Could the M8 become WP version of the Galaxy?

[Nogitsune Micah]

No Micah your a hater and what you post shows it is true.

I don't need to argue real facts from your delusions...because that is entirely the case here,like to your reference to being a troll....or your delusions of the sd cards outside of your fantasy world solely based on your usage of your phone.

Nope..nor will I engage you in any type of debate just SO You can continue to derail another HTC m8 thread, since that is precisely your goals..see you really don't want this phone to succeed,and have proven that over and over,all in the disguise of stating your opinion. The only reason I can figure out is that the moderators here are also Android haters and they too feel as you do about it..otherwise they would have shut you down long ago..and it's strange because I thought this site had rules against doing this very thing...

We are done..

I really am not sure how my opinion(or using your word "Delusions") is any worse than your opinions about SD cards? It's like saying you're welcome to believe that about SD cards, but i can't XD

But yes we are done lol. Too funny XD

 

[Adrynalyne]

NO more than yours Thanks!
When you start off with "Everyone I know...."

that can be 1 to a million or no one but voices in your head So your "Anecdotal Statistics" can apply to you<3

The difference between you and me is I say ' Everyone I know' and you say
'Everyone'. Mine is a fact,yours is not.

 

[Mr. MacPhisto]

I can agree with a lot of this. Managing apps is a thing of the past, but the rest sounds fine to me. The big problem is that even though Verizon management is excited about Windows phone that doesn't necessarily translate into sales reps pushing them. I hope the M8 does well and others like LG and Samsung take notice and start making nice Windows phones.

The difficult thing is changing the culture on the sales floor for Verizon and elsewhere. That's why Verizon actually actively lobbied HTC with Microsoft for the M8 to happen. They are doing the same thing with LG and Samsung while also encouraging Lenovo to make Motorola phone available in Android and Windows Phone when they fully take over ops. The idea is that perception for Windows Phone will change when they see it running the same hardware - that at least communicates the idea of a level playing field. I keep hearing the G3 is due soon and has been testing with Windows Phone for a couple of months. The biggest barrier with Samsung is getting them to drop the physical button and the capacitives next to it. Most other manufacturers are ditching the capacitive or physical buttons on the bottom.

From an OEM perspective, pushing Windows Phone now is a no brainer, but they can't just ramp up production. They can make a handset able to be used either way so they can adapt to trends while encouraging market growth. Like I said, Samsung cares less due to volume, but LG, Lenovo, HTC, and smaller handset makers do care. Patent issues will crop up for OnePlus and others that will not crop up with Microsoft. MS' patent portfolio and ability to indemnify OEMs is appealing and something that cannot be offered with Android. The margin on many phones could increase by $15 a pop when you factor in patent fees and service license fees and that plays out at scale. Just a guess, but I'd wager HTC would much rather sell the One M8 with Windows over the Android version because they'll make more money on the Windows version. Rumor is that margins on Windows Phones since Microsoft got rid of the fees runs about 50% higher than margins on Android phones. Play that out over 100,000 units or hundreds of thousands and that is millions of extra dollars in profits. The challenge is growing it. Verizon expect that most of the growth will come outside of the US at first, though they expect an uptick in the US in the Fall as more handsets come to market from a variety of OEMs. Android grew largely because it had such a variety of options at many price ranges. Windows Phone looks to finally have the options and be on all the carriers in the US.

Google does have things to worry about, despite what some may think. On the Android side, they are reliant on Samsung. Completely (kinda)hypothetical, but what would happen if Samsung decided to make their own store, use Microsoft location services, mapping, and Bing, and work with MS on a rebranded, heavily optimized version of IE and renamed it Nebula (or something like that)? If most of the apps came over, most people wouldn't notice. Google probably also would be forced to allow their apps in the Samsung Store just like they are in the App Store. It would still be Android, but it would not be what Google wants. I can guarantee that Google never wished for a single manufacturer to be so powerful, but a large amount of Google clout and Google's lifeblood for advertising relies on Samsung - and Samsung knows it. What will Google do if Samsung demands revenue from Google Play purchases made on Samsung devices?

