Related
We all know Microsoft is on a roll to make patent licensing agreements with Android OEMs. Since last week, Microsoft have announced 4 such deals without disclosing the amount of royalty involved. Today Reuters that Microsoft is demanding about $15 per Android device from Samsung, one of the largest android OEM in the world. Microsoft is also ready to lower the royalty amount if Samsung agrees with some deeper alliance related to Windows Phone smartphone making. Microsoft signed similar deal with HTC last year, Will Samsung also join the fray soon? I hope Samsung agrees with Microsoft on the later deal of less royalty amount for Android devices and more Windows Phone smartphones. Also analysts predict Samsung to ship about 19 million smartphones this quarter, if the deal is done Microsoft will get about $1 Billion IP licensing revenue from Samsung alone in a year...
Now that is a beautiful puzzle, they've already released the most user friendly and in my opinion best is on the market and now they're putting a squeeze on the big name android OEMs to eliminate some of the competition. I love this, now just throw in some good marketing and well have the trifecta of a perfect operating system.
z33dev33l said:
We all know Microsoft is on a roll to make patent licensing agreements with Android OEMs. Since last week, Microsoft have announced 4 such deals without disclosing the amount of royalty involved. Today Reuters that Microsoft is demanding about $15 per Android device from Samsung, one of the largest android OEM in the world. Microsoft is also ready to lower the royalty amount if Samsung agrees with some deeper alliance related to Windows Phone smartphone making. Microsoft signed similar deal with HTC last year, Will Samsung also join the fray soon? I hope Samsung agrees with Microsoft on the later deal of less royalty amount for Android devices and more Windows Phone smartphones. Also analysts predict Samsung to ship about 19 million smartphones this quarter, if the deal is done Microsoft will get about $1 Billion IP licensing revenue from Samsung alone in a year...
Now that is a beautiful puzzle, they've already released the most user friendly and in my opinion best is on the market and now they're putting a squeeze on the big name android OEMs to eliminate some of the competition. I love this, now just throw in some good marketing and well have the trifecta of a perfect operating system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, you know what they say...fruit is better for us than pastries/dairy. (Mango vs. Ice Cream Sandwich/Eclair)
good for them, I don't think it's good for us
I can't believe a thread on xda of all places supporting a broken patent system, extortion, profiterring instead of innovation. wow.
*wipes tear* i love you Microsoft! always have done and will be loyal forever
The only group to blame for this is Google, releasing something that completely infringes on a bunch of other peoples patents. While it may be a douchey move to do this to the very manufactures you're partnered with, I can't blame MS.
ohgood said:
I can't believe a thread on xda of all places supporting a broken patent system, extortion, profiterring instead of innovation. wow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except, after seeing your responses on here for months now... You would have zero problems with this if Google was doing it, right?
FiyaFleye said:
Except, after seeing your responses on here for months now... You would have zero problems with this if Google was doing it, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are probably right
I'm kinda put off by some of those patents . I mean really .. you can patent that ?
Although they do own the patents so "Pay up Sucka's ."
This will not be good for user's in the end either way .
My .02
ohgood said:
I can't believe a thread on xda of all places supporting a broken patent system, extortion, profiterring instead of innovation. wow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But be logical now instead of loyal. Is it fair for someone to release a product using a part of something that you own and you receive nothing for it?
How would you feel if you developed an app and I took a portion of that and created my own app and made millions?
I am not saying the patent system is perfect; it is far from. But people need to innovate and license, not steal and pass off. And we are not even sure what this patent infringement is, but players are settling quickly. This suggests to me that it may be open and shut wrong-doing on Google's part.
But the thread is a little sensational. If MS's intention was to cripple they would be doing more than seeking royalties
nicksti said:
But be logical now instead of loyal. Is it fair for someone to release a product using a part of something that you own and you receive nothing for it?
How would you feel if you developed an app and I took a portion of that and created my own app and made millions?
I am not saying the patent system is perfect; it is far from. But people need to innovate and license, not steal and pass off. And we are not even sure what this patent infringement is, but players are settling quickly. This suggests to me that it may be open and shut wrong-doing on Google's part.
But the thread is a little sensational. If MS's intention was to cripple they would be doing more than seeking royalties
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's my sentiments and what I've been about all along. Yet when I say Apple has the rights to receive compensation on their infringed patents, I'm an Apple fanboy. Then when I side with MS's side of the patent infringement, I'm a MS fanboy. The only time I'm not harassed badly for seeming like a fanboy is when I say something favorable about Google. If I say something favorable about any other company...even if the favored words are intermixed with multiple companies, I'm a fanboy. The friggin rationality of the web is beyond mind twisting. People will stomp and storm over the least little thing.
nicksti said:
If MS's intention was to cripple they would be doing more than seeking royalties
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this. MS definitely has the money to go after Google itself if they wanted to, but going after OEM's could be a way to secure a footing for WP7 as it's up to them to push WP7. If OEM's don't support WP7, it's screwed. Also, going after Google would conflict with MS & it's anti-monopoly issues.
