5 ms·

Google is just researching and trying out new products that can potentially help their bottom line - so what if some may not explode in popularity. Their botto

Google is just researching and trying out new products that can potentially help their bottom line - so what if some may not explode in popularity. Their bottom line is to get more exposure to their ads, and I'm not arguing if that's good or bad. Driverless cars would mean that passengers have more time to be exposed to web ads on their phones and tablets (I'm not saying that's the primary motivation or benefit, but it certainly is a factor in Google's involvement). Expanding Internet access in cities through Google Fiber means more people can be exposed to their ads. Sharing Android freely with anyone means increased access to the web and thus Google ads. It's not too difficult to see what the motivation for developing Google Glass is - you would potentially be exposed to ads all day long, not just when you whip out your phone or when you are using your computer.

enome 13y ago
I never really understood the reason behind driverless cars until I saw that they create 3D models of the environment they drive through. If everybody would drive a google car that would mean google has the potential of mapping the outside world in 3D in real time or atleast any place where cars can be used. The possibilities with this kind of data are pretty crazy and also a little scary.
- rafe33 13y ago
  It's also a massively profitable industry. It would do for the car industry what android previously has done for them in mobile.
  - gress 13y ago
    Android is loss making for Google, and has resulted in an industry with only two profitable players, both of whom view Google as a competitor. I doubt that is the scenario that Google would like for the auto industry.
- praptak 13y ago
  < I never really understood the reason behind driverless cars Really? It might sound crazy but I think people would just buy them because they are, you know, useful for getting places.
  - robotresearcher 13y ago
    And will save perhaps 20,000 lives and many more serious injuries in the US alone every year.
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  Nothing awesome can come without fear.
- rhizome 13y ago
  Keep in mind that from a business perspective, the main use of these vehicles might be military. Think of them as drones in car form.
- rcxdude 13y ago
  Well, the cars that google are developing also (AFAIK) rely on an existing 3D map of the environment of similar detail to what they scan in.
AceJohnny2 13y ago
I don't understand why you assume their only or main reason to develop Google Glass and self-driving cars is ads. Their original product was a search engine. Their breakthrough money-making product was ads, indeed, and they've focused their business model on that, but I contest that it's in their DNA. Do you really think the only value they could derive out of self-driving cars is for more targeted ads?
- joelrunyon 13y ago
  Google is an advertising company. Everything they do is an attempt to protect their advertising revenue in the search vertical. Read this article on all of google's besides search being a "moat." http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat/
  - amaks 13y ago
    This might be a case few years ago, but google is clearly trying to diversify its business with the high speed internet, self-driving cars, robotics. It's hard to justify these investments for the sake of ads.
    - joelrunyon 13y ago
      High Speed Internet --> To have more data & serve you more ads throughout your whole internet experience (not just google). Cars --> Oh, have more time while you're not driving? Spend it on your tablet / computer / device & see more ads. Robotics --> Time freed up around the house? Spend more time online. Need to have your robot run errands for you? Approve these coupon offers at nearby grocery stores & have your robot pick them up. Glass --> Like the outfit that person is wearing? Here's a coupon to buy it right now. Google is an ad company. They have cool tech - but they it comes back to ads.
