Author Topic: Does Google own the future? Who else does?  (Read 28307 times)

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« on: April 01, 2015, 08:21:50 AM »
I've been through LPs,  Cassettes,  8 tracks,  CDs, Mp3, and now the cloud.   Gas was 16 cents a gallon when I was a kid.   Time moves on and the past is often not a good indicator of the future.

My feeling is that Google may be the company creating the future we will live in relatively soon.  (hell they own a big chunk of the present right now)

Of course Governments such as the US, China and Russia may dominate the AI field.

So what you think?    Intel?  Apple?  Samsung?

What companies do you think will create and own the future?   (I'm not talking niche players with interesting technology or ideas here)   
« Last Edit: April 01, 2015, 11:54:13 AM by Bob W »

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7396
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Does Google owns the future? Who else does?
« Reply #1 on: April 01, 2015, 09:20:43 AM »
Companies we haven't heard of yet. Because they don't exist. Probably biotech.

LordSquidworth

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 124
Re: Does Google owns the future? Who else does?
« Reply #2 on: April 01, 2015, 11:25:15 AM »
I'd love to see google fiber gain real traction and spread all over. Perhaps with the birth of another actual internet company, instead of all these cable companies offering garbage internet.

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Re: Does Google owns the future? Who else does?
« Reply #3 on: April 01, 2015, 11:59:44 AM »
Companies we haven't heard of yet. Because they don't exist. Probably biotech.

Appears Google is already on this  --
"In 2014, Google ($GOOG) poured more than one-third of its $425 million venture fund into healthcare and life sciences companies, lead investor Bill Maris told WSJ, up from just 9% in 2013. And, rolling into next year, Maris expects Google Ventures to maintain roughly the same dollar value and strategic focus."

http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/google-ventures-splashes-life-sciences-its-425m-purse/2014-12-16

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7396
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Does Google owns the future? Who else does?
« Reply #4 on: April 01, 2015, 12:09:44 PM »
Companies we haven't heard of yet. Because they don't exist. Probably biotech.

Appears Google is already on this  --
"In 2014, Google ($GOOG) poured more than one-third of its $425 million venture fund into healthcare and life sciences companies, lead investor Bill Maris told WSJ, up from just 9% in 2013. And, rolling into next year, Maris expects Google Ventures to maintain roughly the same dollar value and strategic focus."

http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/google-ventures-splashes-life-sciences-its-425m-purse/2014-12-16

Google is in the position where they have essentially just one revenue source, and they really need to diversify away from it. Because who knows how long they can own online advertising. They are trying all kinds of interesting new R&D because they have all that cash and smart people. Nothing has worked out for them yet. But the driverless cars and other things could be huge later.

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Re: Does Google owns the future? Who else does?
« Reply #5 on: April 01, 2015, 12:20:15 PM »
Companies we haven't heard of yet. Because they don't exist. Probably biotech.

Appears Google is already on this  --
"In 2014, Google ($GOOG) poured more than one-third of its $425 million venture fund into healthcare and life sciences companies, lead investor Bill Maris told WSJ, up from just 9% in 2013. And, rolling into next year, Maris expects Google Ventures to maintain roughly the same dollar value and strategic focus."

http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/google-ventures-splashes-life-sciences-its-425m-purse/2014-12-16

Google is in the position where they have essentially just one revenue source, and they really need to diversify away from it. Because who knows how long they can own online advertising. They are trying all kinds of interesting new R&D because they have all that cash and smart people. Nothing has worked out for them yet. But the driverless cars and other things could be huge later.

I pretty much figured out they have my number when last night I was on line reading about AI.   I thought to myself "I think I'll turn on the Roku and see what TED Talks I can find"    Damned if the youtube channel wasn't already presenting me with the exact TED Talk I was looking for.   Scary shit!    So really while google may have revenue from advertising what is probably most valuable for them now is what they know about all or our digital lives.   

I do agree that many of their ventures seem pretty far fetched and are unprofitable at the moment.   I think that is the price of buying the future.   I'm guessing that there aren't a lot of companies actively buying and inventing the future. 

http://thenextweb.com/google/2014/01/27/google-is-reportedly-acquiring-artificial-intelligence-firm-deepmind-to-aid-its-robotics-project/

http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-launches-quantum-processor-artificial-intelligence-project/#!

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #6 on: April 01, 2015, 03:02:32 PM »
I think it depends on what you mean by own the future. My guess is that certain companies will continue to own small chunks.

Tech is so difficult to predict. Things can change rapidly.

