6 ms·
> Google does everything in-house. The company gets Maps and all of its cloud services basically for free. This statement is utterly false. In-house does not m
by davyjones 13y ago
> Google does everything in-house. The company gets Maps and all of its cloud services basically for free.
This statement is utterly false. In-house does not mean free.
- Brakenshire 13y agoAll of its Maps data and many of its APIs already existed for Google Maps on the desktop. Within the mobile space, and relative to a mobile-only competitor, Google's access to that data is effectively free.
- andrewflnr 13y agoYou mean it has a low marginal cost. However, it required a huge capital investment to create, from which they are now rightfully reaping the benefits.
- Brakenshire 13y agoI'm certainly not saying they are wrong to leverage that asset. I don't think the point is about right or wrong as regards Google's action, but simply the extra barrier this represents for a competitor.
- dirtyaura 13y agoMap data for mobile isn't free even for Google. Google buys licenses to the data from a few map data providers, and as there was effectively a duopoly in global map data, those licenses have very strict terms of use. To use that data for e.g. real-time navigation assistance in mobile requires a different, much more expensive licenses.
- Brakenshire 13y agoGood point, thanks for the correction.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- andrewflnr 13y agoExactly. Google's mapping data is a legitimate competitive advantage, and there is no reason anyone else forking android should be entitled to it.
- Brakenshire 13y agoThe article in no way says this is illegitimate, it is listed as an extra barrier that a competitor would have to cross.
- andrewflnr 13y agoMaybe not explicitly, but it was stated in the context of a critical article about Google's betrayal of openness, so we could at least be forgiven for interpreting it in that light. It's not a stretch to assume it was meant as a criticism.
- zobzu 13y agoClose enough to free.