      - eonil 13y ago
        I had a big expectation on Boston Dynamics, but not anymore because Google purchased them.
mcphage 13y ago
> Google is just researching and trying out new products that can potentially help their bottom line - so what if some may not explode in popularity. That's all good. Where it's a problem is when they take a product that they haven't sufficiently researched—haven't finished, in other words—and then charge people real dollars for them. Lots of real dollars.
- pook1e 13y ago
  I don't see the problem. Google is letting people pay to beta test their product. They aren't forcing anyone to buy anything nor are they marketing it as a finished product.
kkowalczyk 13y ago
I doubt Google has as simplistic view of their business as you do. Google's bottom line is the same as everyone else's: making money. Currently, the ads are very lucrative for them and they use the money from ad business to both expand the ad business (like investing in YouTube or Android) AND try to find other sources of revenue (e.g. Google Fiber or Google Apps for enterprise). You can't assume that Google is terminally stupid and can't see past their current business model. Google Fiber is not free. If people use Comcast, they'll see as many ads from Google as if they were using Fiber. Google can estimate how much ADDITIONAL ad revenue they could expect per user from Fiber vs. Comcast usage and that's probably not much. At $70 or $120/month, this can be very profitable business (long-term, of course, initial investment is huge). Outside of US, companies make good profit at lower prices. Same goes for self-driving cars: transportation is a massive industry. Taxis alone are $10 billion industry. Personal car ownership and use is massive. If Google could get a piece of that business, it could be more profitable than their ad business.
corresation 13y ago
Their bottom line is to get more exposure to their ads Anyone who says this or its many variants has no business acumen or creativity. It is the banal banter of the boring. This sounds harsh, but seriously it grows tiring watching people desperately try to stretch everything to fit some nonsensical hypothesis. Google is a very large company and their product is technology. They happen to have entered the market at a time when advertising was literally the only way to make money online (they originally tried to use the web purely to sell business search appliances, but that didn't pan out), but assuming that their entire future business model is ads is the domain of simpletons. And, as an aside, I see more ads on my iPad and iPod Touch than I do on my Nexus 5. Isn't that weird?
- rimantas 13y ago
  So. please tell, what their future business model is? Google product is ads, plain and simple.
  - corresation 13y ago
    Google has amassed the most enormous, capable data system on the planet. They have more knowledge about the world, places, people and information than anyone. They have continually demonstrated a computer engineering excellence that is simply unmatched. If you lack the creativity to understand the opportunity ahead of them (or how the lack of these things has hurt companies like Apple), you should disengage from the conversation. Simply trotting out the tired, nonsensical "hurp durp ads" rejoinder adds nothing to the conversation but demonstrates a bit of tiring flag waving. And by your very analysis, what is DaringFireball's "product"? It is ad (and t-shirt) supported, therefore the product is ads and t-shirts?
    - throwawaykf03 13y ago
      > Google has amassed the most enormous, capable data system on the planet. They have more knowledge about the world, places, people and information than anyone. They have continually demonstrated a computer engineering excellence that is simply unmatched. I think the real criticism is that despite all this and all the potential opportunities ahead of them, pretty much all their revenue is from ads. Personally, I don't think of this as a cause for criticism, but I do view such a single point of failure as a significant weakness.

