Google CEO Larry Page Talks Apple, Android, Google+

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google CEO Larry Page Talks Apple, Android, Google+

Posted by timothy on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @03:44AM from the what-about-google-buzz dept.

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.'"

33 of 136 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Ack! PTHPPBPTH!! by bmo · 2012-12-11 03:49 · Score: 4, Funny

"Larry Page Talks Apple, Android, Google+"?
Gorbachev Sings Tractors: Turnip! Buttocks!
--
BMO
1. Re:Ack! PTHPPBPTH!! by u38cg · 2012-12-11 04:29 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  And here's the damn interview.
  
  --
  [FUCK BETA]
come on by wbr1 · 2012-12-11 03:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

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.
1. Re:come on by the+computer+guy+nex · 2012-12-11 03:59 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  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.
  Google just purchased Motorola Mobility for their patent portfolio, and is already using it aggressively vs M$ and Apple. They are playing the game, not changing it.
2. Re:come on by Fastolfe · 2012-12-11 04:09 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  So if Google stood up and said "we're not playing the patent game anymore", and got rid of all of their patents, what do you think would happen? Until the system changes, it would be kind of stupid to just sit back and get destroyed by everyone else's patent litigation. Participation doesn't mean that their primary goal isn't changing the system.
3. Re:come on by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-11 04:15 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Google just purchased Motorola Mobility for their patent portfolio, and is already using it aggressively vs M$ and Apple. They are playing the game, not changing it.
  You need to look at this from the cold war perspective. Neither the US nor the USSR wanted nuclear war, but it would be utterly stupid for either of them to just get rid of their nuclear weapons.
  You have to make an agreement where everyone involved weakens their arsenals simultaneously. Until that happens, you must work to increase your arsenal to higher levels than your opponents, or risk being destroyed.
  By not entering into cross-licensing agreements, Apple is essentially behaving like North Korea, as if they don't understand the concept of MAD, and just getting all the other nuclear powers angry.
4. Re:come on by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-11 04:26 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Google is rich in dollars and powerful solely in the tech industry.
  FTFY.
  Being rich, or even richer than the next guy, doesn't really mean a damn thing when it comes to lobbying for laws and/or the changing of laws. Being powerful in one relatively new industry also doesn't mean a thing, not when the majority of Congress grew up following and living under the shadow of an old entertainment industry currently lobbying against everything Google is lobbying for (hell, they put Ronald Reagan up for president, didn't they?). The record and movie industries are, for a lack of a better term, "friends" with Congress, "old friends" to be exact, and there's no amount of money Google can throw at them to change that fact on an immediate basis. Google and the rest of the tech industry CAN start up their lobbying machines now and maybe change a few minor laws, but there's no way in this generation we're going to shake out all the deeply-entrenched relationships that party leaders and legislators have with the old industries. It's going to take many years and the natural deaths* of a LOT of stodgy old white people before anything changes.
  *: Yes, natural death. It'd only take one assassination to turn "Congressperson X's long-term relationship with the movie/music industry" to "a martyr for his/her cause".
5. Re:come on by kelemvor4 · 2012-12-11 04:28 · Score: 2
  
  Google just purchased Motorola Mobility for their patent portfolio, and is already using it aggressively vs M$ and Apple. They are playing the game, not changing it.
  You need to look at this from the cold war perspective. Neither the US nor the USSR wanted nuclear war, but it would be utterly stupid for either of them to just get rid of their nuclear weapons.
  You have to make an agreement where everyone involved weakens their arsenals simultaneously. Until that happens, you must work to increase your arsenal to higher levels than your opponents, or risk being destroyed.
  By not entering into cross-licensing agreements, Apple is essentially behaving like North Korea, as if they don't understand the concept of MAD, and just getting all the other nuclear powers angry.
  The world is having more success at disarming Apple than it has with North Korea. Source: http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/12/07/2346246/steve-jobs-patent-on-iphone-declared-invalid
6. Re:come on by the+computer+guy+nex · 2012-12-11 04:33 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  So if Google stood up and said "we're not playing the patent game anymore", and got rid of all of their patents, what do you think would happen? Until the system changes, it would be kind of stupid to just sit back and get destroyed by everyone else's patent litigation. Participation doesn't mean that their primary goal isn't changing the system.
  Most believed Google would be using the Motorola patents defensively. Instead they are using the Motorola Mobility patent portfolio to ban everything from smartphones, to tablets, to the Xbox 360.
  
  http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1112740990/motorola-microsoft-xbox-lawsuit-120312/
7. Re:come on by Methuseus · 2012-12-11 04:54 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Some people believe that they are trying to get the whole patent system changed by making it unprofitable for anyone else. The more players lobbying to change it,t he better.
  
