8 ms·

Balls

208 points by jordw 15y ago

aaronbrethorst 15y ago
Motorola held out for a full acquisition at a premium far above the company’s actual value, and threatened to go after its sibling Android partners if Google didn’t acquiesce. Say what you will about Gruber and his Apple fanboyism, this rings true to me. By and large, the article seems very astute.
- asknemo 15y ago
  Threatening to go after other Android partners makes little sense for Motorola. It's not something Motorola would do to get most profit from it. If Motorola has threatened Google something, it would be to sell to Microsoft. That will make much more sense.
  - aaronbrethorst 15y ago
    I would bring up IP as a very important for differentiation (among Android vendors). We have a very large IP portfolio, and I think in the long term, as things settle down, you will see a meaningful difference in positions of many different Android players. Both, in terms of avoidance of royalties, as well as potentially being able to collect royalties. And that will make a big difference to people who have very strong IP positions. http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/08/11/motorolas-sanjay-jha-openly-admits-they-plan-to-collect-ip-royalties-from-other-android-makers/ http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/08/11/motorolas-sanjay-jha-o...
    - asknemo 15y ago
      That doesn't mean the action make sense. My point is that it won't make sense for Motorola to do that, not whether they did or did not do it. Google can easily tell them that if they do that prematurely, Android ecosystem will fail, rocking the same boat they are in. Sensibly, you can't get much royalties from a failed platform, and Apple/Microsoft won't give Motorola any medals for going that path.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - thomholwerda 15y ago
      Could somebody - for the love of god - FINALLY explain to me where in this quote he is saying they're going to sue other Android phone makers? Because all I'm reading is Motorola explaining IP is going to be a differentiating factor - both in terms of avoiding royalties and collecting them. The "...from Android phone makers" is added to the "collecting them" by the guy who wrote that article - very disingenuous, and of course, folk like Gruber gobble it up without a second thought. Pathetic.
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  >Motorola held out for a full acquisition at a premium far above the company’s actual value, According to http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2888292 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2888292 the real purchase price is closer to $7B, not $12.5B as stated in the article, due to cash and deferred tax assets. The Nortel patents went for $4.5 billion and this acquisition gives Google both a ton of patents as well as a company with physical assets that makes the Droid line of phones and the Xoom tablets. Not to mention, Google has $40B in cash or short term investments just laying around to be put to use.
- tjogin 15y ago
  I have to agree, this was a very insightful piece if you ask me. Not rambling or scrambling to make sense of everything, which is how some of the other analysis reads on the topic. Gruber took a few steps back, somehow saw the hole picture and described it tersely. Maybe one of Gruber's best.
socratic 15y ago
Does Gruber ever add any real information in an information theoretic sense? He seems to be on Apple's side 100% of the time. (I guess he suggested that the App Store approval process was broken at some point...) He mostly just appears to be a pro-Apple pundit who has a popular blog that gets a lot of revenue in advertising. But I never see Cringely or Dvorak posts upvoted. What gives? This does not seem to be very reasoned analysis. He calls the CEO childish and Android (the largest smartphone OS in the US?) desperate. This feels like a hyperbolic opinion piece. What should I be getting out of this article?
- orangecat 15y ago
  Does Gruber ever add any real information in an information theoretic sense? I'd say the main information content is in who he attacks in the process of boosting Apple. Microsoft and Windows barely get mentioned these days; it's all Google and Android all the time.
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    I think Gruber, Asymco, et al. have been taken aback by Android's year over year ascendancy. They were certainly predicting gloom and doom of Android, so patents are their last resort to reign in Android now. See units and marketshare of Android for 2nd quarter 2010 vs. 2011. http://wmpoweruser.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/image66.png http://wmpoweruser.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/image66.pn... Asymco failing at analysis and predictions: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2887430 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2887430
    - guywithabike 15y ago
      Units and market share don't mean much if your margins are razor thin (or, worse, nonexistent).
      - cageface 15y ago
        They do if selling phones is a means to a greater end, which it is for Google.
staunch 15y ago
All I can think about is that Microsoft/Apple blew billions on patents which forced Google to blow billions more to block their move. Think how much real innovation $20 billion could have created if it weren't for the shitty patent system.
