- [There are] some fundamental limitations inherent to the design that have yet to be overcome.
- These are:
1. Each module requires an individual case and a connector. These take up space, making the resulting device bulkier and less sleek-looking than a normal device.
2. Each swappable component has to remain distinct from all the others. Integrating components together is a tried and tested method of cost and size reduction meaning that a modular device has always been more expensive to make.
3. Every swappable component has to be tested with every other in every possible configuration to ensure that they all work together properly. This means that testing and certification is much more onerous meaningfully increasing development costs.
- In every instance to date, this has resulted in a bulky, ugly device that has a lower specification and higher price than its competition.
It’s investing the equivalent of $8.5 billion into developing OLED technology over the next three years for everything from TVs to cars to wearables.
Drawings indicate that Apple would indeed be employing a System in Package (SiP) technology along with a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) architecture. The SiP technology is used by Cupertino in the Apple Watch, and it allows for faster production of more compact and more efficient circuitry.
“Used phones and, the iPhone in particular, have tremendous appeal,” Claure said. “We have a surprise in terms of what will happen to these used phones.”
The future is TRUSTED filters directing the audience where to partake of desirable music.
Applies to more than music.
As Sergey and I wrote in the original founders letter 11 years ago, “Google is not a conventional company. We do not intend to become one.” […]
We’ve long believed that over time companies tend to get comfortable doing the same thing, just making incremental changes. But in the technology industry, where revolutionary ideas drive the next big growth areas, you need to be a bit uncomfortable to stay relevant. […]
What is Alphabet? Alphabet is mostly a collection of companies. The largest of which, of course, is Google. This newer Google is a bit slimmed down, with the companies that are pretty far afield of our main internet products contained in Alphabet instead. What do we mean by far afield? Good examples are our health efforts: Life Sciences [and] Calico (focused on longevity). Fundamentally, we believe this allows us more management scale, as we can run things independently that aren’t very related. […]
Sergey and I are seriously in the business of starting new things. Alphabet will also include our X lab, which incubates new efforts like Wing, our drone delivery effort. We are also stoked about growing our investment arms, Ventures and Capital, as part of this new structure.
If anything communicates Larry Page’s and Sergey Brin’s desire to move beyond search, this action does. Role clarity and organizational clarity both help in the pursuit of new opportunities. They’re not sufficient, obviously, but they’re useful. And clarity often leads to better focus or speed.
Expect other changes to happen at the business unit level and below, as leaders at different levels imprint more of their vision and goals on their organizations. Should apply to both mature and exploration-focused business units.
Update (August 11): Initially, I listed only 3 business units under Alphabet: Google, Ventures, and Capital. I corrected this error.
Android was originally designed, above all else, to be widely adopted. Google was starting from scratch with zero percent market share, so it was happy to give up control and give everyone a seat at the table in exchange for adoption. […]
Android still uses a software update chain-of-command designed back when the Android ecosystem had zero devices to update, and it just doesn’t work. There are just too many cooks in the kitchen: Google releases Android to OEMs, OEMs can change things and release code to carriers, carriers can change things and release code to consumers. It’s been broken for years.
I couldn’t have said it better. The headline seems apt, too. I usually don’t write about security. 1) My experience is limited; 2) iOS isn’t perfect, either; and 3) it’s not quite a dynamic, cutting-edge topic. But the number and scale of issues on Android is getting ridiculous. Google made the trade-off between rapid scale and solid security. Scale won. And so “open” is now also a double-entendre.
Earlier this year, Toyota spelled out what many car companies were thinking: It would rather have its own software inside its cars than software from Apple and Google. On Thursday, it took another step to box out the mobile giants.
The Japanese carmaker signed a deal with two auto tech companies, Telenav and UIEvolution, to equip some 2016 models with a dashboard navigation system linked to mobile phones. It works with both iOS and Android. But, according to the software partners, the system doesn’t wrest control from Toyota, a rising concern in the auto industry as Apple and Google promote their connected dashboards. […]
[ Part of the desire for software control comes from] the very real concern from carmakers that surrendering control of in-car experiences to mobile companies would render them useless. […]
Ford CEO Mark Fields articulated this concern in an interview with Re/code in April: “At the end of the day we don’t want to end up as the handset business.”
I sincerely hope auto makers’ ability to create high-quality software matches their desire for control. Soon.
The relationship between Google and Huawei could be mutually beneficial beyond the phone’s co-development. The Information claims that talks are in progress for Huawei to help Google bring a mobile app store to China, where government regulations have restricted the search giant from conducting much business of note.
Will this be effective? Call me skeptical. (That’s not a knock on Google, by the way. I respect its choice to stay out of China.)
Chennapragada spelled out the three-pronged direction [for Google Now on Tap] — what she called the “bets” her team is taking. The first bet was embedding Now with Google’s full “Knowledge Graph” — the billions-thick Web of people, places and things and their many interconnections.
The second is context. Now groks both the user’s location and the myriad of signals from others in the same spot. If you enter a mall, Now will tailor cards to what people in that mall typically ask for. “Both your feet are at the mall. You shouldn’t have to spell it out,” Chennapragada said. “Why should I futz with the phone and wade through 15 screens?”
And this is where the third benchmark for Now comes in: Tying that context to the apps on your phone, or ones you have yet to download. In two years, Google has indexed some 50 billion links within apps. In April, it began listing install links to apps deemed relevant in search. Indexed apps will be included in Now on Tap when it arrives in the latest Android version this fall.
I’m looking forward to trying out Google Now on Tap.
