Entelligence: 'Don't be evil' isn't the basis for a relationship
By Michael Gartenberg 
posted January 15th 2010 11:02AM
posted January 15th 2010 11:02AM
Entelligence is a column by technology strategist and author Michael Gartenberg, a man whose desire for a delicious cup of coffee and a quality New York bagel is dwarfed only by his passion for tech. In these articles, he'll explore where our industry is and where it's going -- on both micro and macro levels -- with the unique wit and insight only he can provide.
As nice as the Nexus One is -- and in my opinion it's the nicest Android device on the market -- it makes me wonder what Google's up to with Android and why it's even in the mobile OS business, let alone selling phones directly to consumers. I'd ask the same about Chrome and Chrome OS as well. Android is particularly puzzling, however: Google licenses it for free and it's turned up on some rather interesting devices, but none of those devices have helped build out an ecosystem. Many of them are proprietary and Android is rapidly becoming fragmented -- the Archos5 Internet Tablet, for example, can't make official use of the Android marketplace. But nothing is as strange as Google getting into the hardware business directly and selling devices, albeit unlocked and unsubsidized ones, directly to consumers.
Certainly that idea can't be going over too well with partners and licensees. Just imagine being Motorola and having the best Android device on the market for just a few months until the Droid was upstaged by the Nexus One. What about LG and Samsung, who were barely acknowledged at the Nexus One event?
In fact, why does Google need to be in the mobile OS space at all? Google products have been key standards for almost all mobile platforms as a defacto choice. Apple currently has Google as the default for search and location- based services in the iPhone, and there's built-in support for Gmail. Is getting into the OS business really a better move than partnering?
It's time for Google to think less about "don't be evil" and time to think about how to be a good partner and friend. |
Chrome, the browser and the OS, beg the same question. Google search is the default choice for Firefox, and the Mozilla / Google relationship made a lot of sense -- and a lot of money. Chrome OS muddies the waters and will likely create confusion among vendors as they try to decide between Chrome and Android. What's more, the planned Google Chrome OS hardware will likely make more than one OEM re-think what platforms it will support.
For more than a decade, we've heard the Google mantra, "don't be evil." I'm not suggesting that Google's done anything wrong, but the company's actions of late just don't seem like the best way to make friends and influence others. Lately, when the topic of Google comes up, one word keeps getting repeated over and over. Hubris. It's time for Google to think less about "don't be evil" and time to think about how to be a good partner and friend -- just because it can enter a business doesn't mean it's good idea for Google or Google's partners. We need look no further than ancient Greek mythology to know where hubris leads.
Michael Gartenberg is vice president of strategy and analysis at Interpret, LLC. His weblog can be found at gartenblog.net. Contact him at gartenberg AT gmail DOT com. Views expressed here are his own.
The more people use Android, Chrome, Chrome OS, G-Mail, etc. the more information they gather on individuals. With that information, they can more effectively do targeted advertising. Personally, I'm uncomfortable with a single company possessing so much information on individuals.
Why is Engadget posting a story by a Microsoft shill as if it was a neutral article. According to Wikipedia, this guy was hired by Microsoft in 2007 as an "Enthusiast Evangelist" to publicize Windows Vista. Apparently, he has written many articles in the past critisizing Linux and Google.
Has anyone stopped to think that the big G is using its Android OS, Chrome OS, and Chrome browser to effectively deliver more ads based on individual user data. We already have admob ads in a lot of the free apps on Android devices (hell, I see them in tons of iphone apps). Its just like when you do a google search you see ads related to your search. Now add that to your Android OS set top box (oh its coming) or your Android microwave. Example, when you search for the Baskin Robbins 31 Flavors, or your your deluxe brand of Preparation H on your brand new Android Os phone. When you get home and turn on the tv thats connected to you Android set-top box you will see ads about Hemorroids and commercials about 31 flavors when you go to nuke last nights left overs. Its just a thought....I think Google will eventually partner with online content delivery companies or cable companies for its set top box. Google's core biz has always been search and ads....with its step in to the OS and browser realm we will see more individual specific ads. I have no problem with that.....But give the consumer some type play here. Google can't charge us a huge amount for the devices we will help you make money with (DON'T BE EVIL).....I understand the early adopter usually bares the burden of helping the device manufacturer recoup the capital spent on the manufacturing, development, marketing etc of the device....But I think this is a different business model here with the consumer making google money by viewing its ads and using its search.....And that, people is what we call the big picture.
"Why does Google need to be in the mobile OS space at all?"
When I was a Blackberry, I used Google Maps and GOOG-411.
Now that I'm a Droid user, I use those two plus Google Apps (Gmail, Calendar, Contacts), Navigation, Picasa, Voice, Listen and Talk. Oh, and Google is my default search for everything.
Did you really need me to tell you the benefit to Google in writing a mobile OS? What a worthless article.
