Google is just the 21st Century Microsoft ...

[UCFBS]

I said it just before the start of the new century. From nothing original to "we are the standard" (and we will not use open standards by default), they just keep on leveraging one product marketshare to break into others.

They announced a new series of products with the Pixel 2, and people assume they are the first with these items, they actually designed them, while they are really just a late product to market, and usually by co-opting another 'partners' product (who just grits their teeth).

- http://bgr.com/2017/10/04/google-pixel-2-event-top-announcements-roundup-pixel-2-xl/

They haven't done anything original. Even the Pixel 2 was co-opted from, yet again, HTC, just like the original Pixel. Even the Pixel C Tablet was original the nVidia Shield Tablet 2, which Google froze out from resellers (so nVidia had to go the "Gaming Store" route).

Just sad. Just completely sad. But America, with their blind brand loyalty, will believe Google is an actual "hardware vendor." At least Apple does design some of their equipment.

 

[chemmie]

Why do you hate capitalism?

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

I said it just before the start of the new century. From nothing original to "we are the standard" (and we will not use open standards by default), they just keep on leveraging one product marketshare to break into others.

They announced a new series of products with the Pixel 2, and people assume they are the first with these items, they actually designed them, while they are really just a late product to market, and usually by co-opting another 'partners' product (who just grits their teeth).

- http://bgr.com/2017/10/04/google-pixel-2-event-top-announcements-roundup-pixel-2-xl/

They haven't done anything original. Even the Pixel 2 was co-opted from, yet again, HTC, just like the original Pixel. Even the Pixel C Tablet was original the nVidia Shield Tablet 2, which Google froze out from resellers (so nVidia had to go the "Gaming Store" route).

Just sad. Just completely sad. But America, with their blind brand loyalty, will believe Google is an actual "hardware vendor." At least Apple does design some of their equipment.

You've commented about the Pixel (and now the Pixel 2) being a rebranded HTC phone. Which phone and is there a good article talking about it?

 

[UCFBS]

Why do you hate capitalism?

Huh? Quite the opposite! I think consumers are fools, that's not the same.

Consumers complain and want the government to solve their own mistakes. I was against the DoJ lawsuit on Microsoft for that very reason.

I'm mega Pro-capitalism, but it requires consumers not to be partisan, brand loyal sheep. Kinda like democracy requires the same too.

 

[UCFBS]

You've commented about the Pixel (and now the Pixel 2) being a rebranded HTC phone. Which phone and is there a good article talking about it?

When Huawei yanked their contracted design of the Pixel phone in early 2016 over branding requirements (among other things), Google was only 6 months from release. So Google had to find an existing design immediately.

The HTC Ceberus was that design

In fact, one of the main, marketing points Google was going to use -- like Apple does -- was that the Pixel wasn't just another Qualcomm reference Snapdragon design. After all, virtually no Americans have ever heard of HiSilicon Kirin.

There are several articles on this, especially in the ODM and SIA industry press (some are English translated), along with the Android (English) media that confirms Google did a wholesale namespace change on the Ceberus commits just 45 days after getting the Huawei boot.

Yes, I know, people are asking for "proof," because they believe Google marketing over industry known reality. Hence my comparison to Microsoft ... people assume they were first with an Office Suite (nope, very late to the party), first with a WYSIWYG document solution (not even the case on Windows itself), etc... Industry and channel control is what defines 90% if American consumers, especially the carrier here.

The new Pixel 2 has also been designed by HTC, and HTC protected itself by starting it's design ahead of Google's contract for the Pixel 2's design. That's why they are so similar. In reality, both are just Qualcomm reference designs, with HTC just choosing to make the two designs similar.

But being in the US, most Americans never see the other phone. That was the case of many Nexus phones as well. In fact, the non-Google Nexus versions usually proved more reliable because updates weren't pushed as fast.

