you know/use. I wouldn't own an Apple product on a bet, yet I'm buried in their dogshit stock. Conversely, I use Google products
almostevery waking minute of every day, they keep getting better, and I don't own a single share of their stock anymore.God, I hope my wife doesn't read this.
Investing in GOOG also provides a ton of call options on future technology. Sure, their R&D might crush near term earnings, but stuff like driverless cars and wearable computing could become their own multibillion dollar industries in the future. I told my parents to buy right after it IPO-ed. I think they eventually got in around $200. I should have followed my own advice but I didn't have any money, which makes things difficult.
They're not just going after Facebook, either. Check out this attack on PayPal:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/JA8m0JOoNYQ
Now you can send and receive money through Gmail as easily as attaching a photo or document.
Loved it Eddie. Particularly the wife comment. +1.
aaaaaaand you lost me
LOL. I got one of the early invites and was all excited and then I got in there and it was a ghost town. I honestly thought it was destined for the scrapheap like Google Wave. Totally different story today. But it's not a social network in the sense where you post drunken pics of yourself or stalk ex-girlfriends. It's more like the best of the web tailored to your individual preferences.
Granted, it takes a little while to get up and running on G+, but the juice is worth the squeeze. My Facebook feed has degenerated into utter dopes and soccer moms, but I can go to G+ anytime and find intelligent life.
For those interested, here's the best 99 cents you can spend to learn a platform that might change the way you "do" the Internet:
What the Plus! Google+ for the Rest of Us
Interesting, Eddie, but I've had Google Plus for quite a bit now and still haven't found any reason to have it. I love LinkedIn, use Twitter a ton for news and sports and marketing myself, and reluctantly keep my facebook because it's the only way I have family pictures and keep in touch with certain friends.
On top of my new WSO addiction, one more social network might kill me
Edit: I will say though that we might just have different preferences. The only thing from Google I use is www.google.com. My phone is an iPhone, my tablet is an iPad, my laptop is a Macbook, my personal email address is a @me.com address, my work computer is a PC loaded with microsoft programs, etc. You probably get far more use out of Google programs than I would
Google Nexus 7 and other models' integration is BOSS. Once my iphone contract is up, I'm switching to google haha
I just laughed at people that said Apple would break $1000 first. It was just the cool kid on the block. Google was steadily rising, while Apple was shooting up. But when asked why, nobody could really give a solid answer for why Apple should break $1000, other than "because it's going to". That made me back off immediately. They haven't brought a gamechanger to the market in a while and all of their reiterations have gotten old. Once I saw them start suing Samsung, I knew it was a wrap. They confirmed that Samsung was a threat and stealing their shine. Google is doing what Google does: innovate. They haven't stopped or changed from that. For a period, it wasn't flashier than Apple, but it wasn't slowing down nor speeding up. I'm not surprised and am quite happy for Google.
But really, why is Google+ that much better than FB (besides all these changes)? I don't have an account; besides, still being in college gives me an excuse to spend a stupid amount of time on Facebook.
Would you say Google+ is better for "older" people? I.e., postgrad, professionals, etc.
Okay, here's my G+ pitch.
I'm a pretty active Twitter user and I was early to the game. I wouldn't call myself a "power" user, but I'm among the top 1% of Twitter users worldwide (top 3% of "active" users). Facebook was cool for me until Twitter came along. Twitter filled a lot of the gaps and in a short time proved that it was a viable platform for news, up to the second current events, and just overall a way more professional environment than Facebook (to be fair, Facebook was never designed for networking or getting work done, it was a mechanism for creeping from Day One).
Google+ is like Twitter on steroids, with all the things that make Facebook functional thrown in. The social sharing is 1,000% better than Facebook because you can delineate exactly who sees each post you make. It's better than Twitter because users aren't constrained by 140 characters, and links are displayed with the post (instead of having to go to another tab/webpage to read a shared link).