Google is seeking the single best answer to a direct query from an effectively infinite number of data points… For most queries there is one right answer that Google will return to anyone who searches for the term in question. In short, the data set is infinite (which means no human is capable of doing the job), but the target is finite. Facebook, on the other hand, creates a unique news feed for all of its 1.44 billion users… what is infinite are the number of targets.
When the data set is big (Google’s challenge) or the user set is big (Facebook’s challenge), you need an algorithm. Good article, in large part due to good insights from Ben.
Google Inc.’s life sciences group has created a health-tracking wristband that could be used in clinical trials and drug tests, giving researchers or physicians minute-by-minute data on how patients are faring.
The experimental device, developed within the company’s Google X research division, can measure pulse, heart rhythm and skin temperature, and also environmental information like light exposure and noise levels. It won’t be marketed as a consumer device, said Andy Conrad, head of the life sciences team at Google.
My take on this is that Google intends to:
1. Start by creating a device that tracks health and environment data *very* accurately (by having to meet clinical trial requirements). Then improve the size, design, power, and other attributes. The next version will be even better for clinical trials. The iteration after that? – suitable for consumers (size, power, etc.).
2. Use insights to improve Android Wear (the OS, or a related reference architecture), even if its aim isn’t to achieve clinical-trial performance on those devices. Very notably, Nest devices could also benefit.
3. In the meantime, Google will learn a lot about biometric and environmental sensors, related data, and related applications for that data.
Earlier this month, when Larry Page announced that Google was launching a new startup called Sidewalk Labs to develop and incubate technology for cities, many wondered what the company [intended to do].
Now, that fuzzy logic is coming into focus. Today, Sidewalk Labs announced it would be leading the acquisition of two companies behind New York City’s LinkNYC initiative, an ongoing plan to convert old pay phones into free public Wi-Fi hubs. Through the acquisition, Sidewalk Labs is merging the two companies—Control Group, which provides the interface for the new hubs, and Titan, which is overseeing the advertising that will pay for the project. The new venture, aptly named Intersection, will seek to bring free public Wi-Fi to cities around the world using different pieces of urban infrastructure, from pay phones to bus stops.
If you look at the underlying need, combined with Google’s interest in being a catalyst for faster, lower-priced internet access (e.g., Google Fiber, Project Fi, Project Loon), this was almost inevitable. Also inevitable: inquiry and debate about privacy issues (whether warranted or not).
Google has today announced the introduction of 17 brand new watch faces for Android Wear, spanning brands such as Rubiks, Hello Kitty, Angry Birds, and more. Google says that there are already more than 1,500 watch faces available to customize your device, and now — lucky you! — there are 17 more options to choose from…
Why not? This isn’t nerdy complexity. It’s user choice for the watch face they look at 5x – 30x per day. It may take a while, but I believe Apple Watch will get custom faces too.
Native apps have overtaken the web as the main place where smartphone users go for entertainment, information and more. So it should come as no surprise that one of the companies that profits the most from our use of the web is looking for ways to get us to use the it more again. According to [Amir Efrati at] The Information, Google last year secretly acquired a startup called Agawi, which had developed technology to use and stream mobile apps over the web without downloading them first, used in applications like in-app adds to preview and promote gaming apps.
Cool. The ability to try an app without downloading it is great. There’s speculation, too, that Google might want to apply Agawi technology to make better web apps. Or, in hyperbolic terms, that Google is trying to “kill native apps”. The key question to answer will be: how will web apps deliver a better user experience than native apps? I’m biased toward native apps, for all the known and obvious reasons to-date, but open to the benefit of another approach, too.
I couldn’t resist. These are all great companies, but they wield different degrees of influence, depending on the area. It’s also a reminder: The order of influence wasn’t always the same. Things change.
— Nick Landry (@ActiveNick) May 28, 2015
After Apple’s “Proactive” initiative leaked this week, these words from Google’s I/O keynote — during the reveal of “Google Now on Tap” — caught my attention:
Selective Hearing & Amplification from Google I/O
- Answers […] proactively
- Natural language understanding
- Things (as in, things recognized)
- Places (Google can recognize 100M places)
- Knowledge graph (Google has 1B entities)
- Neural nets (Google’s is 30 layers deep)
- Machine learning
Machine learning […] is going to be a critical [capability] for Apple
First, these are all related to, or enabled by, the bottom term: Machine Learning. It’s the ability for a computer to learn new things: shapes, patterns of behavior, relationships, and more. This is already a very important capability for Google, and is going to be a critical one for Apple, too. Why? Well, briefly, to enable Apple devices to make sense of the user’s context (location, activity, history, messages, related information, intent, etc.) and, in turn, to help the user achieve her objective, stated or implied. Things like catching a plane, buying a present, or meeting a friend. Or adjusting exercise frequency, sleep, or diet. The possibilities are many.
The figures [Google showed] speak to the […] massive, massive level of investment Google has made
Second, the figures Google mentioned — 30-layer-deep neural net, 100M places cataloged, 1B entities recognized — these are figures that not only speak to the utility that Google Now on Tap will have, they also imply the massive, massive level of investment Google has made. Investment in computing hardware (a good deal of it custom) and software (neural nets, understanding natural language, learning, user interface, etc.).
Finally, this is what Apple’s project Proactive — or anyone’s machine learning ambition — is up against. The question, for Apple is, does it compete head-to-head (symmetrically) or in a focused way (asymmetrically)? Probably the latter. Either way, I can’t wait to see.
Does Apple compete head-to-head […] or in focused way?
Good words from Sundar Pichai, Google’s SVP of Products, at Google I/O 2015. Like Apple, Google does great things to move Mobile Forward.
For us, it is about […] putting technology and computer science to work on important problems that users face and doing it at scale for everyone in the world.