I think Google is moving towards the model of Apple. Apple is a showcase of how the post-web age business be done. Google, being a software leader should also find it hard to earn money by just claiming everything to be open-source and just hope the business be expanded and they cash flow in. That doesn't make much sense to me. Apple, on the other hand, even though the software is not open, this company manage to build everything from hardware to software and then marketing so people see a unique ICON and are pleased for its stability. So, money flows in! Not only with hardware (frankly this won't be the big cash cow), but also comes with the apps dollar! The company then can be healthy grow by carefully manage the product roadmap with the hi-tech trend. The service finally also get paid off so the whole business looks healthy now. At least you won't count on the kick rate, advertisement those kind of blur idea! Google now search the way to manage the hardware and I believe that will finally hurt Samsung, HTC and LG.
If anyone loses it will be Microsoft.
Microsoft gets hundreds of millions of $ per year out of the fees they charge various Android manufacturers for supposedly infringing on MS patents. This is way bigger than the money MS makes from actually selling any mobile products.
Moto has thus far had the cojones to tell MS to get lost.
This deal will hopefully get MS to back down and let Android progress unencumbered.
My happiness in this is that lawyers have lost. It is that simple. No Google can play defense and also offense. But this statement probably will change
"Google is saying all the right things: It will make no changes in how it manages access to Android, and it vows to run Motorola as a separate company. But with both efforts, the devil is in the details."
It will leave the best for its Motorola engineers
Google can walk and chew gum at the same time. It is not like they got into totally unrelated businesses. If you think about it, they are pulling an Apple vertical integration and an Android ecosystem development at the same time. Just like light can exhibit particle and wave features, G can be soft and hard ware featured. Moto already competed with HTC and Samsung, why would this be any different? (other than more resources). Now it is GoMoTo. I think there is a bigger picture here. The grand unification of handset/TV hardware delivered over the net. Content at your fingertips and on your screen. I think the worry should not be over Android. The worry should be coming from cable providers/phone carriers. AppleCast or GoogleCast might be: buy my gear, content access is free or buy my content access, gear is free. I am sure there are some FCC technicalities to overcome, but multiple all-in-one-stop options (cell/broadband/internet access) from many sources can be good for the consumer.
"It is hard enough herding all the Android cats without owning one of them." That just about says it all.
Despite the happy sounding press releases, the other Android partners have got to be feeling a bit like they're getting shafted by this deal.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.