If the question is changed to which large tech companies have the most growth potential, it's a little easier for me to conceptualizer and comment on.

For large tech companies with market caps > $100 billion I feel as though the theme will be the greater the focus, the greater potential for growth.

Apple will continue to grow and in my belief has the most potential of all.

Facebook has also done a great job of focusing and has done well as a result. The risk here is if startups start having down rounds. What will this do to paid growth through app installs, etc.

Microsoft seems to be gaining focus and it will be interesting to see they can start having some success and growth stories. Until I see it, I will remain skeptical yet optimistic.

Google. I love the company but I feel like they are trying to take on too much. If they could focus, I would imagine they will do well but if they continue to try to take on everything, then they'll be moving inches in a hundred different directions.

Intel: if they can execute well in the mobile space, they will have a chance at growth. Otherwise probably more of the same.

Samsung: once again, a company trying to do a lot. I'll talk briefly about their mobile segment. We'll see what happens here. They need to create a hit product that can attract large margins. If they can't do this, then I don't think their mobile segment will do well. Probably their best bet is on displays and memory. I feel like if they focused a lot more there they'd see better results.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2176
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #7 on: April 01, 2015, 09:34:15 PM »
It will be Lithium-Ion Battery Maker Sakti3

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #8 on: April 01, 2015, 10:27:27 PM »
Tell us more about Satki3

Chuck

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Northern VA
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #9 on: April 01, 2015, 11:44:15 PM »
My money is (literally) on Apple. The vision of a single OS governing every activity, from waking you in the morning to driving you home in the evening is something that has massive. Their massive and growing market share will ensure that they are uniquely positioned to act on that potential.

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #10 on: April 02, 2015, 08:21:07 PM »
Couldn't agree more Chuck.

It will be interesting times with Apple over the next few years. They are making great progress as a company, especially in China. In China, the iPhone 6 is the best selling phone and they have nearly 30% of the market in urban areas and 10% overall. There is plenty of room for growth. Overall in the world, they have nearly 12%, so plenty of room for growth. They still have healthy margins, so I can imagine this will continue to contribute to an amazing bottom line.

The introduction of the watch will be interesting and I can foresee Apple Pay continuing to gain traction.

iOS remains the preferred development platform for several reasons, one of which is much easier testing. I can see Android having more problems in this area due to the wide array of device types as well as the proliferation of different Android versions and forks.

CarPlay will be interesting although I don't know how much this will help growth because I haven't done my research.

There is still plenty of upside with Apple. More than all of the others combined.

rocketpj

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #11 on: April 02, 2015, 11:22:41 PM »
Not sure if we will see any major disruptors in the way the winners of the internet explosion have been (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alibaba etc). 

But if you go with the notion that 5% of new technology each decade appears to be essentially magic compared to what came before, you have to accept that we really have no idea what that 5% will be.  Lots of small startups and tech companies think they have it figured out, and a couple of them will be right.

I'm curious to see what it is.  My 5 year old was born around the same time as the tablet computer, and using it is somewhat comparable to walking and talking for him - totally normal.  My great grandfather, a successful farmer who retired in 1947, could not grasp why I would want to use a computer, or what I might use it for.  I wonder what newfangled things my grandkids will be using that boggle our minds completely.

I suspect it will either be an offshoot of computing, or from some other field, or possibly a hybrid of our rapidly expanding computing power combined with biotech or some other unexpected thing.

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #12 on: April 03, 2015, 09:19:27 AM »
Not sure if we will see any major disruptors in the way the winners of the internet explosion have been (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alibaba etc). 

But if you go with the notion that 5% of new technology each decade appears to be essentially magic compared to what came before, you have to accept that we really have no idea what that 5% will be.  Lots of small startups and tech companies think they have it figured out, and a couple of them will be right.

I'm curious to see what it is.  My 5 year old was born around the same time as the tablet computer, and using it is somewhat comparable to walking and talking for him - totally normal.  My great grandfather, a successful farmer who retired in 1947, could not grasp why I would want to use a computer, or what I might use it for.  I wonder what newfangled things my grandkids will be using that boggle our minds completely.

I suspect it will either be an offshoot of computing, or from some other field, or possibly a hybrid of our rapidly expanding computing power combined with biotech or some other unexpected thing.

To give you a hint,  in less than 10 years cloud linked computers will be inserted in your ear cartilage and charge off your body.  (or something like that)  They will cost 20 bucks and be available everywhere.   I just paid $100 for a phone that has more computing power than the entire world the day I was born.

