The ggp said not a single word about embedding gpld code in products. He said "using" gpl software. And if he was referring to said embedding then he is just flat out wrong as Linux is exploding in the embedded space.
Call me a skeptic but I don't think companies predicate their use of gpl'd software on what kooks like mueller have to say. As somebody in a company that makes actual decisions, I sign off on the software that will get the job done. Our servers run Debian. Our desktops run windows with some exceptions. For graphical editing, our people use Photoshop. For document sharing and email, we use Google Apps. Our sales people use Android tablets as that's what our catalog/order taking software runs on. Most companies probably do the same. To do otherwise would lend them eventually to being uncompetitive.
I actually like the fact that florian gets linked on Slashdot. If we're lucky, when people google him, the Slashdot articles will be toward the top. When they click, maybe there is the slim chance they will be greeted with highly rated comments exposing Mueller for the fraud he is. Keep +1ing the truth, people!
Hey, stupid. Android Market in Honeycomb will only work in landscape mode. As the market is probably the most important differentiating factor for a "blessed" Android device, I'd say that points to the intended use orientation being landscape.
Apparently the people that matter believe it and aren't fooled by the FUD.
Peter Chou, CEO, HTC:
We welcome the news of today's acquisition, which demonstrates that Google is deeply committed to defending Android, its partners, and the entire ecosystem.
Bert Nordberg, President & CEO, Sony Ericsson:
I welcome Google's commitment to defending Android and its partners.
Jong-Seok Park, President & CEO, LG:
We welcome Google's commitment to defending Android and its partners.
Are you at it again with the FUD? Google has always had preferred OEM's when they made a significant update to Android. The G1 was HTC, the Droid was Moto, the Xoom was Moto, the N1 was HTC, and the Nexus S is Samsung. This changes nothing. Interesting seeing the rats scurrying. How them grapes taste?
The more I read your posts, the more pathetic Bing sounds to me. Stealing data by sniffing the links people click on Google. MS should be ashamed. What's the point of using Bing if it is just recycled Google results? I think as well as the rest of the world will just stick with the true innovator and leave the copycat to gambits like you.
So, you didn't get enough vandalizing the other thread so you had to come spread some FUD in this one too, huh? This is nothing like ActiveX. ActiveX was a completely closed proprietary technology that works only in ie. This is open source and can be implemented in any browser that the developers care too. How long until this screen name gets retired to that great shill home in the sky?
Riddle me this, Unsatisfied: what percentage of apps on the Android market can you not run? If it is less than say, 5 percent, stop your bitching. If there is an app that you just " gotta have", petition the developer. I have one of the oldest of the second generation Android devices (OG Droid) and I can't remember the last time I had an app that wouldn't run.
Where did all the smart trolls go? Listen, simple-simon, TFA is about the FTC investigating Google. Last I checked, the Federal Trade Commission was a part of the United States government. Want to talk about somewhere else, find a new thread.
Actually it is a great comparison. Building aircraft carriers is a tough business to get into. So is search. That's just how it is. You and MS sound like nothing but a bunch of whiners. "It isn't fair. Whaaah" You want what Goole has? Do what they did. Build great products that people actually want to use. Oh, but that's too hard. Tough shit.
It doesn't matter whether you came out and said it. You implied it and it is obvious what your intent was. Now you are trying to weasel out of it when you get caught by acting innocent with the whole, "Who me?" schtick. Give it a rest. Admit you hate Google and it kills you that they have a product people actually like and that they are successful in delivering it. Now cry some more.
cross-funding of services to extend dominant position,
What is the case though, is that at some point lack of competition, barrier to entry, cross-funding of services to extend dominant position, etc. becomes a regulatory issue in many markets and a job for the government agencies charged with securing healthy competition in the marketplace.
Then you have the gall to say
I am not and have never said anything about if I think they are right or not.
That's exactly why you need that huge amount of user data.
Yeah, and if it weren't for the high cost of steel, labor, and know-how, anybody could be building and selling aircraft carriers. Some things are hard to do and require an enormous investment. It is not society or government's job to make it so every tom dick and harry in their garage can get into any business they want and be on equal footing with incumbent players. What you are asking for is prima facie ludicrous.
