Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
Samsung's Heft in Android Worries Google (wsj.com)
46 points by shawndumas 1693 days ago | hide | past | web | 23 comments | favorite

This is a rewording of the WSJ article stuffed full of SEO spam.


I actually submitted that link directly half a day ago. Didn't realise that when links are edited on a post, the original is ignored, unlike submitting directly. Learn something new every day :)

One thing that I don't see mentioned in the article is Samsung's (and EA's) new "100% Indie" initiative. They're pushing to get more game developers selling through Samsung's store instead of Google's, with the draw being six months of no royalties on sales. After that, it rises to 10%, 20%, and eventually the standard 30%, but if it goes as planned it should get a foot in the door for Samsung's marketplace.

PC magazine has more details: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2415190,00.asp

I am on Samsung's side, if there really is "a side" to this issue.

I have had computer gadgets since 1977 when I bought a single board PDP-8 that I had to code in machine language. I have bought myself and my family a huge number of great computers and various gear since then but I have never had any other gear that I have liked as much as my Galaxy S III. Samsung nailed it. You could take away my MacBook Air and my iPad and that would be OK, but I have no idea what I would want to replace the S III with, except the new S IV that is soon being released :-)

I personally side with whomever treats their employees, particularly engineers, better. In this regard, Google "wins" hands down.

Google has some questionable practices with contractors but Samsung has (imo) worse conditions for its manufacturing workers. Compensation and treatment of white collar technical workers is won by Google, hands down. For me, Google doing well vs Samsung means more "better" engineering jobs in the world, so for this reason alone I will continue to root for Google in this struggle.

Of course, this is just my personal agenda and I don't expect anyone to necessarily share my beliefs. :)

I'd be hesitant to be on the side of anyone that wants to couple hardware together with software and control both.

This article is mostly based on some gossip.

"But Mr. Rubin also said Samsung could become a threat if it gains more ground among mobile-device makers that use Android, __the person said__."

A level journalism right there.

Count the number of times he is vague, and count the number of times he quotes people 'familiar with the matter'.

Makes for a poor read and is apt to make the sceptic in me shout 'speculation'!, but hey, maybe this is what passes for news these days.

Is there a single named source in this article saying something that supports the main topic (the analyst is just stating the obvious)? I feel like this reporter does a lot of articles that sound like Silicon Valley bar chat. What happened to requiring 2 independent sources?

Google used a snake (Samsung) to catch a rat (Apple). The rat is now being slowly consumed by the snake.

Google now realises that once the rat has been consumed, the snake will start looking for other things to eat.

Google is now afraid of the snake. They are now on the look out for snake-eating gorillas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_the_Mother).

Make no mistake that if Google could get their own "Galaxy" through Motorola they'd tell Samsung to f themselves, via fax /email too.

But Motorola may not be able to create a "Galaxy" of their own though. One of the reason Samsung is so successful is because they run a huge marketing/manufacturing operation that caters toward the entire world. The brand image they've created is quite successful, probably 2nd only to Apple. Motorola can create hardware that's just as powerful but so did HTC, LG, etc and none of them were able to touch Samsung's dominance. These days Google may not have a lot of leverage because many consumers (especially in Asia) just want a Galaxy phone, they don't care about or even know about Android/Google's role in it.

For example in China, Android handsets are very successful, but Google doesn't really benefit from that because most Google services are banned from within China and many manufacturers just roll their own skin/apps anyway.

If Samsung can make Tizen work they will probably tell Google to go f themselves, too.

What should really worry Google is if Samsung left Android for either Firefox Mobile OS or Ubuntu Phone or started offering devices running any of these mobile OSes. The days of OS dominance ala Windows are over. That includes the mobile platform.

As it stands now that would only hurt Samsung. Who wants to buy a phone with no apps? Samsungs brand is strong, but it's not strong enough to make a fledgling OS ready for the limelight.

How crazy would it be if Samsung was looking for a Search Engine? Can you imagine Bing, Blekko, or DDG on all the Samsung phones? Totally cut google out. Things might get interesting in search again.

Bing has been the default on some Samsung phones since the Galaxy S 1 (the first of the galaxy line, I believe). In that case, it probably had more to do with the carrier, but I'd imagine carrier influence is still basically as strong.

Samsung has the money and clout to move Google out of Android. IMO, in a year or to smartphones will probably be like desktops, boring, as they do everything needed and new features are not needed by 90% of people. Google has every reason to worry.

If Samsung had anywhere near the software chops to make this happen, wouldn't even at least their midrange phones run Bada? And the desktop analogy falls flat when you consider the fact that some of the most important apps are well integrated services - maps, Siri/Google Now, Gmail, etc.

Exactly. This is a company whose code review process said "Sure, any userspace process can access all memory!", and AFAIK have refused to fix it. I don't think Google has much to worry about.

Or rather, sure: they do on the business side. An app store is a commodity. Samsung has one. If enough users use only Samsung phones then Samsung can sell the apps directly. But that's only true insofar as Samsung phones are clearly better. And right now that property is a combination of some nice hardware and... Google's innovation in Android. Take the latter away and you basically have AOSP on nice hardware, and that's not going to sell many phones.

Long term I think this will settle out as phones and mobile OSes become less differentiated. Samsung too (and Apple, for that matter) will succumb to the inevitable: there really isn't a whole lot of money to be made in selling latte-priced apps in an increasingly competitive market.

Yeah. Samsung makes great hardware, awesome LCD panels etc but their software is not so great (although it's been improving). E.G: Samsung's Smart TV software

To reinforce your point, Samsung is killing Bada.


But they're killing it in favor of Tizen, their next-gen OS, which will be going head to head with Android.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact