“At Google I/O, the group’s annual technology showcase event,” Richard Waters and Tim Bradshaw report for The Financial Times, “Sameer Iyengar, a former Google employee who is now a co-founder of app maker Beautylish, questioned whether Google was being bold enough in laying out its tech vision: ‘The thought leadership is maybe absent, compared to where it was in the past.'”
“There is a hard slog ahead. With a disparate group of handset makers in the Android camp, the platform has struggled to match the more polished set of services and hardware that Apple has built around the iPhone, such as Apple Pay and, more recently, Watch,” Waters and Bradshaw report. “Last week, matching — and trying to surpass — Apple was a strong subtext of Google’s pitch to developers. New features included Android Pay, a rival to Apple Pay and a fresh attempt to break into mobile payments after the disappointment of Google Wallet. A new Google Photos app — with the promise of software that can automatically organise libraries of pictures — also echoed capabilities that are already offered by Apple.”
“But in other areas, Google seemed unprepared. While smartwatches based on last year’s Android Wear technology have been put in the shade by the launch of Apple Watch, Google had little new to show off in response. This was a sign that it is surrendering early leadership in wearables to Apple, according to Carolina Milanesi, an analyst at Kantar Worldpanel,” Waters and Bradshaw report. “Yet some of the latest attempts to extend the Android universe clearly play to Google’s strengths. Its new photos app offers free storage for an unlimited number of pictures… Sucking in large volumes of photos also presents a new opportunity for Google to add to its already substantial mass of data about users. Company executives say they have not made plans to scan the pictures for advertising purposes but make no secret of the fact that a person’s photo library comprises a highly valuable source of information about them.”
What ANALyst seems to miss every single time is that Apple’s customers are way different than google’s customers. Every single apple customer has 10 time the value of 10 or more google customers in terms of spending capacity.
Some one who buys apple products is looking for the best quality and features, some one buying a product based on google software is looking for something cheap.
There is not going to be any competition between apple an google until google starts building its products around quality and customer satisfaction on mind and not looking at its customers as simple “products” it can sell to other companies.
Wall Street focuses on one metric and that’s unit sales. As far as Wall Street is concerned, Apple is the company struggling to keep up with Android and Apple is being valued as such. If Apple had such a lead you wouldn’t be reading about Apple being doomed every quarter and Apple’s institutional ownership would be far higher than it is now. I realize Apple has all the money, but Apple’s “leading” position doesn’t seem to be all that clear-cut to investors. Every quarter brings the question of “Is Apple going to be able to sell enough iPhones?” or “has iPhone sales reach a plateau?” You’ll almost never hear those constant questions about any other company in terms of sales.
All I’m trying to say is that for the exception of a huge, huge lead in market cap, investors don’t see Apple as having an unassailable lead in anything and that’s what has me puzzled. I think if it were true, Apple’s institutional ownership would be much, much higher like Microsoft or Google or even Hewlett-Packard. The way I see it, Wall Street thinks Apple is the company with the “long slog ahead.”
What’s this nonsense about Google/Android struggling to “keep up” with Apple/iOS. “Keeping up” means that you are just about or at least nearly even. A guy in a wheelchair does not “struggle” to “keep up” with a Ferrari, because he’s nowhere close and never will be. Even if technically illiterate people are too stupid to understand that easy fact.
‘Googled’ once meant to find relevant information through a search of web pages using the Google search engine by the user.
‘Googled’ now means to have all personal user data mined, as a result of Google web searches or use of Google apps, and be targeted by ads relevant to the personal information gleaned through such searches and use of apps, and have such information sold to 3rd parties.
If you use Google search or apps, you’ve been ‘Googled’!
It’s a damned shame that Apple has fallen into the same hole that others already have — perverting the true meaning of words. “Epicenter” is — or was — a valuable and useful word to describe a specific thing. Now, the advertising and general bullshit assholes have debased it until it’s lost its value, just as they did with “organic “and many other words.
WWDC 2015 can’t handle the excitement.
What ANALyst seems to miss every single time is that Apple’s customers are way different than google’s customers. Every single apple customer has 10 time the value of 10 or more google customers in terms of spending capacity.
Some one who buys apple products is looking for the best quality and features, some one buying a product based on google software is looking for something cheap.
There is not going to be any competition between apple an google until google starts building its products around quality and customer satisfaction on mind and not looking at its customers as simple “products” it can sell to other companies.
It is arguable that Google and Apple do not compete in the same market.
Wall Street focuses on one metric and that’s unit sales. As far as Wall Street is concerned, Apple is the company struggling to keep up with Android and Apple is being valued as such. If Apple had such a lead you wouldn’t be reading about Apple being doomed every quarter and Apple’s institutional ownership would be far higher than it is now. I realize Apple has all the money, but Apple’s “leading” position doesn’t seem to be all that clear-cut to investors. Every quarter brings the question of “Is Apple going to be able to sell enough iPhones?” or “has iPhone sales reach a plateau?” You’ll almost never hear those constant questions about any other company in terms of sales.
All I’m trying to say is that for the exception of a huge, huge lead in market cap, investors don’t see Apple as having an unassailable lead in anything and that’s what has me puzzled. I think if it were true, Apple’s institutional ownership would be much, much higher like Microsoft or Google or even Hewlett-Packard. The way I see it, Wall Street thinks Apple is the company with the “long slog ahead.”
What’s this nonsense about Google/Android struggling to “keep up” with Apple/iOS. “Keeping up” means that you are just about or at least nearly even. A guy in a wheelchair does not “struggle” to “keep up” with a Ferrari, because he’s nowhere close and never will be. Even if technically illiterate people are too stupid to understand that easy fact.
Google wants the easy part of the pie, the eating.
They don’t want to make and bake the pie.
Apple has shown how you really rake in the money, but Google doesn’t want to get serious about cutting edge device development for the long run.
Google and Apple don’t compete with one another?
This jackass sees things differently:
http://www.bidnessetc.com/44157-google-inc-a-longterm-threat-for-apple-inc-jefferies/
google competes with Mossad, the KGB and North Korea.
‘Googled’
Have you been ‘Googled’?
‘Googled’ once meant to find relevant information through a search of web pages using the Google search engine by the user.
‘Googled’ now means to have all personal user data mined, as a result of Google web searches or use of Google apps, and be targeted by ads relevant to the personal information gleaned through such searches and use of apps, and have such information sold to 3rd parties.
If you use Google search or apps, you’ve been ‘Googled’!
You’re not using Google.
Google is using you.
🖖😀⌚️
It’s a damned shame that Apple has fallen into the same hole that others already have — perverting the true meaning of words. “Epicenter” is — or was — a valuable and useful word to describe a specific thing. Now, the advertising and general bullshit assholes have debased it until it’s lost its value, just as they did with “organic “and many other words.