3 ms·

Given Google's fondness for shutting down APIs and services, I'd be very disappointed if they monopolised all of these markets. They'll be the Microsoft of home

by cbeach 12y ago

Given Google's fondness for shutting down APIs and services, I'd be very disappointed if they monopolised all of these markets. They'll be the Microsoft of home automation. Using it to trap people in their monolith (and Android is just a vehicle for them to deliver ads, folks), and then letting it stagnate or shutting it down if the ad delivery doesn't prove lucrative. I've been burnt so many times by Google I've lost count. Shutting down the Finance API, banning me from Adsense without explanation, shutting down Reader, cutting email deliverability across gmail from my server. Tying the wrong product reviews to my website on Google search. I don't want one company to rule the internet. I don't want a MS-esque services monolith. I want a few product-focussed companies like Nest to exist and compete indepently using open standards.

tempestn 12y ago
Just wanted to say I agree 100%. I expect that Google is going to do very well with all the building blocks they have in place, but I view that prospect with a great deal more trepidation than excitement. (Although I wouldn't say none of the latter; things like self-driving cars are certainly cool, and having Google behind that sort of project makes it much more likely that it will happen in the near term.)
crdoconnor 12y ago
>and Android is just a vehicle for them to deliver ads, folks They are dealing with that 'problem' by steadily de-opensourcing all of the components. You don't use the email app, you use gmail. You don't use the camera any more, you use "google camera". You don't even use the keyboard any more, you use "google keyboard". A lot of the new android functionality is piled into 'google play services'. I don't think the day is that far off where the 'next' version of android will be all closed source, and if you want all of those closed source apps that you depend on to continue working, you'll need to install it. At that point they can start charging fees for android's use.
- personZ 12y ago
  While cbeach's comment that you replied to is trollish nonsense, in response to your reply- You don't use the camera any more, you use "google camera". You don't even use the keyboard any more, you use "google keyboard". A lot of the new android functionality is piled into 'google play services'. Or you use other email clients, alternative cameras, or alternative keyboards. That's kind of the point of Android, and in splitting their own apps off Google is simultaneously making the platform better by opening the APIs required by them. For instance the camera API has gotten dramatically better - http://source.android.com/devices/camera/camera3_3Amodes.html http://source.android.com/devices/camera/camera3_3Amodes.htm... At that point they can start charging fees for android's use. Google already charges partners for Google apps. Samsung is paying Google. This has always been the case with Google. Further most of those apps have been separate concerns since something like Android 1.5, and the platform is dramatically better for it (e.g. the whole fragmentation thing is far less of a concern, because the core platform shrinks to just core services, exactly as it should be).
- Oletros 12y ago
  If so, how AOSP still has email, camera or keyboard apps? Can you show just one service that has been pulled off from AOSP?
jpalomaki 12y ago
Maybe they are looking new revenue sources and don't want to be just in the ad business anymore. With the Nest line or products I could easily imagine them extracting over $1000 from a household that goes all-in with their their product offering (thermostat, few smoke detectors, few Dropcam devices). And there's also good potential for selling add-on services for a monthly fee. Something completely new business might be available on the "smart grid" side. If you are controlling the heating and air conditioning you have pretty strong influence on the amount of electricity the household is using at a given time.
pjc50 12y ago
compete indepently using open standards I don't think this can exist without at least some outside intervention. The monolith has lower coordination costs, potentially better usability (at least at first) and extra opportunities for profit by violating your privacy. So it's more likely to succeed in the market. And once it has dominant market power, we're back to "embrace, extend, extinguish".

by cbeach 12y ago

tempestn 12y ago

Just wanted to say I agree 100%. I expect that Google is going to do very well with all the building blocks they have in place, but I view that prospect with a great deal more trepidation than excitement. (Although I wouldn't say none of the latter; things like self-driving cars are certainly cool, and having Google behind that sort of project makes it much more likely that it will happen in the near term.)

crdoconnor 12y ago

>and Android is just a vehicle for them to deliver ads, folks They are dealing with that 'problem' by steadily de-opensourcing all of the components. You don't use the email app, you use gmail. You don't use the camera any more, you use "google camera". You don't even use the keyboard any more, you use "google keyboard". A lot of the new android functionality is piled into 'google play services'. I don't think the day is that far off where the 'next' version of android will be all closed source, and if you want all of those closed source apps that you depend on to continue working, you'll need to install it. At that point they can start charging fees for android's use.

personZ 12y ago
While cbeach's comment that you replied to is trollish nonsense, in response to your reply- You don't use the camera any more, you use "google camera". You don't even use the keyboard any more, you use "google keyboard". A lot of the new android functionality is piled into 'google play services'. Or you use other email clients, alternative cameras, or alternative keyboards. That's kind of the point of Android, and in splitting their own apps off Google is simultaneously making the platform better by opening the APIs required by them. For instance the camera API has gotten dramatically better - http://source.android.com/devices/camera/camera3_3Amodes.html http://source.android.com/devices/camera/camera3_3Amodes.htm... At that point they can start charging fees for android's use. Google already charges partners for Google apps. Samsung is paying Google. This has always been the case with Google. Further most of those apps have been separate concerns since something like Android 1.5, and the platform is dramatically better for it (e.g. the whole fragmentation thing is far less of a concern, because the core platform shrinks to just core services, exactly as it should be).
Oletros 12y ago
If so, how AOSP still has email, camera or keyboard apps? Can you show just one service that has been pulled off from AOSP?

jpalomaki 12y ago

Maybe they are looking new revenue sources and don't want to be just in the ad business anymore. With the Nest line or products I could easily imagine them extracting over $1000 from a household that goes all-in with their their product offering (thermostat, few smoke detectors, few Dropcam devices). And there's also good potential for selling add-on services for a monthly fee. Something completely new business might be available on the "smart grid" side. If you are controlling the heating and air conditioning you have pretty strong influence on the amount of electricity the household is using at a given time.

pjc50 12y ago

compete indepently using open standards I don't think this can exist without at least some outside intervention. The monolith has lower coordination costs, potentially better usability (at least at first) and extra opportunities for profit by violating your privacy. So it's more likely to succeed in the market. And once it has dominant market power, we're back to "embrace, extend, extinguish".