Slashdot Mirror


Google Buys Part of HTC's Smartphone Team For $1.1 Billion (betanews.com)

BrianFagioli shares a report from BetaNews: Today, a deal finally happens, but Google didn't buy HTC outright. Strangely, as the deal is laid out, the search giant has seemingly bought HTC employees. Yes, for $1.1 billion, the search giant has sort of purchased human beings -- plus it gets access to some intellectual property. HTC gets a much-needed big influx of cash. "Google and HTC Corporation today announced a definitive agreement under which certain HTC employees -- many of whom are already working with Google to develop Pixel smartphones -- will join Google. HTC will receive $1.1 billion in cash from Google as part of the transaction. Separately, Google will receive a non-exclusive license for HTC intellectual property (IP). The agreement is a testament to the decade-long strategic relationship between HTC and Google around the development of premium smartphones," says HTC.

92 comments

  1. Check the teeth by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What do you think, when Google bought the HTC employees, do you think they made them strip naked and then had an auction?

    Tech workers, you have no idea how precarious your world is. You may think you're on top of the whole capitalism game, but when push comes to shove, you're going to get the shit end of the feudalism stick like everyone else who works for a living.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Check the teeth by lucm · · Score: 2, Funny

      they probably bought diversity since the billions they poured in "girl code" bootcamps didn't deliver the right kind of females they need to fill their ratios (i.e. non-white, non-asian).

      It's becoming increasingly expensive and difficult to live up to their level of phony.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    2. Re: Check the teeth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure the HTC employees aren't slaves, and can leave. My guess is they were all given big raises to stay so Google can start the documentation process.

      A year from now, yeah, they'll start trimming the fat. Probably sooner.

    3. Re:Check the teeth by jareth-0205 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      they probably bought diversity since the billions they poured in "girl code" bootcamps didn't deliver the right kind of females they need to fill their ratios (i.e. non-white, non-asian).

      It's becoming increasingly expensive and difficult to live up to their level of phony.

      Ah, Slashdot, the bastion of white male insecurity. Why rail so hard against this stuff? It affects you hardly at all? Are you so unsure about your place in the industry that any attempt to get any other perspectives is somehow offensive to you? Can you not just let things happen without being an arsehole about it?

    4. Re: Check the teeth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, not offensive, just ridiculous. You're either going to be able to do it or not, and so far, the numbers say not.

    5. Re: Check the teeth by hackwrench · · Score: 1

      Sham diversity because they grew up in schools that taught all the same stuff!

    6. Re: Check the teeth by Reverend+Green · · Score: 0

      When a whole class of people are publicly spit upon often enough, they tend to get sick of it.

    7. Re:Check the teeth by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 1

      Setting aside the random chip on your shoulder and just addressing your claim, how many non-Asians do you think a Taiwanese firm has? RoC tech visas are not so easy to get.

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    8. Re:Check the teeth by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Tech workers, you have no idea how precarious your world is.

      Are there any tech (or any other) workers who don't know this? "Job security" stopped being a thing decades ago.

    9. Re:Check the teeth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, I am pretty sure he is complaining that the bootcamps failed to bring in more minorities to coding, not that white males aren't being hired. Second, why can't the alt-left think of their own insults? They stole Snowflake from the alt-right. Pretty sad that the alt-left couldn't come up with anything else that's fragile and feels unique. Which, I want to point out is how the liberals that the alt-right made fun of want people to feel. But the alt-right don't seem to think of each other as unique or different.

    10. Re:Check the teeth by lucm · · Score: 1

      Can you not just let things happen without being an arsehole about it?

      No. The proper way to deal with this nonsense is to be passive-aggressive and constantly throw tiny rocks at this Wall of Mediocrity until it crumbles. Not that it needs it; idiotic dogmas built on the shaky foundations of mindless followers (i.e. you) never stay in place for long, they're usually soon replaced by some other flavor of shallowness and hypocrisy.

