6 ms·

Agree. Nest belongs at Apple, not Google. Apple could've owned the home with AppleTV, Nest and HomeKit.

erikpukinskis 11y ago
Apple doesn't bother with experiences unless they are a big part of most peoples' days. Fiddling with your thermostat is not a huge part of most peoples' days. Nest has yet to prove that they can make a product that plays a significant role in our lives. Beats has. People wear Beats all day.
- chaostheory 11y ago
  If that's the case, then why is Apple bothering with Homekit? Nest isn't just about thermostats and fire alarms. Nest is going to encompass your whole house which is the same thing that Homekit aspires to do. I still feel that Apple made a huge mistake by letting Nest go to Google. The main difference between Homekit and Nest is that Nest's products and platform has already been battle tested.
Steko 11y ago
Not to denigrate Nest but I don't think not having them is going to make Apple any less formidable in the home. Nest's competence is design sense/simple ux which Apple already has plenty of but Google doesn't. That makes them far more valuable to Google. Like just imagine a Nest-less world where Google and Apple both release smart thermostats in 2010. The Apple product might look like Nest and the Google one would prolly look like whatever Honeywell was selling at the time.
- andybak 11y ago
  > Nest's competence is design sense/simple ux which Apple already has plenty of but Google doesn't. I think this trope is rather out of date. If you look at Inbox, Google Play Music, Keep and a few other Google properties, it's not implausible to argue they are ahead of many Apple products.
  - Steko 11y ago
    Strange that you go right to Inbox as an example because, like Nest, it was the result of an expensive acquisition of a noted design team. Which just supports my point, that design isn't a core competence at Google. Are they improving? Sure. But, back to devices and Glass itself, Glass sticking out like a sore thumb, users being branded assholes and banned from use all over is an obvious example of just flat out design incompetence. https://twitter.com/jm_denis/status/524968589489479680 https://twitter.com/jm_denis/status/524968589489479680
    - andybak 11y ago
      Isn't there a slight fallacy at the heart of your stance? You seem to be positing an innate, unchangeable taint that can never be eradicated by change - no matter how pervasive that shift becomes.
      - Steko 11y ago
        No I'm positing that this one particular characteristic not only hasn't been completely eradicated yet, but I don't think they're even trying to eradicate it (although they are trying to mitigate it). Fundamentally Apple is still a company run by designers and Google is still a company run by engineering and yes companies can change what they are fundamentally about but no I don't see either of these two have done this. If anything, I see it being reinforced, with this being personified with moves like Jony Ive taking over Forstall's duties and Melissa Mayer needing to leave Google. I don't like the term you've chosen here, "taint" because Google's culture and hiring preferences have certainly paid off for them in other ways.
- chaostheory 11y ago
  > Nest's competence is design sense/simple ux which Apple already has plenty of but Google doesn't. That makes them far more valuable to Google. Yes, that's my point. Apple buying Nest would keep Google from having better sense about simplicity when it comes to UX particularly when it comes to hardware.
  - Steko 11y ago
    I don't think "buy everyone who's good at X to keep the competition from being able to do X" is a realistic strategy generally. For Apple buying Nest you also have to consider how does Tony Fadell, who has a Jobs type role at Nest, fit into Apple especially given that there are reports that he used to feud with Ive and that may have partly led to his departure. http://www.cultofmac.com/262334/feud-jony-ive-keep-tony-fadell-returning-apple/ http://www.cultofmac.com/262334/feud-jony-ive-keep-tony-fade...

Apple doesn't bother with experiences unless they are a big part of most peoples' days. Fiddling with your thermostat is not a huge part of most peoples' days. Nest has yet to prove that they can make a product that plays a significant role in our lives. Beats has. People wear Beats all day.

chaostheory 11y ago
If that's the case, then why is Apple bothering with Homekit? Nest isn't just about thermostats and fire alarms. Nest is going to encompass your whole house which is the same thing that Homekit aspires to do. I still feel that Apple made a huge mistake by letting Nest go to Google. The main difference between Homekit and Nest is that Nest's products and platform has already been battle tested.

Steko 11y ago

Not to denigrate Nest but I don't think not having them is going to make Apple any less formidable in the home. Nest's competence is design sense/simple ux which Apple already has plenty of but Google doesn't. That makes them far more valuable to Google. Like just imagine a Nest-less world where Google and Apple both release smart thermostats in 2010. The Apple product might look like Nest and the Google one would prolly look like whatever Honeywell was selling at the time.

andybak 11y ago
> Nest's competence is design sense/simple ux which Apple already has plenty of but Google doesn't. I think this trope is rather out of date. If you look at Inbox, Google Play Music, Keep and a few other Google properties, it's not implausible to argue they are ahead of many Apple products.
- Steko 11y ago
  Strange that you go right to Inbox as an example because, like Nest, it was the result of an expensive acquisition of a noted design team. Which just supports my point, that design isn't a core competence at Google. Are they improving? Sure. But, back to devices and Glass itself, Glass sticking out like a sore thumb, users being branded assholes and banned from use all over is an obvious example of just flat out design incompetence. https://twitter.com/jm_denis/status/524968589489479680 https://twitter.com/jm_denis/status/524968589489479680
  - andybak 11y ago
    Isn't there a slight fallacy at the heart of your stance? You seem to be positing an innate, unchangeable taint that can never be eradicated by change - no matter how pervasive that shift becomes.
    - Steko 11y ago
      No I'm positing that this one particular characteristic not only hasn't been completely eradicated yet, but I don't think they're even trying to eradicate it (although they are trying to mitigate it). Fundamentally Apple is still a company run by designers and Google is still a company run by engineering and yes companies can change what they are fundamentally about but no I don't see either of these two have done this. If anything, I see it being reinforced, with this being personified with moves like Jony Ive taking over Forstall's duties and Melissa Mayer needing to leave Google. I don't like the term you've chosen here, "taint" because Google's culture and hiring preferences have certainly paid off for them in other ways.
chaostheory 11y ago
> Nest's competence is design sense/simple ux which Apple already has plenty of but Google doesn't. That makes them far more valuable to Google. Yes, that's my point. Apple buying Nest would keep Google from having better sense about simplicity when it comes to UX particularly when it comes to hardware.
- Steko 11y ago
  I don't think "buy everyone who's good at X to keep the competition from being able to do X" is a realistic strategy generally. For Apple buying Nest you also have to consider how does Tony Fadell, who has a Jobs type role at Nest, fit into Apple especially given that there are reports that he used to feud with Ive and that may have partly led to his departure. http://www.cultofmac.com/262334/feud-jony-ive-keep-tony-fadell-returning-apple/ http://www.cultofmac.com/262334/feud-jony-ive-keep-tony-fade...