Slashdot Mirror


Google Buys iPhone Search App, Kills It

Hugh Pickens writes "PC World reports that Google has acquired a popular iPhone application called reMail that provides 'lightning fast' full-text search of your Gmail and IMAP e-mail accounts. The app downloads copies of all your e-mail which can then be searched with various Boolean options. reMail has only been in the application store for about six months — with a free version limited to one Gmail account and a premium version which can connect to multiple accounts. 'Google and reMail have decided to discontinue reMail's iPhone application, and we have removed it from the App Store,' writes company founder Gabor Cselle, who will be returning to Google as a Product Manager on the Gmail team. Google isn't saying what the fate of reMail might be. Some are suggesting reMail could be integrated into Gmail search or live on in some form as a part of Android, Google's mobile platform. Another possibility is that Google may have snapped up reMail just to kill it, not because reMail was a competitor to anything Google had, but because reMail made the iPhone better or the acquisition may have more to do with keeping good search technology away from the competition, as opposed to an attempt to undercut the iPhone. 'Perhaps Google is just planning to buy up all the iPhone developers, one at a time, until Android is the only game in town,' writes Bill Ray at the Register."

23 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. Fate? by Em+Emalb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It'll be "re-incorporated" into some distant version of gmail.

    Otherwise, buying an app like this and not using it is a complete and utter waste of time.

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:Fate? by ceejayoz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Otherwise, buying an app like this and not using it is a complete and utter waste of time.

      They hired the developer, though, and it's not necessarily a waste of time to deprive a competitor of a good application either.

    2. Re:Fate? by JWW · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are correct it is a very Microsoft kind of thing to do. This is definately in the realm of embrace-extend-extinguish.

      BTW: Note to Google, embrace-extend-extinguish is evil.

      Its looking more and more like its well past time for Google to admit that the "Don't be evil." slogan no longer applies anymore.... If it ever really did.

    3. Re:Fate? by bill_kress · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Google tends not to play like that. They actively encourage competition and feel it's good for the marketplace.

      --I got pegged as a microsoft marketing droid once by an AC, Now I just need my Google, linux and Apple "fanboy" creds...

    4. Re:Fate? by Draek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are correct it is a very Microsoft kind of thing to do. This is definately in the realm of embrace-extend-extinguish.

      Wrong. Embrace-Extend-Extinguish is when you Embrace a competitor's product/standard, Extend it in ways incompatible with the original product, and Extinguish it by pushing your own product so hard in the minds of consumers it is you, and not your competitor or the standards body, who determines what's the standard to follow.

      What Microsoft tried to do with HTML before Firefox, and Java before the anti-trust lawsuit are E-E-E. Arguably, what Apple, Nokia and Google are trying to do with h.264 and HTML5 is also E-E-E. But simply buying a company that makes a popular product for a competing platform isn't E-E-E, it's just business as usual and examples of such are plentiful in the corporate world.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
  2. Totally idiotic conclusions by MemoryDragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Googles interest is to route as much traffic as possible to their services so that they can earn the ad revenues, now this application basically performed inbox searches without redirecting the user to gmail (where google would get the money from the ad revenues)
    So they simply killed it because it did not bring them any revenues!

    1. Re:Totally idiotic conclusions by BrokenHalo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Googles interest is to route as much traffic as possible to their services so that they can earn the ad revenues

      That was what immediately occurred to me too. Google isn't being *very* evil, it's just trying to maintain its income base. I don't have (or even particularly want) an iPhone, but given Apple's various ways of pursuing its business model, evilness seems to mean different things to different people.

      Just to be clear, I'm not particularly bashing Apple (I'm typing this on a MacBook I inherited from my wife when she upgraded to a more recent model), I'm just saying let's not be hypocrites.

    2. Re:Totally idiotic conclusions by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's why they killed POP access, too!

      Oh, wait, no they didn't.

      Slashdot should be embarrassed for all the FUD they've been posting. Apple is the new Microsoft, except for Apple fanboys, who hold Google as the new Microsoft.

    3. Re:Totally idiotic conclusions by kjart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Slashdot should be embarrassed for all the FUD they've been posting. Apple is the new Microsoft, except for Apple fanboys, who hold Google as the new Microsoft.