      Google already got caught with their pants on their ankles, positioning themselves as Saviors of the Ostracized IT Minorities, just to get slapped with lawsuits and soon class actions because they pay women less than men. Which paints their whole "let's hire women" thing in various shades of greed.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    11. Re:Check the teeth by lucm · · Score: 1

      Did you see who those employees are? Follow the chain of links in the articles, there's a picture.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    12. Re:Check the teeth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty certain buying employees from Taiwan is going to be mostly Asian (well Oriental in the English speaking world, Asian in the US)

  2. $300 per phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They've sold about 3+ million of those pixel phones I read, so we're looking at $300 per handset sold.

    IMHO, the issue with Google is they're playing catchup with their own Android OEMs and that has a lot to do with Pichai. I once watched him do a presentation on ChromeOS and he didn't have a vision, he was just sort of wishy washy on the direction, saying stuff like "well maybe extend this, and change that". Since then, Google has twiddled with technology adding features its OEMs already added.

    My current beef with him is that Android is still total crap on the tablets, the bad reviews of the Pixel C's software from 3 years ago, are still valid today, years later, and he's led Google to make a poor mans Windows laptop clone, merging Chrome OS and Android, as if anyone with an Android product wanted a whole layer of crap around the outside of Android and a trackpad and mouse interface.

    I see rumours of a 2 in 1, what's actually needed is an Android leader making a proper tablet. Fuck chromeOS, fuck the WIMP system on a tablet nonsense. Clueless.

    So they've bought the Pixel team of HTC, yet Samsung sell more refurbished exploding Note7's than they sell Pixel phones. In their heads they're a success, in reality, they clearly are passengers on Samsung's train.

    1. Re:$300 per phone by lucm · · Score: 1

      My current beef with him is that Android is still total crap on the tablets

      I have the latest Samsung tab (10 inch) and it's a magnificent device. Snappy, polished, free of bloatware. Menus are friendly and convenient, the browser (not chrome) is fast and has a sensible adblock ecosystem, gps is great, cameras are great. Only thing I don't like is that it doesn't do wireless charging, which is one of those things that once you've tried it you don't want to go back to what you had before.

      So yes Android can work on tablets, just not on google ones. Stil I wish there was a more open solution like plain Linux on mobile devices.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    2. Re:$300 per phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sort of, I like the Samsung tablet except it still flips the orientation of the tablet to suite the app running. If you have a keyboard case, it means you hold a stupid case vertical with the keyboard dangling at the side for a portrait messaging app that needs the keyboard. Samsung also added the stylus as an afterthought, it previously was integrated into the device.

      That is a consequence of Google's control of Android, since its how they define the orientation of apps and the basic way the OS operates.

      Similarly Google's crappy multipane window support undermined Samsungs multipane window support. Their (Samsung's) last high end tablet, the Pro 12.2 pretty much marked the end of Samsung pushing at the top end of tablets. A lot of what Samsung *could* do without being held back by Google are clear to see on the iPad Pro. Apple increased tablet market share at Android's expense despite being far more expensive.

      So Samsung now only do 10 inch or less tablets, they were pushing 12.2 inches and larger, but it became silly when you have to hold it up and rotate it vertical for an app. Likewise the resolution has gone down, the current res of Samsung tablets is lower. The stylus is now thrown in the box not integrated into the device. It's like a tablet waiting for Google to get its shit together.

      Meanwhile what are Google doing? Probably shoehorning Chrome OS into something.

    3. Re:$300 per phone by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      A current iteration of the Nexus 7 tablet would please me..

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    4. Re:$300 per phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you lock the orientation?

    5. Re:$300 per phone by Fuzi719 · · Score: 1

      A current iteration of the Nexus 7 tablet would please me..

      I'm running the "Pure Nexus" Nougat 7.1.2 ROM on my Nexus 7 (2013) tablet. It runs beautifully, no lag. I have Google Assistant, all the goodies, without having to tinker or tweak. It just works like it should. Still one of the best tablets made.

    6. Re: $300 per phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am having some problems on my 2013 Nexus 7, though.

      YouTube video and DNS queries often start to become slower over time, then even time out until the tablet is rebooted. Android phones on the same infrastructure don't have these issues.

      Occasionally touchscreen insensitivity occurs, but a quick power off and on seems to solve it.

      On the hardware side, and despite it never has been dropped, parts of the plastic rim between the glass and the case started to fall out in three corners and the glass has partially delaminated in one, luckily outside the active display area.