I've been watching too much TED about AI and the exponential growth of technology.  Exponential thinking is interesting.   

So for example the human Genome project took 15 years -- by year 7 they were 1% complete.  Some people said the projections were off and it would take 700 years at that rate.  What they didn't understand that the exponential growth at 1% indicated the project was half over and that turned out completely true.

So technologies that are 1% today may be 100% in 7 years.   

Google is jumping on those in an array of fields.  None are profitable now and many are at the 1% stage.  Fast forward 7 years and many of them will be off the chart.  And it will all seem to happen in an instant.   

Take AI for instance -   One day it won't be working so well and then "singularity" will be reached.  Within 24 hours the intelligence will go from equaling that of the entire human race to one million times that.   Amazing shit really. 

Chuck

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Northern VA
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #13 on: April 03, 2015, 11:28:41 AM »
If we are discussing disruptive technology, versus disruptive companies, I think the next huge thing is fairly obvious: Self Driving Automobiles.

Imagine what will change: Trucking as an industry will not exist, because trucks driven by machines don't need to sleep or eat, and so will run 24 hours a day (trucking now is limited by the number of hours truckers can legally drive without stopping). Taxis will become an automated service, as will busses, making both much cheaper. Drunk driving will be something people read about in history books or hear about from their grandparents.

This will affect the workforce in huge ways, and cause lots of political upheaval. Taxi and Trucker unions will fight the DoT sign off on this tech for years, but after it's adopted for private use it's only a matter of time. This will make goods at large stores much cheaper, because transporting goods is often more expensive than the goods themselves to a wholesaler. It will make cab and bus costs trivial.

Everyone will be driven everywhere and will hear from old timers how when they were kids only rich people had that luxury.

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #14 on: April 03, 2015, 11:47:05 AM »
That is a good one on the self driving cars.   That of course is a short interim stop before advanced 3d printers eliminate the need for most trucking.

seattlecyclone

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5130
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Seattle, WA
    • My blog
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #15 on: April 03, 2015, 03:23:21 PM »
That is a good one on the self driving cars.   That of course is a short interim stop before advanced 3d printers eliminate the need for most trucking.

Honestly, I don't think 3D printing will ever be the way most of our goods are produced. It's a slow and energy intensive process: raw materials have to be melted and then extruded bit by bit at a small scale. Most parts can be made in a more energy-efficient manner using more traditional manufacturing processes. Also, you can't 3D print a circuit board or a car or anything else that has to be made of many different materials, so even if individual parts were all made with 3D printers there would still need to be facilities to assemble the finished goods. Self-driving cars actually help the economics of centralized production because you retain the economies of scale involved with building lots of the same thing in one place while eliminating much of the cost involved in transporting the finished product to different locations.

I could be proved wrong about all this, but that's how I see it right now.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6580
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #16 on: April 03, 2015, 03:55:59 PM »
Not sure if we will see any major disruptors in the way the winners of the internet explosion have been (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alibaba etc). 

But if you go with the notion that 5% of new technology each decade appears to be essentially magic compared to what came before, you have to accept that we really have no idea what that 5% will be.  Lots of small startups and tech companies think they have it figured out, and a couple of them will be right.

I'm curious to see what it is.  My 5 year old was born around the same time as the tablet computer, and using it is somewhat comparable to walking and talking for him - totally normal.  My great grandfather, a successful farmer who retired in 1947, could not grasp why I would want to use a computer, or what I might use it for.  I wonder what newfangled things my grandkids will be using that boggle our minds completely.

I suspect it will either be an offshoot of computing, or from some other field, or possibly a hybrid of our rapidly expanding computing power combined with biotech or some other unexpected thing.

To give you a hint,  in less than 10 years cloud linked computers will be inserted in your ear cartilage and charge off your body.  (or something like that)  They will cost 20 bucks and be available everywhere.   I just paid $100 for a phone that has more computing power than the entire world the day I was born.

I've been watching too much TED about AI and the exponential growth of technology.  Exponential thinking is interesting.   

So for example the human Genome project took 15 years -- by year 7 they were 1% complete.  Some people said the projections were off and it would take 700 years at that rate.  What they didn't understand that the exponential growth at 1% indicated the project was half over and that turned out completely true.

So technologies that are 1% today may be 100% in 7 years.   

Google is jumping on those in an array of fields.  None are profitable now and many are at the 1% stage.  Fast forward 7 years and many of them will be off the chart.  And it will all seem to happen in an instant.   

