backtop


Print 57 comment(s) - last by Reclaimer77.. on Feb 3 at 5:22 PM

The Nest team will stay intact

Google bought Nest Labs earlier this month for a solid $3.2 billion in cash and according to a new report from TechCrunch, Google's new Nest team will be the search giant's core hardware group. That means Nest won't just be used for home automation and energy monitoring -- the team will be in charge of Google's latest hardware, which could include smartphones and tablets for Google's Android mobile operating system.
 
Google will keep the Nest team intact, including Nest CEO Tony Fadell. Fadell, who used to work for Apple on the iPod as well as the iPhone development teams, is considered a top dog when it comes to hardware -- but he's also comfortable with software. 
 
TechCrunch said Google was looking for the right product designers and engineers who could cross between both hardware and software, and saw that in Nest. 


[SOURCE: Digital Trends]

While Google will likely have its new hardware team work on home-automated devices as well, many reports say the Nest guys will take over all hardware projects spanning many kinds of devices. It's currently unclear what those devices will be.
 
It's interesting to see that Google sold off Motorola Mobility the same month that it acquired Nest. Many have concluded that Google originally acquired Motorola with the same intentions as when it acquired Nest; to have an innovative hardware team to power Android devices and beyond.
 
Google ended up selling Motorola to Lenovo for $2.91 billion earlier this week, reportedly taking a $7 billion net loss on the company. 
 
But Google got to hold onto Motorola's patents, which is likely what it acquired the company for anyway. Now, armed with patents and a whole new hardware team, we'll have to wait and see what Google does next. 
 
Google just posted its Q4 2013 financials, posting a significant rise in revenue from $14.42 billion USD in Q4 2012 to $16.86 billion USD in Q4 2013. Analysts expected $16.75 billion USD. But net income (GAAP) was at $4.10 billion USD ($12.01 USD/share), which is up roughly 15 percent year-over-year, but represents 1.5 percent less than the $4.16 billion USD ($12.20 USD/share) than Thomson Reuters predicted. 

Source: TechCrunch



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: In-house ads
By troysavary on 1/31/2014 3:45:31 PM , Rating: 3
What is embarrassing is your irrational need to defend Google no matter what. If you are too stupid to see the danger, in your current nanny-state, anti-energy political environment, or having a device in your home that gives remote monitoring of your energy use, and remote control of your temperature, all because Google tells you it is a good idea, then fine. But the smart person is the one who will remain in control of his own energy use, rather than let some corporate or government entity decide it for them.


RE: In-house ads
By troysavary on 1/31/2014 4:29:57 PM , Rating: 2
That was supposed to read "of having" not "or having"


RE: In-house ads
By Reclaimer77 on 1/31/2014 11:00:03 PM , Rating: 1
What dangers? Can you please provide me some examples of the lives Google has ruined? Or the negative consequences someone has faced by using Google?

I'm not defending Google as you keep insisting. I just don't see how anyone should buy into the doomsday crap you haters are shoveling evert time Google is mentioned.

I'm tired of this. Please provide hardcore facts and examples of people who have directly been harmed by Google, or shut up already.


RE: In-house ads
By themaster08 on 2/1/2014 3:29:27 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Can you please provide me some examples of the lives Google has ruined?
They ruined my life by banning the Windows Phone YouTube app! :(

... Just kidding, don't take it to heart, Reclaimer ;)


RE: In-house ads
By troysavary on 2/1/2014 4:57:42 AM , Rating: 2
No, of course you are not defending Google. It isn't like you jump in every Google related article and tell people to "Shut up" if they have anything negative to say about Google. Nope, your post history does not make you look like a drooling fanboi at all.

This isn't even about Google in particular. I wouldn't want anyone having access to my thermometer. If it was MS, Apple, and any of the more traditional people in this market like Honeywell or GE, I wouldn't want my energy use monitored with a government in place that believes in Man Made Global Warming and is willing to make aws based on that belief. You were against smart meters for the power grid when DT did articles about them. I guess because they were not made by Google, they were bad.

You want examples of where people were actually hurt by Google? The authors who lost revenue when you could read almost the entire book on Google Books. Google lost that one too. They were forced to greatly reduce the amount of content they stole. Lives were not ruined, but finacial harm was done. Any time I give examples though, you ignore them and go back to crying about how MS is picking on Google. Or you do something truly pathetic like trying to associate my dislike of Google with being a Nazi sympathizer, which was truly moronic, even by your low standards. I've come to realize you are stupider than Pirks.


RE: In-house ads
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/1/2014 8:08:40 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
It isn't like you jump in every Google related article
Pot, Kettle....


RE: In-house ads
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2014 8:30:09 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly Cheese. I love that this guy thinks he can take the high road on me or something.


RE: In-house ads
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/14, Rating: 0
RE: In-house ads
By troysavary on 2/1/14, Rating: 0
RE: In-house ads
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/14, Rating: 0
RE: In-house ads
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/1/2014 5:28:43 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Yes you fucking did you little spineless twat. Someone accused me of being a holocaust denier because he obviously misread what I posted, and you piled on, agreeing I must be and made a lame attempt to link it to my denial of reality everywhere else. Since the only disagreement I generally have with you is over Google, it was fucking obvious what you were linking it too. Do I need to go to the thread and quote you, you snivelling shit eater? If you are gonna have the gall to link me to something that reprehensible, at least don't fucking pretend that you never said it.
I hope they ban you, this was totally uncalled for.


RE: In-house ads
By Reclaimer77 on 2/1/2014 9:14:40 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know, it's kind of funny seeing someone totally lose their mind over nothing.


RE: In-house ads
By ven1ger on 2/3/2014 3:11:58 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Do I know that MS uses my data. Yes, I do. Do I like it? Not really. But our data is not MS primary product, so I trust them more with it than I do Google.


Sorry, but this got me to wonder about something. I think I'd trust a company more if data is their primary product because they'd handle it a lot better than a company that data isn't their primary product. Would I trust my money in a bank if handling money wasn't their primary product? Would I entrust security to a company that security wasn't their primary function? Giving a pass to MS with regards to your data because data isn't their primary function seems kind of misplaced to me.


RE: In-house ads
By Reclaimer77 on 2/3/2014 11:39:13 AM , Rating: 2
I exposed him as a hypocrite, so he had to come up with some BS.

I guess he lets his next door neighbor hold all his money for him too. That's a banks primary product, so you know, you can't trust them as much...


RE: In-house ads
By NellyFromMA on 2/3/2014 12:41:58 PM , Rating: 2
Well, there is a key difference.

Google monetizes its users by collecting massive amounts of subtle data from a large variety of input sources and aggregates those results across one another to determine your psychological / retail profile. They don't actually value PROTECTING your data so much as they value USING it.

Microsoft markets itself a secure-services solution so, yes, they are more security-oriented. They also make very little on ad-revenue and there data collection and aggregation is typically opt-in as opposed to opt-out. So, MS has certainly positioned itself to not completely cede that avenue of revenue but also seemingly has realized it can't both collect swaths of personal data such as Google while also marketing secure-services. There is no future for MS continued success on ad-revenue alone so expect them to continue to opt for privacy for paid services.


RE: In-house ads
By Reclaimer77 on 2/3/2014 5:22:59 PM , Rating: 2
On what planet do the words Microsoft and security go together that solidly?

Anyway we're getting off point. He's a hypocrite and his reasoning why he's okay with MS selling his data and not Google was concocted bulls#it.

I admit I hate Apple freely and openly. If he just grew a spine and admitted he plain hates Google, I could respect that.


"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki