Showing posts tagged google
“
The findings paint a very poor picture of the search giant’s social network—a picture of waning interest, weak user engagement, and minimal social activity. Google calls the study flawed—we’ll explain why in a second—and has boasted that more than 170 million people have “upgraded” to the network. RJ Metrics’ report, on the other hand, is yet another indicator that Google might indeed just be a “virtual ghost town,” as some have argued.

Google’s “reason” is basically that everyone is sharing privately, and they are all people you don’t know…

Exclusive: New Google Study Reveals Minimal Social Activity, Weak User Engagement | Fast Company

Short Thoughts: Google is Doomed

Faith No More

parislemon:

That’s maybe my biggest problem with Google. They release something, and I no longer have any faith that it’s going to be any good. It’s hard to get excited about a company like that. It’s the same reason why it’s hard to get excited when Microsoft and Yahoo release new things. The track record just isn’t there any more. The faith is gone.

(Reblogged from parislemon)

Android Orphans: Visualizing a Sad History of Support

understatementblog:

The announcement that Nexus One users won’t be getting upgraded to Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich led some to justifiably question Google’s support of their devices. I look at it a little differently: Nexus One owners are lucky. I’ve been researching the history of OS updates on Android phones…

(Reblogged from understatementblog)
“
Your phone is a tool for communicating. You shouldn’t be communicating with the phone; you should be communicating with somebody on the other side of the phone.

Put another way, “Your phone is for talking to people on the other side, it’s not a computer.”

I don’t think this is a plan for the future.

Android Chief Andy Rubin Says Your Phone Should Not Be Your Assistant - Ina Fried - AsiaD - AllThingsD

FOSS Patents: Shocker for Android OEMs: Google document proposes giving Motorola time-to-market advantage to build Android "lead devices"

This is insane, what kind of company has a culture where people are even allowed to write down things like this? Zero concept of transparency, and disgust for the public.

“
Even still, this horse is still a horse. When Twitter came around, the Internet didn’t show me a horse. It showed me a chimera shooting lasers from its eyes and pooping Faberge eggs. It was like, “Whoa, I have never seen this before.” When I logged onto Googolplex, I just saw another horse. Painted white, admittedly, and maybe given a nice currying, but still a horse.
Of Google-Plus And Circle Jerks

Android Developers Flocking to iOS

“
Google has now shown a lot of expertise at the fast follower or “copier” model with products like Google and Android. When Microsoft was good at this the company eventually ended up being labeled as innovative and I don’t think the company’s psyche ever recovered. Wonder if the same could happen with Google…
Post by Dare Obasanjo from Mobile

Google needs data, not ads

In this podcast, The Unified Field Theory of Google, Joseph Smarr talks about how Google’s plan is not to destroy Facebook, but to create an ecosystem where enough people are using Google+ that Facebook users will apply pressure to create interoperability. I think that very likely will destroy Facebook if successful, but that’s not the point.

People think when google does something new, “how will they sell ads?” Assuming their ability to monetize things with ads as their core motivation for everything. I don’t think that it is. It is their core profit center now, but the central goal is really accessing data, and always has been.

Google’s mission is to organize the world‘s information and make it universally accessible and useful.

I really don’t think that’s bullshit to them, but I also don’t think it’s unambiguously humanitarian. They didn’t always make money selling ads. They are able to sell ads effectively because they have access to data that allows them to be more targeted. Data is valuable for its own sake. There are a lot of things that Google does that are not immediate candidates for advertising that they still spend money on. Google Health had a promise to never have ads, it has since died. And Google Books started with a lot of data, and no clear way to profit. They now sell some books on the side, but I can’t imagine it pays for the scanning operations.

Google wants data for its inherent value. A value they think they will be able to monetize on later, or “make accessible” if you want to be more generous. This might be through ads, or some other mechanism.

This plan is achieved best through an open web, so that the data is more accessible to them, and a lot of trust.