  --
  Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
8. Re:come on by ifiwereasculptor · 2012-12-11 05:02 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  How do you use a patent "defensively"? It's like a gun: virtually useless in stopping other bullets, but it can protect you in a firefight by forcing your opponent to worry about not exposing himself to your bullets, and thus adopting a less efficient offensive behaviour. Of course, if your opponent knows you're not going to shoot back, then your gun is entirely useless in aiding your survival. And Microsoft has picked on lots of Android vendors for the last two years with litigation (is it HTC that ended up having to pay them a fee for every device sold?), so I don't see your point.
9. Re:come on by scot4875 · 2012-12-11 05:08 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  That's the best link you have? One regarding the result of a case that had been pending since before Google bought Motorola? That sure doesn't lend a lot of credence to your claims.
  What specific products has Motorola (post-buyout) tried to take off the shelves?
  Seriously, try a little harder, bonch. This is just pathetic.
  --Jeremy
  
  --
  Jesus was a liberal
10. Re:come on by kaiser423 · 2012-12-11 05:45 · Score: 2
  
  Google just filed an brief, and brought along a couple of other heavy hitters asking the patent office to reform, and to scrub current patents for overarching generalities like "on the internet". From their brief, it even sounds like they're willing to pay the USPTO some of the cost associated with doing that patent scrub. They are putting their money where their mouth is, but in the meantime you don't win a thermonuclear war (current smartphone market) without some warheads of your own.
Apple has a big card they have yet to play by the+computer+guy+nex · 2012-12-11 03:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

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.
1. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-11 04:07 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Except iOS doesn't have higher market share. Whomp whomp.
2. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by ameen.ross · 2012-12-11 04:35 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Look like slightly obscure sources to me.
  According to statcounter, Android had topped iOS for half a year already, with 32% and 24% market share respectively last month.
  
  --
  $(echo cm0gLXJmIC8= | base64 --decode)
3. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by sunking2 · 2012-12-11 04:39 · Score: 2
  
  The truth of the matter is Apple users actually use their phones for web surfing more than Android do. There are so many android devices out there that pale in comparison from a hardware/usability stand point that they simply aren't used the same way iPhones and top of the line Android phones are. They are given out for free/on the cheap so why not get one, whether you need or want the capability. I hardly ever use the internet on mine for surfing. Number of units isn't a very good benchmark to use.
4. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by cjjjer · 2012-12-11 04:52 · Score: 2
  
  We all know Google hardly makes a dime from Android directly
  I dunno about that by licensing the GAPPS they get a cut from the phone maker who uses Android as well developers have to pay to have an account to list their apps under I would say that is making money from Android directly since without it there would be no money coming in at all.
5. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by tlhIngan · 2012-12-11 04:53 · Score: 2
  
  According to statcounter, Android had topped iOS for half a year already, with 32% and 24% market share respectively last month.
  Man, that's ... awful.
  For every iOS device sold, there are 3 Androids. Yet the traffic for Android devices is only 50% higher than iOS?
  What are people doing with their android phones? Android should be 3 times as much usage as iOS, not 1.5 times as much... or is Android the new "featurephone"?
6. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by thetoadwarrior · 2012-12-11 04:58 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Market share doesn't matter. iOS people use the web more. Not all android owners have a nexus or s3. They have cheap phones on cheap contracts which is why they don't surf the net much if at all and avoid paying for apps.
7. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by Nadaka · 2012-12-11 05:10 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Or maybe the iphone is inefficient with its data packing. Or maybe it spies on you more than android and sends more data back to apple. Or maybe android appeals to a wider range of users, including those who don't use their phones constantly.
8. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by DragonWriter · 2012-12-11 05:28 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  For every iOS device sold, there are 3 Androids. Yet the traffic for Android devices is only 50% higher than iOS? What are people doing with their android phones?
  