Take AI for instance -   One day it won't be working so well and then "singularity" will be reached.  Within 24 hours the intelligence will go from equaling that of the entire human race to one million times that.   Amazing shit really.

I read somewhere that "Moore's Law" will fail sometime around 2020. This is because the size of transistors will rapidly approach that of single atoms. We'll need a way to push past that boundary first.

To be truthful, AI scares me (must be all those Terminator, Alien, Matrix type movies).

Holyoak

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 447
  • Age: 53
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #17 on: April 03, 2015, 04:11:31 PM »
Can't help but think biotech at a level we can hardly even imagine, will be our not so distant reality...  Super micro machines to fix what ails us or repairs us at the nano level.  No more shotgun style prescriptions/therapies; rather precisely tailored treatments/drugs based on your unique chemistry/DNA and diagnosis.  Truly amazing robotic surgery, far better, less invasive testing and diagnostics, incredible prosthetic devices/new eyes just like OE/hearing...  Awe inspiring treatments and managements for pain, brain trauma, paralysis, cancer.

Also think carbon nano tube tech will be blockbuster, and applied in countless ways.  Exponential growth, fueled and funded by Google, Apple, Intel, and many others yet to be discovered, will be the vanguard of this next quantum shift.  Just the same, old school tech (read infrastructure) will have to be dealt with...  Kinda hard to conger up H2O in a desert, I'm sure Canada would love to pipe water into the Golden state, along with all of us having a better grid, bridges, roadways...  Also as mentioned, we are PATHETIC with regard to the internet; paying $45/mo for 15 meg download, dealing with a monopoly?  Christ, can you even get speeds that slow in a lot of Europe/Scandinavia/Japan/S. Korea?  My ISP's "bargain" speed is 3 megs down for I think $25/month.  PATHETIC!

Maxman

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 50
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #18 on: April 03, 2015, 05:24:47 PM »
Also Batteries and solar energy are improving rapidly to the point of being viable alternatives. This will give us unlimited energy. Who can imagine what new technologies will spring up from that?

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #19 on: April 03, 2015, 07:00:43 PM »
Self-driving cars are extremely interesting. I also see it going into trucking first and then into consumer. It will take a lot of time to prove safety and I'm sure there will be a lot of bumps along the way. At some point, we'll have the first traffic accident caused by a software defect. The taxi use case is really interesting and I think the company that masters this along with realtime logistics will be huge, although a long way off. Thinking about it in these terms makes Über's current market cap of $40 billion seem cheap. Once again, a long way off. My bet is on the company that masters the logistics algorithms though rather than the company that creates the self-driving cars (although they could be the same thing).

Biotech has a lot of potential, but the difficulties are always: 1) it takes massive initial investment and 2) Long regulation lead times since everything needs to be extensively tested.

Battery and alternatives are interesting but also take a lot of testing to make sure safety issues are addressed. The technology once developed, is largely commodity, so I don't see there being a company being a huge winner here. Even the largest battery companies today have relatively modest market caps comparatively. Same for solar. In terms of the transformative nature of the technology though, it has huge potential.

Anyway you look at it, exciting times ahead!

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #20 on: April 03, 2015, 07:32:18 PM »
Oh yeah and with regard to broadband, in the near term, millimeter wave mobile broadband could be very interesting.

Gigabit speeds over the air.

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7396
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #21 on: April 04, 2015, 09:23:47 AM »
Electric cars are already here and relatively affordable. I have 2, and they are cheaper (total cost of ownership) than my cheap gasoline cars were. It will take maybe 20 years before the average person realizes how great they are, batteries get even cheaper, and the vehicle fleet turns over enough for them to be 50% of cars on the road. And in 20 years they will be self-driving too. Imagine as we get to almost no oil consumption for motor vehicles. That could dramatically change geopolitics. All the countries in the Middle East and Africa that are unstable because of their oil wealth might finally be able to develop normally. We wouldn't have more wars for oil.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2176
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #22 on: April 04, 2015, 02:38:39 PM »
Electric cars are already here and relatively affordable. I have 2, and they are cheaper (total cost of ownership) than my cheap gasoline cars were. It will take maybe 20 years before the average person realizes how great they are, batteries get even cheaper, and the vehicle fleet turns over enough for them to be 50% of cars on the road. And in 20 years they will be self-driving too. Imagine as we get to almost no oil consumption for motor vehicles. That could dramatically change geopolitics. All the countries in the Middle East and Africa that are unstable because of their oil wealth might finally be able to develop normally. We wouldn't have more wars for oil.