Kinda old. Its been a known fact that Microsoft makes more money from Android than WP7.
Sad, sick, but true. The patent system is ridiculous.
The patent system is there to protect people from having their stuff stolen. How'd you like it if someone broke into your house & stole everything? Ok, not exactly the same thing. Or how about, you developer some new software or Ui or something & some big company like MS/Apple/Google steals it & makes millions or even billions off it? It's funny how when it's the big corperations, it's "sad/sick/etc," but if it were some small company or a single person, it's ok.
Double Standards just aren't cool. I may not like big corporations & their greed, but guest what, they have rights too.
You do realize that patent licensing happens everywhere to protect the developer of a technology. Like DVD/Blu Ray manufacturers paying royalties to the developers of that technology. The "Blu-ray Disc Association" (Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, Philips, Thomson, LG (Lucky GoldStar) Electronics, Hitachi, Sharp, and Samsung) created the Blu Ray format, so everyone else making Blu Ray players/burners must pay a royalty. How would you like it if you were the developer of Blu Ray & seeing all these companies making money on your technology while you're broke.
NOTE: In all of MS's 36 years, this is only the 7th time they actually acted on their patents.
drkfngthdragnlrd said:
The patent system is there to protect people from having their stuff stolen. How'd you like it if someone broke into your house & stole everything? Ok, not exactly the same thing. Or how about, you developer some new software or Ui or something & some big company like MS/Apple/Google steals it & makes millions or even billions off it? It's funny how when it's the big corperations, it's "sad/sick/etc," but if it were some small company or a single person, it's ok.
Double Standards just aren't cool. I may not like big corporations & their greed, but guest what, they have rights too.
You do realize that patent licensing happens everywhere to protect the developer of a technology. Like DVD/Blu Ray manufacturers paying royalties to the developers of that technology. The "Blu-ray Disc Association" (Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, Philips, Thomson, LG (Lucky GoldStar) Electronics, Hitachi, Sharp, and Samsung) created the Blu Ray format, so everyone else making Blu Ray players/burners must pay a royalty. How would you like it if you were the developer of Blu Ray & seeing all these companies making money on your technology while you're broke.
NOTE: In all of MS's 36 years, this is only the 7th time they actually acted on their patents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you.....
everyone have the right to collect $$$$ for their patents, as they have spent time money and efforts, and no one is allowed to just take and use someone else's work...
Google will have more trouble coming their way when Nortel patents will change hands...
Oracle is also going to collect money from Google for some stuff they used in android, estimated $2 billion or so....
Google should have done their homework tbh, handing over these issues to the hardware manufacturers is pretty weak.
Not that I'm agreeing with these patents, some of them are very vaguely defined.
You guys really don't know how vague some of the patents are. Hell I can pick any software and find some copied code. Do some deeper investigation yourself. Doesn't matter how big or small a company is, doesn't matter to me if its Google, Apple, or some unknown Guy down the street.
The patent system needs a major over haul. Make a new OS or program and make millions, and I guarantee you that you will be slapped with patent infringement. Its sick.
truffle1234 said:
I agree with you.....
everyone have the right to collect $$$$ for their patents, as they have spent time money and efforts, and no one is allowed to just take and use someone else's work...
Google will have more trouble coming their way when Nortel patents will change hands...
Oracle is also going to collect money from Google for some stuff they used in android, estimated $2 billion or so....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You do know oracle had to drop more than 90% of their case.
It isn't vague. When you patent something, you have to be thorough about how it all works. These "news" articles just give the "Title" to the patent. The full patent has this huge legal description of what exactly is patented. I know this because as a kid I was going through the patent process, till my lawyer found out what I was trying to patent already existed. BTW, as for try to make an OS. Well the problem is all OS's are basically the same, very similar UI's save (WP7). they all have some form of taskbar/start menu/window based applications. The whole point why Windows is called Windows. The point of inovation is to make something new, not copy what's there & try to make it different. That's basically borderline plagerism, granted that's to do with writing, but it's the same thing.
See this;
1) No. 6,909,910 from 2005 for "managing changes to a contact database."
2) No. 7,644,376, issued in 2010 to cover an API that lets mobile apps learn about state changes in the device.
3) No. 5,664,133 from 1997 covering "context sensitive menu system/menu behavior," known more generally as a graphical user interface that lets users "quickly and easily select/execute the desired computer resource."
4) No. 6,578,054 from 2003 covering online and offline transmission of data through methods that "eliminate data transmission and allow multiple copies of data to be synchronized via incremental changes."