      I'll give it a year or so before replacement. I'm already looking out because, Just like my phone replacement (from HTC to Xiaomi), a year is about what it takes me to happen onto something that ticks all the boxes at a reasonable price.

    7. Re:$300 per phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      google should put android on desktop. They should stop fucking around with chromeos...

    8. Re:$300 per phone by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Wireless charging is pretty pointless. If it just worked anywhere in my house, great. If I have to put it on a specific pad, may as well plug it in. I would rather reduce the price and not have the hardware.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    9. Re:$300 per phone by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      They stopped pushing size because nobody is buying the ultra large ones, for either OS. They didn't sell. At that point people just want a laptop.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  3. This will not end well by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well, Google is in for some mass firings soon. There's going to be a huge culture clash between Google's far left SJW culture and Taiwan's meh don't care culture. If you think James Damore was bad (and he wasn't, the man was super reasonable, he was trying to help when Google's diversity classes told him they couldn't figure out why the company wasn't more diverse) then all these new Taiwanese employees are going to be a nightmare. You think these Taiwanese are going to go to the gay pride parade? People have been fired from Google for declining to attend. I bet Google learned from the Googlegate fiasco, and instead of highly public firings, will do quiet ones instead. Still, they're going to lose capable people due to the fact that the SJW culture sounds insane to people raised outside the bubble.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol talk about SJW, gotta find a way to push your crybaby agenda into everything. Who wants to bet both sides are professionals who have already been working together and they will keep doing that?

    2. Re:This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, if anyone is going to go to gay parade, then it would be the Taiwanese guys :D

    3. Re:This will not end well by CrybabiesArePeople · · Score: 0

      Boo hoo hoo!

    4. Re:This will not end well by thegarbz · · Score: 0, Troll

      You think these Taiwanese are going to go to the gay pride parade?

      You think anyone in Taiwan including Google in Taiwan gives a crap about your Western US-centric SJW bullshit?

    5. Re:This will not end well by blind+biker · · Score: 2

      As one who has spent some time in Taiwan, I can tell you that the culture there is AWESOME. And yeah, totally don'tgiveashit about PC stuff, but not in a bad way. Women or minorities aren't being harassed; it's just not a topic of any interest.

      I loved it there, and am looking forward to going back. BTW, the food is superb.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    6. Re:This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think James Damore was bad (and he wasn't

      He may have been sincere, but what he wrote was nonsense.

    7. Re:This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please do us all a favor and stick your head in an oven you fucking troll.

    8. Re:This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What for example?

    9. Re:This will not end well by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Snowflake spotted.

    10. Re:This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    11. Re:This will not end well by coofercat · · Score: 1

      Regardless of anyone's summation of cultures, has anyone ever been part of a large corporate acquisition that was a success? I mean, some do work to some degree, but in my experience, after about 6 months it's hard to find more than a handful of the "new intake" anywhere. If you're not buying a load of unmanageable legacy systems, antiquated production lines and a customer list of low-paying, high maintenance clients, then you don't get to keep much after the brains leave the building.

    12. Re: This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look - a lone SJW, trying it's best to be a troll.

    13. Re:This will not end well by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      You think these Taiwanese are going to go to the gay pride parade?

      Some might. Some won’t. Just like anywhere else. But you seem to have missed the news from this year from Taiwan. They are leading at the forefront when it comes to gay rights in Asia being the first country to legalize same-sex marriage. Which runs counter to your implication that Taiwan is a country made up of MAGA alt-righters like Damore.

    14. Re:This will not end well by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Damore actually comes across as a super reasonable guy who just wanted to help. Typical white male nerd. The diversity training he was forced to attend asked for ideas about why Google wasn't diverse enough, so Damore came up with some ideas like they asked. BOOM fired. Dude's not alt-right, but keep calling anyone you dislike a Nazi.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    15. Re:This will not end well by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Damore actually comes across as a super reasonable guy who just wanted to help. Typical white male nerd. The diversity training he was forced to attend asked for ideas about why Google wasn't diverse enough, so Damore came up with some ideas like they asked. BOOM fired. Dude's not alt-right, but keep calling anyone you dislike a Nazi. He was a victim of a "hundred flowers campaign" style trick to get dissidents to expose themselves. Mao did the same thing to get hidden dissidents in the open and then nailed them to the wall just like Google did Damore.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    16. Re:This will not end well by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Yeah he comes across as “reasonable” if you’re a white male. Not so much if you’re a woman or minority when you are talked down to and told you’re unable to do your own job as if every woman and minority is identical.