      It never ceases to amaze me when people are surprised when giant corporations behave like giant corporations.

    4. Re:Totally idiotic conclusions by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And by that logic, they should be killing off all 3rd party mail client POP and IMAP inbox access for everyone in 3... 2...

  3. Google saw a good thing... by H0p313ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... and bought the company.

    company founder Gabor Cselle, who will be returning to Google as a Product Manager on the Gmail team

    It is perfectly normal to pull the product temporarily to re-brand and redirect during an acquisition that is technically interesting but does not completely meet the company vision. Nothing to see here, move along.

    --
    XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  4. Re:Don't be Evil? by c · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > So much for _that_ motto... as if they lived by it
    > in the first place.

    You'll need to explain why playing hardball with Apple counts, in some way, as "evil". The developer got a nice permanent job and a pile of cash, existing users still get to use the app they bought. Potential users are out of luck, but I don't see how Google owes them anything...

    c.

    --
    Log in or piss off.
  5. How is this different from Apple? by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As I recall, there were quite a few commenters here that thought Apple was being a schmuck for killing google's phone app even though google's app replaced apple's phone app instead of installing itself side-by-side. Here, you've got google killing their competitors that are trying to mooch off their mail service. Sounds like pretty similar behavior to me on both apple and google's part since they are trying to stamp out a competitor who is getting a "free lunch" off their products.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    1. Re:How is this different from Apple? by delinear · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe because there's a big difference between "killing" and "giving a huge bag of money and a job and the potential to integrate the app into the google codebase", regardless of how the Register/Slashdot try and spin the story title?

  6. bla bla bla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "possibility is that Google may have snapped up reMail just to kill it"

    I have no facts but I must opinionate...

  7. Re:lulz by aztracker1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    More like IBM... as far as phone development goes, it's like Android is the Linux of phone platforms (err, wait).

    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  8. Or... by asdf7890 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They have effectively employed a Developer (or more than one if the company wasn't a one man band) for work on their mail related projects taking his existing work on a (popular?) mail related application as part of his CV. They were perhaps on the lookout for a developer with good experience in both mail protocols and UIs for mobile devices (I can see that skillset fitting in to their plans as I understand them). Said developer/company does not have time to maintain/support the iPhone app long term on top of new responsabilities in the new position with Google so decided to stop, and Google has not particular interest in keeping it going by passing it to another team either because the market for it is too small for them to care or it just isn't the direction they want to send a dev team in at the moment.

    There doesn't need to be any anti-Apple consideration here at all. Apple users need not worry: if there is a good market for such an application someone will step up to the bat and create one. In fact I predict many will turn up soon as people try follow in this fellow's footsteps - you just need to hope one of the new projects will be both good and long lived...

  9. it's for the people by pydev · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Companies like Google buy small companies mainly for the people. Think of it as a big hiring bonus.

    I suspect other than that, reMail simply didn't figure in any of their business plans.

  10. Re:Microgoogle? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes. Their option was to hire on talent and reward the original creator of something they found interesting; or create their own, integrate it, somehow subtly alter their backend to break the competitor's work, and destroy their competitor's user base (along with any hope of making money).

  11. Buy competition, kill competition by furby076 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Sounds like the same strategy some other big computer company would do and get flamed for it. As far as I am concerned as long as they are going to make an equal or better product I couldn't care less, but still Google is exerting it's influence, money and power to control the intarweb.

    And with that, the troll/flame mods can post their displeasure for my anti-Google statement.

    --

    I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
  12. Re:Effort to protect an illegal monopoly by ClosedSource · · Score: 2, Insightful

    All you need to have is a few deep-pocket competitors lobby the government and you will become an illegal monopoly. That's why Ticketmaster isn't an illegal monopoly - no deep-pocket competitors.

  13. Proprietary... by Bert64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is why many people don't like closed source proprietary software...
    The original vendor of this software has stopped developing or distributing it, this would be bad enough and effectively turn existing versions into abandonware... But given Apple's distribution model, this software is now effectively completely defunct. What happens to all the people who paid for the non free version?

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  14. Fixed that for ya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    • Write a very good freeware
    • Get bought out by competing proprietary vendor
    • profit