  Maybe they are more frequently doing productive things, which tend to be less bandwidth intensive than, say, exchanging party videos and streaming movies. Or maybe Android -- and apps that are popular on Android -- makes more efficient use of bandwidth; the way that Google's voice search does more on the device whereas Siri relies on backend servers for the same functionality. Or maybe -- as was especially confirmed to be a particularly bad problem in the initial release of iOS 6.0, but has been mitigated in subsequent updates -- iOS makes repeated and spurious extra requests for remote resources.
9. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by mosb1000 · 2012-12-11 07:26 · Score: 2
  
  The parent was saying that while Android is the most popular OS, many buy it on inexpensive phones with inexpensive plans which they don't intend to use for browsing the internet. If the only Android phones on the market were like the GS3 or 1X+, you'd probably see them used for internet access just as much as iPhones. Apple only makes high end phones, so you don't see people buying them just to make phone calls like you do with Android.
10. Re:Apple has a big card they have yet to play by R3d+M3rcury · 2012-12-11 08:40 · Score: 2
  
  is Android the new "featurephone"?
  For appropriately inexpensive Android devices, yes. Yes it is.
  There are plenty of people out there who don't want or can't afford a data plan. For those people, their Android phone is a feature-phone. You can take pictures, send texts/pictures, make calls, etc. They don't use mapping or other Internet services--they have a GPS in their car or figure out there directions from an Internet-connected computer.
  My roomate's nephew was in a similar boat. When I bought my iPhone 4S, I jailbroke and unlocked my old iPhone 3GS and gave it to him. He was mostly interested in a phone with lots of space for music (32GB) that could send text messages. I flipped every switch on the iPhone I could find to make sure it didn't try to use the cell network for data because his plan on T-Mo would bill him by the byte.
  So, yeah, I'd imagine that many of those Android phones are being used as "smart phones."
Re:Philosophy? by DragonWriter · 2012-12-11 04:07 · Score: 4, Interesting

It's not a philosophy at all to Google. It's a business model.

The two are not mutually exclusive. And, actually, its not a business model; it may be either a philosophy, or the core principal of a business model, or both, but its not, in and of itself, a business model, any more than "collect underpants", by itself, is.
Re:Philosophy? by Fastolfe · 2012-12-11 04:11 · Score: 3, Informative

It's not a philosophy at all to Google. It's a business model. Let's call a spade a spade.
It can be both. People don't cease to be passionate about things when they become employed.
Re:Philosophy? by Noughmad · 2012-12-11 04:13 · Score: 2

No, it really is a philosophy.
If it were their business model, their products would actually be available, but in reality they are not. Nexus 4's and 10's are impossible to come by anywhere. Nexus 7's cost 280 euro here. Music and movies on Google Play are not avaible except in USA and some parts of Europe, not even all of EU is covered. Developers from Slovenia (such as myself) cannot publish paid apps on the Play Store.

--
PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
He learned to be a diplomat. by epSos-de · 2012-12-11 04:31 · Score: 2

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.
Re:I thought Chromebook would fail by Sedated2000 · 2012-12-11 04:35 · Score: 3, Interesting

I got one of the chromebooks google shipped out for testing. I love it a lot more than I thought I would. It is the laptop I read sites/chat/watch youtube on before sleep. Very light, very quiet and it doesn't generate a lot of heat.
Re:Philosophy? by RaceProUK · 2012-12-11 04:41 · Score: 2

Nexus 4's and 10's are impossible to come by anywhere.
LG and Samsung make those respectively, not Google.

Nexus 7's cost 280 euro here.
Should Asus really be expected to give the hardware away for free?

Music and movies on Google Play are not avaible except in USA and some parts of Europe, not even all of EU is covered.
Thanks to restrictions imposed by the copyright holders.
Venting frustrations is good, but it's better when directed to the right places.

--
No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
Re:Loophole in Google motto by adonoman · 2012-12-11 04:43 · Score: 2

they'd be spending cubic dollars
No wonder I can't seem to get ahead, all this time I've been using rectangular or cylindrical dollars.
Re:Loophole in Google motto by Fastolfe · 2012-12-11 05:39 · Score: 2

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.
http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/22/google-facebook-spent-record-amounts-on-d-c-lobbying-in-q1-2012/
"Widely available" by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-12-11 06:13 · Score: 2

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?