    17. Re:This will not end well by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Oh and I like how you didn’t address my point about Taiwan. Please do explain why the Taiwanese would not participate in gay pride parades other than you’re assigning your own bigotry to them as if they as a population are identical to you and Damore.

    18. Re:This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you would find it reasonable that people should assume that all white males are potential serial killers? If not, why not? There’s much stronger statistical data showing serial killers skew heavily white and male (only 17% or so are female) an anything Damore wrote.

    19. Re:This will not end well by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Damore actually comes across as a super reasonable guy who just wanted to help.

      To you, perhaps, but he doesn't come off that way to a lot of people. He's more of a provocateur than a "reasonable guy". Just look at his tweets lately.

    20. Re:This will not end well by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      "as if every woman and minority is identical."

      ...but all white males are oppressors.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    21. Re:This will not end well by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      You do understand that men get treated that way too, right? Its power that abuses, not gender.

      --
      Good-bye
    22. Re:This will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I imagine the guy you are responding too is going off his original memo and the way he acted regarding that situation rather than what he's doing now people tries to ruin his career and tarnish his character for answering a question in good faith.

      I imagine going through something like that would change anyones behaviour.

      His original memo and how he acted at the time was extremely reasonable. A lot of people thought it didn't come off that way becuase a lot of people are blinded idelouges who think any questioning of the status quo is racist/sexist/homophobic/nazi-ish. A lot of people are stupid like that.

  4. Does the justice department do anything anymore? by mike2006 · · Score: 1

    Seems to be such blatant look the other way when it comes to antitrust laws by our government and the media, particularly when it comes to Google. Looks like Google continues to make the right investments in politicians and the news media.

  5. What the fuck are you talking about? by pablo_max · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seriously, what the actual fuck are you talking about?
    Have you ever worked with a Taiwanese company? I am guess not. I have worked with several over the year. And yes, even HTC. From both US (California) and Europe.
    They are extremely demanding and extremely "into the details".
    In fact, at one point our mother company brought in one guy to act as our COO from one of our Taiwan locations with the idea that the team in CA should adapt towards the Taiwanese working style. The end result was 30% of the employees quit due to the ridiculous expectations which were being placed on them.
    The larger companies in Taiwan have zero work/life balance relative to the US and European companies.
    To say that Taiwan's culture is "Meh" as you put it, is ignorant at best and willfully racist at worst. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are just some ignorant fuck ball who never left their mom's basement and not a casually racist prick.

    1. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You missed the context. They're "meh" about SJW bullshit but super into actual results and doing actual work.

      SJWs aren't. SJWs are all about promoting women and minorities over actual qualified people to hit some arbitrary quota. If you can't prove you're a special snowflake in an SJW-centric environment, you have no career. The SJW cancer is slowly strangling Google and American companies in general. It's why Silicon Valley is dying and Apple hasn't had a good idea in a decade.

      Google's SJWs aren't going to care that the HTC employees are focused on making the best smartphone that they can. It's all about virtue signalling now.

    2. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Informative

      You completely missed the point, didn't you? And called other people racist instead of thinking outside your bubble, which is par for the course. This is the result of our universities producing too many word thinkers. Yes I've worked with Taiwanese companies. Taiwanese value work results first, while Google values hard left culture first. Thus they are headed for a big culture clash, and Google being the owner is going to win. I'd guess more than 30% will quit (or more likely be fired) by Google.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a fucking idiot!

    4. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by blind+biker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Seriously, what the actual fuck are you talking about?
      Have you ever worked with a Taiwanese company? I am guess not. I have worked with several over the year. And yes, even HTC. From both US (California) and Europe.
      They are extremely demanding and extremely "into the details".