 

[Adrynalyne]

The difficult thing is changing the culture on the sales floor for Verizon and elsewhere. That's why Verizon actually actively lobbied HTC with Microsoft for the M8 to happen. They are doing the same thing with LG and Samsung while also encouraging Lenovo to make Motorola phone available in Android and Windows Phone when they fully take over ops. The idea is that perception for Windows Phone will change when they see it running the same hardware - that at least communicates the idea of a level playing field. I keep hearing the G3 is due soon and has been testing with Windows Phone for a couple of months. The biggest barrier with Samsung is getting them to drop the physical button and the capacitives next to it. Most other manufacturers are ditching the capacitive or physical buttons on the bottom.

From an OEM perspective, pushing Windows Phone now is a no brainer, but they can't just ramp up production. They can make a handset able to be used either way so they can adapt to trends while encouraging market growth. Like I said, Samsung cares less due to volume, but LG, Lenovo, HTC, and smaller handset makers do care. Patent issues will crop up for OnePlus and others that will not crop up with Microsoft. MS' patent portfolio and ability to indemnify OEMs is appealing and something that cannot be offered with Android. The margin on many phones could increase by $15 a pop when you factor in patent fees and service license fees and that plays out at scale. Just a guess, but I'd wager HTC would much rather sell the One M8 with Windows over the Android version because they'll make more money on the Windows version. Rumor is that margins on Windows Phones since Microsoft got rid of the fees runs about 50% higher than margins on Android phones. Play that out over 100,000 units or hundreds of thousands and that is millions of extra dollars in profits. The challenge is growing it. Verizon expect that most of the growth will come outside of the US at first, though they expect an uptick in the US in the Fall as more handsets come to market from a variety of OEMs. Android grew largely because it had such a variety of options at many price ranges. Windows Phone looks to finally have the options and be on all the carriers in the US.

Google does have things to worry about, despite what some may think. On the Android side, they are reliant on Samsung. Completely (kinda)hypothetical, but what would happen if Samsung decided to make their own store, use Microsoft location services, mapping, and Bing, and work with MS on a rebranded, heavily optimized version of IE and renamed it Nebula (or something like that)? If most of the apps came over, most people wouldn't notice. Google probably also would be forced to allow their apps in the Samsung Store just like they are in the App Store. It would still be Android, but it would not be what Google wants. I can guarantee that Google never wished for a single manufacturer to be so powerful, but a large amount of Google clout and Google's lifeblood for advertising relies on Samsung - and Samsung knows it. What will Google do if Samsung demands revenue from Google Play purchases made on Samsung devices?

What would they do? Bribe developers? Because few will jump ship unless the platform is a winner and as we have seen, great platforms don't always bring in developers. Google Play has 3x as many apps as Amazon. It may look like Google relies on Samsung, but the reality couldn't be further from the truth. Google relies on ad revenue and any platform brings it in. On top of that, Android made Samsung, not the other way around.Samsung had no winning OS before Android. Android allowed them to thrive in the mobile space. If Samsung falls or jumps ship, another OEM will fill the vacuum, and it will be easy due to little competition. Samsung wants to leave Android I am sure, but there is a reason they haven't and cannot yet--they have no app ecosystem. Hence, Tizen was put on hold. Bribing developers only goes so far, as MS has seen.

 

[a5cent]

It may look like Google relies on Samsung, but the reality couldn't be further from the truth. Google relies on ad revenue and any platform brings it in. On top of that, Android made Samsung, not the other way around. Samsung had no winning OS before Android. Android allowed them to thrive in the mobile space.

I think not. The overwhelming majority of consumers don't buy an Android phone. They buy a Samsung phone, just like they buy a Nokia phone or an Apple phone. Those are also the brand names into which billions of marketing dollars are poured each year world wide. Nobody really advertises Android, iOS or WP.

