Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Could Soon Start To Twist Google's Arm
Hugh Pickens writes "For the past three years, Android has experienced a kind of free space expansion, but as we enter 2012, it seems the game may be changing. Instead of the old 'there's more than enough room for every Android handset maker to be a winner,' we have a three-horse's-length leader: Samsung shipping close to 55% of all Android phones, while Motorola and HTC lag behind. '[Samsung] could be in a position to twist Google's arm,' writes Jean-Louis Gassée.'If last quarter's trend continues — if Motorola and HTC lose even more ground — Samsung's bargaining position will become even stronger.' But what is Samsung's 'bargaining position'? What could they want? Perhaps more search referral money, earlier access to Android releases, or a share of advertising revenue. Will Google let Samsung gain the upper hand? It's not likely, because Motorola is about to become a fully-owned but 'independent' Google subsidiary, and its 16% of the Android market could counterbalance Samsung's influence to some extent. So what could Samsung do? 'Consider the Kindle Fire example: Just like Amazon picked the Android lock, Samsung could grab the Android Open Source code and create its own unlicensed but fully legal smartphone OS and still benefit from a portion of Android apps, or it could build its own app store the way Amazon did,' writes Gassée. 'Samsung is a tough, determined fighter and won't let Google dictate its future. The same can be said of Google. This is going to be interesting.'"
John Gruber asked an interesting question in response to this: Has any single PC vendor ever controlled that much of the Windows market? It's going to be very interesting to see how Android vendors respond to Google entering the handset market. It can't be good for the platform to have vendors forking the operating system just to snipe at each other. It's already fragmented enough with TouchWiz and all the other junkware, and popular phones that are months old don't even get major updates. This kind of unregulated chaos is exactly what so many critics predicted; it may even be an opportunity for Microsoft to win some Windows Phone deals as carriers decide they don't want to run a competing vendor's operating system. Whatever happens this year, I'm sure iPhone users will grab the popcorn and enjoy the show.
Open Source software has a tradition of ending up this way, especially when it's a program that needs custom hardware. (See also: Asterisk) First there's a surge in competitive hardware providers... then one of the hardware providers merges with the software provider and they then become the only hardware maker left. Doesn't require that you be the #1 vendor coming in, that follows once you become the official one.
Just because Google thinks they can dictate anyone and tell them what to do with impunity.
Well they did write the thing. This is Slashdot, where an open source developer is something more and less than a saint, to be quoted reverently, loved as a brother, feared as a tyrant, and accorded all the perquisites of an 18th level mage. Everybody knows that a copyright license is a holy compact, reifying Lockean rights and Benedictine virtue, and none shall interfere with the licensor's prerogatives (unless the licensor is rich, "doesn't give back to the community," or creates something that isn't source code, that is).
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Google is in the same position Microsoft was a decade ago. It has money coming out its ears and not much to buy. Samsung could annoy Google enough that Google gets into the mobile business. Just like Microsoft and the xbox, Google can afford to lose money every year pretty much until it has a winner or it gets bored and finds another shiny toy. If you were selling half of all the Android phones, would you want to rock the boat?
Android, being a highly specialized distro of linux, has grown to the point where it is forking, the separate android forks will either thrive or collapse into one or two main lines
this is neither surprising nor distressing I do however think Google will end up under a lot of pressure to allow android market on other forks, if they fail to do so, and other marketplace providers do allow their system to be installed on any device, google will lose developers who wish to target devices like the kindle fire and the nook tablet
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
This sounds very hypothetical. Is there any indication they're actually doing this? Just because Samsung sells slightly over 50% of all Android phones, that doesn't automatically give them a huge amount of bargaining power. There are lots of other companies with competitive phones ready to grab market share if Samsung stumbles. And any attempt by Samsung to fork the OS would have a high risk of hurting their market share and giving those companies exactly the opportunity they want.
"I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
Speculating about what might happen when you have no idea where the market is going or what the Android vendors might want is silly. Just watch as people get riled up about what they come up in their own paranoid imaginations and scream about how wrong it all is... this is gonna be a fun topic to read. :)
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Amazon (like Apple) have the content people want available directly through their tablet.
Samsung copy the looks of trendy tech. They don't seem to have much leverage really...