This was also the case in the Tablet space too.

nVidia was unique in that it designed both the nVidia Shield Tablet LTE and Google Nexus 9 LTE. Google was enfuriated when nVidia released first, released cheaper (by $200+), negotiated with AT&T without Google, and was winning head-on review after review. Google locked nVidia out of all retail access, so nVidia only sold 144,000 units, unable to sell other than via on-line and game stores.

So nVidia conceded the Shield Tablet 2 to the role of the Pixel C LTE, with the Google required pricetag ($250 markup).

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

When Huawei yanked their contracted design of the Pixel phone in early 2016 over branding requirements (among other things), Google was only 6 months from release. So Google had to find an existing design immediately.

The HTC Ceberus was that design

In fact, one of the main, marketing points Google was going to use -- like Apple does -- was that the Pixel wasn't just another Qualcomm reference Snapdragon design. After all, virtually no Americans have ever heard of HiSilicon Kirin.

There are several articles on this, especially in the ODM and SIA industry press (some are English translated), along with the Android (English) media that confirms Google did a wholesale namespace change on the Ceberus commits just 45 days after getting the Huawei boot.

Yes, I know, people are asking for "proof," because they believe Google marketing over industry known reality. Hence my comparison to Microsoft ... people assume they were first with an Office Suite (nope, very late to the party), first with a WYSIWYG document solution (not even the case on Windows itself), etc... Industry and channel control is what defines 90% if American consumers, especially the carrier here.

The new Pixel 2 has also been designed by HTC, and HTC protected itself by starting it's design ahead of Google's contract for the Pixel 2's design. That's why they are so similar. In reality, both are just Qualcomm reference designs, with HTC just choosing to make the two designs similar.

But being in the US, most Americans never see the other phone. That was the case of many Nexus phones as well. In fact, the non-Google Nexus versions usually proved more reliable because updates weren't pushed as fast.

This was also the case in the Tablet space too.

nVidia was unique in that it designed both the nVidia Shield Tablet LTE and Google Nexus 9 LTE. Google was enfuriated when nVidia released first, released cheaper (by $200+), negotiated with AT&T without Google, and was winning head-on review after review. Google locked nVidia out of all retail access, so nVidia only sold 144,000 units, unable to sell other than via on-line and game stores.

So nVidia conceded the Shield Tablet 2 to the role of the Pixel C LTE, with the Google required pricetag ($250 markup).

I'm not doubting Google commandeered the HTC Ceberus (thanks for the phone model btw) but I read Google acquired part of HTC, presumably the engineering and design division responsible for the Pixel 1 (or Ceberus) and Pixel 2. So while the Pixel 1 was not truly a Google phone, the Pixel 2 is completely from the in house engineering and design. So I don't believe they technically "co-opted" the Pixel 2.

The reviews for the Pixel 2 have been quite good so far. May be a good alternative to Apple and Samsung.

 

[chemmie]

So, you are "mega Pro-Capitalism" yet you sit and complain about one of the most natural results of Capitalism? Makes total sense.

 

[UCFWayne]

So, you are "mega Pro-Capitalism" yet you sit and complain about one of the most natural results of Capitalism? Makes total sense.

chemmie are you pro capitalism? pro communism? or something else?

 

[UCFBS]

So, you are "mega Pro-Capitalism" yet you sit and complain about one of the most natural results of Capitalism? Makes total sense.

Capitalism, like Democracy, requires the consumer, like the voter, to not be sheep. I'm complaining about the ignorance of the consumer ... huge difference.

As Ralph Nader used to point out ... the US Gov't should have changed Microsoft's practices as its biggest consumer, instead as a regulator (largely on-behalf of competitors, not consumers).

Remember, I'm a Libertarian-Capitalist. I argue the problem is, ultimately, the ignorant consumer, like the ignorant voter. We much remain educated to be free.

The Housing Bubble is a perfect example of how regulation doesn't work, and ignorant consumers only make the matter worse. Not that we have "regulation" anymore. It's more like "control" which people mistake as "regulation."