Bang, you nailed him.
Maybe now you get to have his bagel tomorrow :) Fair is fair.
ecosystem
noun Ecology a biological community of interacting organisms and their physical environment.
(I know I said it before, it just annoys me that the engadget people love that word so much, so that they use it wrong is right up my alley.)
GOOGLE HERE WITH ANOTHER FANTASTIC PRODUCT!!!!
I could not disagree more.
As a consumer I look positively upon cooperations who look to change the way the industry does things in order to hopefully create a better environment for the consumer. Google has already established itself as a powerhouse. Now it is in the position to change the nonsense that most of the other major players potentiate.
I think that Google can afford to NOT care what its partners think, because partners only think of themselves. Google can think of whats best for the consumer and "do no evil"
Google has NOT entered the smartphone hardware business, they have entered the smartphone *reseller* business. Their ultimate goal is to eliminate carrier exclusivity on high-end Android phones. They want you to be able to go to their online store, pick out a phone, and then pick out a carrier. Of course it isn't there yet, but they've got to start somewhere.
I learned this information from a cool site called Engadget, you should read it once in a while before you write silly articles.
i wish we could downrate articles..
-__________-
@adrianomelette I bet this Gartenberg would be ranked down to oblivion.
@adrianomelette & @ Thinker
Entelligence: 'Don't be evil' isn't the basis for a relationship
By Michael Gartenberg posted Jan 15th 2010 11:02AM
---
This article has been down-ranked into oblivion. View article.
@cray even... :(
having read several Gartenberg rants, I've come to the conclusion he's an opinionated dickwad. His tagline is seriously annoying. His opinions are annoying.
I believe Engadget publishes his crap only to annoy us.
I think its all the bloggers and media making a bigger issue about this then everyone else is. Google didnt make a phone, the only difference here is that they are selling the phone. HTC made the phone so there is nothing different happening here to the likes of Moto, LG or Samsung. They were competing with HTC in the first place. Google in my eyes did the right thing, they need to have a phone out there that sets the standard for android truly pushing the OS to its limits and showing what it can do. Alot of these companies seemed to wanna stay with in the mid to low range phone arena which wasnt really offering much of a competition to the iphone. I do agree there are too many different versions of Android out there which is hurting the developers. Other then that STOP HYPING THIS WHOLE GOOGLE RIPPING OFF ITS PARTNERS FOR A GOOD COUPLE MORE READS ON YOUR BLOG!
I'm getting tired of this guy's pro-industry, anti-consumer blather. He entirely misses the fact that people LOVE android, LOVE Chrome, and probably will love Chrome OS, too. Android is the only viable open-source OS for smartphones, and that is a huge deal. It's about time we got this awesome hardware out from under microsoft, rim, palm and apple! I'm gonna go ahead and thank google for ignoring people like gartenberg.
Chrome OS: Distraction, or just because we want
Chrome: They are acknowledging that if the browsers stop using Google, they are in trouble, and they also need a reference platform for their product (think: "Wave does not work in your browser? try Chrome")
Nexus One: I think they are sending a message to telcos (real evil) and they must be playing with the idea of ad subsidized phones (instead of telcos subsidized)
I don't think the author of this article is in a position to be giving Google relationship advice.
This article makes a lot of sense. I share many of these same thoughts. Not really too clear to what google is trying to prove. One thing is for sure, too much of one thing is not a good thing. Too much Google!
has Google defined what they think is EVIL?
This post is complete crap. Google SHOULD be getting into all these different markets. They are the only company that try to help out the consumer instead of raping them. If they never entered the phone market, we would all be using crippled iPhones and paying out the rear. With Android we can do whatever we want with our phones and use things like Google Voice etc.
Why with a theme of "Don't Be Evil" is the Google logo lit with "monster lighting" from below like in old monster movies. Looks menacing.
it's simple.....everybody thinks that google is out to dominate a market, but sometimes they want to simply stimulate competition... android it just for that. when ever some one gets to big, google steps in. apple got to big with its iphone google comes out with android. microsoft gets to big to big with office and windows, google steps in there as well.....
sometimes they just want to make sure there is a level playing ground, even if the do not succeed at it, they shake up the market enough to keep the big boys at bay. google voice is another one.....
I really don't want to see another Gartenberg FUD piece about Android. You don't like it. We get it. Stop dragging less informed readers down with you.
google only wants more advertising dollars and control. anyone with half a brain probably should fear google. unless you're sheep. baaaah
@majg
Thank F someone posted the bleedingly obvious which for some reason isn't mentioned often and most consumers just miss entirely (like a number of people commenting here)
Google isn't a search, email, video, mapping, cloud, book, blog, photo, dns, OS, app or device company
Google is an advertising company. All their services are built to either/both harvest info about you and push ads at you. That is the primary function and gets Google's primary development dollars.