So the story is that Samsung sell so many phones/devices that they can strong arm Google now, although we do not know if they are doing this, or if they even want to do this, or what it is that they would want if they did actually do it. We don't even know exactly how many units they are selling!
But we do know that Google would have no choice but to acquiesce, otherwise Samsung could turn to Windows Phone (which would ruin Samsung's sales overnight), or they could fork the OS and make their own version - even though that would also result in their sales dropping.
This story is just some people coming up with some make believe stories, and citing each other to back them up.
Maybe because - for the most part - Samsung's phones don't *suck* the way some others' do.
I was immensely underwhelmed by the performance of my last Motorola, and even less impressed with Motorola's support of their customers (advertised the milestone as supporting flash, didn't ship an OS update that allowed it until over a *year* and in some cases not-at-all).
Samsung ping-ponged a bit on ICS for the Galaxy-S, but it looks like they'll be go for it after all.
That being said, I'd love to get my hands on a Xiaomi phone, so hopefully they'll enter the ring and add to the competition sometime soon.
>Samsung is a tough, determined fighter and won't let Google dictate its future. The same can be said of Google.
Yep. Google is a tough, determined fighter and won't let Google dictate its future.
Samsung has a history of ripping off competitors and breaking various laws. They're not good at doing anything requiring bold action or independent thought.
This is a transient phenomenon regarding a mundane hardware device who's feature set will soon be ubiquitous.
The only important commercial issue in the wireless market is the subscription fee.
Whether it's a phone or a laptop, you should always buy the best because its cost is minuscule next to the carrier subscription.
And the carriers have locked their pricing model by being able to control elected officials.
When you select a carrier, you won't get what you paid for, if you can even determine what that was.
Samsung apparently backs Tizen, the latest Maemo/MeeGo derivate: http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2012/01/09/samsung-backed-open-source-mobile-os-tizen-leaks-in-new-screenshots/ This could all prove very interesting!
If Samsung breaks compatibility, then I will not be using Samsung any longer. It's just as simple as that. Yeah, I'm just one geek among many other geeks who will agree with me. But regular users far outnumber us to the point at which we don't make much difference... sad. I like Samsung.
they want Android closed up.
tight as a drum, tell the dirty hippies to go home.
i really hope that google tells them to stuff it in their arse and blow.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Samsung would never bite the hand that feeds it...
I suppose it's the same Jean-Louis Gassée? who used to work at Apple in the 1980s and created BeOS after that. It seems he got into the tech blogging world in between his work at that Silicon Valley VC firm he's in today.
Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
Hopefully in 6 months when I'm forced to throw away my phone and buy a new one there will be better phones on the market... and its looking like that better phone will be a samsung phone
Google isn't in this to 'win' and control a handset platform. They're in it to not 'lose' to Apple: they spent all that money and effort creating Android so that the mobile platform wasn't completely controlled by Apple (who could then dictate terms on advertising on that platform).
Remember, Google isn't about making money from technology. It's about making money from advertising, and it uses technology to keep anyone else from threatening its advertising revenue.
Google has made Chrome for the same reasons... to prevent Microsoft from controlling the browser platform and defaulting everyone to Bing. The fact that they also use this to drive standards adoption and technological advancement in browsers is a secondary bonus strategy.
The other nice side-effect of this strategy is that we get (more or less) open platforms and improving technology. But that's a side-effect not the main purpose, and should the mindset at Google change, or the market change, expect their attitudes to 'open and improving' to change.
Google's nightmare would be that Microsoft pays Samsung a lot of money to default all their devices to Bing. As long as they don't do that, I'm not sure Google gives a monkey's what Samsung do with their market dominance.
Business/App ideas are like arseholes: everyone's got one, they're mostly shit, but very rarely they contain a diamond
Samsung already tried to create their own OS, Bada. Its a failure. It has gained no traction. Nobody cares about it.
If they try to push their own market, they'll likely lose more than just the Market - they'll lose all google experience Application. This includes Gmail, Maps, Navigation, Translate, etc. Basically the shity that makes android cool (yeah iPhone guy, thats awesome that you have tomtom, but I didn't have pay shit for my turn by turn and its just as good when I'm in coverage).
