Google creates a big problem

[Karyyk]

I can read the industry news and draw conclusions. If you are too blind or unwilling to follow, that is your issue. In this case, there are over a dozen different references of bits of the negotiation that when put together, come to a central premise.

Still sounds like conjecture to me. Time will tell, but choosing to disagree with this hardly points to someone having a "sick love affair with Android." You mention "over a dozen" references that assisted your "central premise." Why haven't those been cited?

 

[Bob Maxey]

Seadog - Post some links to backup your claims is what I think they are wanting.

In your above post you state "but I have no actual knowledge" and then followed up with "The fact is that Google."

Stating you "don't know" and then calling out unsubstantiated "facts" is pretty much shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to debate.

Google's Cloud Music Service Launch Facing Delays - FoxBusiness.com

Details of Google

http://www.crn.com/news/cloud/22940...;jsessionid=HuparjCHZ8-MMYJrRMHrKQ**.ecappj01

Google’s Cloud Music Player for Android Leaked—Take a Look - Techland - TIME.com

Here are four reports about the (upcoming?) Google Cloud Music Service. If you Google the query, there is lots of talk and discussion about Google's Cloud Music Service. That said, nothing on Google's official site I can find says they are working on or considering such a service.

So one can conclude it might be just wild speculation because there are links to stories that indicate it is not been announced by Google.

I can forgive the OP for asking about GCMS because there are lots of reports and discussion. But it might not be true, too.

Bob

 

[SweetPoison]

This thread is very interesting! And respectful and civil. Let's keep it that way.

 

[Thphilli]

Google did let it out that they were working on music market, and I would hardly call the release of Honeycomb a complete OS. As for them trying to get a good deal for their customers, look who is into wild speculation. I try to put out references as a courtesy, but for those who have a sick love affair with Android, I might as well be speaking ill of Allah from the reaction I get. I can read the industry news and draw conclusions. If you are too blind or unwilling to follow, that is your issue. In this case, there are over a dozen different references of bits of the negotiation that when put together, come to a central premise.

It is not that unusual for technology companies to act like jerks. If you look at the industry, it is hard to find one company that hasn't at one time or another. Including Microsoft (still king of jerks), Apple, Adobe, etc. Everyone knows that the record labels are jerks, as are most of the movie/TV studios. Over the past few years, Google decided that they would be more than a search engine. That is good. But they have been trying to steamroller into areas without a clear plan of implementation. Nor with the flexibility to refocus when others do not play by ther game plan.

So we are like 20 posts into this thread and you STILL haven't explained why or what Google did that makes them jerks. It sounds like your initial premise was that Google had announced a music service without hammering out deals with the record labels beforehand, but I am pretty sure that I have shown that not to be the case.

And I AM a lover of Android, some might call it sick I guess . . . I am not an irrational lover of Android. I don't think you will find a post from me saying something wildly irrational regarding either Android or iOS.

This quote from you gets to the heart of the matter though:

I can read the industry news and draw conclusions. If you are too blind or unwilling to follow, that is your issue. In this case, there are over a dozen different references of bits of the negotiation that when put together, come to a central premise.

You haven't read industry news. You have read industry RUMORS and industry hearsay. So you are drawing conclusions on a very shaky foundation. Remember when Apple was going to be releasing the iPad2 as a 7 inch tablet?

http://www.pcworld.com/article/187215/apple_tablet_will_have_7inch_oled_screen_expert_says.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/7-inch-ipad-2010-8

http://www.bgr.com/2009/12/23/apple-tablet-definitely-coming-in-7-size/

There are DOZENS more articles all describing the great 7 inch tablet that Apple was launching.

You have to understand that until someone actually has a product in hand and is able to either show it to you on video or through screenshots or pictures, it doesn't exist. Google Music may come exactly how these rumors and speculation describe it, or it could be completely different. Until Google announces something, its better off to act like it doesn't exist, because it doesn't.

 

[HKWrite12]

i don't know if this has been mentioned, but I find it extremely interesting how Google has managed to be like a Superpower between Android and Apple. They are attempting to develop stand up OS in compared to iOS, while acting as mail provider and Search engine for Apple products.

I guess they have yet to learn their place.

All in favor of google as a search engine ONLY, say i(Pad)!

Sent from my iPad 2 using iPF

 

[Thphilli]

i don't know if this has been mentioned, but I find it extremely interesting how Google has managed to be like a Superpower between Android and Apple. They are attempting to develop stand up OS in compared to iOS, while acting as mail provider and Search engine for Apple products.

I guess they have yet to learn their place.

All in favor of google as a search engine ONLY, say i(Pad)!

Sent from my iPad 2 using iPF

You know why Google is doing everything that they are doing right? Android isn't something that Google decided to get into so that they could try to diversify their products. Google is ALL about search and advertising. Its where their money is; 97 percent. They saw that the mobile sector was set to explode with new devices and they wanted to make sure that those mobile devices use Google's search and ads. Android is a moat around Google Search to protect it from rivals. They only way they could assure the mobile space would belong to Google Search was to introduce their own software platform. They knew that Microsoft was going to try and resurrect Windows Mobile and would obviously be using Bing. That pretty much left Apple and RIM. These two companies could basically decide the fate of Google Search in the mobile sector and Apple would later develop its own mobile advertising system. Instead of allowing something like that to happen, they bought Android and developed a mobile OS centered around their services: Gmail, Search, Gtalk, etc. I don't think Google had any idea that Android would be succeeding as much as it has, but they made a damn smart move buying the company.

 

[Seadog]

Google may have made a little mistake this morning when it accidentally pushed out a test version of its Android Market which the folks at Tech From 10 found on their Galaxy S this morning. There were a few changes to the market, which we’ll get into later, but the most interesting nugget was the addition of Android Music 3.0, which the Tech From 10 crew quickly downloaded. Unfortunately, Tech From 10 is currently down, most likely due to this hubbub, but the site had a chance to grab a few screen shots of the app.

Aesthetically speaking, it’s almost identical to the current Android Music player seen on Honeycomb for tablets, but it’s been compressed, and is obviously suited for smaller screens. The settings menu has also changed and now has various streaming-related options.

Droid Life also got a peak at the Android Music app and pointed out that you can now get the “Recent” section with album previews and a scrolling wheel feel. Droid Life has the APK file, if you’re so inclined to try it out, but it couldn’t figure out how to unlock the streaming music service.

Today, a new version of Android’s Music app, analogous to that of the player found in Honeycomb, was accidentally leaked to developers. It includes a new rating system and options for what is purportedly Google’s cloud music service. However, and despite the app being available for download, no one has had any luck with pushing or playing music from the cloud. This is not surprising since Google probably hasn’t allowed the service to be accessible to those who aren’t employed or cleared by Google’s project managers. Perhaps a trip to Mountainview and logging into Google’s network will resolve that. Any takers?

Anyone that thinks Google is not doing cloud streaming is strongly in denial with all the information available on it.

 

[Thphilli]

Anyone that thinks Google is not doing cloud streaming is strongly in denial with all the information available on it.

Maybe. However anyone who takes all of these rumors and leaks, and then goes and posts:

It is being reported that Google in it's egotistical way has screwed things up big time. They announced their cloud based music and video store to challenge iTunes and steal a march on Apple. Without any agreement from the media companies, they made a bunch of claims. Tacked on the cloud storage plan of Amazon, which the media barons have frowned upon, and Google has stepped deep in its own mess.

I would ask of this person:

1) What is Google's egotistical way?
2) What did they screw up big time?
3) When did they announce a cloud based music and video store?
4) When did they make a claim and what was the claim that they made?
What mess have they stepped into seeing as the answer to the previous questions are: 1)There isn't one, 2)nothing, 3)they didn't and 4)they didn't?