Of course they want to release an OS, not to create competition, not to kill MS but to get total access to you for ad profiling.
@majg
Thank F someone posted the bleedingly obvious which for some reason isn't mentioned often and most consumers just miss entirely (like a number of people commenting here)
Google isn't a search, email, video, mapping, cloud, book, blog, photo, dns, OS, app or device company
Google is an advertising company. All their services are built to either/both harvest info about you and push ads at you. That is the primary function and gets Google's primary development dollars.
Of course they want to release an OS, not to create competition, not to kill MS but to get total access to you for ad profiling.
How can the "vice president of strategy and analysis" write such lame article?
for $549 you can buy a unlocked n900 and the nokia n900 is one, if not the best cellphone around here.
Anyways Google Nexus was a great disappointment, it is not so impressible, in fact, if you exclude the screen, it is just a average smartphone, and for over $500 is not a bargain at all.
@magallanes
If you get the nexus one unlocked on the non contract t mobile plans, it's the cheapest top end smart phone you can buy over two years.
The n900 is not as good as the nexus one's hardware. Don't delude yourself.
I am very surprised by this article as well. Google offers progressive and innovative products to users for free by advertising. Chrome with webkit and Android for phones are essential to continuing this web experience through all of google's cloud based services. They are looking to corner all markets by saying that regardless of the platform (Mac, PC, phone, tablet) they can create a platform in which all of your services will integrate better across your office, home and phone, and better yet free open source. Imagine our web and navigation experience if google never existed. Their free and open source products have changed the way that everyone (mac, pc and phone users) engage our technology for the better. Google is not looking to outsell the Droid with the N1, they are looking to raise the bar for Android smart phones and the way google and distribute more Android devices period.
Michael Gartenberg must have missed the part where a Motorola exec Engadget talked to during CES said the first Google phone was HTC's, and the second will be Motorola's.
Why is this a featured article? Why did it even get posted in the first place? Repeating after previous commenters I can say that this simply rumbling, speculative and bitter.
I disagree! Unless you do not like the point he is making.
Michael Gartenberg is giving us "the state of the union" seeing how we have received so many posts about Android and the Nexus One phone here at Engadget. He is getting us to think beyond all the news. Someone that is buying a Nexus One phone is not necessarily buying into a uniform platform such as the iPhone or the Palm Pre. Not everyone understands this issue as clearly as you might imagine. And it is good for people to make informed decision. The truth never hurts anyone except those who benefit from having it concealed.
Good point and well thought out!
"Good point..." I am referring to Michael Gartenberg.
I think there can be a couple of reasons:
Making Android and Chrome/Chrome OS available, free and open source,
1) aims to provide quality products easily available to whoever might want them. They are increasing the choices available. Their business model seems to be to do whatever is best for the consumers - which doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.
2) be a little more self-dependent, trying to make sure if tomorrow iPhone OS ditches Google for Yahoo as the default search engine, Google can still make money from mobile. The flip side is that this strategy involves consumers getting more and more dependent on Google, which can be risky for the long term
Very much Agree with the Article.
How does it not make sense for google to go this route? They are one of the few if only OS's that can compete with Apple, and Apple is headed in the obvious direction cell phones need to go. Android needs decent hardware to perform at the level it must to compete with the iphone's smooth, snappy processor. Only Motorola even TRIED to put out a phone comparable to the iphone's specs. If im google id be furious that the carriers were bringing the OS along so slowly with 192mb ram here, a 528mhz processor there, It took TMobile 4 android phones to get above 256mb ram and even then they had the same processor and tiny screen. Instead of milking and milking and milking customers like TMO, Google put out what is arguably the best cell phone available. With a little more advertising they'll be on their way to catching up to Apple's market share. The OS is clean, it just needed a decent phone to run on, and now it has that.
@Gartenberg, just because Google does not conform to what you expect a business should/shouldn't do doesn't necessarily mean they are shooting themselves in the foot...
You ask why Android is free allowing fragmentation then have you considered that Google brought out Nexus One to champion the standard Android platform?
As for a reason for Chrome, Android/Chrome OS. have you not considered that Google may want to experiment and diversify?? I thought it would make good business sense to do so... when you have become a top search provider and have the power then why not dabble in some vertical integration and invite the competitors along for the ride? At the end of the day, the more who get involved, the more people who will use Google regardless in what shape or form it is...
This article is nothing but a collection of whinings.
1. Droid is NOT worse than nexus. Droid has keyboard, nexus doesn't. Droid is squarish, nexus is roundish. The have as much in common as iPhone and Nexus.
2. The author has this idea that Google is obligated to cater to its partners. Google gave them the OS, there's nothing that says they can't make a device of their own.
