Slashdot Mirror
Google CEO Larry Page Talks Apple, Android, Google+
Nerval's Lobster writes "Fortune magazine managed to score an exclusive interview with Google CEO Larry Page. While he doesn't reveal a whole lot about the company's future plans—CEOs are great at offering fuzzy generalities, if nothing else—he manages to reveal just a bit about the ongoing competition with Apple, the evolution of search, and monetizing mobile devices. Google's rivalry with Apple has descended into massive lawsuits, but Page doesn't exactly channel Genghis Khan when it comes to his own feelings on the issue. 'I think it would be nice if everybody would get along better and the users didn't suffer as a result of other people's activities,' he told the magazine. 'We try pretty hard to make our products be available as widely as we can. That's our philosophy. I think sometimes we're allowed to do that. Sometimes we're not.'"
"Larry Page Talks Apple, Android, Google+"?
Gorbachev Sings Tractors: Turnip! Buttocks!
--
BMO
Google is rich and powerful. If they were seriously interested in changing patent and copyright laws that stifle innovation, they would put their where their mouth is and lobby for real change. Instead they talk it when it suits them, but they know those some laws can be used to protect their profits. Ergo hypocrisy and no real change.
Silence is a state of mime.
Currently Google is pre-selected as the search engine for iOS devices. We all know Google hardly makes a dime from Android directly - they are an advertising company. Google ironically makes more money from iOS due to the higher usage of iOS devices around the world (and, in turn, more ad impressions).
Something as simple as having the user select their search engine of choice during device setup, and having the list alphabetical (Bing, Google, Yahoo) would cause a significant revenue decline.
If these behind-the-scenes talks with Apple and Google get worse, this will be the big sign.
But they suckered me in with the $249 price, and this little machine is just a ton of fun. Its like Desktop Android - thousands of Android apps. I think they've hit a home run with this little device.
'We try pretty hard to make our products be available as widely as we can. That's our philosophy."
It's not a philosophy at all to Google. It's a business model. Let's call a spade a spade.
'We try pretty hard to make our products be available as widely as we can. That's our philosophy. I think sometimes we're allowed to do that. Sometimes we're not.'"
He should have stated: -
I think sometimes we're allowed to do that. Sometimes we're not, because of our perceived one sided revenue model as interpreted by the some in the newspaper industry for example.
And, it looks like several thousand Android apps have already been ported to Chrome. So I'm kind of a smart idiot. Like an idiot-savant I guess you could say.
Still trolling Google stories with an endless number of alt accounts.
http://slashdot.org/~bonch
What a loser.
Larry Page is never exact recently, he learned to keep his mouth shut, becasue his stock will drop, if he said something that is not good or something that let's people speculate about troubles.
He prints his own money now. So he is basically set, if he just keeps his real thoughts to himself.
~ Best man at your service.
Ergo hypocrisy and no real change.
Their motto is "don't be evil" which is not the same thing as saying "be a force for good". Maybe they see that as a convenient loophole in their motto.
Seriously, if Google really cared about spreading their products as widely as possible they'd be spending cubic dollars on lobbying for copyright and patent reform. But they don't seem really interested in being a leader in doing this.
in Led Zeppelin/ Glad to see he got a new gig.
A bit of an aside, but what the hell is really meant by "exclusive" interview? That there were no other interviewers in the room?
He fights for the users.
They have no problem teaming up with apple to buy up Kodak patents. That and the Motorola deal show they aren't against patents. They're just like everyone else. I can't believe people still think they try to do the right thing. If they really wanted to do that they can start paying fair taxes.
I think monetizing is my new, most-hated word. (It used to be "premium.") Both are lame-o marketing speak. Why not just call monetizing what it is: Trying to make a profit off something. As for premium, it's intended to convey some sense of privilege or exclusivity, but it's too frequently used for utterly banal things, like "points" in some stupid marketing scheme.
I'm having a hard time getting through the rest of the article because of that word.
It's not exactly breaking my heart that companies are having a hard time figuring out how to make an even bigger profit off of a gadget that's already been sold to consumers. How about some device, that when you buy it, it turns your sister into a crackwhore in the service of the company that sold you the device? I'm being facetious, but I think some of these companies, if they could come up with such a technology, would have no trouble making this the reality. (They could then sell "premium" sister-services, some restrictions may apply, not valid in all states, yadda yadda yadda).
If this were Usenet, I'd killfile the lot of you.
Read the article you linked to.
Microsoft sued Google, they countersued.
Isn't that defensive use?
ain't bad either.
Who cares? Geeks take this shit way too seriously. Channel Genghis Khan? WTF does that even mean? He should behead the interviewer with a war axe? Actually, that would be pretty awesome, and a good distraction from the liquidation of civilization. Put it in a circus tent and sell lots of bread products.
You know where else I have heard about using patents "defensively"? At Microsoft, circa 2001-2002 when I worked there. It was all about using them "defensively" back then. Then Microsoft had found itself struggling in a number of markets and started suing people left and right to extract royalties. Google will do the exact same thing a few years down the road, for the same reason.
We try pretty hard to make our products be available as widely as we can. That's our philosophy.
So, where's the Google Talk client for iOS?
I'd be happy if they would just fix the blasted domain crowding. Filling 60% of the results with different pages all on the same domain is usually not useful.
Yeah, some believe that is Apple's strategy too.
I'm amazed that such a beautiful piece of parody was modded into oblivion.
The meaning of "they" is not very clear. Does "they" mean all Android users? You might say I'm trying to misunderstand what you said. But would you and anyone else who read your statement see a difference in the following statement?
Some Android users have cheap phones on cheap contracts... At the same time, other Android users have expensive phones on expensive contracts because they surf the net , a lot, and ....
Google is more evil than Microsoft ever was.
It's got to be. Smart we may be, but Business Intelligence wouldn't be a fit here.