I agree Rick, Samsung without software is crippled...but Google has good chances...but it could be someone else winning it all at the end...IBM? artificial intelligence (or some other version of Watson) will take over in 10 years...I see little response from Google on that front
Yeah, I think Google is winning. Some of that's based on Google's viewpoint... they pretty much want to make the internet work for everyone, since that's where they live and mostly where their money comes from. That's pretty powerful.
Devices by themselves... that's pretty 20th Century. The internet by itself... very 90s. But hooking together is very cool. And the better that works, the better you're going to like devices that bring that particular vision.
So here's an example. Over the weekend, I bought a few CDs at a yard sale and ripped them on my PC. Today, I bought another couple of online discs. Ok, I know, album purchases are also so 20th century, but that's how I roll. I bought those albums on Amazon. Next I'm checking my Google Music Player for other stuff to play while I'm working... and both the CDs from the weekend and the brand new stuff I bought on Amazon is already in the Google player.
There are plenty of times my smartphone (Samsung/Google Nexus) or tablet (Samsung) are away from the internet -- going 100% "cloud" is not a good idea, and may never be. But making things work so transparently, syncing my whole music library without even worrying where I happen to be, or notes I write on my tablet, or my email, my web browser configuration, etc. The net isn't taking us "post-device" but it does promise to take us past the point that any specific device is all that important.
But this doesn't help Google compete with Samsung if they give away their software to Samsung and others. But if they stop doing this they fragment Android and Google just haven't got a large enough market share to go it alone in hardware.
I'm pretty sure that Google don't see themselves as a major competitor to Samsung. Their Nexus line fills a gap in the market for people who want the latest Android technology (geeks basically) rather than the mass consumer market that Samsung aim for. It also ensures that Google are not dependent on third parties to bring their latest software to market. But I don't believe that Google have ever expected to dominate hardware sales. They are primarily a software company and are smart enough to concentrate on doing what they are really good at.
In my opinion, Google isn't going after the mobile devices market. They are expanding their share to enhance their online offering. A very simple example is google maps and navigation. The more people using google navigation; the more precise the driving time prediction is going to be. The best way to ensure people are using Google navigation is through google maps apps. In addition, the more people using google navigation api, the better.
With these said, Google may charge license fee. I couldn't see it happening soon unless Google management decides to give a better competitive advantage to Motorola.
On the other hands, Google is primarily delivering Android OS. Apple is selling device with iOS. Samsung is selling device with Android. As of today, Google's Android OS has the biggest market share. Apple devices will always attract fans. Samsung offers the best Android hardware at the moment. To compare all these companies, I feel like comparing Kit-Kat, Apple and chocolate coated strawberry. Just look at product alone, Nexus 5 vs iPhone 5s vs Galaxy S4, everyone can make their own vote. ;)
Amazon definitely isn't direct competition for Samsung, but they are in some ways competition for Apple & Google, and have an Apple-like concern for ease of use.
They sell media, have well regarded cloud services, an app store, and their own devices -- and a lot of integration. If you're in Amazon Prime, you get a lot of nice bonuses (I'm not, but I know several people who are). On the book side, I'm concerned with their dominance, but I have to give them credit -- they keep on improving the physical Kindle readers (both e-Ink & tablet), and seem to have their act together much more than their competition.
I'm not sure what "winning" means in this context. Android must cost Google a lot to design and maintain but they give it away for free. Even if Android becomes the de facto standard OS for all small devices in the future isn't that something of a pyrric victory? At least Microsoft made money on their monopoly. Google make money from advertising-supported web services. It's not clear why they need to produce an OS to do this.
Also, not all future devices may fit the ad-supported revenue model that Google uses. They make less money from mobile ads than PC ads. Will anyone want ads on a smart watch? How many "things" in the IoT will be capable of displaying ads?
Maybe Google will one day start charging a license fee for Android and become the new Microsoft? But Samsung will probably be their biggest customer and Apple will still be there. So I don't see a single winner here.
Definitely, I believe Linux will win in long term just like in the PC world. Nonetheless, the winning doesn't exclude any other OS existence. I am sure Linux based mobile device will get more attention from techies than from non-techies. As of now, Apple will still hold on to the share of non-techies together with some very technical persons. :)
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.