Samsung is making a TON of fucking money selling their devices. Their bada devices, on the other hand, don't sell at all. The moment they sell an Android phone without the google experience apps - and required ordinary users to hack the device to get those apps? That phone will have shit sales, carriers will return stock, and they'll be forced to reflash all of these devices with a proper version of android, and encur the repackaging costs for doing so.
Of course they're smart. They already know this. Prediction: They're going to continue to be the #1 smart phone maker - and they're not gonna screw that up - anymore than they can with their shitty TouchWiz interface.
Not for us "users", who will expirence even more fragmentation of the market and incompatibilities/lock downs/etc.
And there was so much promise. Greed gets in the way again.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Gruber is normally full of shit and here he does not disappoint me.
In case we've forgotten, there was a time where IBM controlled almost all of the PC market. They didn't dominate Microsoft.
Right now Intel has 60% + of the Windows CPU market (probably above 75%, but I dont have numbers on hand) and they dont dictate terms to MS. There are only three GPU vendors, Intel, Nvidia and AMD. Do any of them dictate terms to MS?
So, Grubers point is pretty much bollocks.
There is no platform infighting here. HTC are competing with, not fighting against Samsung. Same with Motorola, LG, SonyEriksson and others. Samsung dont hold anything over Google or other vendors.
As they continue to watch the Iphone fall behind in features and market share. Even with the majority of Android phones being sold with 2.3.x they are still outselling Iphones. People are choosing Android, as much as the Iphone fans like to pretend otherwise.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
AT&T Samsung Infuse owner here. Touchwiz sucks monkey nuts and isn't removable unless you put a different rom on the phone. Phone came with froyo and a promise that gingerbread would be pushed in August. Well, here we are in January and still no gingerbread. Not officially supported by cyanogenmod. Locked bootloader huge pain in the ass to get around, haven't bothered because it looks like there are no good roms anyway.
A word of advice to Samsung: Don't kill the golden-egg laying Goose, because that may be you last golden egg.
Actually, Google bought Android.
Why would Samsung do such a silly thing? Do you really think they're really that stupid? To remove Google apps and the Google Market from their phones would be a death sentence that would create consumer backlash and the migration to phones which did have Google services and the market. Samsung got where they are today because of Google. To think they would start trying to boss around the company that gave them this opportunity is idiotic and underscores the ignorance of Asian culture and the importance of loyalty. Sorry, to break it to you, but Samsung isn't the evil Microsoft people try to make them out to be.
Since Apple have 100% of the Apple phone OS market, in what way is this indicative of something GOOD for Apple phone users when one company having as much as 55% of the Android OS market is a bad thing?
Is your proposition that there needs to be more Samsung share?
I wouldn't call forking an Open Source project "picking the lock".
The Kindle Fire has no camera, GPS, or core Google apps (Maps, Gmail, Talk, Voice, Google+, etc)
Samsung's success has been through shipping flagship devices, not crippled ones at rock bottom prices.
Information wants to be beer.
Amazon I can see, but Samsung? And we're not talking about a tablet, but a phone. Amazon wasn't foolish enough to try to pull off an "Amazon experience" phone because they knew it would fail. You can only pull that off with a tablet because its a very select list of tasks that need to work really well. No Google App store on the phone is instant buzzkill for me and 99% of the market. Even if they partnered with Amazon, it's just not enough. That's like buying an iPhone and being forced to use GetJar only. (No offense GetJar.) That's a hell of a weak bargaining position, considering that's not all they'd lose.
Forget App store, it would also lose Gmail, Maps, Navigator, YouTube, etc, etc, etc. DOA! And it's not as though HTC isn't reading to take their #1 spot in a heartbeat.
I8-D
--
Marcan, there is a new arrogant asshole in town!
Samsung's Smart Phone business is large enough to be self sustaining, including sustaining SW development and App sales, with little dependance on Google. Google's has the challenge of becoming a US handset maker in a market that they deliberately commoditized. The commodity handset business is radically different from their current media-selling-ads business. The patents they acquired through Moto are great, but they mainly defensive. That said, I would not worry about Google. Android is a huge success.
seobook.com? Yeah, that's going to be an impartial source: a community of parasites that actively games Google's search algorithms to make searches less useful to average users and then throws a fit every time Google defeats one of their schemes and in the process makes their algorithms more useful to average users.
--Jeremy
Jesus was a liberal