So for me, Twitter has become an open chat window with about 500 people on it who I interact with in real time at any given moment, while G+ is where I get a large part of my information. The unlimited nature of a G+ post makes it easy to skip something and come back to it later, or expand the post and dive right into it. One example I'll give is +Brian Koberlein. If you have any interest in space or astrophysics, this guy is giving away the goods on a daily basis and you don't have to go anywhere besides G+ to see his stuff.
The one drawback to G+ was that it was a single timeline like Facebook, and if you were tied into a lot of people or some prolific groups, it was easy to miss important stuff. Not anymore. With the changes they made yesterday I'm able to cruise back a lot farther and see everything in a much more visual format which makes it easy for me to find the good stuff.
Plus the interaction with other users is seamless and all in real time. I won't even mention Hangouts, which is changing the way the world videoconferences. And it's all tied into this new super Gchat.
In short, if you're just fucking around then Facebook is the place. But if you want to connect with people you don't yet know who share your interests/passions and then have intelligent dialogue with them, you won't find that on Facebook. Facebook is pretty terrible for discovery. It's basically limited to the people you know.
Given the change to own AAPL at 9x earnings, I will take it. The probability that the do come out with a new, innovative product is higher than, say HP.
Of course it is, and I know it's just a waiting game. But is pisses me off that I sold a company I love to buy more of a company I more or less loathe (and always have), only to see the two go in opposite directions almost immediately.
Google+ is horseshit that nobody uses. A ton of people have accounts (I do) but nobody uses it. It's garbage. It's redundant.
Google has some great products--google.com search engine, Google autonomous vehicle technology, Google maps/Google earth and gmail, for example--and it has some crap products--Google Glass will likely never catch on because of the aesthetics and Android OS, for example, is home to 90% of malware whereas iOS has 0%.
Saying that Google > Apple is kind of a simplistic way of looking at these companies. Both companies have a lot of different products. For example, MacBook is way more expensive than most PCs laptops but they are far and away superior products. If money isn't an object and you want a superior product you buy Apple laptops. If money does matter and you want to play video games, then PC laptops make more sense. Google announced a video streaming service--ok, Apple iTunes has 800 million individual accounts.
^^^ This is what cracks me up about Apple devotees. This actually happened to me in my office this morning. A woman came in to make a pitch worth a pretty decent chunk of business to her. Rather than bring her laptop, she just brought a thumb drive with her presentation on it and asked to use one of our computers. No problem. She plugs it in and can't get it working. After a few uncomfortable minutes I ask her what the problem is and she says, "This computer doesn't have Keynote."
I won't go into how stupid it is on the part of the users of an operating system with 5% of the world market share to expect the other 95% to have something that will accommodate them, but suffice it to say she lost the deal and won't be coming back.
This is what cracks me up about people with blind hatred for Apple products--a complete lack of logic and facts to back up their hate. More than likely you've never even used an Apple computer, at least not since the 1990s. It reminds of the people who hate on Rush Limbaugh who have never listened to a single one of his radio programs (actually, Seth McFarland, a liberal, made a funny Family Guy episode about that).
I constantly sing Google's praises. I'm essentially unpaid spokesman...which is unfortunate. As other have pointed out, Apple is a good company that builds good products, and there's a place for that, but Google is where it's at long term.
They are mint money faster than Bernarke and they invest so much of that back into R&D. They are a truly innovative company and that will win out in the long run. They have the brains to dream up products that don't make sense right now and they have the means to fund them.
To me, Apple is pulling the old Japanese trick of being second to market with a subjectively superior product (I say subjectively because some of their products have limitations, as Eddie pointed out, and they can be cost prohibitive, which is a huge drawback to most of the world). I think being second to market eventually catches up to you. Sure, you may just drop to number two, but there could be a lot of space between you and number one.