You might think that Google being somewhat reliant on Samsung is FUD, but pretty much nobody in the industry would agree with you. The entire business world has been speculating for years how Samsung might eventually leverage their power over Google, and Google Search can surface literally hundreds of articles on how Google's executives have been scrambling to keep Samsung's power in check (here's the very first hit Google search provided). Google wouldn't do that if they felt completely unaffected by what Samsung might or might not do and had nothing to fear.

 

[Adrynalyne]

I think not. The overwhelming majority of consumers don't buy an Android phone.

Thats because Android is an OS, not a phone. So we agree there. Here is the reality of it. If you don't have the apps, you don't have the marketshare. Google doesn't license Android, so and they make more money off of iOS, so...

Let me ask you, where was Samsung marketshare-wise before Android in the mobile world?

As for your link, tthat isn't relevant. It has more to do with Samsung agreeing to certain restrictions to be allowed to bundle google apps, and that means not providing other services and methods to undermine them. That and Touchwiz is hurting Android's performance, and people are noticing. Of course, they blame Android, not Touchwiz. The rest is blogger speculation.

Samsung didn't make Android, they made a name for themselves in the Galaxy line WITH Android. Google certainly enjoys the increased ad revenue too. Android became popular because it targets every smartphone sector: low, midldle, and high and has the ecosystem.


Here is the reality. Android passed iOS in marketshare in 2010. HTC had more marketshare than Samsung. Android was already eating into iOS before Samsung became a player. There is no reason that won't continue now if Samsung jumps ship and another OEM continues.


http://www.macrumors.com/2010/11/10...os-in-3q-2010-global-smartphone-market-share/
http://androidandme.com/2010/06/news/samsung-aims-to-pass-htc-in-smartphone-market-share/


So call me wrong all you want, but history paints a different picture.

PS--Bloggers are not "in the industry". So I am ok with them not agreeing with me Especially since they all parrot each other, inflating certain so-called facts to that point that all of a sudden its everywhere so it must be true.

 

[a5cent]

Let me ask you, where was Samsung marketshare-wise before Android in the mobile world?

Irrelevant. We're talking about today, not history.

As for your link, tthat isn't relevant. It has more to do with Samsung agreeing to certain restrictions to be allowed to bundle google apps, and that means not providing other services and methods to undermine them. That and Touchwiz is hurting Android's performance, and people are noticing. Of course, they blame Android, not Touchwiz. The rest is blogger speculation.
<snipped>

Your point was that Google being reliant on Samsung couldn't be further from the truth.

You are in fact the only person I've ever heard make that claim. The link I provided refers to just one of hundreds of articles claiming the opposite. If you think that article on the WSJ page was written by a kid in their parents basement, fine, you have many others to choose from. Surely at least a few were written by credible reporters with good contacts to the industry? If you're going to discredit all of them, you're really just discrediting yourself.

Finally, there seems to be general agreement that Google sold Motorola as a concession to Samsung. Many similar examples can be mentioned. Google would not offer any concessions of any kind if they felt they'd be completely unaffected by any of Samsung's actions.

Nobody is claiming that Samsung exiting the Open Handset Alliance would instantly kill Android. That is as ridiculous a claim as it is extreme, but the exact opposite claim, that it would have virtually no affect on Google-Android's market share is just as extreme and ridiculous. A large segment of Samsung smartphone owners would wander off to whatever Samsung offered, and considering the size of that segment, that is a very notable chunk of Google-Android's market share. It's not hard to understand.

You are not the only person with a grasp on reality, and given that I must weigh your opinion against practically everyone else's who has ever written about it, it doesn't seem hard to decide who is more likely closer to the truth.

 

[Adrynalyne]

Irrelevant. We're talking about today, not history.



Your point was that Google being reliant on Samsung couldn't be further from the truth.

You are in fact the only person I've ever heard make that claim. The link I provided refers to just one of hundreds of articles claiming the opposite. If you think that article on the WSJ page was written by a kid in their parents basement, fine, you have many others to choose from. Surely at least a few were written by credible reporters with good contacts to the industry? If you're going to discredit all of them, you're really just discrediting yourself.

Finally, there seems to be general agreement that Google sold Motorola as a concession to Samsung. Many similar examples can be mentioned. Google would not offer any concessions of any kind if they felt they'd be completely unaffected by any of Samsung's actions.