 

[UCFBS]

I'm not doubting Google commandeered the HTC Ceberus (thanks for the phone model btw)

Indeed. But I still cannot believe the army of people who believed Google actually designed it. But that's what happens when Google gets up on stage, lies its ass off, and people believe them.

Google bought Motorola, but they literally just bought them for patent defense.

Spoiler

They still ran them as a separate entity. Moto also wasn't an ODM. Just like Apple, they contract all fabrication. But at least Moto was an OEM, like Apple.

Google has never been an OEM. They just slap their name on it. In fact, if you look at Linux kernel contributions, other than Red Hat (who has massive oversight/signoff, at least 40% at any time) and, in its heyday, Novell-SuSE, the major contributors are hardware vendors.

That's how Android is as well (which is not a GNU/Linux compatible platform, just a Linux kernel-based fork).

but I read Google acquired part of HTC, presumably the engineering and design division responsible for the Pixel 1 (or Ceberus) and Pixel 2.

This just happened. I'm sure Google is considering becoming an OEM. But we said the same thing about Moto, and look what happened there?

However ... I'll concede that maybe, just maybe, Google did just recently buy HTC to finally become an ODM. Why?

Spoiler

It's beyond the technical fallout, where the Kirin 960 destroyed the Snapdragon 821, even the Apple A10, in integer and floating point benchmarks, and its Mali G71 met the Adreno 530 in GPU benchmarks (usually that's where HiSilicon has been behind compared to Qualcomm), and for less power consumption.

It's very likely that Huawei's "undeclared war" on, and the fallout with, finally made Google buy HTC.

The rumor is that Huawei's CEO personally "pulled the rug" from under Google one evening in 2016 February. Huawei is basically China's IBM. They control the backend ... everywhere, even if consumers are ignorant of who they are. They are an ODM, an OEM ... including the radios! That's everything! The HiSilicon is a complete SoC they 'own,' right down to virtually al;l the radios on the planet (other than Verizon's). The only one on the planet that is like that is Samsung, and even they have far more radio access issues (more than Huawei).

Now Huawei won't be much of a consumer threat to Google in the US, and that likely won't be for a long time. Huawei's presence in the US is limited to low-to-midrange, starting with the 2nd-tier carrier resellers and, in only the last 2 years, their "Honor" brand which targets age 18-34 who don't have good credit, so they have to pay the full price of a $150-350 phone upfront.

But in Europe and India, where far less than half of consumers (unlike 90% of Americans) get their phones, they are taking over a lot of mindshare. They have agreements with Leica, Porsche and Amazon, where Amazon is winning the "Retail and Set Top" war, and have taken a lead in AI.

It's gotten so bad that Google has been yanking all sorts of support from FireOS and Amazon products. This was well-timed with their introduction of competing products. Ergo ... Microsoft all over again.

I.e., by the time the US gov't finds them guilty of leveraging one monopoly to obtain marketshare in another, they will have gotten that marketshare.

All the meanwhile, people assume 'the superior product won.'

So while the Pixel 1 was not truly a Google phone, the Pixel 2 is completely from the in house engineering and design. So I don't believe they technically "co-opted" the Pixel 2.

HTC still designed it, completely. It wasn't Google. Google doesn't have the OEM expertise at this time. The Pixel 2 XL is LG, and I'm not as familiar with what's going on there. But the relationship seems the same.

I.e., people need to stop assuming just because a phone doesn't say "HTC" or "LG" on the outside, that it was designed by Google. It's been quite the opposite from the ODM and SIA media. But Americans assume a lot.

Spoiler

Again, Google just flat out lies its ass off, and people believe them. That's what insults me most, as someone who has been on the inside of the ODM world.

Which goes back to the Microsoft strategy ... buy the 3rd best product and market the heck out of it. Partnerships happen far more in hardware, than software, hence why Google is still at the mercy of its OEMs and ODMs.

Although the recent HTC purchase may change that. We'll see. But the Pixel 2 (and likely 2 XL) was not designed by Google at all.

The reviews for the Pixel 2 have been quite good so far. May be a good alternative to Apple and Samsung.