      Wow. Way to completely miss the point of GP. He/she was talking about the political correctness culture, which is indeed nonexistent in Taiwan. This wouldn't even be a topic of conversation if Google didn't foist themselves firmly into the PC domain in recent years.

      you are just some ignorant fuck ball who never left their mom's basement and not a casually racist prick.

      I see nothing that would suggest any of that in the GP post. Do you think that, if you spew enough vitriol, it becomes true? I've seen this kind of righteous indignation play out numerous times on social media, and not once was the recipient even remotely deserving of it.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    5. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google values hard-left culture first?

      Right, because that's how you make money.

      You really are a fucking tool.

    6. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Google values hard-left culture first?

      Right, because that's how you make money.

      Exactly. Google having shitloads of money is exactly why SJWs can run rampant in Google.

      In any other company with less cash, the company would have bankrupted or dived into obvious financial problem long before SJWs took over as much as they had in Google.

      GP's point exactly that Google's virtue-signalling-over-making-money culture will have serious clash with HTC's result oriented culture.

    7. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Leftist theory is indulged when you have enough of your (or someone else's) parents' money to explore failed theories and try to make them work.

      When you, on the other hand, have to work, you abandon failed theories and get a paycheck to feed your family. Avoiding work is an indulgence.

      Not that exploring theories is a bad thing, but clearheaded honest appraisals of failed theories should result in exploring new, potentially successful theories, not hashing over history well written and well understood by those who accept facts. And working is not a bad thing. It's ok to be part of someone else's dream, and better when they compensate you for your labor.

      Google can indulge leftist theories only because they have succeeded in the non-leftist marketplace. Indulging those who oppose the means of your success doesn't make much sense to me. If it's fairness you seek, know that in addition to the inherent unfairness of the Universe, Man's heart is not kind and generous. Left to human nature, we devolve into mean, cynical, violent creatures that will take care of ourselves first, and to the genuine harm of others, and only when we are satisfied will we consider the needs of others, usually only when they result in advantage to us.

      To turn our hearts from pure self-interest requires a change of heart, and leftist theory offers no such thing. Ever.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    8. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously Pablo - you're a fucking idiot.

      The parent above you didn't say a single thing about Taiwanese culture not being demanding or precise.

      This is why no one respects the far left - you don't even listen before you go off on some tirade about ignorance and racism.

      I've lived and worked abroad including Singapore for many years - ready to call me ignorant or racist as well ?

    9. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken like a true racist SJW snowflake.

    10. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not about virtue signaling, and this imagined "SJW" extremist mentality is not, in fact, running the show. You are letting your imagination fill in tremendous gaps in evidence since you clearly have no direct experience working inside a company like Google.

      You do realize that Google engineering staff is still overwhelmingly dominated by white males and Asian males, right? Do you think we just stopped hiring highly qualified people to chase the diversity metrics in a vacuum? Here's a thought: it's possible to optimize for multiple constraints in parallel with a reasonable balance.

      Source: I'm a white male with a flourishing career at Google, and I'm surrounded mostly by other people who are also white males with flourishing careers at Google.

    11. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, I believe you. Now, come out of the closet with bog-standard conservative views. How many people will immediately refuse to collaborate with you? How long until you're fired for being useless due to lack of teamwork? I'd advise keeping your mouth shut.

    12. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quiet, that's not the narrative Rush and Alex Jones are peddling. Seriously, the very premise is absurd that these people think SJWs are running the show pretty much anywhere let alone responsible for entire industries.

      I've worked in diverse teams and not so diverse teams, the only difference is the number of times you say "what?" when listening to someone with a thick accent. When you are a good leader you recognize the strengths and weaknesses of all the people that report to you and you figure out how to play to those strengths. I don't care that my lead developer is gay or and Indian, I care about their ability to execute and ask good questions when the scope is more vague than it should be. Pretty sure most people feel the same way too.

    13. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to have it quite backwards. America in the 18 and 1900s was very much a bastion of the right, we had robber barons and all sorts of problems brought on by exactly what you're saying. People left to human nature, we devolved into mean, cynical, violent creatures that will take care of ourselves first.

      This is why we had events like the great Chicago fire and why textile mills started as a small step up from slavery. It wasn't until people started exploring leftist ideas that the middle class was born. We had lakes and rivers catching on fire before we started at least trying to take care of the environment.