5) No. 6,370,566 from 2002, with the self-explanatory title, "Generating Meeting Requests and Group Scheduling From a Mobile Device."
All of that us understandable but the patent system us royally ****ed up.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/27/technology/27patent.html
http://www.macgasm.net/2009/12/30/the-patent-system-is-broken-and-nokia-vs-apple-continues/
There are patents that defy the laws of phsyics, patents that are beyond belief. ****s stupid. Its actually hurting innovation from the little guys.
Almost a year later Microsoft will be properly training sales reps on how to use & sell WP7.
http://www.bgr.com/2011/09/07/microsofts-to-finally-educate-retail-partners-on-windows-phone/
Sent from my SGH-i917 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
They should just employ existing users as training won't be enough for many sales reps (e.g. that HTC rep interviewed about the Titan on Engadget).
...it's a good start...but it' not far enough... Microsoft, the OEMs and the providers must release "catchy" ads which clearly show all the wonderfull things you can do with the device, how "hipp" you will be with your friends and familly and where you can buy it and what to ask for....
hhmmm
So, microsoft will turn around the salespeoples' opinion of wp7, and weed out the bad ones, and have good marketing in place by the christmas shopping season ?
I doubt it. Sounds like they've only acknowledged a problem so far. Look for real changes from the slow moving giant in january, when no one will care.
Kind of reminds me of those center isle people that spray me with perfume insttead of asking first. Ugh
FTC said:
...it's a good start...but it' not far enough... Microsoft, the OEMs and the providers must release "catchy" ads which clearly show all the wonderfull things you can do with the device, how "hipp" you will be with your friends and familly and where you can buy it and what to ask for....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ads should be just like the iPhone/Windows 7 ads where actual features are demonstrated. Anything else won't get much attention.
ohgood said:
So, microsoft will turn around the salespeoples' opinion of wp7, and weed out the bad ones, and have good marketing in place by the christmas shopping season ?
I doubt it. Sounds like they've only acknowledged a problem so far. Look for real changes from the slow moving giant in january, when no one will care.
Kind of reminds me of those center isle people that spray me with perfume insttead of asking first. Ugh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is Mango not being out yet, so these sales reps won't be trained until the iPhone 5 and tons of new Android phones are out... at which point they won't care about their WP7 training. It's a loop of fail.
Peew971 said:
The problem is Mango not being out yet, so these sales reps won't be trained until the iPhone 5 and tons of new Android phones are out... at which point they won't care about their WP7 training. It's a loop of fail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...maybe Microsoft, the OEMs and the Providers team up to allow the sales staff some cash-incentives or sweepstake promotion to "convince" the sales reps to have a closer look at WP7....
FTC said:
...maybe Microsoft, the OEMs and the Providers team up to allow the sales staff some cash-incentives or sweepstake promotion to "convince" the sales reps to have a closer look at WP7....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think they should offer them free phones. There will be at least some who would take them up on it and I'm sure they could write it off as a promotional expense anyways.
FTC said:
...it's a good start...but it' not far enough... Microsoft, the OEMs and the providers must release "catchy" ads which clearly show all the wonderfull things you can do with the device, how "hipp" you will be with your friends and familly and where you can buy it and what to ask for....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is the phone is supposed to save us from our phone.
Your idea works contrary to that. Apple markets to that crowd: people who are glued to their phones.
Microsoft's marketing basically states that they want you to buy a phone you don't have to be tethered to. A phone you shouldn't have to use all the time. A phone that lets you get on with REAL LIFE. Newsflash, for a ton of smartphone users (esp the younger generation) REAL LIFE involves being tethered to a phone... Microsoft's marketing failed to appeal that that huge demographic. Apple and Android Ads are going for broke, though... Microsoft Marketing for WP7 seems like it was tailored for 45+ business people, whilst pushing a social consumer-centric smartphone. It makes absolutely no sense...
It runs contrary to what you say. They should have just done it the Apple way.
The big mistake was releasing the OS early. They should have waited 6 more months and released it with half the Mango features baked in. That would have, IMO, attracted a lot more people.
Now, a lot of people have the thought of a half-baked OS that can do basic functions, and it will be hard to shake that.
Also, you cannot really change the Reps' minds. They will probably agree with the trainers in a training setting, but once the customer walks through the door they will push what they prefer to push anyways.
Microsoft's marketing has it wrong. You cannot market a phone to save us from our phones. People can get that by buying a feature phone that isn't pushing everything form every social network or chat service to their phone every minute of the day. Or a dumb phone, even. Smartphones are popular because people can do most things on them. They're popular precisely because their addictive due to how much you can do on it. The nature of a smartphone, IMO, guarantees that you will spend a large amount of time actually using it. To suggest otherwise, makes no sense.
