Google Services are charity?
Got into a debate on a forum recently over people freaking out about the possibility that Microsoft might bait and switch on Windows 10 and convert to a subscription based model. (Which is a myth that has been dispelled numerous times now BTW). And one fool actually brought up (again) the argument that Microsoft needs to make money. But, they went on to state that Microsoft can't afford "charity stunts", while Google can and that this is why people love Google.
Just WOW! I'd be really interested in knowing what "charity stunts" people have benefited from that Google has done. This is just pure ineptitude. Google doesn't offer products and services as an act of charity any more often than anyone else. In fact, the may be second only to Apple in terms of companies that don't.
This points to a serious flaw in people's understanding.
Where the F*** do you think Google's MASSIVE wad of cash comes from? YOU! Google profits the living daylights out of every one of those supposed "charity stunts". THAT is not charity. It is absolutely true that as the consumer of Google's services you don't pay them cash directly. You pay them in information, which they then sell or use to increase the cost of ad placement.
You trade your privacy for their services. In this respect, something like, say GMail is infinitely more expensive to the end user than Outlook. Or Google Drive compared to OneDrive. Or Skype compared to Google+ or Google Hangouts. The Microsoft equivalents are much more free than Google's services are.
Pretty much all of Google's revenue comes from advertising. Check that link out. In Q1 2015, $15.5B of their total $17.2B in revenue came from ad revenue. THAT IS 90%. And how does Google make 15 BILLION DOLLARS in 3 months from advertising? They use every little piece of data that passes through their service to either help make sure ads supplied are more relevant (and thus more costly to advertisers) and by using those services to present the ads. It is the first part there which is most important.
I don't want to give the wrong idea. This doesn't make Google evil. Or bad. Or anything really. It is simply a different business model than Microsoft or Apple use. And it is easy to see why consumers prefer this. And, each service, on its own doesn't really compromise a lot of information. And some of their services truly are good enough to justify what you give up in terms of privacy for most people.
To get an idea of how much information Google has on you if you use some of their most common services and have a Google Account you're signed into when you use them. They can most likely determine where you live, go to school/work, hang-out via GPS and Google Maps usage. They have access to everything that flows through your inbox via GMail. They know what you search for online when you're logged in and search within Google Search. They know who your friends are via Google+ and Google Hangouts and if your friends use those services they know all of those same things about them as well.
Honestly, for the vast majority of North American citizens, Google could probably enable a service that when you turned on your phone said something like "You're friends Greg and Alex are going to the Taylor Swift concert tonight at 10pm, would you like to buy tickets to join them?". Probably the only reason they haven't is due to how creepy most people would think that is. But, they likely already do it to a degree. I'll wager some of the ads you see from Google when you're logged into their services are actually ads selected based on shared interests with people you're connected to via other Google services.
Again, that is neither here nor there. It is simply the reason that I say that Google doesn't do charity work, they just don't monetize you directly. And it scares me that people are either unaware that Google does this, or if they are aware then don't perceive this as a "cost". Google's ToS on how they use and are allowed to use this data actually allows for quite a broad range of interpretations. It also means that a lot of personal information about you is stored in one massive central location. If that data is ever compromised the potential risks are MASSIVE.
Oh, and Microsoft can't afford charity? They have $90B+ in the bank. And they are profitable. They aren't AS profitable as Apple or Google. But they have money to spend. And, since this argument was in reference to free Windows 10 upgrades... I'd like to re-iterate... WINDOWS 10 IS NOT FREE. The retail OS will still cost stupid amounts of money. OEMs will still pay on desktops, many laptops, and perhaps even some tablets.
The ONLY upgrade revenue Microsoft "loses" are the upgrades which wouldn't have been free already (normally within the 3-6 months leading up to the OS release, all machines sold by their OEM partners get free upgrades). And that means that they only lose sales on the absurdly small group of people that would have paid $100+ for an upgrade. Most people upgrade their OS by buying a new PC. How is it that people actually don't see this?
Just WOW! I'd be really interested in knowing what "charity stunts" people have benefited from that Google has done. This is just pure ineptitude. Google doesn't offer products and services as an act of charity any more often than anyone else. In fact, the may be second only to Apple in terms of companies that don't.
This points to a serious flaw in people's understanding.
Where the F*** do you think Google's MASSIVE wad of cash comes from? YOU! Google profits the living daylights out of every one of those supposed "charity stunts". THAT is not charity. It is absolutely true that as the consumer of Google's services you don't pay them cash directly. You pay them in information, which they then sell or use to increase the cost of ad placement.
You trade your privacy for their services. In this respect, something like, say GMail is infinitely more expensive to the end user than Outlook. Or Google Drive compared to OneDrive. Or Skype compared to Google+ or Google Hangouts. The Microsoft equivalents are much more free than Google's services are.
Pretty much all of Google's revenue comes from advertising. Check that link out. In Q1 2015, $15.5B of their total $17.2B in revenue came from ad revenue. THAT IS 90%. And how does Google make 15 BILLION DOLLARS in 3 months from advertising? They use every little piece of data that passes through their service to either help make sure ads supplied are more relevant (and thus more costly to advertisers) and by using those services to present the ads. It is the first part there which is most important.
I don't want to give the wrong idea. This doesn't make Google evil. Or bad. Or anything really. It is simply a different business model than Microsoft or Apple use. And it is easy to see why consumers prefer this. And, each service, on its own doesn't really compromise a lot of information. And some of their services truly are good enough to justify what you give up in terms of privacy for most people.
To get an idea of how much information Google has on you if you use some of their most common services and have a Google Account you're signed into when you use them. They can most likely determine where you live, go to school/work, hang-out via GPS and Google Maps usage. They have access to everything that flows through your inbox via GMail. They know what you search for online when you're logged in and search within Google Search. They know who your friends are via Google+ and Google Hangouts and if your friends use those services they know all of those same things about them as well.
Honestly, for the vast majority of North American citizens, Google could probably enable a service that when you turned on your phone said something like "You're friends Greg and Alex are going to the Taylor Swift concert tonight at 10pm, would you like to buy tickets to join them?". Probably the only reason they haven't is due to how creepy most people would think that is. But, they likely already do it to a degree. I'll wager some of the ads you see from Google when you're logged into their services are actually ads selected based on shared interests with people you're connected to via other Google services.
Again, that is neither here nor there. It is simply the reason that I say that Google doesn't do charity work, they just don't monetize you directly. And it scares me that people are either unaware that Google does this, or if they are aware then don't perceive this as a "cost". Google's ToS on how they use and are allowed to use this data actually allows for quite a broad range of interpretations. It also means that a lot of personal information about you is stored in one massive central location. If that data is ever compromised the potential risks are MASSIVE.
Oh, and Microsoft can't afford charity? They have $90B+ in the bank. And they are profitable. They aren't AS profitable as Apple or Google. But they have money to spend. And, since this argument was in reference to free Windows 10 upgrades... I'd like to re-iterate... WINDOWS 10 IS NOT FREE. The retail OS will still cost stupid amounts of money. OEMs will still pay on desktops, many laptops, and perhaps even some tablets.
The ONLY upgrade revenue Microsoft "loses" are the upgrades which wouldn't have been free already (normally within the 3-6 months leading up to the OS release, all machines sold by their OEM partners get free upgrades). And that means that they only lose sales on the absurdly small group of people that would have paid $100+ for an upgrade. Most people upgrade their OS by buying a new PC. How is it that people actually don't see this?
Comments
Post a Comment