 

[Seadog]

First, Google confirmed it had acquired mobile music startup PushLife for $25 million. The purchase of PushLife indicates that Google is very cognizant that it'll take more than the cloud to migrate users from a competing service. After all, the majority of consumers are hooked on Apple--it's won't be easy to wean them off iTunes. But that's exactly what Google is likely hoping to do with PushLife, which, according to according to eWeek, enables users to easily port their iTunes music libraries from desktops to Android-based smartphones.
Second, a report released Monday indicates Google has been engaged in albeit somewhat thorny negotiations with major record labels. According to the Music Void, citing a source close to the negotiations, Google is having difficulty locking down licensing deals with the labels and is in dispute over how much to charge for subscriptions.

The Music Void reports that Google is fed up with the labels, particularly WMG, which is said to be suggesting that Google charge users $30 per year for the cloud service. Apparently, Google wants users to be able to try the service for free with the first 500 tracks stored. Warner declined to comment. (Still, $30 per year doesn’t seem outlandish by any stretch — services such as MOG and Rdio cost around $10 per month.)

Google may decide to go the way of Amazon (by creating a more basic music locker, sans licenses) or shut down the service all together, reportedly. Still, we have to keep in mind that these are all rumors, and negotiations are fluid.

Apparently the search engine giant’s negotiation with music labels are now “broken” and have moved backwards instead of forward. Chances of us getting access to an online music streaming service or store from Google might now be next to none. Because of the deal going sour, Google might end up creating some sort of cloud storage locker service that Amazon is running right now.

My personal opinion is that Google is a second rate tech company tryng too hard to move up. In doing so, they are stepping on feet that are full of bunions. Too many of their recent actions have been done without being considerate of the rules of negotiating. I may hate politicians, but I have dealt with enough of them to know that they are like mafia dons, and if you do not show them respect, things go very bad. The same atitude is apparent in many other fields. Especially entertainment moguls. Google either did not do their homework before venturing on this mission, or were arrogant enough to think they had enough clout to ramrod this through. Google made their chops as a search engine. Their additional endeavors have been aggressive, but nothing that could be considered inventive. They have tried to emulate several other technologies with a haphazard planning. The devil is in the details, and they have been making a bunch of mistakes cause by not paying attention to the details. Android is a necessary OS, but is no where near as robust and refine as iOS and a couple of others. Google has a lot to learn and may someday be as big a player as their ambition. They just have a lot to learn.

 

[Seadog]

I would ask why anyone would be so smitten with Google that they cannot see what in in front of their eyes. Where they stepped in it, was in pissing off the media moguls. If they do not make a deal, which is unlikely, then their only option is to team with Amazon, or only offer the cloud storage service and face likely legal battles. It will mean that all the hard work that Apple has done, will probably be sunk because the labels will take a hard line. And do not think that Amazon and Google would win in court. After spending millions, they will find that copyright and music rights are full of precedence in favor of the labels. Even if they win, Amazon and Google would probably have to increase the price to pay their lawyers. and it would be years to get everything settled. I would not be surprised if the labels file a cease and desist order against Amazon within a couple months.

 

[Thphilli]

My personal opinion is that Google is a second rate tech company tryng too hard to move up. In doing so, they are stepping on feet that are full of bunions. Too many of their recent actions have been done without being considerate of the rules of negotiating. I may hate politicians, but I have dealt with enough of them to know that they are like mafia dons, and if you do not show them respect, things go very bad. The same atitude is apparent in many other fields. Especially entertainment moguls. Google either did not do their homework before venturing on this mission, or were arrogant enough to think they had enough clout to ramrod this through. Google made their chops as a search engine. Their additional endeavors have been aggressive, but nothing that could be considered inventive. They have tried to emulate several other technologies with a haphazard planning. The devil is in the details, and they have been making a bunch of mistakes cause by not paying attention to the details. Android is a necessary OS, but is no where near as robust and refine as iOS and a couple of others. Google has a lot to learn and may someday be as big a player as their ambition. They just have a lot to learn.

No. So you think Google is a second rate company because they are trying to change things for the better? Because they didn't follow the "rules of negotiating"?? What???