If it was just the case of algorithms Google wouldn't be collecting all that data and there would be much more competition
Let's see, Yahoo, Bing, AOL, Ask.com, Baidu, whatever they have in Russia. And everyone of them is fighting tooth and nail and making money.
As for "better services, better interface, more convenient searching", how exactly would you improve that?
That's like sitting at a table in 2005 and asking "how do we make a better smartphone?" And then pretending like it can't be done when nobody at that particular table shits out an iPhone. I don't know but somebody does. And in that case, somebody did.
It's already pretty much as convenient as it gets.
I watched a super computer beat two Jeopardy champions live using advanced search algorithms and quick reflexes. Yes, unimaginitive one, it most certainly can be done better.
I was just pointing out that the " it is so easy to switch search provider" argument is a bit naive as it is dependent on there actually being alternatives.
Bing, Yahoo, AOL and Ask.com, are all alternatives. And that's not even counting engines like Baidu and whatever they have in Russia that is kicking everybody else's ass. Just because Google makes a better product and people prefer it doesn't make it anti-competitive. Sounds like a case of sour grapes more than anything else.
What is the case though, is that at some point lack of competition,
There is no lack of competition as I mentioned above.
barrier to entry,
Running with the best of the best in search will never be cheap. I'll bet building aircraft carriers isn't cheap too. What would you suggest we do to "fix" that? Oh, nothing? Hypocrite much?
cross-funding of services to extend dominant position,
This is not even close to against the law. Google has a dominant position not a monopoly. You are confusing the two. Apple dominates the iDevice ecosystem but it isn't illegal because they have competition just like Google does.
etc.
such as?
becomes a regulatory issue in many markets and a job for the government agencies charged with securing healthy competition in the marketplace. And the rules are different (and might even seem unfair) for companies that are deemed to be in such position. Which is exactly what we are seeing here
You have made no legitimate argument that suggests this makes sense in Google's case.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, hi Florian!
The ggp said not a single word about embedding gpld code in products. He said "using" gpl software. And if he was referring to said embedding then he is just flat out wrong as Linux is exploding in the embedded space.
Call me a skeptic but I don't think companies predicate their use of gpl'd software on what kooks like mueller have to say. As somebody in a company that makes actual decisions, I sign off on the software that will get the job done. Our servers run Debian. Our desktops run windows with some exceptions. For graphical editing, our people use Photoshop. For document sharing and email, we use Google Apps. Our sales people use Android tablets as that's what our catalog/order taking software runs on. Most companies probably do the same. To do otherwise would lend them eventually to being uncompetitive.
I actually like the fact that florian gets linked on Slashdot. If we're lucky, when people google him, the Slashdot articles will be toward the top. When they click, maybe there is the slim chance they will be greeted with highly rated comments exposing Mueller for the fraud he is. Keep +1ing the truth, people!
-- Sent from my iPad. :)
Hey, stupid. Android Market in Honeycomb will only work in landscape mode. As the market is probably the most important differentiating factor for a "blessed" Android device, I'd say that points to the intended use orientation being landscape.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
This just figures. Dishonest bastards. The Android news just keeps getting better and better today.
It pretty much looks like Google told them what to say.
Ha ha ha. Scurry on little troll. How them grapes taste?
Peter Chou, CEO, HTC:
We welcome the news of today's acquisition, which demonstrates that Google is deeply committed to defending Android, its partners, and the entire ecosystem.
Bert Nordberg, President & CEO, Sony Ericsson:
I welcome Google's commitment to defending Android and its partners.
Jong-Seok Park, President & CEO, LG:
We welcome Google's commitment to defending Android and its partners.
Are you at it again with the FUD? Google has always had preferred OEM's when they made a significant update to Android. The G1 was HTC, the Droid was Moto, the Xoom was Moto, the N1 was HTC, and the Nexus S is Samsung. This changes nothing. Interesting seeing the rats scurrying. How them grapes taste?
bullshit. It's fucking stealing and it's slimey. Bing is a joke.
The more I read your posts, the more pathetic Bing sounds to me. Stealing data by sniffing the links people click on Google. MS should be ashamed. What's the point of using Bing if it is just recycled Google results? I think as well as the rest of the world will just stick with the true innovator and leave the copycat to gambits like you.
furthermore have a host of financial services companies among my clients asking me for advice as they shape their investment decisions.
I weep for those companies.
