7 ms·
I'm trying to think of a tech acquisition that was favorable, or at the very least not unfavorable for the consumer. It seems like tech (maybe all) acquisition
by jader201 13y ago
I'm trying to think of a tech acquisition that was favorable, or at the very least not unfavorable for the consumer.
It seems like tech (maybe all) acquisitions almost always favor the buyer and not the consumer.
Does anybody have any good examples?
- randomdata 13y agoAndroid, Inc., also acquired by Google, seemed to work out well for the consumer, I would say.
- droopybuns 13y agoI just don't get why anyone would hold android up as an example of success, given the comments in the following thread. The gap between expectations & execution on android is tremendous. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7053108 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7053108
- potatolicious 13y agoThe comparison isn't between "what Android could be under Google" and "what Android is under Google". The comparison is between "what Android could be as an independent company" and "what Android is under Google". I think ultimately Android is doing a lot better for a lot more people than it would have had it remained independent. I'm also having a hard time imagining anyone else that could've acquired them and achieved substantially better results (see: Microsoft's handling of the Danger acquisition).
- MartinCron 13y agoI don't see the YouTube acquisition as being harmful. Pixar is still making (some) good movies under Disney. I'm sure there are more examples.
- MartinCron 13y agoAnother example: Bungie made some great games under Microsoft.
- jader201 13y agoI would say it's debatable as to whether YouTube has been harmful. I think many aren't a fan of the licensing changes and other experience elements, but maybe those would have happened anyway. I agree w/ Pixar to some extent, but it seems they have seen a slight decline in quality recently (Cars 2, Monsters University, Brave). I think particularly, they may be looking for more opportunities to exploit previous franchises vs. making quality films. Cars 2 was the best example of this, as was evident by the mounds of merchandise on store shelves following the release. Again, both of these are debatable, but I still don't think you can say in either case that the acquisition was favorable to the consumer.
- mastermojo 13y agoI think youtube wouldn't have managed to continue operations without a company like google stepping in. It was running massive bandwidth costs and did not have the ad network in place to monetize.
- caprad 13y ago> Pixar is still making (some) good movies under Disney. Pixar movie quality seems to have dropped, while Disney's have gone up after the acquisition. http://i.imgur.com/H2s4hVL.jpg http://i.imgur.com/H2s4hVL.jpg Cars 2 was clearly a release for money (they make more money of Cars merchandise than they do from films), but the other films?
- malnourish 13y agoI think what helps explain this image is that it's likely everything before Cars 2 was already in development prior to the acquisition. Pixar seems to have lost some of their magic, however Disney is certainly stepping up their game. The aesthetic divide between them is shrinking. I did not like Wreck It Ralph though. Not at all.
- sheldoan 13y agoYouTube
- smackfu 13y agoHas the Instagram acquisition had any negatives for the consumer?
- cloudwalking 13y agoYes, photos are no longer embedded in tweets.
- Jare 13y agoWhich means I don't see them anymore, which means I don't cringe at the filter abuse... Wait, actually, this HAS improved things for my particular tastes. :) But yeah, this is a pretty good example because the link between the acquisition and the damage to the product / end user is very obvious.
- AutoCorrect 13y agoI'd say that's why they buy the companies...
- jfb 13y agoApple buying NeXT.
- cloudwalking 13y agoHere are just a few examples: - Keyhole (now Google Maps) - Android Inc. - Motorola Mobility - GrandCentral (now Google Voice) - NeXT - Siri In general, an acquired company initially became successful by bringing value to consumers. When that company is acquired, it gets more resources to bring more value to customers.
- eridius 13y agoGoogle Voice is effectively a dead product, isn't it? Doesn't seem that favorable to me.
- ariwilson 13y agoIt's kept working for the last 3 years being awesome... Doesn't seem that dead to me.
- RALaBarge 13y agoI keep my 10 year old cell phone number alive and well on voice.google.com, it works great.
- possibilistic 13y agoI use it every single day. I wouldn't call it dead. We'll see if Google tries to wholly replace it with hangouts. I wouldn't be mad unless it were missing features.
- arikrak 13y agoA large number of Google acquisitions involve Google making a product free that before cost money. </done-defending-google>
- bertil 13y agoI would argue Hotmail — Microsoft brought scaling and maturity, and kept a stronghold on the net long enough to actually threaten and push Google further. I doubt Gmail would have appeared without that acquisition. But then again: the dozen other examples cited above are certainly better.