When you market a smartphone that isn't THAT, you're telling people you want to sell them a boring device that won't allow them to get as much done (that may not be the case, but that's how many consumers will interpret it), and it will have the opposite effect.
I actually think a lot of that happened with the Microsoft Marketing.
They need to get front and center in stores like Best Buy. Have displays in Carriers stores - especially i.e. AT&T and/or Verizon (and maybe T-Mobile if they will allow them to compete that hard with their MyTouch and Sidekick series devices).
Interesting fun adds that tell people the phone is fun and they'll want to use it all the damn time, not the opposite, etc.
Really, where Mango is taking WP7 is a complete 180 from their marketing (integrated social networks, facebook/windows live all baked in, Bing functionality that lets you do virtually everything, etc.). I don't know why or how they failed so hard on the marketing front. It's like they were trying to convince people NOT to buy WP7 devices.
That being said, the commercial where the woman fell in the airport staring at her Blackberry was still funny as hell.
Avatar28 said:
I think they should offer them free phones. There will be at least some who would take them up on it and I'm sure they could write it off as a promotional expense anyways.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They will just sell them on Craigslist. You can't extort support from sales reps. What are you talking about. Sales reps are not evangelists, and should not be treated as such (even tho they act as such in many cases, not in WP7's favor). That's clearly anti-competitive, as well. Carriers and competing platform OEMs alike would strongly object to that behavior. It can possibly get them in trouble.
A ridiculously large majority of sales reps are avid iOS/Android users, supporters, and advocates for lack of a better word.
I go into carrier stores all the time and I've had reps in T-Mobile stores especially flat out tell me the HD7 was crap and they would never recommend I get a Windows Phone. Yes, in those direct terms.
Others are so passive that when customers come in with negative pre-concieved notions about the platform and state misinformations in front of them, they make no effort to correct them - maybe they know no better themselves, though.
Ask them to walk you through an Android or iPhone, though, and they have no issues. They'll even tell you how to root your phone and recommend the best home screen replacements, among other things...
Maybe we should all go into carrier stores and record this happening and post it to YouTube, we can start a Twitter trend! Lol, just kidding...
@N8ter
...what you say in your 2 posts above is true... Although the basic concept of Microsoft's idea to "free" peoples from their "phone addiction" is a positive way of thinking, it is allmost impossible to re-educate peoples from bad habits. Social networks like Twitter, Facebook and SMS make people believe that they require immediate attention and reaction in order to be part of the game. It is very funny and sad at the same time to observe people getting totally nervous if they don't see any new messages on their phone for a couple of minutes... Maybe the governments should request to put warning stickers on the phone:Addiction to your phone can be dangerous for your mental health
FTC said:
Addiction to your phone can be dangerous for your mental health
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LMAO, yeah, I agree with what both of you said on this. The problem is most people don't like being told they're addicted to something even if it's a cell phone/social networking site/etc.
N8ter said:
I don't know why or how they failed so hard on the marketing front. It's like they were trying to convince people NOT to buy WP7 devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's actually a quite frequently observed failure on the part of client marketing team/agency creative folks miscommunication. What the agency probably got in the creative brief was an assignment to create a series of attention-grabbing videos with a "creative" catchphrase that would convey the "glance and go" message, which Microsoft people decided was all-important. This idea could only come from people who know the product well. Of course they didn't mean that you needn't use your phone anymore, what they meant was that you may now spend much less time with non-productive overhead stuff, and do things easier and faster and so on. The problem is that the message is being communicated to people who don't know anything about the OS, and therefore would have absolutely no clue how this "glance and go" will happen, or why it is even important. But "how" and "why" weren't in the brief. And the agency listened to their client and decided not to argue.
...the main problem with the "Really" and "Me" ads are that they are not "selling"
a product. This is the big difference between the Apple and Microsoft strategies.
Apple has the product and the sales outlets. So for them it is easy to advertise their products.... Microsoft on the other hand has only an WP7 operating system and no specific "Windows Phone". Microsoft can only advertise the nice things their WP7 operation system can do, but this is just a system and not a touchable object. It's like going in a shop and asking for a computer or a TV-Set....
This is why Microsoft needs to team up with the hardware makers and the carriers to advertise specific products which the consumer can go to a shop and ask for: "I want to see the Samsung/HTC/whatever Focus/HD7/whatever"
FTC said:
...the main problem with the "Really" and "Me" ads are that they are not "selling"
a product. This is the big difference between the Apple and Microsoft strategies.
Apple has the product and the sales outlets. So for them it is easy to advertise their products.... Microsoft on the other hand has only an WP7 operating system and no specific "Windows Phone". Microsoft can only advertise the nice things their WP7 operation system can do, but this is just a system and not a touchable object. It's like going in a shop and asking for a computer or a TV-Set....