Nobody is claiming that Samsung exiting the Open Handset Alliance would instantly kill Android. That is as ridiculous a claim as it is extreme, but the exact opposite claim, that it would have virtually no affect on Google-Android's market share is just as extreme and ridiculous. A large segment of Samsung smartphone owners would wander off to whatever Samsung offered, and considering the size of that segment, that is a very notable chunk of Google-Android's market share. It's not hard to understand.

You are not the only person with a grasp on reality, and given that I must weigh your opinion against practically everyone else's who has ever written about it, it doesn't seem hard to decide who is more likely closer to the truth.

LOL, you cannot ignore the past. I'm not worried about you not believing me,either. I'm not naive enough to think one company rules google and android. If that makes me the minority,well hey, I can live with that

I don't base my opinions off of bloggers. Let Samsung leave Android and watch Android not fail. I wont be the one eating crow on this one. It wont be the first or last time stupid decisions hurt a company (Samsung).

Tell me again, what mobile market did Samsung have a stranglehold on before Android? Android gave them a media to thrive upon, not Samsung giving Android medium to thrive upon.

People will go where the apps are and as soon as they see their favorite apps aren't there...the phone goes back.

Hows Bada doing against Android?

 

[a5cent]

LOL, you cannot ignore the past..

Nobody is ignoring the past. But it's been proven beyond a doubt that the past can't be used to predict the future, particularly not in a market as volatile as consumer electronics. That is why it's irrelevant to this debate.

I could just as easily ask you how Android's market share was doing before Samsung got involved. It existed, but Samsung is the company that brought it to the masses. So, who has whom to thank for what? No, don't answer that, it doesn't matter...

I'm not naive enough to think one company rules google and android.

I don't think anybody is that na?ve. You're the only person pretending anyone has said that. The whole point is that Google and Samsung are dependent on each other.

Your claim that nothing Samsung does can notably affect Google-Android's market share is the only misconception I want to squash.

I don't base my opinions off of bloggers.

Good, at least we have something to agree on.

I think we can leave it at that. Anyone reading along will have made up their mind by now, and neither of us will convince each other.

 

[tgp]

I am trying to get my mom to switch to T-mobile since I am going to be transferring to Stanford in Cali so i can get unlimited data BUT she refuses to since T-mo doesn't have the best coverage back home where we live.

Off topic, but I used T-Mobile for a year or so because of their incredible $30 plan. However, I dropped it because the low price was not worth anything since the service is so poor where I live.

 

[scottcraft]

I have no doubt Samsung could start running their own os and the average person who purchases their phones probably wouldn't notice a difference. The problem as I see it would be the apps. I can't see Samsung getting an app store with the amount and quality of apps like the Play store has for a while. So yes, Samsung could start using Tizen or whatever and it would affect Google, but how many of those customers would stay with Samsung once they figured out some of the apps they are accustomed to having aren't available. I guess Samsung and Google could reach an agreement for Samsung to run Google Play apps on Samsung's software.

 

[a5cent]

I have no doubt Samsung could start running their own os and the average person who purchases their phones probably wouldn't notice a difference. The problem as I see it would be the apps. I can't see Samsung getting an app store with the amount and quality of apps like the Play store has for a while. So yes, Samsung could start using Tizen or whatever and it would affect Google, but how many of those customers would stay with Samsung once they figured out some of the apps they are accustomed to having aren't available. I guess Samsung and Google could reach an agreement for Samsung to run Google Play apps on Samsung's software.

That is true, and that describes Samsung's dependency on Google.

As you say, the question is how fast Samsung could convince developers to submit their apps to their app store. As McPhisto mentioned, this is all very hypothetical, so nobody can predict how exactly that would play out. My personal opinion is that Tizen has no chance of success. However, if Samsung instead decided to just create their own version of AOSP, then I think they could come out on top.

