Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Jul 2012 00:59 UTC
Google "Google today announced financial results for the quarter ended June 30, 2012. 'Google standalone had a strong quarter with 21% year-on-year revenue growth, and we launched a bunch of exciting new products at I/O - in particular the Nexus 7 tablet, which has received rave reviews,' said Larry Page, CEO of Google, 'This quarter is also special because Motorola is now part of the Google family, and we're excited about the potential to build great devices for users.'"
Order by: Score:
Comment by some1
by some1 on Fri 20th Jul 2012 02:46 UTC
some1
Member since:
2010-10-05

ref vs. href typo in the link

Reply Score: 2

tomcat
Member since:
2006-01-06

Pretty much zip.

Reply Score: 1

Johann Chua Member since:
2005-07-22

And that's relevant because...?

Reply Score: 2

bitwelder Member since:
2010-04-27

So what? The entire Google business is centered around advertisement (and search). Everything else is there just to keep the main business growing.

Reply Score: 2

Radio Member since:
2009-06-20

I think they recognize that fact and are actively looking into diversification (hence Motorola, hence Google Play Music/Movies/etc., hence the Nexus Q, etc.).

Reply Score: 3

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, advertising is also kinda big in music (~radio model) or films (similarly) ;)

And as for Motorola... I don't know, I'm not sure if buying a stumbling (for the past few years) phone maker is the best thing to do when wishing to diversify. Probably Google also had (at least largely) in mind the Moto patent chest, and/or they were forced a bit (remember how, a year ago and about a week before the Google+Moto announcement, Motorola CEO said they can go with patents after other Android makers, and adopt WinPhone?)

Reply Score: 2

l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

Pretty much zip.


Well, I don't know, maybe you could find some companies out there, who'd be really happy to see their main line of businness be as profitable as Google's (and still be able to spend on Motorola, and be able to offer some hw at manufact. price, and be able to work on a line of new stuff). I would be.

Reply Score: 3

arpan Member since:
2006-07-30

True, but a single source of income also means that Google are vulnerable.

What if after their contract is up, Mozilla decide to go with Bing. What if Apple & Samsung stop using Google as the default search engine. That would have a huge impact on Google's income.

Reply Score: 4

acobar Member since:
2005-11-15

Hum, lets recap a long list of things/companies that or were in the path or tried it latter.
On online advertising:
- Crushed all others;

On search:
- Altavista - crushed;
- Yahoo (search) - crushed;
- Bing - failed.

On browsers:
- raised to 2nd position even though was last to arrive. With the explosion of smart-phones, lined to be the first.

On Phones:
- Nokia - crushed;
- RIM - crushed;
- Palm - crushed;
- Apple - failed to get market leadership.

On tablets:
- Little success so far, but improving.

On maps:
- Crushed all others.

On online services (mail, office):
- getting their share.

On social nOt-working:
- Seems like Google+ is improving.

We cannot say that Google created all things or were first to the market in pretty much any segment they do business, but they know better than any other company I know how the leverage what is there to help improve their own business and, while doing it, also helping foster a lot of FOSS projects.

Also, they put a lot of effort on partnership. That was a strong point of Microsoft before they became the leviathan they are today and started to disrespect or neglect the ties they had acting like a dictator and pissing off left and right. Hope google does not follow this path.

Oh, yeah, Firefox user here.

Reply Score: 8

judgen Member since:
2006-07-12

Google+ might look like a failiure, but it is not. It is growing and the setup of it all is not like facebook where you can physically track a person down that you disagree with, Google+ without a doubt is the only competitor to facebook that matters. And facebook is going to be the next myspace soon unless major changes is made to their concept. Guess who will pick up the pieces?

Last i checked, facebook is till bleeding users to an extent almost unfathomable in the west. They claim they are growing in the far east, but even though they are at the same amount of users, the relative purchase power of lets say fillipino or chinese users is alot less. Thus ads does not matter as much. Add to that the failiure of localization of ads on facebook. When i was in Cambodia and used facebook non of the adds were in champa, and seriously.. Almost none of the champa populace would understand english ads and much less buy something from those ads.

Reply Score: 4

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

the setup of it all is not like facebook where you can physically track a person down that you disagree with

Hm?

When i was in Cambodia and used facebook non of the adds were in champa, and seriously.. Almost none of the champa populace would understand english ads and much less buy something from those ads.

When you used FB ...was that when you were logged, I presume? I'd guess FB can localise ads also per user, not only per coordinates.


Overall, the dynamics of such services tend to be too chaotic (like with social networks in general - the people kind) to predict a real demise or rise at this point in time. And FB might be just settling itself into long-term equilibrium in the west.

Reply Score: 2

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Google+ might look like a failiure, but it is not. It is growing and the setup of it all is not like facebook where you can physically track a person down that you disagree with, Google+ without a doubt is the only competitor to facebook that matters. And facebook is going to be the next myspace soon unless major changes is made to their concept. Guess who will pick up the pieces?


Wishful thinking. Literally none of the people on my friends list belongs to G+. It's a ghost town. There's zero incentive to use it, from my standpoint. Furthermore, I don't want Google having that much information about me or my friends.

Reply Score: 2

spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

The default search engine of the most popular browser (more than 50% market share) is Bing. If Mozilla decided to change the default search engine it would have a little impact, Apple and Samsung even less. When people search something on the net, they 'Google' it, they don't 'Bing' it. They just go to www.google.com

Reply Score: 0

franksands Member since:
2009-08-18

As far as I know, the default search engine for IE8 is google. I think in IE9 google comes by default too.

Reply Score: 1

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

The default search engine of the most popular browser (more than 50% market share) is Bing. If Mozilla decided to change the default search engine it would have a little impact

How do you come up with "more than 50%"? None of the several data sources on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers fits that (and it shows that Mozilla defaults have comparable reach to the two other top browsers).

Reply Score: 2

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

True, but a single source of income also means that Google are vulnerable.

What if after their contract is up, Mozilla decide to go with Bing. What if Apple & Samsung stop using Google as the default search engine. That would have a huge impact on Google's income.


Yes, and that was exactly my point. For all of its various projects, Google primarily makes money from a single source: advertising. Which means it's far easier to disrupt their business.

Reply Score: 3