3. Google makes a lot of cool stuff. And their philosophy is to release it first and see where it takes them. Hence the existence of so many products by google that have no coherent structure, and many of google services exist in beta versions for a LONG TIME for this same exact reason. They don't have to have a "WHY". It's a model that keeps investors interested, and keeps US interested. How's it unfair to Motorola? Motorola basically got pulled out of the gutter thanks to the google's popularity, and practically-free phone operating system.
After all, EVERYBODY hates apple for how closed off they are. They run the company with very little input from the users. The basically tell people what to like. YET, there's nothing wrong with it (ie, Apple chose to completely screw apple computer builders in the 90's); this is how they choose to run the company . Imagine apple gave motorola iPhoneOS, do you then propose that apple shouldn't release a phone anymore?
I agree with Gartenberg, I don't see any major changes as a result of the Nexus One, I'll be amazed if Verizon allows it on their network.
TMobile is in trouble and may not be around as we know it this time next year, they're desperate to add new subscribers, being a European company, I can see that they would adopt this business model.
Also, as a loyal TMobile customer for a decade, it chaps my ass I can't get the upgrade price because I have a family plan, particularly since I bought the first Android phone over a year ago.
I agree with the hubris comment, I think companies will have second thoughts about allowing Google access to their intellectual property, and I think Google abandoned the "do no evil" some time ago, right about the time they agreed to filter search results in China.
Dunno about you-all but I think it's about time to look critically at Google and carefully consider how much data about you you allow them to collect.
@TFNN Verizon pushed the Droid hard since it can compete with a phone they don't yet have access to (iPhone) and if you checked google.com/phone you'd already know that the Nexus One will be available on Verizon this Spring.
I seriously doubt that Google is brash enough to put a Verizon logo on one of THEIR pages violating trademark if a deal had not yet been struck.
Also you'll note the link to droiddoes.com near the Verizon logo. Verizon is very much loving Google at this point and Google is definitely reciprocating. After all the two companies will only benefit from one another. Google getting more eyeballs and Verizon selling more plans and charging for more data use.
Google has been growing horizontally for a long time now.
They are starting to look for synergies between their products and try to grow vertically.
I think it's a smart move.
Google prefers to be in the smartphone OS market so that it has more control over the devices that are gonna be used to access its services.
it permits Google to provide its produtcs with a good advertising and an easy access for the customers.
Partnering with Apple to leave the OS market would in my opinion make google weaker and more dependent on Apple of Microsoft who will try to grow vertically too and will provide access to more and more services that will be very well implemented in their devices and very well promoted.
What if Google is not out to make friends anymore?
I think Google is setting out to have a finger in every cookie jar and honey pot in the tech industry. First they started off with having their on-line services become the norm and now they wish to move on to devices. Sure, this is a slap in the face of their partners, but I think in the end Google wants to have a monopoly in evderything it does.
Considering this view of Google's plans, these moves with Chrome and Android and Nexus One become the logical steps. The question then is, that can Google do it alone?
Surely though, Google is such a large and almost obscure company in its aims and directions, that it is only the next step to move into the mobile device market. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Google moves into the laptop/desktop space next. Long gone are the days that Google was just a search engine.
Google is preparing to change the entire mobile phone business model. I think putting flash on the Nexus 1, and offering it unlocked are the first steps. Google became a multi-billion dollar company by giving away it's product for free and making money from ads. I think they're going to do the same thing with android and their google phones. I predict that within the next few years we'll see a free service plan offered by google. They'll make their money buy selling the devices directly to the consumer and ads, which will become more dynamic and more personalized.
A 'technology strategist' such as Gartenburg should realise that there are no 'friends' in business. What a preposterous statement. In the tech world, if you aren't moving, you are falling behind.
Google got in to Browsers for the same reason Microsoft did. Also, Google pays firefox a crapload of money to be the default browser. The larger the Chrome market share gets the less Google needs to pay out. Google wants to own the web, some articles predict mobile web usage will dominate desktop web usage within 5 years. Google wants to be ready and wants mobile users using their web services by default.
This guy can seriously suck an ass. Why is apple allowed to make a cellphone?? They aren't in the cell phone market, and they obviously don't give a rats ass if they are making any friends. And who the hell are you to be speculating on a company's corporate direction. I'm sure a lot of smart people already took these issues into consideration. That's there fucking job. You obviously have no connections with motorola, samsung, lg, apple, or any other phone manufacturer to tell for certain that anyone was actually upset that google is selling a phone. It's called competition, and anyone could have sold that phone with HTC as the manufacturer. it's not as though google opened up a factory and started shitting out phones. They wanted a developer phone for there mobile platform. What the hell does chrome OS have to do with it?? Why isn't google allowed to join the operating system game? It's not as though they don't have some of the smartest people on earth programming for them.
Please, for future reference, Michael Gartenberg. Shut your fucking hole if you don't know what you are talking about.