Seeking Alpha: Android is a net negative for Google


Recommended Posts

This is how Google shot itself in foot: Each additional Android user is likely already a Google user on the desktop, and encouraging them to use Google on their Android phone instead of their Windows desktop simply means downsizing their revenue from desktop ad dollars to mobile pennies. The more their phones are adopted and used, the more they cost to support via Google Play and other services, the less they earn from desktop ads, and the less they feel they need to serve other platforms, which would have earned them money without all the support costs associated with Android. The pyrrhic victory will ultimately end up burning Google?s cash flow. (via wmpoweruser.com)

Link: http://seekingalpha....et-share-part-i

This is how Google shot itself in foot: Each additional Android user is likely already a Google user on the desktop, and encouraging them to use Google on their Android phone instead of their Windows desktop simply means downsizing their revenue from desktop ad dollars to mobile pennies. The more their phones are adopted and used, the more they cost to support via Google Play and other services, the less they earn from desktop ads, and the less they feel they need to serve other platforms, which would have earned them money without all the support costs associated with Android. The pyrrhic victory will ultimately end up burning Google?s cash flow. (via wmpoweruser.com)

Link: http://seekingalpha....et-share-part-i

whats your point ?... android is simply a sub devision of google ... google ads and youtube are the revenue of their company (mostly) ... remember gangnam styles 1billion views ? imagine how many people watched an ad for that video ...I think they can afford to lose money if it means dominating a market its the game

whats your point ?... android is simply a sub devision of google ... google ads and youtube are the revenue of their company (mostly) ... remember gangnam styles 1billion views ? imagine how many people watched an ad for that video ...I think they can afford to lose money if it means dominating a market its the game

Company loosing money to gain market share or to even harm a competitor is understandable, but they are loosing bigger amount in one division to earn petty amount from other division.

Data mining is a huge source of profit these days, and thanks to Android, Google knows more about you than ever. Even if Android wasn't hugely profitable, Google was smart to jump into to mobile world to avoid becoming irrelevant. Microsoft realizes this which is why they're trying to force their way into the mobile realm with Windows 8, putting their flagship product at risk in the hopes of winning big.

  • Like 3

This is how Google shot itself in foot: Each additional Android user is likely already a Google user on the desktop, and encouraging them to use Google on their Android phone instead of their Windows desktop simply means downsizing their revenue from desktop ad dollars to mobile pennies. The more their phones are adopted and used, the more they cost to support via Google Play and other services, the less they earn from desktop ads, and the less they feel they need to serve other platforms, which would have earned them money without all the support costs associated with Android. The pyrrhic victory will ultimately end up burning Google?s cash flow. (via wmpoweruser.com)

Link: http://seekingalpha....et-share-part-i

To me Googles biggest failure is how horsecrap Google Play is.

If I want a book on Android, I go to the Kindle Marketplace. If I want music on Android, I go to Amazon MP3. Google Play wasn't terrible, but it was missing so much.

Every purchase on Google Play earns them money...or would, if stuff was even there.

I sold off my Nexus 7 and got another SSD.

LOL at people thinking Google is in a bad position because of Android..

They RULE the mobile. The amount of information and everything they have access to is making them boatloads of money that comparing it to whether or not Android costs them something is completely asinine and completely lacks the understanding of what Google is doing in the long run. Mobile ecosystem and advertising and gelocation and so many things are the next desktop. Desktop will be dying out and whether they had Android or not they would lose money.

Balmer would fluff every single executive at Google to be in the same position.

  • Like 2

And let's not forget all the ads on Android that Google makes momey from.

Let's not forget that I am not motivated to buy anything because of an ad. Especially intrusive ads.

A very neutral source we have here....

Seeking Alpha? What's not neutral about them? It's a website for investors. Where else would you suggest we look for information about Google's financials?

Neither am I, but they make money right along from them. Same as here, and I rarely click on an ad here.

Yes ad impressions earn them money and it doesn't matter if you don't buy! Furthermore, not everyone can afford two things such as a computer and a cellphone. The easiest and cheapest way to get people online is through mobile and google dominates that too with youtube, maps, search, and email! The next billion people to get online are more likely to get online via mobile than on a desktop. Also because android is everywhere even with cheaper models and cheaper tablets and people have access to everything they basically need such as surfing, facebook, pictures, youtube and general usage. A computer is overkill for many people who just use it for very basic typical fun use especially senior citizens, uneducated people and kids.

They're not in a bad position *because* of Android. They're in a bad position because they only have one ( over 90% basically) source of income.

Which really is not a bad position in this case. Ads are not going away and are expanding all the time. So this is a constant reliable stream of cash coming in for Google. And Google has ads everywhere, not just on the Android platform. Now if Google's main source of income was the Chrome Book, then that would be a bad position.

This is how Google shot itself in foot: Each additional Android user is likely already a Google user on the desktop, and encouraging them to use Google on their Android phone instead of their Windows desktop simply means downsizing their revenue from desktop ad dollars to mobile pennies. The more their phones are adopted and used, the more they cost to support via Google Play and other services, the less they earn from desktop ads, and the less they feel they need to serve other platforms, which would have earned them money without all the support costs associated with Android. The pyrrhic victory will ultimately end up burning Google?s cash flow. (via wmpoweruser.com)

Link: http://seekingalpha....et-share-part-i

Except this isn't reflective of reality...

Mobile is the key to stronger revenue streams by Google on every platform. In the most basics, mobile increases the amount of information Google has on each individual user. They now have information about where the users travels (via GPS), who they contact (via SMS and Call Logs), what applications they install and use, the content of their EMail (via Gmail), etc. This complete picture allows Google to push up the price of their ads across the board as they are able to sell the advertiser "more relevant clicks" which is all they care about.

So, you're looking at this all backwards.

LOL at people thinking Google is in a bad position because of Android..

They RULE the mobile. The amount of information and everything they have access to is making them boatloads of money that comparing it to whether or not Android costs them something is completely asinine and completely lacks the understanding of what Google is doing in the long run. Mobile ecosystem and advertising and gelocation and so many things are the next desktop. Desktop will be dying out and whether they had Android or not they would lose money.

Balmer would fluff every single executive at Google to be in the same position.

Desktop will be dying? Oh my, how you change your tune when posting in Windows 8 threads!

Just read the first line:

Disclosure: I am long MSFT, INTC, AAPL. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

And I stopped right there. Microsoft, Intel and Apple writer?

Can't get more object than that! /s

Desktop will be dying? Oh my, how you change your tune when posting in Windows 8 threads!

Yep it will.. for most people at least. My dad and many family members have already stopped using desktop computers. They are way too complicated for simple things they need (email, skyping, simple browsing). Desktop won't die but it will be mostly limited to those who actually need it (content producers, programmers, designers etc.. professionals in general).

And since this is inevitably happening, Microsoft's desktop OS dominance will become irrelevant in the big picture.

remember gangnam styles 1billion views ? imagine how many people watched an ad for that video ...I think they can afford to lose money if it means dominating a market its the game

That video had ads?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
    • So how did you solve the problem? Disabling Secure Boot isn’t a solution.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!