Google opens store, more may be coming

Chromebooks and Android stuff?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23992985-googles-first-store-pops-up-in-london.do

@Bass: That's interesting, and puzzling. Apparently it should be all about the ChromeBook which, as far as I know, is the only Google branded product with a price tag, but I'd say that opening up a retail chain for a single device is a little bizarre, even by Google's standards.

We shall see...

Even Yahoo! once had a retail store.

The Nexus One, Droid, ect... Android phones mostly have powered by Google text on them.

The 7" and 10.1" Galaxy Tabs also have tons of Google trademarking on them as do 4 Sony TVs with Google TV, various Logitech devices such as the Revue, ect...

http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&categoryId=8198552921644751999

These days it's hard to find something that doesn't have Google printed on it or referencing it in some way.

What's troublesome is that Google feels the need to expand into the physical world this way. It could mean that they finally hit their plateau. That they can no longer gain ground online.

Google stores would be high rent deadweight that probably won't help.

Instead of opening a store, they should commission some more speed videos.

-Josh

2 hours ago, ComeOnBeer wrote

The Nexus One, Droid, ect... Android phones mostly have powered by Google text on them.

The 7" and 10.1" Galaxy Tabs also have tons of Google trademarking on them as do 4 Sony TVs with Google TV, various Logitech devices such as the Revue, ect...

http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&categoryId=8198552921644751999

These days it's hard to find something that doesn't have Google printed on it or referencing it in some way.

What's troublesome is that Google feels the need to expand into the physical world this way. It could mean that they finally hit their plateau. That they can no longer gain ground online.

Google stores would be high rent deadweight that probably won't help.

Retailing Android devices is the only way Google can make money off Android. Or at least more than what Microsoft makes off Android devices.

@cbae:

Or at least more than what Microsoft makes off Android devices.

That only works for the first world. Where Android really hit it off is the 3rd world with < 2.3. Those device manufacturers and distributors will never give Microsoft a red penny in patent protection scheme-racket money. They would laugh at the proposition of paying for intellectual property.

These are literally companies that can sell millions and disappear off the face of the earth the next business day only to reopen under another set of circumstances. That's where the bulk of the money is made. I'm not talking about metered and audited sales of electronic devices running Android. I am talking about what the west considers the black market.

America and Western Europe are an ideological face for the rest of the world. The rest of the world just doesn't give a damn about what is who's. If they can get their hands on it and load it on a device, it's theirs, and they can sell it.

Google's foray into stores will not last long. Larry Page is el capitan now, and there's no way he's stupid enough to approve going forward. It would be a step backwards for Google.

@ComeOnBeer: As long as MS is making more money from Android than WP7 then I guess they don't really care if the black marketeers slip by.

Not really sure what they're trying to achieve with a store though. By the sounds of it, they're not too sure either.

3 hours ago, ComeOnBeer wrote

@cbae:

*snip*

That only works for the first world. Where Android really hit it off is the 3rd world with < 2.3. Those device manufacturers and distributors will never give Microsoft a red penny in patent protection scheme-racket money. They would laugh at the proposition of paying for intellectual property.

The enormous volumes of piracy in the parts of the world you're referencing (many of whom are most certainly not 3rd World countries) never stopped Microsoft from selling enormous volumes of Windows and making plenty of money from it. Cheap knock-off devices that exist at the fringes of legality aren't really an important target, because the people with significant cash aren't buying them.

Google's foray into stores will not last long. Larry Page is el capitan now, and there's no way he's stupid enough to approve going forward. It would be a step backwards for Google.

Well we agree on something, though I'm not sure I'd attribute it to any great business acumen on the part of Larry Page. It seems to follow the typical Google model of "someone else is doing it and making money, let's try it and see if we make money too" and blindly wandering in to it without any real understanding of why.

Will pop in at the weekend and report back. 

Incidentaly Tottenham Cort Road "TCR" is a road off Oxford Street with pretty much only computer / HiFi / Gadget type shops so its probably a good place for Google to start.

5 hours ago, Ian2 wrote

Will pop in at the weekend and report back. 

Incidentaly Tottenham Cort Road "TCR" is a road off Oxford Street with pretty much only computer / HiFi / Gadget type shops so its probably a good place for Google to start.

