meiroy Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Google+ doesn't seem to be that impressive: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2011/11/google_had_a_chance_to_compete_with_facebook_not_anymore_.html There's so much information out there it's easy to go and pick some article to confirm whatever opinion you'd like to express. Here's another link: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2011/11/google-plus-pages/ Why Google Plus Pages (Will) Beat Facebook. And Twitter Now I can spend another 5 second and find some article stating that Google+ sucks. Oh, and BTW, you're seriously trolling this thread. How is he trolling this thread?!? There might be many articles on Google+ but I found the Slate article interesting and another viewpoint. It's not like this was some obscur blog, it's a major website. There is no need to censor negative information. If you would follow this thread from the beginning and note all his posts, not just the one above, it should be quite obvious, especially if it's compared to another thread. Anyhow, I do agree with you that negative posts and push back is extremely important, so trolling the thread does have its helpful aspect even if it's for the sake of trolling. Here's the definition of trolling: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) Let me address the characteristics: Inflammatory: I hold a negative view on Google. My posts are in support of this view. If you read through the posts, you'll see most of them contain some sort of evidence or datapoints that I used to form my opinion. You don't say? You hold a negative view on Google? Who would have guessed... So, I've taken your suggestion of looking again at your posts on this thread by clicking on your profile, only to yet again notice the massive amount/ratio of your posts on this thread and their content. If I thought previously that you are trolling now I'm pretty sure about it. Anyhow, this is OT and I stop here. Pardon to all who had to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted November 29, 2011 Author Share Posted November 29, 2011 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20111129080612204 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 This was unexpected. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204012004577072323400561792.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 This was unexpected. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204012004577072323400561792.html Indeed. I can't say that I like it much at first glance, but I'll reserve judgement until I have more details and figure out what the strategy is. I guess there could be potential (and maybe even margins) in becoming a kind of inventory-less shopping hub, but it seems hard to pull off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCG Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 Google has struggled with retail though. I kind of wish they would focus on what they do best, which is search and advertising. It seems like Brin is ignoring Steve Jobs' advice of sticking to 4 products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 Google has struggled with retail though. I kind of wish they would focus on what they do best, which is search and advertising. It seems like Brin is ignoring Steve Jobs' advice of sticking to 4 products. Page is the CEO now, not Brin. And he did refocus the company a fair bit in the past 6 months by closing down lots of projects, but I doubt that he would ever literally stick to only 4 products. IMO it's different to have a look at the Apple store and not having too many products as it is to go to youtube, do a search, check gmail... The offering isn't quite the same, since you don't have to choose between products - you can use all of them for free if you want. I'm not expecting much, but I'd love them to surprise me, especially as a consumer (not a shareholder anymore) since any competition for Amazon can only make prices and services better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCG Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 Google has struggled with retail though. I kind of wish they would focus on what they do best, which is search and advertising. It seems like Brin is ignoring Steve Jobs' advice of sticking to 4 products. Page is the CEO now, not Brin. sorry...hadn't had my coffee yet. I don't think they should literally stick to 4 products if other new products/services support their main businesses, if that makes sense. Things like Android, Gmail, Youtube, and other products are tied back to Google search and advertising, which is fine. I just don't want to see them getting too far into things that are really separate from their main business (becoming a phone retailer and providing customer service was beyond their main business, and they struggled at it). I like Google Shopping though, and think it might be better to tie this one-day shipping thing into Google Shopping. It's unclear what Google's role will be in this thing though. Google has been very successful with the majority of their products, so I shouldn't really doubt them, but they've struggled when trying to get into aspects of retail (Selling phones, Google Books, Google music so far, etc.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Is there anyone not suing Google on Android? http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=215744& In other news: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204791104577109010174484888.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 26, 2011 Author Share Posted December 26, 2011 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20111223193332457 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted January 5, 2012 Author Share Posted January 5, 2012 Buying more patents from IBM: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16409081 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Buying more patents from IBM: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16409081 Did they not find enough patents with Motorola after spending $12.5B on them? Motorola looks like they're already losing marketshare: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/06/us-motorola-idUSTRE80522I20120106 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smazz Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Buying more patents from IBM: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16409081 Did they not find enough patents with Motorola after spending $12.5B on them? Motorola looks like they're already losing marketshare: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/06/us-motorola-idUSTRE80522I20120106 I always wonder about these patents from the tech industry. With how so many can be created with a few changes from an existing (in general terms) and knowing how fast the tech in the industry changes - its amazing that older patents (except in a minority of situations) are so valuable. For Instance - the Kodak patents. For a company that hasnt done anything and has zero business left its amazing that their patents are still worth $Billions. Yes, I realize the deal with their technology still being used in some of the smartphone camera tech but as per my first statement, it still amazes me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share Posted January 7, 2012 Buying more patents from IBM: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16409081 Did they not find enough patents with Motorola after spending $12.5B on them? Motorola looks like they're already losing marketshare: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/06/us-motorola-idUSTRE80522I20120106 I'm guessing they did an assessment of where they still had some vulnerabilities and patched those holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerbaron Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 My favorite technology patent is the Color Kinetics patent (Phillips). It basically claims any control of multiple color LEDs with PWM. I don't know how the patent office let that happen but PWM is the only way you can control a LED... Ah yes Color Kinetics was not making any money but Phillips bough them at 700M$ for their patent portfolio. My point is: Some very specific (0.1%) patents are worth a fortune, 90% are worth less then the paper they were printed and the remaining 9.9% is worth some money but not a game changer. You really need to be an expert in a narrow field in order to recognize the 0.1%! BeerBaron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Buying more patents from IBM: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16409081 Did they not find enough patents with Motorola after spending $12.5B on them? Motorola looks like they're already losing marketshare: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/06/us-motorola-idUSTRE80522I20120106 I'm guessing they did an assessment of where they still had some vulnerabilities and patched those holes. My understanding is that, the patents are negotiating cards with violated patents representing potential liabilities. As long as you hold enough high value cards, it doesn't matter which area you hold them in. The one with the most total value gets the residual payment after subtracting their potential liability. Is that not how it works? HTC seems to be slipping too: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/htc-posts-poor-q4-results-loses-android-mojo-to-samsung-apple/66332 The only one doing well is Samsung. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Buying more patents from IBM: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16409081 Did they not find enough patents with Motorola after spending $12.5B on them? Motorola looks like they're already losing marketshare: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/06/us-motorola-idUSTRE80522I20120106 I always wonder about these patents from the tech industry. With how so many can be created with a few changes from an existing (in general terms) and knowing how fast the tech in the industry changes - its amazing that older patents (except in a minority of situations) are so valuable. For Instance - the Kodak patents. For a company that hasnt done anything and has zero business left its amazing that their patents are still worth $Billions. Yes, I realize the deal with their technology still being used in some of the smartphone camera tech but as per my first statement, it still amazes me. The patent system is badly broken, I wonder why there hasn't been a big overhaul? Where is the resistance to the overhaul coming from? On one hand we seem to be handing out patents for obvious improvements like candy. On the other hand, a groundbreaking product like the iPhone seems to have little that can be protect it from blatant copying. http://thedoghousediaries.com/3345 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share Posted January 7, 2012 My understanding is that, the patents are negotiating cards with violated patents representing potential liabilities. As long as you hold enough high value cards, it doesn't matter which area you hold them in. The one with the most total value gets the residual payment after subtracting their potential liability. Is that not how it works? That's mostly my understanding too, but that's the broad lines. I think that if we zoom in a little, we'll find that it's a bit more subtle than that, and that in some cases it's worth going after certain specific patents either for defensive or offensive purposes, and that they can be used differently than the massive stockpile because they are of higher quality/specificity than the average BS patent out there. Not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compoundinglife Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 The patent system is badly broken, I wonder why there hasn't been a big overhaul? Where is the resistance to the overhaul coming from? On one hand we seem to be handing out patents for obvious improvements like candy. On the other hand, a groundbreaking product like the iPhone seems to have little that can be protect it from blatant copying. http://thedoghousediaries.com/3345 NPR's "This American Life" did a excellent piece on ex MSFT CTO Nathan Myhrvold's company IV which has a large patent portfolio. Doesn't answer the question of where the resistance is coming from but gives some good insight into one of the firms buying them up. http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/441/when-patents-attack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racemize Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 I happen to write patents (including software patents) for a living, so hopefully I can provide some insight here. Generally, for large companies, patents are used in the arsenal method mentioned previously. Oftentimes, competing companies will cross license the patents or leave each other alone due to the high cost of litigation and the likelihood of infringement on both sides. However, I've read that Apple has pretty much declared war on iPhone mimics and is not willing to take money to settle the dispute--we'll see how that plays out. With regard to patent reform, there has been a lot of changes in the patent system recently, both in the recent bill that was passed as well as several new court rulings. In general though, I believe the largest issue with patents is the quality of Examination. The Examiners at the Patent Office are generally paid less than their counterparts and are pressed for time (there is a lot of pressure on them to get through their case loads). Additionally, many of the Examiners are English as a second language folks. Because of the disparity in pay, this is a hard issue to overcome. I'll also note that obviousness is very hard to determine in hindsight. Many of the best inventions appear extremely obvious once they are created, but had to be created in the first place. For example, it took quite a while for windshield wipers to become automatic, which seems awfully obvious to people after the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted January 11, 2012 Author Share Posted January 11, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16486796 Spanish banking giant BBVA is switching its 110,000 staff to use Google's range of enterprise software. The deal is the biggest that the search giant has signed with one company for its cloud-computing services, where software is offered as a service via the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Cue a fresh round of lawsuits: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-57356989-264/google-in-search-google-had-no-choice/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha231616967560 Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16486796 Spanish banking giant BBVA is switching its 110,000 staff to use Google's range of enterprise software. The deal is the biggest that the search giant has signed with one company for its cloud-computing services, where software is offered as a service via the internet. Yes this is hopefully where Google begins to show the potential of its cloud strategy for paying enterprise users. That their first large enterprise customer is a bank is no accident. They are starting out with the most difficult type of customer to service in this space. Our own small business just switched to Google apps for email and docs and we are pleased with the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 More bad news for Google: http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/13/facing-another-pr-disaster-google-accused-of-fraudulently-undermining-a-kenyan-startup http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2398872,00.asp http://gigaom.com/video/google-tv-ces/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meiroy Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16486796 Spanish banking giant BBVA is switching its 110,000 staff to use Google's range of enterprise software. The deal is the biggest that the search giant has signed with one company for its cloud-computing services, where software is offered as a service via the internet. Yes this is hopefully where Google begins to show the potential of its cloud strategy for paying enterprise users. That their first large enterprise customer is a bank is no accident. They are starting out with the most difficult type of customer to service in this space. Our own small business just switched to Google apps for email and docs and we are pleased with the results. Same here. Their products just get better and better, increase efficiency and save money. At least from a perspective of a small company. Using cloud services seems so natural now, why bother with purchasing and handling your own software and excess hardware while getting a possibly inferior output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest valueInv Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 The lawsuits aren't going to be over anytime soon: http://gigaom.com/apple/apple-targets-samsung-smartphones-tablets-with-new-german-lawsuits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now