With a Samsung AOSP announcement, I think Samsung could have developers falling over themselves to submit their apps to Samsung's store. Assuming Samsung can find or create replacements for all of Google's services, which they have already started doing, Samsung could even provide binary compatibility to Google-Android apps. That would allow developers to submit the exact same binaries to Google's as well as Samsung's store. No fuss, assurance your app continues to be offered to the widest possible audience, and most importantly, no extra cost.

That is a huge difference compared to the situation WP has with it's own app battles.

EDIT:
Provided Samsung chooses to compete using their own version of AOSP, AFAIK nothing prevents Samsung from pushing their own app store onto every Samsung device in the world. From one day to the next, that would expose the apps in their store to hundreds of millions of users. A user base far larger than WP's. Provided developers can reuse whatever Android apps they already have, I'm pretty sure that is enough to send them scrambling to publish.

 

[DoctorSaline]

With 'internet of things' looming ever so closer, Samsung and google need each other more than ever. Google, for its vast ecosystem of apps of local market and media and Samsung, for its prowess in consumer electronics.

 

[MDMcAtee]

With 'internet of things' looming ever so closer, Samsung and google need each other more than ever. Google, for its vast ecosystem of apps of local market and media and Samsung, for its prowess in consumer electronics.

No they don't...People buy Androids because they have what they need and what they want and by what is shown them in the stores. Google is talking to Cyanogen teams...think about it.. HTC is back in the black...Motorola is doing great and LG is on a roll...Samsung isn't the only game in town and since Androids own the market..people can get what they want just as easily from another maker...heck even Microsoft has a forked version of Android...

Advertising is what drove Samsung to where it is..and they stole it straight from Apple's handbook...and anti Apple commercials won't get Microsoft anywhere...While amusing,targeting Apple fanatics is just plain stupid...especially when they aren't even close to leading the market worldwide.

The vast majority of people are guided to buy by what is shown on the tv....not tech sites...or blogs. The new folks seek out places like this most often if they have a issue on a recommendation..

No...Google doesn't need Samsung..it's the other way around...

Posted via Windows Phone Central App

 

[DJCBS]

Well hopefully Nokia won't be that stupid. I can understand licensing Here Maps to the other OEMs(even if I do not like it) but Pureview has been synonymous with Lumia and that 808 phone(I think).

Hopefully Nokia is not stupid enough to do something like that.....or Microsoft is smart enough to see that that is not a good thing and offers the right price for it. That would probably be the day I no longer support Nokia and drop Windows Phone entirely to be honest

Nokia would be stupid NOT to license it to OEMs that pay them to. You must understand that Nokia's relationship with Windows Phone ended the day the D&S was sold. Nokia now has to take advantage of the rich potential and portfolio their patents have. They are working on imaging stuff for Android. That much I know. Whether it's an Android Camera (a la Galaxy K Zoom) or Imaging Android apps or partnerships with Android OEMs, I don't know. However they are doing it.

Microsoft knew that would happen the day they moved on Nokia's D&S division. They bought the name "PureView" precisely to try and keep the idea that their Lumias are the only ones using that tech. It may work, it may not. Time will tell. Microsoft may try to offer the right price for the PureView patents, but Nokia will not sell them. They know they are valuable, it would be stupid of them to sell the jewels without any need.

If the exclusivity of PureView tech on WP is the only reason you're staying with WP, you better start preparing yourself to eventually drop WP. I don't see Nokia throwing away money from potential licensing deals just to appease WP users =P

 

[Nogitsune Micah]

Nokia would be stupid NOT to license it to OEMs that pay them to. You must understand that Nokia's relationship with Windows Phone ended the day the D&S was sold. Nokia now has to take advantage of the rich potential and portfolio their patents have. They are working on imaging stuff for Android. That much I know. Whether it's an Android Camera (a la Galaxy K Zoom) or Imaging Android apps or partnerships with Android OEMs, I don't know. However they are doing it.

Microsoft knew that would happen the day they moved on Nokia's D&S division. They bought the name "PureView" precisely to try and keep the idea that their Lumias are the only ones using that tech. It may work, it may not. Time will tell. Microsoft may try to offer the right price for the PureView patents, but Nokia will not sell them. They know they are valuable, it would be stupid of them to sell the jewels without any need.