This is why Microsoft needs to team up with the hardware makers and the carriers to advertise specific products which the consumer can go to a shop and ask for: "I want to see the Samsung/HTC/whatever Focus/HD7/whatever"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't agree with that... Microsoft don't make PC's, just the OS that run them. But the Windows 7 ads worked because they were showing people what you could do with the OS (the "Windows 7 was my idea" ones). People thought that looked cool and knew what they wanted before going into the shops.
Same goes for Apple, most of their ads cover iOS and iOS apps, it's only with the iPhone 4 that they started insisting on things like Retina Display. Most of what they show is the OS, not the hardware. Microsoft needs to advertise the OS and actually show what it can do.
FTC said:
This is why Microsoft needs to team up with the hardware makers and the carriers to advertise specific products which the consumer can go to a shop and ask for: "I want to see the Samsung/HTC/whatever Focus/HD7/whatever"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Advertising an OS is still possible, but the current form is basically promoting a very unclear solution for a non-existing problem. This won't go anywhere.
FTC said:
... This is why Microsoft needs to team up with the hardware makers and the carriers to advertise specific products which the consumer can go to a shop and ask for: "I want to see the Samsung/HTC/whatever Focus/HD7/whatever"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft can't do "just" that. Ms loves to put long, wordy names on products. "Droid Does" was a brilliant campaign, like the product or not. Can't believe ms didn't learn from it. It displayed the os's capabilities, and gave the customer the easiest one word request that equalled sales: gimmie a droid !
Walking into a store and having a customer be expected to remember " gimmie a microsoft windows phone seven samsung focus - the newer version" isn't going to work. "Gimmie an iphone" proved this also.
Drop the marketspeak, drop the 20 syllable phone phonics, and drop the suits. Apple sold billions with kids dancing with their device in hand. Du huh ?
Androids sell because -everyone- recognizes the name and google. That, and there are 30 to choose from at the stores. Names like g1, g2, nexus, bionic, thunderbolt... no one cares who made it, or embellishments in wordy names.
Peew971 said:
Same goes for Apple, most of their ads cover iOS and iOS apps, it's only with the iPhone 4 that they started insisting on things like Retina Display. Most of what they show is the OS, not the hardware. Microsoft needs to advertise the OS and actually show what it can do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...I don't know if in the UK you get your load of Apple TV-spots for the iPhone as we do in Germany: "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have an iPhone..." It shows the actual phone and what you can do with it. This is what matters and this is "hard selling"... If Microsoft does something similar (as they are still doing), it shows nicely what you can do and how simple it is, but it is not backed up by some specific devices. With Apple, the consumer knows he has to ask for an iPhone, with WP7 he has to ask for a vague "Windows Phone" .... For Android, the makers advertise their specific models but are not talking about "Android Phone"... And this is the big difference which really matters...
You dismissed the part where I was talking about the "Windows 7 was my idea" ads. These were very effective without mentioning any specific computer or manufacturer. All they did was showcasing the OS and it worked!
Some examples:
vangrieg said:
It's actually a quite frequently observed failure on the part of client marketing team/agency creative folks miscommunication. What the agency probably got in the creative brief was an assignment to create a series of attention-grabbing videos with a "creative" catchphrase that would convey the "glance and go" message, which Microsoft people decided was all-important. This idea could only come from people who know the product well. Of course they didn't mean that you needn't use your phone anymore, what they meant was that you may now spend much less time with non-productive overhead stuff, and do things easier and faster and so on. The problem is that the message is being communicated to people who don't know anything about the OS, and therefore would have absolutely no clue how this "glance and go" will happen, or why it is even important. But "how" and "why" weren't in the brief. And the agency listened to their client and decided not to argue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know exactly what they meant. I don't any explanation.
The fact and the matter is that it flew over people's head and that message was so vague that it was basically ignorable.
Also, the ads were not attention grabbing at all.
This is great Advertising, IMO. It totally grabs your attention and gets the point across. It gets right to the point, and it doesn't feel like it drags on forever. It's hillarious, too.
See here:
The Microsoft Ads were nothing like that.
Peew971 said:
You dismissed the part where I was talking about the "Windows 7 was my idea" ads. These were very effective without mentioning any specific computer or manufacturer. All they did was showcasing the OS and it worked!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got your point and you're wasting your time even bothering with responding to that other person. It was obvious.
WP7 is similar to iOS in that hte launch devices all used extremely similar hardware configurations. Microsoft could have marketed it like an iPhone and every ad would have been legit.
The crap about "Microsoft is marketing an OS, Apple is Marketing a phone" doesn't fly. WP7 is not Android. Microsoft dictated the launch device specs so tightly that they were all basically the same thing. The user experience on literally all those phones were pretty stock and unmodified.