It isn't even out yet. Of course pre-release reviews are going to be glowing.

In any case, from everything I read, it's still just another reference Qualcomm design, with a few changes on the outside by the ODM.

About the only thing Google knows how to do is screw up the software platform. That's because they don't know how to sustain consumer products, only servers they control (don't get me started -- and I have insider knowledge on this).

Spoiler

I know, I had six (6) Nexus devices, as well as the nVidia Shield Tablet LTE (I returned my Nexus 9 quickly, and bought my own Shield, as I tried out my wife's), and even seen the non-western, non-Google version of the Nexus 6P.

Even Huawei USA got tired of Google bricking the Nexus 6P. No one should ever need to factory reset a phone after an Android upgrade. I had to to that at least 50% of the time with my Nexus devices, but never anyone else's. Heck, nVidia used to release Shield updates within 2 weeks of Google, and I never had any issues.

 

[chemmie]

Capitalism, like Democracy, requires the consumer, like the voter, to not be sheep. I'm complaining about the ignorance of the consumer ... huge difference.

As Ralph Nader used to point out ... the US Gov't should have changed Microsoft's practices as its biggest consumer, instead as a regulator (largely on-behalf of competitors, not consumers).

Remember, I'm a Libertarian-Capitalist. I argue the problem is, ultimately, the ignorant consumer, like the ignorant voter. We much remain educated to be free.

The Housing Bubble is a perfect example of how regulation doesn't work, and ignorant consumers only make the matter worse. Not that we have "regulation" anymore. It's more like "control" which people mistake as "regulation."

yea....LOL
Regulation is what caused our burst housing bubble a few years ago. Great joke.

You should stop believing you are so enlightened for being a "Libertarian-Capitalist." You aren't. A good argument could be made that you are even more ignorant than those you criticize.

 

[UCFBS]

yea....LOL
Regulation is what caused our burst housing bubble a few years ago. Great joke.

Do you have some sort of reading comprehension issue? I mean, just how did you get that from what I said?

Seriously ... it was a huge combination of factors, including all sorts of programs and cheap debt, as well as the interest free economy, robosigning and other things. But ultimately, it was consumers literally not stepping back and going, "Hmmm, can I really afford this?" as well as "Hmmm, this house was 60% cheaper just 5 years ago."

That's the thing. We Libertarian-Capitalists try to point out that government causes problems, and we have blown past 'regulation' to the point of 'control.'

But if all you know is partisan views, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[UCFBS]

but I read Google acquired part of HTC, presumably the engineering and design division responsible for the Pixel 1 (or Ceberus) and Pixel 2.

This just happened. I'm sure Google is considering becoming an OEM. But we said the same thing about Moto, and look what happened there?
However ... I'll concede that maybe, just maybe, Google did just recently buy HTC to finally become an ODM. Why?

Okay, answered my own questions. [1] [2]

So unlike Motorola, which was for IP and kept separate (then re-sold it for peanuts), Google laid off 50% (2,000 people) from the HTC division it acquired, but brought the rest in-house. So it's not just IP this time. That makes sense because it was likely there was redundancy in firmware and platform teams. I would assume most of the 2,000 that remain are more hardware-side, which Google does not have.

So, again, Google didn't design the Pixel 2 (putting the 2 XL aside). This is well known in the ODM/SIA realm. But it does look like they have really acquired the people who did. Same with all these frilly products. They look like cheap Chinese solutions that are already available.

But with the +2,000 add of largely hardware people just over the last two (2) weeks, this may change in the next eighteen (18) months.

- bjs (aka UCFBS)

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/4/...interview-new-google-hardware-vision-htc-deal
[2] https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/20/16340108/google-htc-smartphone-team-acquisition-announced

 

[UCFBS]

Also, just to make "my other point" ...
- http://bgr.com/2017/09/26/htc-u11-plus-vs-pixel-2-htc-iphone-x-rival/

 

[OmniKnight]

It doesn't matter