Support NeoGAF

[jman2050]

Google has a parent company? o_0

Basically a shell company they created to better delineate Google's core businesses from all the other stuff they own. Instead of all the other stuff being subsidiaries of Google, they're now subsidiaries of Alphabet, with Google itself now also a subsidiary.

 

[Oblivion]

It was created in 2015 in a restructuring at Google.

Basically a shell company they created to better delineate Google's core businesses from all the other stuff they own. Instead of all the other stuff being subsidiaries of Google, they're now subsidiaries of Alphabet, with Google itself now also a subsidiary.

Ah, I see.

 

[NeOak]

Google has the marketshare but they don't have the same level of control (almost none in China) and Apple makes way more money with the iPhone. There is a reason that Google is going to start making their own chips like Apple has for years.

Apple has the better strategy and makes a better phone overall.

Google pays Apple billions every year to be the default search engine on iOS and Google apps are better on iPhone. What does that say?

Better overall phone? Pls.

I mean, they finally copied Nokia stuff for videos like a year or two ago. Living Images says hi. As well as other shit Nokia had years before.

OIS on phones was basically a Nokia first with the Lumia 920.

And only if they stopped using shit modems and nerfing the good modem, maybe it could get better LTE speeds. Their CPUs are beasts.

Oh yeah, enjoy the forced animations though.

 

[this_guy]

On Android I can scroll down GAF much quicker and that's all that matters. iPhone scrolling is smooth but slow.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

On Android I can scroll down GAF much quicker and that's all that matters. iPhone scrolling is smooth but slow.

Safari scrolling is fast on iOS 11. They finally fixed that.

 

[w1ck3dn1nj4]

This good guy Google narrative really needs to stop. Neither them nor Apple is all good or all evil. They each have their own philosophy in what they view as most important, which guides what they do with their products. And each side can be seen as both good and evil, depending on the prism through which one decides to view them.
.....
At the end of the day though, they’re both companies. They do what they do to make money. Period. If they could make insane piles of cash by setting orphans on fire, they’d do it. They don’t care about you. They care about how much you’re willing to spend.

Painting Google as the good guy is not the point I was trying to make. Fact is, I don't give a shit whether it's Google, Apple, MS, Samsung, Sony or any other company. This sort of laughable good vs evil dichotomy is more like a straw man retort you’d expect from a fanboy. I'm merely dissecting this from the ECOSYSTEM POINT OF VIEW of two opposing ideologies, i.e. the inherent characteristics of how one ecosystem philosophy is naturally better for competition, in promoting choice, flexibility and value for consumers. Not because of some virtuous goodness on the part of some corporation.

You’re quite right in saying these companies are primarily concerned about their bottom line and don’t really care about you. That’s my point too. All I’m saying is, as consumers, just like these companies, you should be reciprocal in approach with regards to your bottom line. As the distribution numbers clearly show, the one vendor ecosystem is not going to be doing you any favors of if you’re worried about getting squeezed, or getting less choice and flexibility. It’s a model that shifts leverage away from consumers into the hands of the corporation in the long run. 90% monopoly of industry profits from a market share of only 14% is a disgusting picture of a corporation profiting disproportionately at somebody’s expense, no?

 

[w1ck3dn1nj4]

Andriod= win for consumers
Apple= win for corporation

Lmao please tell me you don't actually believe that.

Oh, I’m sure plenty of people are laughing their asses off too at the denial of some and the inability to digest the numbers in front of them. Alright, I’ll indulge for one last time

From an ecosystem standpoint of iOS vs android, if you look of the bottom line implications of parties concerned,

How is 90% of industry profit from 14% market share, not indicative of a big win for the corporation? Selling vastly less, but squeezing disproportionately more from fewer customers is not a win for the corporation?

Conversely on android, how is 10% industry profit from 86% market share not indicative of a big win for consumers? Selling vastly more but profiting a lot less is not indicative of consumer power and leverage? Who the fuck then is the beneficiary from competition here? Who the fuck ends up with greater choice and flexibility, in overall value for money and better bottom line?

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

Oh, I’m sure plenty of people are laughing their asses off too at the denial of some and the inability to digest the numbers in front of them. Alright, I’ll indulge for one last time

From an ecosystem standpoint of iOS vs android, if you look of the bottom line implications of parties concerned,

How is 90% of industry profit from 14% market share, not indicative of a big win for the corporation? Selling vastly less, but squeezing disproportionately more from fewer customers is not a win for the corporation?

Conversely on android, how is 10% industry profit from 86% market share not indicative of a big win for consumers? Selling vastly more but profiting a lot less is not indicative of consumer power and leverage? Who the fuck then is the beneficiary from competition here? Who the fuck ends up with greater choice and flexibility, in overall value for money and better bottom line?