- squidbot 15y ago
  This is the most sensible commentary I've seen yet. Fits the "America is pretty much screwed" articles making the rounds these days. It's actually pretty damned depressing that $20 billion dollars was spent on a legal game rather than awesome R&D.
  - int3 15y ago
    The money's not gone, it's mostly just transferred from one party to another -- in this case, from Google to Motorola's shareholders. Of course, many man-hours are wasted in the legal wrangles, but it certainly doesn't add up to $20 billion dollars of lost productivity.
    - philwelch 15y ago
      You can say that about practically any transfer payment. The cost of a transfer payment is opportunity cost. If Google invested 20 billion dollars in R&D, we'd have 20 billion dollars of R&D done in addition to someone, somewhere, having that 20 billion dollars to spend again.
      - Confusion 15y ago
        Google bought a lot more than just patents.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
    - ryanhuff 15y ago
      The worst thing is that Google is now invested in the problem by $20 billion more than it was previously. The more invested U.S. companies become in patents, the more difficult it becomes to make change.
icarus_drowning 15y ago
The primary issue that I have with Gruber's argument is that it seems to reverse some of his more recent assertions about the Google Patent Wars(TM). Haven't we been hearing from Gruber for months on end how patents were going to somehow destroy Android (or cripple it, which is basically the same thing)? Now we're supposed to simply ignore that Google bought 3x the Nortel patents at 3x the price[1] (Gruber's math, not mine), a move that greatly diminishes (if not negates) their loss in the Nortel auction? Now we're supposed to focus on Motorola's problems as a handset manufacturer? I get that Gruber's mainly going after the over-the-top Lyons piece (a piece which strikes me as poorly thought out and terribly argued). But it does seem like this is Gruber's first move toward a pivot away from the importance of patents in Android vs. Everyone. You know, those patents that Gruber has been trumpeting for weeks now as the death knell of Android. Just ignore those. [1]: Or cheaper?: See recoiledsnake's comment below: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2890038 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2890038
- spiffworks 15y ago
  Gruber has for a long time made his living off of propping up strawmen and beating them down, much to the amusement of his readers. Everyone knows that Leander Keahney and Dan Lyons are insane, only Gruber goes to the pain of proving them so, with little insight or value added to the discussion, other than to incite his audience to gleefully laugh at the stupidity of the 'other'. I can't believe it actually took me so many years to realise this, but he is off my rss now.
  - ellyagg 15y ago
    As you know, it's easy to get backslapped on pro-Google hn by dissing Gruber, but why not just respond to his analysis instead. Gruber seems to be right an awful lot for someone so casually vilified. For example, he took a lot of flack here for defending Apple's move to leave flash out of mobile safari. I think enough time has passed to make clear that he and Apple were right. The anti-Gruber hate looks more like sour grapes every day.
    - spiffworks 15y ago
collint 15y ago
I see this: Google was a happy accident because of the web. Given the trajectory of Apple, where would the web be in 10 years if Google wasn't throwing everything, and clearly they are doing so, at keeping their platform alive. Android is about keeping the web a dominant platform as we shift to the next generation of computing. Google is right to bet the farm on keeping that endeavor alive. It appears as though they got backed into the corner, but we've never seen Google make a purchase like this. It's more expensive than usual. And it's not an obvious up-and-comer. I imagine the #1 thing they could do would be to start picking off staff from both companies to form a super-group to push the hardware into yet unknown territory. (As a person whose career interests align with Google's I hope the knock it out of the fucking park.)
gc_val 15y ago
Is it an analysis or rant? Looks like JG is more annoyed with the fact that GOOG got patent portfolio than credible threat to iPhone with possible all integrated Moto based Android devices. He is absolutely wrong on whole "patent wars" issue. Of course GOOG is showing its "big brother" attitude time to time but his beloved AAPL is not clean either. This holier than thou attitude sucks! Moto may be "second-rate" mobile maker. They may be in loss. GOOG is not stupid to shell out 12B "just" for patent portfolio. Always remember GOOG thinks ahead of everyone. People were criticizing GOOG when they made Android open and free. They were criticizing about paying too much money to YouTube (which is on fire now). GOOG is definitely smarter than Gruber.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
blinkingled 15y ago