Google is trying to CHANGE things. They have consistantly done things that would MASSIVELY help consumers. I don't know or really care what their motivations are for doing these things.

The Nexus phones tried to start a "direct to consumer" sales mechanism.

Google bid on the 700mhz spectrum to force Verizon over the threshold so that they had to comply with FCC regulations such as sharing the spectrum with consumers from other carriers.

It really seems to me that you don't know what you are talking about. You are literally criticizing Google for not falling in line and just accepting the crappy aspects of modern technology.

Android is a necessary OS, but is no where near as robust and refine as iOS and a couple of others.

Maybe not as refined, but its RIDICULOUSLY more robust. What are you talking about?

Google either did not do their homework before venturing on this mission, or were arrogant enough to think they had enough clout to ramrod this through.

So couldn't you say the EXACT same thing about Apple? Apple owned the mp3 player market and FORCED the labels to deal with them. Were they arrogant? No. Is Google arrogant for using its GIGANTIC clout to try and do the same thing with record labels? No. How can you even make this argument?

 

[Thphilli]

I would ask why anyone would be so smitten with Google that they cannot see what in in front of their eyes. Where they stepped in it, was in pissing off the media moguls. If they do not make a deal, which is unlikely, then their only option is to team with Amazon, or only offer the cloud storage service and face likely legal battles. It will mean that all the hard work that Apple has done, will probably be sunk because the labels will take a hard line. And do not think that Amazon and Google would win in court. After spending millions, they will find that copyright and music rights are full of precedence in favor of the labels. Even if they win, Amazon and Google would probably have to increase the price to pay their lawyers. and it would be years to get everything settled. I would not be surprised if the labels file a cease and desist order against Amazon within a couple months.

What in gods name are you talking about? It seems like you have this whole scenario figured out in your head based on rumors and your own speculation. Seriously, wut?????

Amazon is doing NOTHING illegal and the labels can try and sue all they want, they won't prevail. You might want to read this until the end:
Nilay Patel • Amazon Cloud Player and how bandwidth killed the copyright star

Amazon literally sells you the track and then transfers the song into your cloud storage pool. Everytime they sell a track they transfer the song into the consumers storage pool. So if a thousand people buy a Rebecca Black song, Amazon has 1000 copies of it on its servers. The labels have nothing to sue them over.

Google won't "team" with Amazon because it would be stupid to have a third party in charge of an important aspect of Android.

And the "hard work" that Apple has done is strong arming the labels into negotiating because they owned the mp3 player market the same way Amazon strong armed publishers because they owned the e-reader market. Why would anything Google does affect CONTRACTS that Apple and the labels have made? It makes no sense.

It really seems like you have a massive misconception of what is occurring here and drawing some really shaky conclusions.

 

[Thphilli]

I would ask why anyone would be so smitten with Google that they cannot see what in in front of their eyes. Where they stepped in it, was in pissing off the media moguls. If they do not make a deal, which is unlikely, then their only option is to team with Amazon, or only offer the cloud storage service and face likely legal battles. It will mean that all the hard work that Apple has done, will probably be sunk because the labels will take a hard line. And do not think that Amazon and Google would win in court. After spending millions, they will find that copyright and music rights are full of precedence in favor of the labels. Even if they win, Amazon and Google would probably have to increase the price to pay their lawyers. and it would be years to get everything settled. I would not be surprised if the labels file a cease and desist order against Amazon within a couple months.

I had to come and post here again because I remembered how ridiculous this comment was. Hey Seadog, how much sense does this comment make with this news:

Reuters: Apple set to launch cloud-based music service ahead of Google -- Engadget

Damn Google sinking all of Apples hard work . . . . . oh wait.

Damn Google stepping on all those toes . . . . oh wait.

Damn Google pissing off those media moguls . . . . oh wait.

So do you think Apple is going to have to go to court to defend this as you do with Amazon and Google? Do you think the labels will file a cease and desist order against Apple within a few months of this launching?

LOL.