Again though, it all depends on your point of view.

If I’m looking at it as objectively as possible, both methods are wins for corporations:

For Apple, they’re taking the lion’s share of profits on a sliver of market share. This is a win for them.

For Google, they’ve got the lion’s share of the market in usership. This gets them access to lots and lots of user data they can then use to target ads, which is how they make their money. This is a win for them.

As for consumers, neither side really loses or wins. It’s all perspective. If I’m an iOS or Android user, why do I care how much profit they make and how big their market share is? Do I enjoy their products? If yes, I keep buying it. If not, I move elsewhere.

This talk about user choice is a false dilemma. Nobody forces anybody to buy any kind of phone (outside of certain jobs, perhaps). You can buy whatever pleases you, and somebody else’s choice shouldn’t matter to you in the least.

 

[hirokazu]

You'd have to be pretty far up Google's arse to think that they're in the mobile game benevolently for the good of consumers. Both Google and Apple are in it for profits. They're successful because the products and services they offer in their pursuit of profits also provide a good value proposition to their customers. That and the competition that currently exists between them provide a benefit for consumers.

The whole "one is a saviour while the other is a greedy corporate demon" viewpoint is really childish.

 

[teh_pwn]

Currently, iOS App Store revenue is above Google Play and third party app markets combined. Combined numbers are expected to exceed iOS numbers this year though, while one-on-one, iOS is expected to maintain its lead until at least 2021 (which is the furthest projection given thus far).

Super weak long game. Android is in the rest of the world, and as that matures they'll most likely use that.

Apple never plays nice with their partners and it will bite them in the ass again.

 

[w1ck3dn1nj4]

This talk about user choice is a false dilemma. Nobody forces anybody to buy any kind of phone (outside of certain jobs, perhaps). You can buy whatever pleases you, and somebody else’s choice shouldn’t matter to you in the least.

LOL WTF? Who the fuck is even talking about this warped sense of user choice and being forced to buy anything? Of course you’re free to choose what you like. I’m referring to choice here in the sense of having MORE OPTIONS for consumers to choose from, at a variety of price points which represents the best bang for their buck, not some retarded notion of whether somebody else’s choice matters to them or not. Your rambling makes as much sense as storyline in porn or an erection on the pope. A distraction of sorts but ultimately pointless.

Look, I’m not trying to paint this as some good vs evil thing on the part of any company. Like you said, all these companies are the same in the sense that they don’t really care about you, and are primarily concerned about their bottom line. Likewise as a consumer, I’m saying you should be thinking about your bottom line too. Why the fuck shouldn’t you care if you’re worried about getting squeezed in the long run?

Look, I’m not saying as consumers we should be preoccupied with how much profit corporations make or how big their market share is. That’s the desperate projection of some disillusioned fanboy. As consumers, I don’t see why we shouldn’t take a moment to digest the distribution numbers as empirical evidence of how one ecosystem philosophy tends to favor our bottom line and another the corporation’s. Again, this is not because of some benevolent aim of the corporation, but rather the natural inherent characteristics of the ecosystem philosophy. No matter how you slice or dice it, you can’t deny the numbers clearly show the more open philosophy results in companies getting the squeeze due to excessive competition, while the closed one vendor ecosystem leads to consumers getting a taste of the same medicine. Not that hard to swallow, is it?

Anyways I’m done wasting time in this thread. You knock yourself out if you want to. I’ve got to fly abroad soon and prepare for some tough interviews. Fuck Brexit!!!

 

[spelen]

Again though, it all depends on your point of view.

If I’m looking at it as objectively as possible, both methods are wins for corporations:

For Apple, they’re taking the lion’s share of profits on a sliver of market share. This is a win for them.

For Google, they’ve got the lion’s share of the market in usership. This gets them access to lots and lots of user data they can then use to target ads, which is how they make their money. This is a win for them.

As for consumers, neither side really loses or wins. It’s all perspective. If I’m an iOS or Android user, why do I care how much profit they make and how big their market share is? Do I enjoy their products? If yes, I keep buying it. If not, I move elsewhere.

This talk about user choice is a false dilemma. Nobody forces anybody to buy any kind of phone (outside of certain jobs, perhaps). You can buy whatever pleases you, and somebody else’s choice shouldn’t matter to you in the least.

"Nobody forces anybody to buy any kind of phone " unless of course you enjoy IOS ecosystem but not their hardware, or perhaps you simply lack the requisite funds to purchase their phones. yes less option is typically viewed as anti consumer.