Gruber claims that Apple and Microsoft probably are feeling great that Google had to shell out $12.5B to acquire a failing company like Motorola along with its 'misguided' management and rapidly declining sales. So what is wrong with that loaded closing statement? Well lots. Firstly he admits the patents part was a good move for Google and the Android platform. He also does math and says they bought 3x Nortel patents for 3x the price. So essentially Google got ton of other Motorola stuff (hardware division, cable modem, set top boxes, Android handset software team et.al) for free. Plus so far as I can tell Droid is a pretty well known and fairly successful brand and Motorola's management did the right thing in saving the company from going down under - not exactly misguided. Gruber would perhaps only call them guided if they did not compete with Apple in any way shape or form! And what did Gruber had to say when Apple spent billions on Nortel patents? Nope not desperation or anything. Just the fact that Google lost was super important and Android was going to be in trouble. Gruber also leaves us with no insight on what Google could have done better. He also doesn't feel nearly as bad about Google having Apple by the balls on Nortel patents and making them pay good for Nortel patents, as much as he does about Motorola having Google by the balls by just doing what any sane business will do to maximize its valuation. In comparison actually Google got an arguably better deal - 12.5B for 25000 patents, and a whole functional, moderately successful hardware company with diverse business. P.S. Motorola has done phones long before Apple thought about it. As such they know a whole lot more about the hardware part as I can tell by the signal and voice quality of my Moto phone. Google and you will find many that can make reliable phone calls with Motorola phones when iPhone could never. So dissing Motorola may be fashionable but I think they know better.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- bgentry 15y ago
  just FYI, the "Droid" brand is licensed by Verizon, not Motorola. There have been many "Droid" phones, all of them on Verizon and from several different manufacturers.
  - blinkingled 15y ago
divtxt 15y ago
The problem with Gruber is that he'll write a fair analysis only as long as the fair analysis favors Apple. This means we won't get a fair analysis from him on things like the patent war and app store high-handedness. Sometimes he'll do a great piece. Sometimes you have to sift carefully for the bias. Then there are articles like this - insults, lies and condescension: - Lyons has always been an ass, but when did he get so bitter? - you just look childish when, only after losing the auction, you then claim you didn’t really want the thing anyway (google never cried sour grapes on nortel) - Motorola knew they had Google by the balls. ... and they made Google pay and pay handsomely The trick is not to get fooled by the reasonable-sounding phrases like: Another way to look at this story... and That’s not to say it wasn’t a bold, brash move, or even... the right move. To those of you discussing Gruber's position on patents: it is the patents that change position relative to Gruber. :) edit: typos, formatting
- divtxt 15y ago
  To clarify: a biased Gruber article may actually have valid points. The problem is that Gruber will only include pro-Apple points. For example, note that Gruber does NOT point out how the acquisition will allow Google to do Apple-style seamless hardware/software design. edit: Android -> Google as pointed out by m_eiman below
  - m_eiman 15y ago
    the acquisition will allow Android to do Apple-style seamless hardware/software design. It will allow Google to do that, but I'm sure that's what you meant to say.
  - ThomPete 15y ago
    I sure don't hope that Google bought Motorola for that. It will fail just as all other mergers that look good on paper do that. You got two big cultures coming from completely different parts of the tech world. There is no way that you will get seamless vertical integration that way.
  - fredoliveira 15y ago
    The interesting bit is that on the conference call they did say that that was actually not the plan (most likely to keep the other android partners comfortable). Supposedly their process for Android remains the same and Motorola will be on the same footing as everyone else when it comes to software access. This says that the deal was 100% about patents and nothing else, which in turn says it wasn't that great of a deal in the first place (considering as they paid a big premium for the patent portfolio). But assuming that they break their promise to partners and do what apple does too by designing both hardware and software together: it would be a good thing for Google as a phone maker, but a nail on the "Android as open" coffin. I don't think they'll be able to risk a move like this - angering their partners and probably breaking Android up -, which just means that the actual impact this will have on the quality of phones coming from Google and Android as a mobile OS is slim to none.
Tichy 15y ago
It's true that Motorola is not the most exciting handset maker. However, if Google could just get rid of the nonsense and get Motorola to create "pure" devices, some very good things could come out of it. They are certainly capable of it. Personally I am hoping to hear an announcement of the Xoom 2 as soon as possible.
chanux 15y ago