Admittedly I rarely use Google+ plus not but I like the changes they have made and feel compelled to give it another shot. Just like Google Wallet, I think they had bad market timing. Wallet was a bit too soon and faced headwinds because of the carries and infrastructure, etc. I think that's changing. I also think this is the same with social networking. I'm going to keep my Facebook for the foreseeable future because I'm heavily invested in the friends I've connected with, but as Eddie also pointed out, FB have become more of a platform to connect with drinking buddies and organize nights out.
Ultimately, I think people outgrow that and as I leave for business school and develop a whole new social circle, one a bit older and arguably more successful and mature, Google+ might just be the better way to stay connected with it going forward.
Regards
I agree that Apple is often 2nd to the market and that their market share is paltry for a lot of items, but that isn't their purpose. Their aim isn't the mass market. Their aim is the high end electronics market. In some ways it's comparing apples to oranges, or Mercedes to Honda. Neither is bad--they're just fundamentally different.
I agree that Apple products are only subjectively better, but let's be clear--the iPhone is 53% of all smartphone profits worldwide. Samsung is 47%. Nobody else turns a profit on smartphones. The iPad is consistently rated as the top tablet. MacBooks are consistently rated among the top laptops and ultrabook comparables. iTunes is dominant in the music industry--it transformed the industry. The iPod became and remains the ultimate MP3 player. That's all subjective, yes, but it's a pretty objective subjectivity.
Someone got mad at me in a thread I made and said I edited my original post (even though I didn't) so I'm just going to post this in here:
Shouldn't Google consider a stock split? I understand that it wouldn't technically increase their market cap, but since the price would be more affordable for average investors, wouldn't this increase demand for shares, which would then lead to an incremental increase in their proportional stock price/market cap. Are there cons to stock splits? It just seems like it's such an obvious option, I don't understand why a company as succesful and prominent as Google would want to keep their stock price at $900+ and, thus, out of reach of average (i.e. non-wealthy) investors.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
I am dying to know your rationale/analysis behind your decision back then to buy AAPL and sell GOOG. I am sure you well justified it before you pulled the trigger. Care to share?
Does anyone actually use iTunes for music? TV? Movies? I get my music from Spotify, most of my TV from Netflix, and if I ever need a movie I'll go Amazon. Not particularly integrated, but I don't see any reason it really needs to be.
I use iTunes for music, have an nice movie collection on my iTunes now from digital copies included in Blu Ray purchases, and I've rented movies from Xfinity on demand, iTunes, and my PS3 before.
I also watch TV on my TV (and I suppose on HBO GO on my iPad)
I wasn't aware you couldn't buy Windows 7 anymore. I just bought a new desktop online and it came with 7 Pro installed as well as a Windows 8 disk in the box. No argument that Windows 8 is another fumble by MS a la Vista. But I think it's so bad on the desktop environment that Windows 7 will linger like XP did until they bring out another OS that actually works. (full disclosure: I haven't installed Windows 8 and don't plan to, it just looks like a nightmare built for a smartphone and then cobbed together for a desktop OS).
There is a percentage of PCs that are still sold with Windows 7. The vast majority come with Windows 8 pre-installed. You can still buy Windows 7 online while supplies last. You can't walk into a store and buy Windows 7 anymore. It truly is a great operating system. Microsoft f*cked up big time with Windows 8.
Windows 8 is Windows 7, just with the metro screen.
This thread is a great example as to why investing in tech companies is more of a bet than anything. It is truly hard to predict future earnings/cash flows of a tech company further than 18 months due to the fact that you can have a Google come out with a superior product and you are fucked.
Hope you didn't sell on AAPL...
Google's Making It's Own Uber (Originally Posted: 02/02/2015)
Much of Uber's unrealistic $41 billion valuation comes from the future potential of driverless cars. But if Google is just keeping his technology for themselves...lol Uber.