A lot of people are buzzing about changes to Google's privacy policies. From my understanding, they pool all of your Google things together to make the Google experience a little more streamlined. I looked at my Google dashboard and saw no surprises, and am completely fine with everything I saw there. A lot of sited like Gizmodo, Washington Post, etc, are claiming that this is a downward move for Google, and that it portrays corporate evil. They claim (and users who post in comments) that they're going to rid themselves of everything Google... why?
Am I missing something?
I love Google, I love their free services, I love their phones, I love Android. I can't just quit it all like these websites are saying people should.
Now, I don't fall in line with others or follow, for lack of a better term, but I feel like I'm missing something very large.
Google has access to my searches. Emails. Contacts.
Google can see my phones, what apps I download, where I am via Google Maps, etc.
Google knows who I am as a human.
This doesn't bother me, but I feel like it should. Please tell me what I'm missing, and tell me why its bad that they have access to all these things. Because right now I'm OK with that fact. Who am I? Why am I so important to them that they're looking at me out of the millions and millions of other people using their services, all equal with me?
Please help me understand this.
Sent from a yakju GSGN
Immediately following your post, I went to Gizmodo to read their article about Google's privacy changes (Google's Broken Promise: The End of "Don't Be Evil").
Being an occasional Gizmodo reader, I was surprised to see the moderator's reaction to the comments below the article. He used some pretty foul language and insults, very unbecoming of a Gizmodo employee.
Most of the commenters' quips seem to be questioning the sensationalism of the article, usually defending Google's stance. The majority of the comments are actually just backlash against the moderator, who in turn threatened bans against commenters whose opinions collided with his own.
I'm a die-hard Lifehacker fan... but it seems the Gawker network needs to clean house and hire some professionals.
PolyOlefin said:
I'm a die-hard Lifehacker fan... but it seems the Gawker network needs to clean house and hire some professionals.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. I do enjoy reading some Gawker sites, but they're getting really *****y and obnoxious lately.
So to the subject, should we be worried?
ztm.000 said:
So to the subject, should we be worried?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't this fall to a matter of trust?
Admittedly, I'm firmly in the Google camp when compared to the spectrum of its competitors. However, I'm also innately suspicious of corporate business, as their loyalty to profit trumps any consideration for their users/employees (Google is better than most).
They explicitly state they're not selling your information to third-parties; it's being used to improve their own services, which any company would do. Facebook is doing similar things, but people aren't going to abandon Facebook. As long as Google remains an anonymizing proxy between myself and other companies, I'm fine with it.
Ultimately, the average user doesn't have anything worth keeping secret from Google's algorithms. What's that? Google's ad-targeting you for dog collars because you posted a YouTube video of your basset hound swimming in a pool? Nobody cares.
In a Big Brother, "1984" sense, I suppose you could argue it's a slippery slope. Again, doesn't it boil down to individual trust? There are certain companies I trust more than others, and Google ranks pretty high on my list.
Am I being naive? Is my bias keeping their transgressions out of the light? Perhaps we need a Google-hater to weigh in for some perspective.
ztm.000 said:
So to the subject, should we be worried?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know, should you? Do you care that data Google took from you in Gmail is now being used while you're using Chrome? Because that's all that is changing.
They're not taking any additional data.
They're not removing anything.
They're taking what they already did, and applying it to all aspects of your Google accounts. IE: you'll see more similar ad's.
APOCALYPSE NIGH! Gizmodo is a joke.
I don't think we need to be worried.
Question is, what does Google want from us, our money they just want to sell us products. By combining data from all different Google services, they are just trying to create a profile for me, that will help them better identify what I may need, and try to sell it to us.
The problem lies with the fact that the aggregated data may become too incriminating if one has something to hide. But for me, the only fear is with that data being hacked and sold to those who like to operate above the law.
So is Google back to being evil? Nope, they never were. But they have a lot if power, and with great power, comes great responsibility.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App
To sum it up, Google is simply taking all the information it already has of you throughout its services (Gmail, G+, YouTube, etc) and letting these services share this information between themselves.
Google is probably the only company I trust with my privacy. I suggest you take a look at Google's Policies & Principles page, where they list the new (and current) policy and how it affects you. Don't be afraid to read it, they're not hiding behind legal mumbo jumbo, they make it very easy to read and understand.
I'm pretty sure all of these sites are making a huge deal out of this because Google has consistently been pumping out successful services one after the other, and they're using this policy change to:
1) Get pageviews, and thus money, and
2) Its "fun" to try and see the "perfect kid around the block" fail.
Also, Gawker Media f* sucks and has for a very long time now.
We are not in position to point fingers and take positions. Nothing we know (at least for sure) about what google do with our data.