enome 13y ago

I never really understood the reason behind driverless cars until I saw that they create 3D models of the environment they drive through. If everybody would drive a google car that would mean google has the potential of mapping the outside world in 3D in real time or atleast any place where cars can be used. The possibilities with this kind of data are pretty crazy and also a little scary.

rafe33 13y ago
It's also a massively profitable industry. It would do for the car industry what android previously has done for them in mobile.
- gress 13y ago
  Android is loss making for Google, and has resulted in an industry with only two profitable players, both of whom view Google as a competitor. I doubt that is the scenario that Google would like for the auto industry.
praptak 13y ago
< I never really understood the reason behind driverless cars Really? It might sound crazy but I think people would just buy them because they are, you know, useful for getting places.
- robotresearcher 13y ago
  And will save perhaps 20,000 lives and many more serious injuries in the US alone every year.
jasonlotito 13y ago
Nothing awesome can come without fear.
rhizome 13y ago
Keep in mind that from a business perspective, the main use of these vehicles might be military. Think of them as drones in car form.
rcxdude 13y ago
Well, the cars that google are developing also (AFAIK) rely on an existing 3D map of the environment of similar detail to what they scan in.

AceJohnny2 13y ago

I don't understand why you assume their only or main reason to develop Google Glass and self-driving cars is ads. Their original product was a search engine. Their breakthrough money-making product was ads, indeed, and they've focused their business model on that, but I contest that it's in their DNA. Do you really think the only value they could derive out of self-driving cars is for more targeted ads?

joelrunyon 13y ago
Google is an advertising company. Everything they do is an attempt to protect their advertising revenue in the search vertical. Read this article on all of google's besides search being a "moat." http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat/
- amaks 13y ago
  This might be a case few years ago, but google is clearly trying to diversify its business with the high speed internet, self-driving cars, robotics. It's hard to justify these investments for the sake of ads.
  - joelrunyon 13y ago
    High Speed Internet --> To have more data & serve you more ads throughout your whole internet experience (not just google). Cars --> Oh, have more time while you're not driving? Spend it on your tablet / computer / device & see more ads. Robotics --> Time freed up around the house? Spend more time online. Need to have your robot run errands for you? Approve these coupon offers at nearby grocery stores & have your robot pick them up. Glass --> Like the outfit that person is wearing? Here's a coupon to buy it right now. Google is an ad company. They have cool tech - but they it comes back to ads.
    - eonil 13y ago
      I had a big expectation on Boston Dynamics, but not anymore because Google purchased them.

mcphage 13y ago

> Google is just researching and trying out new products that can potentially help their bottom line - so what if some may not explode in popularity. That's all good. Where it's a problem is when they take a product that they haven't sufficiently researched—haven't finished, in other words—and then charge people real dollars for them. Lots of real dollars.

pook1e 13y ago
I don't see the problem. Google is letting people pay to beta test their product. They aren't forcing anyone to buy anything nor are they marketing it as a finished product.

kkowalczyk 13y ago

I doubt Google has as simplistic view of their business as you do. Google's bottom line is the same as everyone else's: making money. Currently, the ads are very lucrative for them and they use the money from ad business to both expand the ad business (like investing in YouTube or Android) AND try to find other sources of revenue (e.g. Google Fiber or Google Apps for enterprise). You can't assume that Google is terminally stupid and can't see past their current business model. Google Fiber is not free. If people use Comcast, they'll see as many ads from Google as if they were using Fiber. Google can estimate how much ADDITIONAL ad revenue they could expect per user from Fiber vs. Comcast usage and that's probably not much. At $70 or $120/month, this can be very profitable business (long-term, of course, initial investment is huge). Outside of US, companies make good profit at lower prices. Same goes for self-driving cars: transportation is a massive industry. Taxis alone are $10 billion industry. Personal car ownership and use is massive. If Google could get a piece of that business, it could be more profitable than their ad business.

corresation 13y ago

Their bottom line is to get more exposure to their ads Anyone who says this or its many variants has no business acumen or creativity. It is the banal banter of the boring. This sounds harsh, but seriously it grows tiring watching people desperately try to stretch everything to fit some nonsensical hypothesis. Google is a very large company and their product is technology. They happen to have entered the market at a time when advertising was literally the only way to make money online (they originally tried to use the web purely to sell business search appliances, but that didn't pan out), but assuming that their entire future business model is ads is the domain of simpletons. And, as an aside, I see more ads on my iPad and iPod Touch than I do on my Nexus 5. Isn't that weird?

rimantas 13y ago
So. please tell, what their future business model is? Google product is ads, plain and simple.
- corresation 13y ago
  Google has amassed the most enormous, capable data system on the planet. They have more knowledge about the world, places, people and information than anyone. They have continually demonstrated a computer engineering excellence that is simply unmatched. If you lack the creativity to understand the opportunity ahead of them (or how the lack of these things has hurt companies like Apple), you should disengage from the conversation. Simply trotting out the tired, nonsensical "hurp durp ads" rejoinder adds nothing to the conversation but demonstrates a bit of tiring flag waving. And by your very analysis, what is DaringFireball's "product"? It is ad (and t-shirt) supported, therefore the product is ads and t-shirts?
  - throwawaykf03 13y ago
    > Google has amassed the most enormous, capable data system on the planet. They have more knowledge about the world, places, people and information than anyone. They have continually demonstrated a computer engineering excellence that is simply unmatched. I think the real criticism is that despite all this and all the potential opportunities ahead of them, pretty much all their revenue is from ads. Personally, I don't think of this as a cause for criticism, but I do view such a single point of failure as a significant weakness.