If the exclusivity of PureView tech on WP is the only reason you're staying with WP, you better start preparing yourself to eventually drop WP. I don't see Nokia throwing away money from potential licensing deals just to appease WP users =P

Oh pureview isn't the reason I am here...it's everything that makes the Lumia line is why I am staying. The moment I see the Lumia line losing its selling points due to making other phones better, I'm out just my opinion. Tis why I'm already flirting with apple as it is.

The day I see a non Lumia with pureview is my last day with windows phone. Much like you don't care for the new Microsoft mobile, I literally will refuse to buy/support the OS

I just hope Microsoft is far smarter than we give them credit for.

 

[DJCBS]

Oh pureview isn't the reason I am here...it's everything that makes the Lumia line is why I am staying. The moment I see the Lumia line losing its selling points due to making other phones better, I'm out just my opinion. Tis why I'm already flirting with apple as it is.

The day I see a non Lumia with pureview is my last day with windows phone. Much like you don't care for the new Microsoft mobile, I literally will refuse to buy/support the OS

I just hope Microsoft is far smarter than we give them credit for.

I'm sure Microsoft is quite aware that Nokia's imaging capabilities will soon be going Android. That's why Microsoft already approached Canon. I'm sure folks at Redmond are trying to build something extra and don't rely exclusively on a technology that is no longer exclusive to their phone and can, at any moment, show up in the competition.
On the other hand, we've seen Microsoft do some really stupid stuff in the recent past...so although I say "I'm sure" I think it's more "I really hope". I like Windows Phone 8.1 and although I wish Microsoft Mobile to crash and burn, I do wish the OS to thrive with other OEMs. And if we can get rid of iOS in the process...great =P

 

[MDMcAtee]

I'm sure Microsoft is quite aware that Nokia's imaging capabilities will soon be going Android. That's why Microsoft already approached Canon. I'm sure folks at Redmond are trying to build something extra and don't rely exclusively on a technology that is no longer exclusive to their phone and can, at any moment, show up in the competition.
On the other hand, we've seen Microsoft do some really stupid stuff in the recent past...so although I say "I'm sure" I think it's more "I really hope". I like Windows Phone 8.1 and although I wish Microsoft Mobile to crash and burn, I do wish the OS to thrive with other OEMs. And if we can get rid of iOS in the process...great =P

IOS won't be going anywhere, anytime soon, nor will Android. I can see WP going away as we know it though, especially if Microsoft doesn't start make some fundamental changes in the os.

I know that doesn't sit well with you or any other hater of the other platforms, but minute increases of market share is not enough to sustain the platform.

Apple has realized this fact, and has started changing the way it does things allowing the user choice while keeping the os secure. Microsoft doesn't have a choice but to follow a suitable path if it wants to see it's sales grow exponentially.

I know that you and others will argue that this isn't necessary, but 85% of the world says that it is.

It won't matter how many apps that the store has, if the functionality of the most wanted apps aren't there so a good user experience isn't there.

I truly like WP and want to see it flourish but forcing developers to utilize the IE and Xbox engine, as well as keeping the rest locked down is not going to convince people to invest in it as much as the other platforms.

When small things bug people enough over time, they start looking for a replacement phone. Companies have to go outside of their normal control groups to see what people think and want. Apple did this, and also listened to its customers.. and the changes are coming. Watch how many units are sold as a result of this.

Microsoft did a great thing getting this phone onto the platform, but it alone is not enough to make a great difference.

I fully understand that many people hate to see Microsoft change and become more Android or Apple like, but the sad reality of this is that is exactly what the vast majority of people want.....

Ask yourself this.... How hard would it be for Microsoft to allow different browser and music and video player engines extentions to function properly and still keep it sandboxed and the same for the ui.... A simple little bit of freedom of choice for the customer can pay back huge dividends.

Purest will hate it of course, that is to be expected, but as long as it allows you to choose and still keep it as you like it, to criticize the changes and do something childish like leaving the platform is counter productive to the platform as I have seen some here post.