From Bloomberg (link inside post)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-02/exclusive-google-and-…very interesting...with all the PR nightmare Uber has gone through in recent months, wouldn't be surprised if Google would actually be able to gain some traction here. Especially if there were some cool driver-less options.
I think Google will do very well with their Uber service with autonomous vehicles. I have read that they expect to launch fully autonomous cars for the public by 2020.
Delete. Stupid comment.
Well-played Google well-played.
Wow, this could be big
Any idea as to when this might be public??
Last I heard, Google's driverless cars still needed someone behind the wheel, and it was going to take years of tests and proof before any laws would be changed allowing cars to roam free without a driver? They made the same moonshot theories about Google Shopping Express last year, that at some point your groceries could be delivered by a driverless car (and the biggest challenge was getting the groceries from the curbside to your door). Awesome theories, but seems like it's years away.
I'm assuming their current in-house offering is for Google employees to hitch a ride with other Googlers from say SF to Mountain View, which is an awesome idea given the amount of people that make that trip everyday, and it was likely just a pet project from one of their genius engineers. Seems like a long shot to suddenly say they are going to unseat Uber because they have this in-house app. Not to mention the fact that Google Ventures poured $260MM into the Company 18 months ago (I think it was their biggest investment yet) and took part in the $1.2bn series D last year. Maybe I'll be eating my words 6, 24, 48 months from now, but doesn't seem like a credible threat to me at this stage.
Also important to note that Uber is stepping up its game in getting driverless cars up and running:
"Next up, and according to TechCrunch, comes the suggestion that Uber has recruited robotic researchers from Carnegie Mellon in order to staff a research facility. The facility, to be situated in Pittsburgh is designed to… you guess it, build driverless cars." - Forbes article
It will be very cool to see how this plays out.
Link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/benkepes/2015/02/02/the-battle-looms-uber-d…
The end of Google's Golden Age? (Originally Posted: 01/23/2012)
Google has long been the poster child of silicon valley success. From small search engine to the tech giant we see today, Google has been touted for having all the right answers. However, the question that I'm wondering; has Google's Golden Age of growth finally come to an end?
This question seems silly, they are a high flying stock that analysts seem to love. But Forbes' Eric Jackson pointed out some interesting facts in his latest article that has made people start to question the what exactly is in the Google Kool-Aid. For instance take a look at Google+. This foray into social media has evidently some 90 million plus users. However, they failed to describe the term "users". Most of the people counted were people using gmail since, lets be honest, Google+ blows. The only people that want to separate their friends into circles are the ones that don't have any. Even the mobile section that everyone agrees should be a hit doesn't even account for 4% of their revenues. Also Google continually gives the number of android activations without ever telling people what that number means.
Google's bread and butter has been Adsense, which accounts for 96% of their revenues. However, this market is slowing. In addition to this their international business growth is slowing as well. Domestic core business growth remained flat with Cost Per Click dropping. Google's management said this was "just the nature of experimentation in our systems.”
To be fair Google is massive and I don't see them going anywhere for a long, long time. But what do you guys think? Will Google have to admit that their growth is finally slowing?
No. Google stifles the internet market themselves. Your post hurt my head.
Hey... How do I +1 your comment?
Their growth is definitely slowing but they still have insanely high goals and aspirations as a company and are extremely well-managed. They're sitting on more cash than Apple, and are a solid company. But they need to stop dicking around stick to gmail and internet cause anything else they touch flops.
Don't forget Android! I haven't taken a look at how much money they're making off of their cuts of Android App Market app fees, but I guess it can't be all thaaaaat much if 96% of their (admittedly astronomic) revenues are from AdSense. Still, Android's fast-growing, and there's definitely a lot of untapped potential there for Google.
Android has enormous potential. As a free OS for internet-enabled mobile devices, Android has the potential to be on billions of cell phones across the world. Specifically, it has the potential, as device prices freefall, to become a leader in the cell phone OS market in every developing country on Earth.