Google picks up nearly three times as many patents as AppleSoft got from Novell and Nortel... And they paid… nearly three times as much... and a phone company came free?
- pooriaazimi 15y ago
  Patents are not measured by quantity, but by their quality. A ton of patents doesn't mean anything if you can't use them in court to hold AppleSoft back. I don't have the faintest idea whether these patents are of good quality or not, I just wanted to point it out. It's beyond me why so many bright people here on HN think these 25,000 patents might worth the same as (or three times more of) Nortel's patents. They 'might', but we don't know that as a fact. I'd always heard Nortel was strong on patents, but prior to this day I didn't know that Motorola had any patents at all.
ZeroGravitas 15y ago
"Motorola — a handset maker with rapidly declining sales" -- Gruber (with a link to an Asymco post, which doesn't actually mention sales figures, only market share) Last quarter they sold 4.4 million smartphones, up from 2.7 million the same quarter last year. (If you're more interested in market share as depicted by Asymco's graph then they're growing slightly at around 5% of the smartphone market, compared with say Apple which is growing slightly at around 15%, or Samsung which has gained 15% in the last year to just under 20%.) Even if you like to play the Asymco game of including dumbphones that don't run Android to make Android look bad, they still increased total phone sales year-on-year, to 11 million, meaning their increased Android sales replaced a smaller number of lost dumbphone sales.
Padraig 15y ago
The article makes a great case that Motorola is the real winner. The buyout can't have been solely for the patents, because Motorola are losing patent battles. It's unlikely that it was just to own a phone manufacturer, because why buy a 3rd rate one at a 60% premium? So why? Because Motorola had Google by the balls and could have further fucked Android up for everyone else. It's a shame how every discussion of a Daring Fireball article here collapses into 'Gruber is a fanboy', but it's particularly frustrating when it's an insightful article like this one. If he's half as bad as some of you make out, it should be easy to argue the points without resorting to attacking the man.
discodave 15y ago
Ok, so the math for everybody. Google spent 12.5B. Motorola has 3B in cash. The stock market thought motorola was worth around 6-7B incl cash (assuming they weren't just factoring in a takeover already). So google really paid around 6B for the patents, they don't have to do anything to motorola. They can sell all or parts of it, maybe muck around with some of the parts of Motorola other than cell phones. But either way the Nortel auction was 4.5B for JUST patents while google gets a mobile electronics company + patents for its 12B.
palebluedot 15y ago
The price of $12.5B is prior to discounting the $3B+ in cash the MMI is holding. A lot of emphasis is placed on the '$12.5B' value in this article, without taking into consideration that this is really 25% higher than the effective price of $9.5B, once you back out the cash.
tptacek 15y ago
I would be just fine with banning Daring Fireball from HN, if it meant we could avoid the biweekly DDoS on HN's intellectual capacity sparked by tens-deep threads arguing about Gruber's pro-Apple bias. Only on HN or Reddit is Gruber's pro-Apple stance not the most boring conceivable topic. It's embarrassing to see ostensibly smart people pick it apart, as if it was faceted and nuanced. I myself love Daring Fireball, because Gruber is an f'ing good writer. But I could give a sh!t about discussing him on HN. Anyone else want to just start flagging these things off the site? Look at these silly comment threads. You'd be doing a lot of people a favor by nipping them in the bud.
- dasil003 15y ago
  The worst part in this case is that he's shooting fish in a barrel. The article he picks apart isn't deserving of the analysis. Sometime Gruber posts interesting theories or observations, and in that case I'm all about discussing them, but this article is just filler for his core demographic.
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  He seems like a good writer only if you're already under the RDF, otherwise he comes across as a shallow spin and mudslinging machine and defacto Apple PR. Example of a predictable and hypocritical post: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/08/15/apple-samsung-images http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/08/15/apple-samsung-im... This is the reason for the disconnect between the HN commenters and the flame wars. It's just hard for people to understand others almost-bordering-on-religion obsessions and biases. While you say you'd be fine with banning DF from HN, we all know which segment of HN'ers vote up DF, Asymco and some of Marco's stories here, some of which have very convoluted and shallow arguments/analysis/math which seem cherry picked and tailor-made to prop up one particular company and don't withstand five minutes of reasoned analysis. The problem is that some of these articles are "something that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" (from the HN guidelines) to a group of people rooting for a company and totally shallow drivel to others, so no wonder it's all a flamefest that isn't going to go away soon.
  - tptacek 15y ago