I look forward to seeing some changes take place as long as they at least have the forethought to leave the descion to the customer on utilizing it.

Posted via Windows Phone Central App

 

[Mr. MacPhisto]

I have no doubt Samsung could start running their own os and the average person who purchases their phones probably wouldn't notice a difference. The problem as I see it would be the apps. I can't see Samsung getting an app store with the amount and quality of apps like the Play store has for a while. So yes, Samsung could start using Tizen or whatever and it would affect Google, but how many of those customers would stay with Samsung once they figured out some of the apps they are accustomed to having aren't available. I guess Samsung and Google could reach an agreement for Samsung to run Google Play apps on Samsung's software.

I'm not sure if that's the case. Developers would have to take a gander at market data and guess how many users of their apps use Samsung devices.

Samsung runs right around 30% of the smartphone market in the US. Apple is around 40%. Windows Phone is roughly 3%ish while Blackberry still runs 2%. LG is under 10% and HTC is around 5%.

So if the OEM responsible for over 50% of all Android phones has decided to start its own store and not install Google Play and you develop for Android, don't you just automatically tell then you'll put your app in their store. Samsung could even incentivize it by charging less than Google does per sale. Google gets 30%. Microsoft's model may be better, where volume sellers get a discount at a certain point.

Much also depends on Samsung and what they'd want to do. They could be an interesting partner to work with if MS were considering rebranding IE and popping it on Samsung devices could put a ding in Chrome. Even with Chrome it is less about loyalty to Google and more about a "that's what everyone else is using" mentality. Samsung has the power to shift that dramatically - as they could also seriously shift search engine power by defaulting to Bing and locking it into the search buttons on their devices. People will use what they are given.

Let's think about how Google became powerful to begin with. They paid OEMs to reset the default search in browsers and the machines to Google. That's where the growth of Google began - they offered more money to OEMs to start out which allowed them to grow the user base and harness the data they collected for ads. Brilliant strategy, but it can also be used against them.

What if Microsoft waives Samsung's patent fees if they agree to lock in Bing and Microsoft services? Apple has been moving - and MS could strike a deal as well. I've long thought it might be wise for MS themselves to curate an alternative Android store where Microsoft Office sits. This is all my own thoughts, but there are strategies that could be employed even outside of just Windows Phone that could make Google hurt and bring more clout to Microsoft.

Microsoft's biggest advantage is their diversity. Google is a one trick pony that has never made any money outside of ad revenues. You ding that and you can cause a panic and a big hit on their market cap and revenue streams. You also have a partner that doesn't mind helping in Apple, who would prefer moving back to the Microsoft/Apple paradigm. Apple doesn't have the diversity of revenue streams that Microsoft does, but their revenue streams are reliant on their own products, not on ad clicks and the sale of user data.

I tend to think customers will find other things to use and leave Google if the Google apps aren't there. People aren't loyal to Google. Google makes nothing tangible. They are used to Google and they have been programmed to use it, but any company that can make the transition away from Google easy while replicating all the services may find there's less of a struggle. People get more frustrated with Google than you know. My own company has moved to Bing mapping because of how poor Google mapping is at address locating on major roads. We have had numerous clients and employees go to wring addresses because Google got the road numbers wrong - and it is a common problem with businesses mapping their location on a website. Google often gets it wrong and they have to manually place the location.

I don't think Google gets taken down directly by Microsoft, but they are very reliant on one party in the tablet space and the Android space. Losing Samsung wouldn't kill them, but it would be a huge setback for them while also conceivably generating a lot more revenue for Samsung. If Samsung builds the phones that so many users run, why shouldn't they get a cut of the Store on the phone? HTC and LG are not in a position to play nasty. Samsung is and they are six times the size of Google with far more diverse revenue streams.

Samsung doesn't even have to run their OS. They just run Android and rip it out from under Google Services. Nokia showed it could be done. I think that was the whole point of the X, to be honest. Show that it worked without Google services.

 

[MDMcAtee]

You better reasech your statement of Google being a 1 trick pony...

Posted via Windows Phone Central App