We just cant forget one thing: When the product is free, YOU are the product.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App
Google could be a government front for a division of project echelon and I wouldn't care. I love their products and they give everything away for free with the exception of adwords. Win win for consumers when a company raises the bar and doesn't charge you for it.
The Google’s Broken Promise: The End of "Don’t Be Evil" article reminds me why I only ever visit Gizmodo a handful of times a year.
I don't care what Google do with my info if I'm honest, as long as they aren't selling it, and I'm not getting my inbox spammed with 100's of 'Canadian Pharmacy' e-mails I really couldn't give a ****.
Wow, I read article heading this morning and was saddened by the fact that Google had "gone Evil". I often skim the titles in my RSS feed (which includes Giz) when I've only got 10 minutes during breakfast to read the news.
After reading this thread, then that thread with its comments, I've lost a lot of respect for Gizmodo and its moderators. What sensationalist garbage. The authors never say what has even "changed" in the privacy policy, only that it was rewritten and the sharing of personal data between Google services is emphasized. Honestly, I had assumed that all of Google's services would be running the same ad targeting code anyway.
As one commenter in the Giz thread mentions, take a look at Facebook. Now that is scary. A network that defaults to public sharing whenever they roll out a new feature? I've lost count of the number of times I had to log on to Facebook specifically to check my privacy settings. Even so, I've erased as much of my personal information as possible, messing up my own experience, simply because I don't trust that Facebook cares even a little bit about me.
Yes, Google's a public company, and has first loyalty to its shareholders. However, it does that by cultivating a user base that trusts it. If they wreck that by sharing users' data with third parties or messing up search results (cough cough, get it together guys), they could see their entire company go down in flames. And that wouldn't be profitable at all.
Some of the editors in Gizmodo are terrible apple fan boys. I remember one article of one of them where he wrote that he had 2 ipads and how fantastic they were. He also said he had an android tablet that he claims gave him such a bad user experience that he had even forgotten where it was...
So many of these "news" websites are run by trendy hipster people that have no other choice than loathe Apple.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
PolyOlefin said:
Immediately following your post, I went to Gizmodo to read their article about Google's privacy changes (Google's Broken Promise: The End of "Don't Be Evil").
Being an occasional Gizmodo reader, I was surprised to see the moderator's reaction to the comments below the article. He used some pretty foul language and insults, very unbecoming of a Gizmodo employee.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gizmodo has always been an unprofessional, sensationalist blog. I intentionally quit reading after the iPhone 4 "stolen phone" debacle. It's like a bunch of high schoolers started a blog together.
As to the subject, if you don't see why you should be concerned, then don't worry about it. Everyone has different beliefs about privacy. Personally, I'm not very concerned about whatever data Google has, but I can understand why others do.
The End of "Don’t Be Evil"
blackdub370 said:
The End of "Don’t Be Evil"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you read this thread, you would see that we're actually about The End of The End of "Don't Be Evil"
Google knows my name
Google knows my screen names
Google knows my location
Google knows my devices
Google knows my home
Google sees my conversations
Google sees my emails
Google sees my search history
Google sees what I type
Google hears my voice
Google sees my face..........
Google now takes (what they already know) emails/gtalk and enhances my searches (which they already see), then can narrow it down by my location (which they already have).....
I fail to see a problem. Guys (not you... mostly opponents) we signed up for this when we entered the digital age. Our info is out there and have signed up to give it out. Quit *****ing and go live in your hole for the rest of your life. Here's a fact:
I opened my gmail, yahoo and Hotmail accounts at roughly the same time. Yahoo has become completely unusable due to spam, I'm obviously some Saudi Princes relative on Hotmail...... but gmail is spam free... there's a reason for it. I trust Google, I have to.
But I know there's a price for free service. 20 years ago we all had AAA subscriptions because we wanted the maps. Those maps we paid for didn't have street view, and we couldn't ask the map where the nearest restaurant was. We don't pay for these services... they are available for us for free.......
That's just my. 02
Sent from my CM9 TouchPad
I have absolutely no issue with this. I think it's obvious that Gizmodo wrote this article in this way to be an alarmist. It was designed to get readers and that's exactly what it did. In the end though, the article is really a POS.
Not sure why anyone, especially android fans, read gizmodo anymore. Check out the verge. They have much better and much less biased editors and writers.
lucasmalaguti said:
We are not in position to point fingers and take positions. Nothing we know (at least for sure) about what google do with our data.
We just cant forget one thing: When the product is free, YOU are the product.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't disagree with you, but you are essentially describing the Internet as a whole.