208 points by jordw 15y ago

Motorola held out for a full acquisition at a premium far above the company’s actual value, and threatened to go after its sibling Android partners if Google didn’t acquiesce. Say what you will about Gruber and his Apple fanboyism, this rings true to me. By and large, the article seems very astute.

asknemo 15y ago
Threatening to go after other Android partners makes little sense for Motorola. It's not something Motorola would do to get most profit from it. If Motorola has threatened Google something, it would be to sell to Microsoft. That will make much more sense.
- aaronbrethorst 15y ago
  I would bring up IP as a very important for differentiation (among Android vendors). We have a very large IP portfolio, and I think in the long term, as things settle down, you will see a meaningful difference in positions of many different Android players. Both, in terms of avoidance of royalties, as well as potentially being able to collect royalties. And that will make a big difference to people who have very strong IP positions. http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/08/11/motorolas-sanjay-jha-openly-admits-they-plan-to-collect-ip-royalties-from-other-android-makers/ http://www.unwiredview.com/2011/08/11/motorolas-sanjay-jha-o...
  - asknemo 15y ago
    That doesn't mean the action make sense. My point is that it won't make sense for Motorola to do that, not whether they did or did not do it. Google can easily tell them that if they do that prematurely, Android ecosystem will fail, rocking the same boat they are in. Sensibly, you can't get much royalties from a failed platform, and Apple/Microsoft won't give Motorola any medals for going that path.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - thomholwerda 15y ago
    Could somebody - for the love of god - FINALLY explain to me where in this quote he is saying they're going to sue other Android phone makers? Because all I'm reading is Motorola explaining IP is going to be a differentiating factor - both in terms of avoiding royalties and collecting them. The "...from Android phone makers" is added to the "collecting them" by the guy who wrote that article - very disingenuous, and of course, folk like Gruber gobble it up without a second thought. Pathetic.
recoiledsnake 15y ago
>Motorola held out for a full acquisition at a premium far above the company’s actual value, According to http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2888292 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2888292 the real purchase price is closer to $7B, not $12.5B as stated in the article, due to cash and deferred tax assets. The Nortel patents went for $4.5 billion and this acquisition gives Google both a ton of patents as well as a company with physical assets that makes the Droid line of phones and the Xoom tablets. Not to mention, Google has $40B in cash or short term investments just laying around to be put to use.
tjogin 15y ago
I have to agree, this was a very insightful piece if you ask me. Not rambling or scrambling to make sense of everything, which is how some of the other analysis reads on the topic. Gruber took a few steps back, somehow saw the hole picture and described it tersely. Maybe one of Gruber's best.

socratic 15y ago

Does Gruber ever add any real information in an information theoretic sense? He seems to be on Apple's side 100% of the time. (I guess he suggested that the App Store approval process was broken at some point...) He mostly just appears to be a pro-Apple pundit who has a popular blog that gets a lot of revenue in advertising. But I never see Cringely or Dvorak posts upvoted. What gives? This does not seem to be very reasoned analysis. He calls the CEO childish and Android (the largest smartphone OS in the US?) desperate. This feels like a hyperbolic opinion piece. What should I be getting out of this article?

orangecat 15y ago
Does Gruber ever add any real information in an information theoretic sense? I'd say the main information content is in who he attacks in the process of boosting Apple. Microsoft and Windows barely get mentioned these days; it's all Google and Android all the time.
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  I think Gruber, Asymco, et al. have been taken aback by Android's year over year ascendancy. They were certainly predicting gloom and doom of Android, so patents are their last resort to reign in Android now. See units and marketshare of Android for 2nd quarter 2010 vs. 2011. http://wmpoweruser.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/image66.png http://wmpoweruser.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/image66.pn... Asymco failing at analysis and predictions: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2887430 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2887430
  - guywithabike 15y ago
    Units and market share don't mean much if your margins are razor thin (or, worse, nonexistent).
    - cageface 15y ago
      They do if selling phones is a means to a greater end, which it is for Google.

staunch 15y ago

All I can think about is that Microsoft/Apple blew billions on patents which forced Google to blow billions more to block their move. Think how much real innovation $20 billion could have created if it weren't for the shitty patent system.