Google still has enormous potential outside of social. Google Apps will likely be a billion dollar business within Google. As will its mobile OS. I don't see this golden age ending anytime soon.
Non laborum molestiae quibusdam quidem aliquid at. Voluptas sit reiciendis eius harum.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Alias id dolor similique minus. Est perferendis ratione illum officia omnis expedita omnis.
Blanditiis sint temporibus quasi nemo et et. Asperiores sed incidunt autem eos maxime rerum nihil.
Sed est facere dicta aspernatur omnis sit. Dolores officiis pariatur autem doloribus veritatis impedit vitae. Sunt iste officiis doloremque eum aliquam. Dicta voluptas at voluptates id voluptatum sint deleniti omnis. Occaecati dolore culpa quia nihil ipsum alias.
Ut repellendus officia et temporibus. Quidem vel sapiente quia voluptas. Vitae eaque quibusdam veritatis maiores nobis autem. Provident enim atque qui quo magni eveniet.
Amet illum non illo eius omnis. Dolore dolores veniam distinctio illum. Omnis et sed quo et enim perspiciatis. Tenetur consequatur ea iste pariatur est sapiente. Aut voluptatum iste qui libero voluptatibus id. Deserunt numquam dignissimos quia qui. Perferendis odit quaerat non consequatur quam dignissimos id.
Quia et officia officiis in optio magni nostrum. Et corrupti illum quis corrupti magni. Numquam aut perferendis tempora error. Necessitatibus optio recusandae necessitatibus labore non perspiciatis. Alias voluptatem deleniti nostrum et quo sit voluptate. Vero vero sit non vel explicabo enim dolorem.
Natus soluta aut debitis. Praesentium sit molestiae assumenda reiciendis quisquam exercitationem quos. Provident dolorum sint et tempore dolor. Officiis dolorem mollitia nostrum et ducimus et illo. Id eos minus et at. Aliquid mollitia non et sed doloribus ipsum sit.
Unde rerum non et ipsam. Sed aliquid unde nisi. Esse est dicta quae iste vitae. Nostrum deleniti aut libero in repudiandae expedita eum quia. Nostrum at ullam debitis voluptate non et sed. Optio ut optio veritatis ipsam libero impedit est.
Tenetur est qui ad ratione accusantium iusto. Cupiditate quibusdam nisi voluptatem. Est quia tempora iusto quibusdam et. Tempore vel enim molestiae dolor. Enim recusandae rerum et voluptatum nobis et.
Dolore dicta assumenda facere libero magni est neque. Nostrum id blanditiis harum autem et velit.
Cupiditate et corrupti et omnis quasi. Quod fuga voluptas dolorem consequatur ut. Voluptatibus qui eveniet aut maxime suscipit. Quos modi vero alias velit id minus. Reprehenderit iure quo quia vero. Tenetur maxime tempore deserunt ut ipsam harum.
Amet aut asperiores quasi qui in assumenda. Officia maxime sapiente molestias dolorem tempora qui sed. Soluta officia rerum nihil ea eum.
Et tenetur id labore nihil delectus rerum facere. Ad repudiandae commodi sed vero earum labore earum. Est molestias libero temporibus necessitatibus est. Qui magni et facilis omnis. Perspiciatis vero at aut. Corrupti soluta eligendi iste amet tempora. Delectus voluptatem vel inventore nesciunt nesciunt ullam ut.
Tenetur molestiae quia qui ut. Cum necessitatibus similique cupiditate inventore veritatis rem. Qui recusandae facere nihil et. Molestiae sit nihil eaque.
Fugit nesciunt impedit nisi sit voluptas nam nobis. Iusto laborum quia assumenda ut corporis. Eius rerum placeat et accusantium perferendis hic.
Libero expedita qui aut dicta. Illum molestiae numquam quis assumenda accusantium et aut labore. Officia provident sed dicta repudiandae officiis. Laudantium vero dolor accusamus et.