HTC bought S3, a graphics company, for $300MM USD in order to defend itself against an onslaught of competitors going after them for patent violations. Owning patents yourself forces a kind of detente as people won’t sue you for fear of you suing them back. Until now HTC’s been naked. In an earlier review last year a panel at the US Patent and Trademark Office said S3/HTC’s patents couldn’t be used against Apple. HTC appealed and a review handed down yesterday upheld the patent’s validity and Apple is now in violation of them. Ironically it’s for the Mac PC line, not mobile devices. At least now HTC has some sort of leverage against all the litigation being thrown at them by Apple.
Here’s what HTC said…
“We are gratified by the USPTO’s decision, which proves again that buying the patents from S3 was a significant and correct move for HTC.”
“We will continue to defend our interests and fight actively against any companies that infringe on our rights,” it said.
Here's the full story...
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2012/07/12/2003537510
Interesting Article. The power of patents just sometimes amuses me. Google bought Motorola for the same thing.
I fainted since the third word :victory: It's S3 actually..
The S3 bought over isn't recent article, HTC actually taking risks on the bought over of S3 from VIA since both of them are Cher Wang's. The actions may lead to some legal issues by taiwan laws that prevent on "arm-length transactions", they seems already get a pass from the verdict though.
Thanks for the link
awesome news and about damn time
but you want to tell me that out of all these patents HTC only got two? that are still under review
is it really worth it?
hamdir said:
but you want to tell me that out of all these patents HTC only got two? that are still under review
is it really worth it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You tell me? Apple got HTC's new phones stopped at the border for weeks by U.S. Customs based on just one patent. If HTC can get an import ban applied to Apple's new retina display Mac Books they've just started selling I think that would probably get Apple's attention.
HebeGuess said:
I fainted since the third word :victory: It's S3 actually.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chips, graphics companies, they're all the same. Thanks, I fixed it.
Just got this email claiming to be from [email protected]:
Security Notification
We are reaching out to you directly as we have discovered that part of your order information was accessed by an unauthorized party. We can confirm that your payment information, password and account are safe, but your name, contact number, email and shipping address may have been exposed.
We took immediate steps to stop the intruder and reinforce security. Right now, we are working with the relevant authorities to further investigate this incident and protect your data.
We wanted to notify you of this so that you can be alert to people pretending to be OnePlus to get further information from you, or people asking you to buy products or services from them. OnePlus will never ask you for your passwords, and any financial information should only be provided via a secure payment page on the OnePlus website or one of our partners if you are buying products from us.
We are deeply sorry about this, and are committed to doing everything in our power to prevent further such incidents. We will continue to investigate and update you as we learn more. In the meantime, please contact us with any questions or concerns at Customer Support.
After this the email ends with various links to OnePlus, an unsubscribe link and then their company address in China
So has anyone else received this?
Is it fake?
Can you post the email headers? Likely that it is legit.
Wouldn't be the first time...
Ah, just seen it IS legit. OnePlus have made a statement about this on their forums and it's in the XDA news section.
This may not be a recent data breach as the last time I bought something direct from OnePlus' online store was the OnePlus 6 early in 2018. (I got my 7T from a retailer).
I seriously should have bought mine from amazon. I knew this was likely...
Well in the EU at least they may (and should) face multi-million euro fines for this under GDPR laws considering their systems have already been hacked in the past. There's no excuse for any company to be complacent about data protection so I hope they they get what they deserve in this case.
I'm unlikely to buy from OnePlus' store again.
SpaceGooner said:
Well in the EU at least they may (and should) face multi-million euro fines for this under GDPR laws considering their systems have already been hacked in the past. There's no excuse for any company to be complacent about data protection so I hope they they get what they deserve in this case.
I'm unlikely to buy from OnePlus' store again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you aware that it may not be complacency? The criminals are constantly beating on the door trying to hack in. Its a constant battle on both sides to stay one jump ahead of the security and or the criminals. Sometimes the criminal hackers win and sometimes the companies security does..
autosurgeon said:
Are you aware that it may not be complacency? The criminals are constantly beating on the door trying to hack in. Its a constant battle on both sides to stay one jump ahead of the security and or the criminals. Sometimes the criminal hackers win and sometimes the companies security does..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes of course you're right in what you're saying. Maybe I was being too harsh when I mentioned complacency. It's just that they have now pledged to improve their data security in light of this event by partnering with a world renowned security organisation. It makes me wonder why they didn't invest in this level of security provision before this breach happened.
SpaceGooner said:
Yes of course you're right in what you're saying. Maybe I was being too harsh when I mentioned complacency. It's just that they have now pledged to improve their data security in light of this event by partnering with a world renowned security organisation. It makes me wonder why they didn't invest in this level of security provision before this breach happened.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The last time the breach happened you mean... This is just hot air being blown out by the corporation.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...ed-40000-credit-card-data-theft/#673762c677ad
It's a constant battle even with small websites with no useful data to steal. They hack in and use your site to spam Viagra and porn ads. I have had several sites I manage get hit even though I am running multiple layers of protection.