Google says its time for an iWatch
You see, the Wall Street Journal reports Google plans its own Android-powered smartwatch and gaming console products in order to "compete" with Apple's anticipated iWatch and Apple television releases. Given speculation of Apple's plans for wearable computing and console gaming go back years, it's not hard to figure out where Google got its game plan.
Many people look to Google through a set of rose-tinted Google Glass goggles. They see the company as some form of creative powerhouse, a champion of openness and standards.
I don't agree. I see a firm that cuts corners (eg mobile device security) in its software/product design. A firm that makes a living by placing ads aroundother people's creative content; that irresponsibly abuses market position to counter competition; a firm that plays fast and loose with customer's privacy. I see a firm that regularly attends those shadowy Bilderberg group meetings.
I don't think Google is our friend.
It's a complete contrast to Apple's approach. Apple fights competitors byattempting to build better products. Sure, critics point to its closed product ecosystem, and I feel that's a reasonable criticism. However, it's inarguable that Apple's decision to operate within that closed ecosystem gives it the chance to develop solutions that work better than most everything else. It doesn't need to compromise on hardware or software design.
One thing Apple doesn't seem to do is make products simply because other people make them. It hasn't made any kind of whispered revelations concerning a Google Glass competitor. It doesn't compete for the sake of it. It competes where it can make a difference.
Google does compete for the sake of it. It must. That firm's self-centric worldview casts itself as the shining path to salvation. From that perspective it sees that what is good for Google must be good for the world. And when it isn't, it isn't Google that must change, but the other guys. Google is always the good guy, even when it is bad.
This also means that if others have a great idea, Google has to imitate it, applying just enough invention to create a product paradigm that competes, while inevitably offloading the difficult stuff — such as risking the cost of manufacture — to others. Once again, other than the OS, Google doesn't actually create anything, bar the occasional first to market proof of concept device, it doesn't risk. It doesn't commit. It leaves the heavy lifting to partners while grabbing as much user data and ads revenue as it can through the exercise.
Sign up for Computerworld eNewsletters.