      Extreme views in either direction are doomed to fail, right now the extreme right is clearly in control, we're removing regulations at a time when we should be strengthening them. Most regulations serve a good purpose, some are overly broad, like the healthcare issue, repealing Obamacare is stupid, fixing what's wrong with it is a much smaller task and could actually do some real good for everyone, but Republicans and especially Trump are so set on removing everything Obama did as President whether it was good or not. I'm sure there are plenty of things even Obama would agree should be done differently from how he did it. But a blanket roll-back just cause makes no sense. Why should people be allowed to dump waste water into rivers again? It makes no sense, I'm sure it raised the cost of doing business for companies that used to just chuck it, but we don't let mechanics just dump antifreeze and oil in the street either. You know they have to actually pay to have all that oil taken away? It's amazing and its even shows personal responsibility which is supposed to be a feature of the right.

    14. Re:What the fuck are you talking about? by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      ^^^ SJW

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  6. Human bondage. by NormanHaga2580 · · Score: 0

    Slavery. Google style.

    1. Re:Human bondage. by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Oh? Part of this deal is that the employees aren't allowed to quit? Because if that's not true, it's pretty hard to see anything even remotely like slavery.

  7. Competition for Samsung by fermion · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It sounds like a legal way and face saving way for Google to prop up HTC. I can imagine the backlash is Google just gave HTC the billion. It wouls likely be unfortunate for Google if Samsung was the only major supplier of Android phones.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:Competition for Samsung by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It will likely end up that way anyway. 1 billion doesn't go far in hardware manufacturing, at current rate apart from some of the chinese brands we will only have google and Samsung making android, it is the problem when the OS becomes a commodity that it is hard to differentiate and survive.

    2. Re:Competition for Samsung by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      It seems that Google bought the HTC design/engineering team, at least some of it.

      Was any manufacturing capability part of the deal? If not, HTC might be the contract manufacturer for Goggle's phone-related business. Not a bad deal.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  8. Please stop politicising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Get off your high horse man!

    This is not about master buying slaves

    This is about Google buying up the part of HTC which design first class smartphone and not getting other part of HTC which is a bureaucratic hell

    You guys who never work in HTC never know how bureaucratic HTC is

    1. Re:Please stop politicising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...You guys who never work in HTC never know how bureaucratic HTC is

      Listen up, Junior.

      HTC didn't invent backstabbing politics, bullshit bureaucracy, or pointy-haired bosses, so shut the fuck up already about how the rest of us will never know what that shit is like.

  9. No content = no profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Selling Android phones that can be upgraded with patches has no future for a phone vendor. Nokia learned this when they lost the struggle trying to go from a market which was "Want a new feature buy a new phone" to a market of "Want a new feature, click update".

    Long term revenue from phone comes from owning the platform. That means monetizing from distribution of content or payment processing.

    Samsung is the exception as they produce almost (in not completely) all components of the phone and therefore have a much higher profit margin from the phone itself. In addition, sales of components to nearly all other phone makers covers most of their internal R&D costs.

    HTC is little more than a reseller trying to scrape what they can off of each sale which leaves them struggling in a market where they are forced to make phones with 2-3 year life spans of high quality while competing against pricing from companies who produce most of the components themselves. It's a clearly doomed business model.

    1. Re:No content = no profit by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      And it looks like the high-end smartphone business is saturated. As a replacement market, the product life cycle has to be short enough for profits.

      The low-end phone market has massive growth opportunities, but these are low-cost items, and so efficiency has to permit a profit worth the effort. Math. The mid-range is fulfilling the Moore's Law promise of PCs - Average PCs are good enough for almost all users. Look at corporate IT, web based services mean you need a desktop PC that can run a browser, email client, and the occasional word processing/spreadsheet suite. That's fulfilled by run of the mill chipsets, and high-end chips are being aimed at servers, AI, and blockchain mining. Even gaming is secondary, and graphics chipsets are being bought up by the aformentioned new darlings of the industry.