So, you didn't get enough vandalizing the other thread so you had to come spread some FUD in this one too, huh? This is nothing like ActiveX. ActiveX was a completely closed proprietary technology that works only in ie. This is open source and can be implemented in any browser that the developers care too. How long until this screen name gets retired to that great shill home in the sky?
He actually got modded down because he's a troll. Much like yourself.
Riddle me this, Unsatisfied: what percentage of apps on the Android market can you not run? If it is less than say, 5 percent, stop your bitching. If there is an app that you just " gotta have", petition the developer. I have one of the oldest of the second generation Android devices (OG Droid) and I can't remember the last time I had an app that wouldn't run.
world
Where did all the smart trolls go? Listen, simple-simon, TFA is about the FTC investigating Google. Last I checked, the Federal Trade Commission was a part of the United States government. Want to talk about somewhere else, find a new thread.
Actually it is a great comparison. Building aircraft carriers is a tough business to get into. So is search. That's just how it is. You and MS sound like nothing but a bunch of whiners. "It isn't fair. Whaaah" You want what Goole has? Do what they did. Build great products that people actually want to use. Oh, but that's too hard. Tough shit.
It doesn't matter whether you came out and said it. You implied it and it is obvious what your intent was. Now you are trying to weasel out of it when you get caught by acting innocent with the whole, "Who me?" schtick. Give it a rest. Admit you hate Google and it kills you that they have a product people actually like and that they are successful in delivering it. Now cry some more.
Powered by Bingâ
At the bottom of the search page I just opened to yahoo.com.
barrier to entry,
cross-funding of services to extend dominant position,
What is the case though, is that at some point lack of competition, barrier to entry, cross-funding of services to extend dominant position, etc. becomes a regulatory issue in many markets and a job for the government agencies charged with securing healthy competition in the marketplace.
Then you have the gall to say
I am not and have never said anything about if I think they are right or not.
Fucking liar.
That's exactly why you need that huge amount of user data.
Yeah, and if it weren't for the high cost of steel, labor, and know-how, anybody could be building and selling aircraft carriers. Some things are hard to do and require an enormous investment. It is not society or government's job to make it so every tom dick and harry in their garage can get into any business they want and be on equal footing with incumbent players. What you are asking for is prima facie ludicrous.
If it was just the case of algorithms Google wouldn't be collecting all that data and there would be much more competition
Let's see, Yahoo, Bing, AOL, Ask.com, Baidu, whatever they have in Russia. And everyone of them is fighting tooth and nail and making money.
As for "better services, better interface, more convenient searching", how exactly would you improve that?
That's like sitting at a table in 2005 and asking "how do we make a better smartphone?" And then pretending like it can't be done when nobody at that particular table shits out an iPhone. I don't know but somebody does. And in that case, somebody did.
It's already pretty much as convenient as it gets.
I watched a super computer beat two Jeopardy champions live using advanced search algorithms and quick reflexes. Yes, unimaginitive one, it most certainly can be done better.
I was just pointing out that the " it is so easy to switch search provider" argument is a bit naive as it is dependent on there actually being alternatives.
Bing, Yahoo, AOL and Ask.com, are all alternatives. And that's not even counting engines like Baidu and whatever they have in Russia that is kicking everybody else's ass. Just because Google makes a better product and people prefer it doesn't make it anti-competitive. Sounds like a case of sour grapes more than anything else.
What is the case though, is that at some point lack of competition,
There is no lack of competition as I mentioned above.
barrier to entry,
Running with the best of the best in search will never be cheap. I'll bet building aircraft carriers isn't cheap too. What would you suggest we do to "fix" that? Oh, nothing? Hypocrite much?
cross-funding of services to extend dominant position,
This is not even close to against the law. Google has a dominant position not a monopoly. You are confusing the two. Apple dominates the iDevice ecosystem but it isn't illegal because they have competition just like Google does.
etc.
such as?
becomes a regulatory issue in many markets and a job for the government agencies charged with securing healthy competition in the marketplace. And the rules are different (and might even seem unfair) for companies that are deemed to be in such position. Which is exactly what we are seeing here
You have made no legitimate argument that suggests this makes sense in Google's case.
Google blocks others services by forcing it's partners to bundle it's services if they want access to the google app marketplace
Not true. There are many Android phones sold by Verizon that have Bing search and maps preloaded yet have access to the Android Market.