squidbot 15y ago
This is the most sensible commentary I've seen yet. Fits the "America is pretty much screwed" articles making the rounds these days. It's actually pretty damned depressing that $20 billion dollars was spent on a legal game rather than awesome R&D.
- int3 15y ago
  The money's not gone, it's mostly just transferred from one party to another -- in this case, from Google to Motorola's shareholders. Of course, many man-hours are wasted in the legal wrangles, but it certainly doesn't add up to $20 billion dollars of lost productivity.
  - philwelch 15y ago
    You can say that about practically any transfer payment. The cost of a transfer payment is opportunity cost. If Google invested 20 billion dollars in R&D, we'd have 20 billion dollars of R&D done in addition to someone, somewhere, having that 20 billion dollars to spend again.
    - Confusion 15y ago
      Google bought a lot more than just patents.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
  - ryanhuff 15y ago
    The worst thing is that Google is now invested in the problem by $20 billion more than it was previously. The more invested U.S. companies become in patents, the more difficult it becomes to make change.

icarus_drowning 15y ago

The primary issue that I have with Gruber's argument is that it seems to reverse some of his more recent assertions about the Google Patent Wars(TM). Haven't we been hearing from Gruber for months on end how patents were going to somehow destroy Android (or cripple it, which is basically the same thing)? Now we're supposed to simply ignore that Google bought 3x the Nortel patents at 3x the price[1] (Gruber's math, not mine), a move that greatly diminishes (if not negates) their loss in the Nortel auction? Now we're supposed to focus on Motorola's problems as a handset manufacturer? I get that Gruber's mainly going after the over-the-top Lyons piece (a piece which strikes me as poorly thought out and terribly argued). But it does seem like this is Gruber's first move toward a pivot away from the importance of patents in Android vs. Everyone. You know, those patents that Gruber has been trumpeting for weeks now as the death knell of Android. Just ignore those. [1]: Or cheaper?: See recoiledsnake's comment below: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2890038 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2890038

spiffworks 15y ago
Gruber has for a long time made his living off of propping up strawmen and beating them down, much to the amusement of his readers. Everyone knows that Leander Keahney and Dan Lyons are insane, only Gruber goes to the pain of proving them so, with little insight or value added to the discussion, other than to incite his audience to gleefully laugh at the stupidity of the 'other'. I can't believe it actually took me so many years to realise this, but he is off my rss now.
- ellyagg 15y ago
  As you know, it's easy to get backslapped on pro-Google hn by dissing Gruber, but why not just respond to his analysis instead. Gruber seems to be right an awful lot for someone so casually vilified. For example, he took a lot of flack here for defending Apple's move to leave flash out of mobile safari. I think enough time has passed to make clear that he and Apple were right. The anti-Gruber hate looks more like sour grapes every day.
  - spiffworks 15y ago

collint 15y ago

I see this: Google was a happy accident because of the web. Given the trajectory of Apple, where would the web be in 10 years if Google wasn't throwing everything, and clearly they are doing so, at keeping their platform alive. Android is about keeping the web a dominant platform as we shift to the next generation of computing. Google is right to bet the farm on keeping that endeavor alive. It appears as though they got backed into the corner, but we've never seen Google make a purchase like this. It's more expensive than usual. And it's not an obvious up-and-comer. I imagine the #1 thing they could do would be to start picking off staff from both companies to form a super-group to push the hardware into yet unknown territory. (As a person whose career interests align with Google's I hope the knock it out of the fucking park.)

gc_val 15y ago

Is it an analysis or rant? Looks like JG is more annoyed with the fact that GOOG got patent portfolio than credible threat to iPhone with possible all integrated Moto based Android devices. He is absolutely wrong on whole "patent wars" issue. Of course GOOG is showing its "big brother" attitude time to time but his beloved AAPL is not clean either. This holier than thou attitude sucks! Moto may be "second-rate" mobile maker. They may be in loss. GOOG is not stupid to shell out 12B "just" for patent portfolio. Always remember GOOG thinks ahead of everyone. People were criticizing GOOG when they made Android open and free. They were criticizing about paying too much money to YouTube (which is on fire now). GOOG is definitely smarter than Gruber.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