      High-end smartphones are not a growth industry, which makes it hard on the fringe manufacturers.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  10. They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by raymorris · · Score: 2

    > Tech workers, you have no idea how precarious your world is. You may think you're on top of the whole capitalism game

    Well Google just paid a billion dollars for what? For HTC's cooperation as Google hired tech workers who were working at HTC. When a good company is willing to pay a billion dollars to try to get you on their payroll, yeah things are looking pretty good.

    When you say "feudalism ... everyone else who works for a living", it sounds like what you're eluding to is the manorial tradition in feudal Europe. The Lords owned the land, and the fiefs who worked the land paid rent. Because the fief could never own the productive land, he would always be a fief, a renter, a peasant. The principle that wealth comes from owning productive capacity is still true, of course. Over 90% of millionaires today are millionaires because they own businesses. Businesses such as Google.

    I started buying Google ( https://finance.yahoo.com/quot... ) about seven years ago, for $280/share. It's now worth $930 / share. So my wealth, the wealth I put into Google rather than big screen TVs, has more than tripled. Owning is still how you build wealth, but unlike the feudal days in Europe, you can own the businesses (and thereby build wealth) any time you feel like it. This very morning you can decide - do you want to spend your resources buying a cup of coffee for $6.50 from Starbucks, or would you rather own Starbucks and let people pay YOU $6.50 for a cup of coffee? Your choice, my friend. Becoming an owner of Starbucks (Nasdaq:SBUX) will cost you $55.15, about the same as buying eight cups of coffee from them. Your choice.

    1. Re: They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by hackwrench · · Score: 2

      Shares are still not the land. You, sir are a serf. My dad, uncle and brother own the land they live on, however.

    2. Re: They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No individual owns land, the government can take it whenever they see fit. You are leasing land from them, provided you pay your taxes and the govt has no pressing need for the land.

    3. Re: They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is pretty absurd. If you take this to its logical conclusion, *nobody* owns *anything* because somebody else can *always* take it away, and that includes the government, since another government (for example) can take away whatever it 'owns' by force.

      Meanwhile, in normal land we all know what we mean by 'owns this land' - it means 'has freehold or local equivalent', and we all know that it's subject to such things as the government wanting to build a road through it etc.

      But some twattard has to bring this point up every time as if they were pointing out something nobody else had ever thought of.

      So fuck off.

    4. Re: They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by swillden · · Score: 1

      Shares are still not the land. You, sir are a serf. My dad, uncle and brother own the land they live on, however.

      Shares are a share of the metaphorical land. And, I own the land I live on, too. Well, the bank and I own it, but in a few years I will own it. What's your point?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Google just paid a billion dollars for what? For HTC's cooperation as Google hired tech workers who were working at HTC. When a good company is willing to pay a billion dollars to try to get you on their payroll, yeah things are looking pretty good.

      Looking pretty good for whom? I missed reading where the employees got the billion...

    6. Re: They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      No....owning land is dependent on paying taxes. Go delinquent on your city taxes for a year or two....see what happens. It is not pretty.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    7. Re:They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Your choice.

      Not really... regular people make $100k working, they spend $90k and put $10k into stocks. Rich people make $10M owning stock, spend $1M and put $9M into more stocks. You can play their game, but you can't win. Granted, there are always a few rags to riches stories but most of the lesser known rich people never "got" rich. They were born rich and unless they either go total playboy or speculate wildly their kids will be even richer. I was in the same class as the son of someone with a $200 million dollar net worth. I've been in a meeting with someone with a $900 million dollar net worth, he started with less but their family always had money.

      Even if I lived on Ramen noodles in a shack and wore rags putting every dollar I've ever made and presumably ever will make into stocks it'd change exactly nothing. It's like pretending a guy in the poorest parts in Africa could put his savings into stocks and end up with my net worth. Maybe if you put like a life-long effort into it making $100k and pretending to make $30k your kids or grand-kids might become capitalists instead of workers. But if you start at zero, you'd better ride a Bill Gates or Zuckerberg-class rocket to the top or win the lottery. It doesn't happen by working at any regularly paid job.

