iOS rakes in four times more ad revenue for Google compared to Android...

[smartpatrol]

Here's some interesting analysis done on the numbers. I don't think it brings up too much new information, but it does do a more thorough analysis.

The whole premise still hangs on whether the information found in the court documents can be used to accurate extrapolate these numbers, but we still don't know for sure.

Wow, that's amazing. Not only is Google making far more per device with iOS than Android, but their revenue per device with Android is actually shrinking while it's growing for iOS.

Based on that analysis, Android looks like a big mistake for Google. Google had the chance to form a close partnership with Apple on their iPhone. Instead they decided to compete against iOS. Now Apple is working on their own maps solution and may even have their own search engine. Then Google will lose out on iOS revenues and have to settle for the far less lucrative Android user base.

 

[lothar]

Wow, that's amazing. Not only is Google making far more per device with iOS than Android, but their revenue per device with Android is actually shrinking while it's growing for iOS.

Based on that analysis, Android looks like a big mistake for Google. Google had the chance to form a close partnership with Apple on their iPhone. Instead they decided to compete against iOS. Now Apple is working on their own maps solution and may even have their own search engine. Then Google will lose out on iOS revenues and have to settle for the far less lucrative Android user base.

You seem to be under the false assumption that Apple wouldn't have done this either way regardless of what Google did with Android.

 

[bearxor]

Eh... I have a feeling, a strong opinion, as it were, that if Google wasn't competing with Apple in mobile that the two would likely still have a very strong relationship. Heck, maybe Eric Schmidt wouldn't have had to resign.

Having said that, calling Android a big mistake is, perhaps, a slight overstatement... Just slight... /s

 

[lothar]

Eh... I have a feeling, a strong opinion, as it were, that if Google wasn't competing with Apple in mobile that the two would likely still have a very strong relationship. Heck, maybe Eric Schmidt wouldn't have had to resign.

Having said that, calling Android a big mistake is, perhaps, a slight overstatement... Just slight... /s

Regarding that, I have two words for you: Vertical Integration.
If you don't know what it means, look it up.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Here's some interesting analysis done on the numbers. I don't think it brings up too much new information, but it does do a more thorough analysis.

The whole premise still hangs on whether the information found in the court documents can be used to accurate extrapolate these numbers, but we still don't know for sure.

My problem with that analysis is that it does not take into account the non-ad money Android brings in via GAPPS.

 

[Mopetar]

From the Global Alliance to Prevent Prematurity and Stillbirth? All kidding aside, how much money do they make from that and wouldn't Oracle's lawyers have brought that up if Google was in fact making a substantial amount of money in that way through Android?

 

[bearxor]

Regarding that, I have two words for you: Vertical Integration.
If you don't know what it means, look it up.

Are you kidding? I studied at the Jack Donaghy School of Vertical Integration.

 

[lothar]

Are you kidding? I studied at the Jack Donaghy School of Vertical Integration.

Okay, so you still think that even though Apple and Google had a "special" relationship prior to Android, you don't think Apple would have made their own search engine and maps for iOS when they see all the profits Google is rolling in from it? All those profits are opportunity costs for Apple regardless of what the relationship between Apple and Google is.

For a company like Apple that practices Vertical Integration philosophy to the core, why are people here still assuming that Apple wouldn't have made their own maps and search if Google didn't decide to compete against them with Android when they see all the profits Google is earning from iOS search, maps, and ads?

Again, they'd be stupid not to. Those profits Google is earning on iOS are an opportunity cost for Apple.
People didn't buy an iPhone because Google is the default search engine and Google Maps is on it.

 

[bearxor]

It's different philosophies, IMO. Google is an advertising company. Apple is a software company.

 

[alent1234]

Okay, so you still think that even though Apple and Google had a "special" relationship prior to Android, you don't think Apple would have made their own search engine and maps for iOS when they see all the profits Google is rolling in from it? All those profits are opportunity costs for Apple regardless of what the relationship between Apple and Google is.

For a company like Apple that practices Vertical Integration philosophy to the core, why are people here still assuming that Apple wouldn't have made their own maps and search if Google didn't decide to compete against them with Android when they see all the profits Google is earning from iOS search, maps, and ads?

Again, they'd be stupid not to. Those profits Google is earning on iOS are an opportunity cost for Apple.
People didn't buy an iPhone because Google is the default search engine and Google Maps is on it.

it's a lot harder to build a mapping application than it sounds. same with search. the original google search engine was years ahead of everyone else technologically

 

[smartpatrol]

Okay, so you still think that even though Apple and Google had a "special" relationship prior to Android, you don't think Apple would have made their own search engine and maps for iOS when they see all the profits Google is rolling in from it? All those profits are opportunity costs for Apple regardless of what the relationship between Apple and Google is.

For a company like Apple that practices Vertical Integration philosophy to the core, why are people here still assuming that Apple wouldn't have made their own maps and search if Google didn't decide to compete against them with Android when they see all the profits Google is earning from iOS search, maps, and ads?

Again, they'd be stupid not to. Those profits Google is earning on iOS are an opportunity cost for Apple.
People didn't buy an iPhone because Google is the default search engine and Google Maps is on it.

Maybe? I think maps is a given, but search is something that will take many years and lots of money to do well. Apple makes the vast majority of their profits from hardware sales, not advertising/software/app sales. So I'm not 100% sure they would have entered search if they weren't so pissed off at Google.

At any rate, I think it's pretty ironic that, were Google to steal marketshare from Apple, they'd actually be losing profits by doing so.

 

[Mopetar]

it's a lot harder to build a mapping application than it sounds. same with search. the original google search engine was years ahead of everyone else technologically

I agree. Apple has acquired several different mapping companies for hundreds of millions over the past few years and they still haven't launched anything. It's going to be a long time before they manage to recoup that. My own opinion is that they're doing it more out of spite than anything.

 

[Red Storm]

At any rate, I think it's pretty ironic that, were Google to steal marketshare from Apple, they'd actually be losing profits by doing so.

It must be nice from Google's point of view. Either way, it's a win-win for them.

 

[TuxDave]

It must be nice from Google's point of view. Either way, it's a win-win for them.

You want to talk about win-win? Look at Samsung.

 

[lothar]

it's a lot harder to build a mapping application than it sounds. same with search. the original google search engine was years ahead of everyone else technologically

Just because it's "hard" doesn't mean Apple still wouldn't have done it.

 

[Mopetar]

Just because it's "hard" doesn't mean Apple still wouldn't have done it.

This is a company that has over $100 billion in the bank. They've probably looked at the cost of doing their own search services and come away with the conclusion that it's not going to be able to pay for itself in a reasonable time frame or fit in well with the company at the current time.

They've invested a lot into maps and they seem to be taking their time. One explanation is that they're tying to come out with something that blows away whatever else is out there right now and that takes time. Another is that doing good mapping software isn't easy and takes a lot of time. Perhaps it's a little from column A and a little from column B.

I think that Apple has realized that the amount of money and time it would take to make a better search alternative to Google is far beyond what they think they could make back from it. Apple hasn't show a tendency to make pointless acquisitions or throw away large amounts of money chasing after markets that they aren't at least somewhat involved in.

I doubt that they'll get involved in search, especially considering that even Google has acknowledged that social networks are the new hot area, and even they're facing an uphill battle. Ping, Apple's only previous attempt at anything remotely resembling a social network has been regarded as a flop. I can't see them spend much effort to get into that space.

Apple has probably studied other companies and looked at Microsoft and realized that trying to be all things only leads to a lot of mediocre offerings. It's better for them to focus on what they're good at and leave search to Google, Facebook, or any other challengers that arise.