blinkingled 15y ago

Gruber claims that Apple and Microsoft probably are feeling great that Google had to shell out $12.5B to acquire a failing company like Motorola along with its 'misguided' management and rapidly declining sales. So what is wrong with that loaded closing statement? Well lots. Firstly he admits the patents part was a good move for Google and the Android platform. He also does math and says they bought 3x Nortel patents for 3x the price. So essentially Google got ton of other Motorola stuff (hardware division, cable modem, set top boxes, Android handset software team et.al) for free. Plus so far as I can tell Droid is a pretty well known and fairly successful brand and Motorola's management did the right thing in saving the company from going down under - not exactly misguided. Gruber would perhaps only call them guided if they did not compete with Apple in any way shape or form! And what did Gruber had to say when Apple spent billions on Nortel patents? Nope not desperation or anything. Just the fact that Google lost was super important and Android was going to be in trouble. Gruber also leaves us with no insight on what Google could have done better. He also doesn't feel nearly as bad about Google having Apple by the balls on Nortel patents and making them pay good for Nortel patents, as much as he does about Motorola having Google by the balls by just doing what any sane business will do to maximize its valuation. In comparison actually Google got an arguably better deal - 12.5B for 25000 patents, and a whole functional, moderately successful hardware company with diverse business. P.S. Motorola has done phones long before Apple thought about it. As such they know a whole lot more about the hardware part as I can tell by the signal and voice quality of my Moto phone. Google and you will find many that can make reliable phone calls with Motorola phones when iPhone could never. So dissing Motorola may be fashionable but I think they know better.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
bgentry 15y ago
just FYI, the "Droid" brand is licensed by Verizon, not Motorola. There have been many "Droid" phones, all of them on Verizon and from several different manufacturers.
- blinkingled 15y ago

divtxt 15y ago

The problem with Gruber is that he'll write a fair analysis only as long as the fair analysis favors Apple. This means we won't get a fair analysis from him on things like the patent war and app store high-handedness. Sometimes he'll do a great piece. Sometimes you have to sift carefully for the bias. Then there are articles like this - insults, lies and condescension: - Lyons has always been an ass, but when did he get so bitter? - you just look childish when, only after losing the auction, you then claim you didn’t really want the thing anyway (google never cried sour grapes on nortel) - Motorola knew they had Google by the balls. ... and they made Google pay and pay handsomely The trick is not to get fooled by the reasonable-sounding phrases like: Another way to look at this story... and That’s not to say it wasn’t a bold, brash move, or even... the right move. To those of you discussing Gruber's position on patents: it is the patents that change position relative to Gruber. :) edit: typos, formatting

divtxt 15y ago
To clarify: a biased Gruber article may actually have valid points. The problem is that Gruber will only include pro-Apple points. For example, note that Gruber does NOT point out how the acquisition will allow Google to do Apple-style seamless hardware/software design. edit: Android -> Google as pointed out by m_eiman below
- m_eiman 15y ago
  the acquisition will allow Android to do Apple-style seamless hardware/software design. It will allow Google to do that, but I'm sure that's what you meant to say.
- ThomPete 15y ago
  I sure don't hope that Google bought Motorola for that. It will fail just as all other mergers that look good on paper do that. You got two big cultures coming from completely different parts of the tech world. There is no way that you will get seamless vertical integration that way.
- fredoliveira 15y ago
  The interesting bit is that on the conference call they did say that that was actually not the plan (most likely to keep the other android partners comfortable). Supposedly their process for Android remains the same and Motorola will be on the same footing as everyone else when it comes to software access. This says that the deal was 100% about patents and nothing else, which in turn says it wasn't that great of a deal in the first place (considering as they paid a big premium for the patent portfolio). But assuming that they break their promise to partners and do what apple does too by designing both hardware and software together: it would be a good thing for Google as a phone maker, but a nail on the "Android as open" coffin. I don't think they'll be able to risk a move like this - angering their partners and probably breaking Android up -, which just means that the actual impact this will have on the quality of phones coming from Google and Android as a mobile OS is slim to none.

Tichy 15y ago

It's true that Motorola is not the most exciting handset maker. However, if Google could just get rid of the nonsense and get Motorola to create "pure" devices, some very good things could come out of it. They are certainly capable of it. Personally I am hoping to hear an announcement of the Xoom 2 as soon as possible.

chanux 15y ago

Google picks up nearly three times as many patents as AppleSoft got from Novell and Nortel... And they paid… nearly three times as much... and a phone company came free?

pooriaazimi 15y ago
Patents are not measured by quantity, but by their quality. A ton of patents doesn't mean anything if you can't use them in court to hold AppleSoft back. I don't have the faintest idea whether these patents are of good quality or not, I just wanted to point it out. It's beyond me why so many bright people here on HN think these 25,000 patents might worth the same as (or three times more of) Nortel's patents. They 'might', but we don't know that as a fact. I'd always heard Nortel was strong on patents, but prior to this day I didn't know that Motorola had any patents at all.