      Not that it's a bad idea, of course. Spend some money now, get a good return on it later but for most all their savings and more are blown away if they want to buy a house. You simply don't have the surplus for the money to become its own exponentially increasing horn of plenty where you just skim off the top. Our oil fund here in Norway estimates that long-term, without crazy speculation we'll on average get 3% real return on investment. So if you want to make $60k a year, you need a net worth of $60k/0.03 = $2M net worth but realistically you'd probably still upgrade your lifestyle. If you want $100k/year + $20k to go into 1% real growth you'd need $4M. That's when you become a capitalist.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    8. Re:They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regular people don't earn $100k

    9. Re:They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $60k, less taxes, so $40k net.

    10. Re:They paid a $ billion to be able to hire us by raymorris · · Score: 1

      The real Return of the u.s. stock market over the last 65 years has been 8% per year. It has many 11 percent before inflation. As might be expected returns are higher you're in years of higher inflation show the real net game is less volatile than the nominal game. 80% is average we also want to plan for Hard Times bad times 4% is generally accepted as a safe value that if you draw down 4% you will never exhaust your principal or not within 30 or 40 years you won't drive down your principal. Normally retirees also have their home paid off you should be paying off your mortgage right every month show your largest expense disappears when she have that paid off many people also move to a smaller home after the kids grow up freeing up cash that could very easily be another $300,000 on top of your Investments.

      If your gross pay is 100000 and you're investing 15000 perhaps and perhaps spending another $15,000 on your mortgage and you're paying taxes if 20000 then you're spending is $50,000 a year other than your mortgage. See your actual spending it needs to be replaced and retirement is about $50,000 a year so you want just over a million dollars. A million dollars would provide you with $40,000 a year with no mortgage payment and a low tax rate and no need to invest any of that $40,000 .
          $40,000 is perfectly livable in that area once you have the other things taken care of. Which means we want at least a million in order to live off the returns. This also assumes you have no other income - for US citizens no social security, no hobby that makes a few dollars, etc. For Norway, we're pretending that you get no money from the gas fund, you're fully self-funded.

      Typically an employer will match part of your retirement or investment savings my last two companies for example match 50% so if I wanted to invest $10,000 a year I would only have to save 6500. The employer match would cover the other other 3500.$10,000 a year 6500 saved it would take 28 years to reach 1 million dollars and retire. It takes 20 years to hit a million if you save $13,500 plus match.

      90% of American millionaires become millionaires, able to live off their investments, using exactly the math and method I just described. Over 90% of millionaires made less than $100,000 / year while working, and they invested around 15% of their income.

      > Maybe if you put like a life-long effort into it making $100k and pretending to make $30k your kids or grand-kids might become capitalists instead of workers.

      I knew a guy who did exactly that. He made $100K and spent like he made $30k, investing $70k / year. The math is, if you invest $70k / year, you only have to work 9.5 years in your life. You can retire at age 30 and live off the investment gains. That's a somewhat extreme case. Living as if you only make $30K isn't something most people want to do (though over 95% of the world does), but then only having to work for 9 and half years, retiring when your baby is born, is extremely cool.

  11. What do the employees get? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd certainly ask for a fat slice in exchange for not devaluing the deal by quitting.

  12. Re:Does the justice department do anything anymore by Merk42 · · Score: 1

    What action did Google take here that broke antitrust laws?

  13. Re: Does the justice department do anything anymor by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

    Googledouches may be douchey, but they know where to hand out the lawful-bribes.

  14. Skip the Pixel 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What this means is that you should skip the Pixel 2 and wait for the Pixel 3 next year as that will be the heavily customized and innovative phone unlike the Pixel 2 which is just off-the-shelf parts.

  15. In other words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google bought off a group of HTC employees to, um, keep 'em quiet about, um, somethin'.

  16. Does every thread now devolve to SJWs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea that Google is in thrall to some far left culture warriors is so myopic.
    It would be interesting to see what some techs thought about the tech involved, like say a Slashdot thread pre gamergate.

  17. Motorola again? by LavouraArcaica · · Score: 1

    I don't really understand why Google bought Motorola to, then, sell it to Lenovo.

    But it appears that if there was a good reason, this same reason was remembered again.

    BTW, I think it was the only moment when Motorola did something really nice. Hope it happens again with HTC.

  18. Sorry, voice to text. Forgot to edit the first bit by raymorris · · Score: 1

    I was using voice to text and forgot to go back and edit part of it. Sorry for the poor readability.