Are the electronics stores in TCR sort of like the ones in Times Square in NYC?

@

2 hours ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

Slightly less shady, but yea, same sort of idea.

Yep, you get the ones that target tourists but there are also a lot of legitimate places where you can usually haggle to get a good price on new kit.  On Saturdays there are usually a couple of Computer Fairs off side streets that can be good value if you know what you are looking for. Sad to say that I spent many a payday in my youth walking up and down that road ...

What's the business reason for Microsoft developing WP7 if they truly make more money per device by waving some vague patents around anyone who uses Android?

And where is this obviously massive amount money going to? Shouldn't Microsoft's mobile revenue be through the roof or something?

Microsoft is the only company that actually gloats about being a patent troll in the media. Their goal is to try and make their open source competitors look legally dangerous to use, because they CAN NOT compete using technology or price alone.

This whole Android patent thing reminds me about when they did the patent deal with Novell where they licensed a bunch of patents "for Linux". It was a big deal, Steve Ballmer was all up in this himself saying how Linux users will have to pay up to Microsoft because they like patented everything.

The part that didn't seem all that well advertised at the time is Microsoft also licensed Novell's patents, and for FAR more money then Novell paid for a license to Microsoft's patents. Yes, basically, Microsoft PAID Novell a large sum of cash and gave them full license to all of their patents.

Doesn't make much sense? Consider the value of patent FUD around Linux that Microsoft was pushing very hard at the time. To Ballmer and friends this seems much more valuable than a couple hundred million apparently.

15 minutes ago, Bass wrote

What's the business reason for Microsoft developing WP7 if they truly make more money per device by waving some vague patents around anyone who uses Android?

 

Three screens and the cloud? Convergence of devices will mean you need to be a player in the desktop, mobile and TV markets if you're looking to stick around for the long term. With Windows at the core of Microsoft's business, it makes sense for it to also be on phones and TV (via xbox).

@Bass: Perhaps they think that, over time, they will claim enough market share to make a good profit?  Perhaps the money making from patents is an opportunistic side-line?

Herbie

@Dr Herbie:

So which thing are you arguing, that the whole patent trolling thing is not a sustainable business model? This I can agree with.

I'm not entirely convinced Microsoft is actually making any significant amount of money by acting like a parasite on someone else's product. We do not know the details of any of Microsoft's Android patent deals. And from their previous Linux patent deal attempts, we know that things aren't always as simple as they seem.

28 minutes ago, Bass wrote

What's the business reason for Microsoft developing WP7 if they truly make more money per device by waving some vague patents around anyone who uses Android?

You're misunderstanding. The claim is that Microsoft makes more than what Google does from each Android device sold. Nobody said that Microsoft makes more from each Android device sold than it does from each WP7 device sold.

Clearly, Microsoft wants to sell more WP7 devices than Google sells Android devices. 

And where is this obviously massive amount money going to? Shouldn't Microsoft's mobile revenue be through the roof or something?

Maybe it is. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Microsoft is the only company that actually gloats about being a patent troll in the media. Their goal is to try and make their open source competitors look legally dangerous to use, because they CAN NOT compete using technology or price alone.

It seems that nobody can compete on technology and price alone. Not even Google. How are Android tablet sales compared to the iPad's?

It takes good timing, good marketing, favorable market forces, and even some luck. If you don't have any of these things apart from technology and price, you do the best that you can and bide your time until all of those things work in your favor.

This whole Android patent thing reminds me about when they did the patent deal with Novell where they licensed a bunch of patents "for Linux". It was a big deal, Steve Ballmer was all up in this himself saying how Linux users will have to pay up to Microsoft because they like patented everything.

The part that didn't seem all that well advertised at the time is Microsoft also licensed Novell's patents, and for FAR more money then Novell paid for a license to Microsoft's patents. Yes, basically, Microsoft PAID Novell a large sum of cash and gave them full license to all of their patents.

Doesn't make much sense? Consider the value of patent FUD around Linux that Microsoft was pushing very hard at the time. To Ballmer and friends this seems much more valuable than a couple hundred million apparently.

It may be become that valuable since part of Microsoft's claims against Android seem to be related to the Linux kernel that Android uses.