ZeroGravitas 15y ago

"Motorola — a handset maker with rapidly declining sales" -- Gruber (with a link to an Asymco post, which doesn't actually mention sales figures, only market share) Last quarter they sold 4.4 million smartphones, up from 2.7 million the same quarter last year. (If you're more interested in market share as depicted by Asymco's graph then they're growing slightly at around 5% of the smartphone market, compared with say Apple which is growing slightly at around 15%, or Samsung which has gained 15% in the last year to just under 20%.) Even if you like to play the Asymco game of including dumbphones that don't run Android to make Android look bad, they still increased total phone sales year-on-year, to 11 million, meaning their increased Android sales replaced a smaller number of lost dumbphone sales.

Padraig 15y ago

The article makes a great case that Motorola is the real winner. The buyout can't have been solely for the patents, because Motorola are losing patent battles. It's unlikely that it was just to own a phone manufacturer, because why buy a 3rd rate one at a 60% premium? So why? Because Motorola had Google by the balls and could have further fucked Android up for everyone else. It's a shame how every discussion of a Daring Fireball article here collapses into 'Gruber is a fanboy', but it's particularly frustrating when it's an insightful article like this one. If he's half as bad as some of you make out, it should be easy to argue the points without resorting to attacking the man.

discodave 15y ago

Ok, so the math for everybody. Google spent 12.5B. Motorola has 3B in cash. The stock market thought motorola was worth around 6-7B incl cash (assuming they weren't just factoring in a takeover already). So google really paid around 6B for the patents, they don't have to do anything to motorola. They can sell all or parts of it, maybe muck around with some of the parts of Motorola other than cell phones. But either way the Nortel auction was 4.5B for JUST patents while google gets a mobile electronics company + patents for its 12B.

palebluedot 15y ago

The price of $12.5B is prior to discounting the $3B+ in cash the MMI is holding. A lot of emphasis is placed on the '$12.5B' value in this article, without taking into consideration that this is really 25% higher than the effective price of $9.5B, once you back out the cash.

tptacek 15y ago

I would be just fine with banning Daring Fireball from HN, if it meant we could avoid the biweekly DDoS on HN's intellectual capacity sparked by tens-deep threads arguing about Gruber's pro-Apple bias. Only on HN or Reddit is Gruber's pro-Apple stance not the most boring conceivable topic. It's embarrassing to see ostensibly smart people pick it apart, as if it was faceted and nuanced. I myself love Daring Fireball, because Gruber is an f'ing good writer. But I could give a sh!t about discussing him on HN. Anyone else want to just start flagging these things off the site? Look at these silly comment threads. You'd be doing a lot of people a favor by nipping them in the bud.

dasil003 15y ago
The worst part in this case is that he's shooting fish in a barrel. The article he picks apart isn't deserving of the analysis. Sometime Gruber posts interesting theories or observations, and in that case I'm all about discussing them, but this article is just filler for his core demographic.
recoiledsnake 15y ago
He seems like a good writer only if you're already under the RDF, otherwise he comes across as a shallow spin and mudslinging machine and defacto Apple PR. Example of a predictable and hypocritical post: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/08/15/apple-samsung-images http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/08/15/apple-samsung-im... This is the reason for the disconnect between the HN commenters and the flame wars. It's just hard for people to understand others almost-bordering-on-religion obsessions and biases. While you say you'd be fine with banning DF from HN, we all know which segment of HN'ers vote up DF, Asymco and some of Marco's stories here, some of which have very convoluted and shallow arguments/analysis/math which seem cherry picked and tailor-made to prop up one particular company and don't withstand five minutes of reasoned analysis. The problem is that some of these articles are "something that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" (from the HN guidelines) to a group of people rooting for a company and totally shallow drivel to others, so no wonder it's all a flamefest that isn't going to go away soon.
- tptacek 15y ago