+1

firewalker

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #23 on: April 04, 2015, 04:00:34 PM »
It would be awesome if self driving cars came to be. If applied wisely, it could drastically reduce auto related fatalities. Right now, they are at a record low in America but are still above 30,000 lives per year. That's like five 9/11 incidents every year.

clifp

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 541
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2015, 04:22:08 PM »


I read somewhere that "Moore's Law" will fail sometime around 2020. This is because the size of transistors will rapidly approach that of single atoms. We'll need a way to push past that boundary first.

To be truthful, AI scares me (must be all those Terminator, Alien, Matrix type movies).

I joined Intel in 1984, I can tell you that Moore's Law was always 5 years away from failing.  Now that doesn't mean it can't in the future, and it fact it will if companies like Intel, and Samsung stop investing in process technology and such.  But I will say that I don't stay up at night worrying that is going to fail any time in the future. That said it has been slow form a doubling in transistor count every 18 months to 2 year and now to a bit over that.

I wasn't scared of AI in the past, but I will say that when genius like Elon Musk, Steve Hawkings, and Bill Gates all say we should be concerned I pay attention.

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #25 on: April 04, 2015, 05:09:28 PM »
One thing that may make Moore's law less relevant is the fact that fewer and fewer computational tasks are gated by the maximum computational capacity of an individual CPU. Overall computational capacity and the ability to parallel process make it less relevant. An example would be Google's Big Query. Without parallel processing, how long would we have needed to wait for Moore's Law to make this possible? It's the parallel processing and process distribution that's the real magic behind it and will make any slow down in Moore's Law less relevant.

WRT electric cars. Agreed that it will be awesome once they start growing more popular. However, it probably won't change geopolitics materially due to a couple of reasons. The U.S. only imports 14% of its oil from gulf states. This will likely continue to decline over the years. U.S. shale producers have made some incredible advances over the past 10 years. As a result, the U.S. is on track to become one of the largest, if not the largest oil producers in the world within the next couple of years.

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7396
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #26 on: April 05, 2015, 07:07:37 AM »
One thing that may make Moore's law less relevant is the fact that fewer and fewer computational tasks are gated by the maximum computational capacity of an individual CPU. Overall computational capacity and the ability to parallel process make it less relevant. An example would be Google's Big Query. Without parallel processing, how long would we have needed to wait for Moore's Law to make this possible? It's the parallel processing and process distribution that's the real magic behind it and will make any slow down in Moore's Law less relevant.

The exponential growth in computing power has been solving a lot of problems for us. Mostly making raw power cheap. A lot of the AI-type applications being discussed on the thread are more problems of developing the right algorithms and data structures than they are of computational power. Sure, the problems get simpler if we could instantly have a billion times greater computational power, but even that isn't enough to model a single human brain given current technology and medical understanding of how the brain operates. These other problems are the limiting factors in AI right now, and will take humans to solve them.

WRT electric cars. Agreed that it will be awesome once they start growing more popular. However, it probably won't change geopolitics materially due to a couple of reasons. The U.S. only imports 14% of its oil from gulf states. This will likely continue to decline over the years. U.S. shale producers have made some incredible advances over the past 10 years. As a result, the U.S. is on track to become one of the largest, if not the largest oil producers in the world within the next couple of years.

The global oil market is more than the US. Every country uses oil. Anywhere less oil is used becomes a decrease in global oil consumption, a decrease in global oil price, and less money going to corrupt regimes financing themselves from a country's natural resources. The US could become a net exporter, EU could become neutral, Japan and China are also moving to electric. All the oil-dependent nations would be less prone to the "Resource Curse".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse
http://www.nber.org/papers/w15836

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #27 on: April 05, 2015, 10:03:30 AM »
Ah yes, other countries definitely. I was thinking primarily of US foreign policy and fighting for oil. Certainly other countries will still have issues due to the reasons you mention. While a move to electric will help this, there will still be issues with natural resources since today most electricity is generated from natural resources. Renewables in the US including hydro (not sure other country's stats) accounts for about 10% of electrical production. The remaining 90% comes from coal, etc. A push to more renewables would cause an increase in demand for rare Earth minerals of which are mined in many countries affected by the resource curse.

Maybe we'll find out that the most transformative technology, and the one that breaks the resource curse cycle, will be asteroid mining.

aspiringnomad

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 864
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #28 on: April 05, 2015, 06:22:02 PM »
If I had to bet on one company, it would be Apple. But if I had to pick between Apple and the field, I'd pick the field.

Wolf359

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 137
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #29 on: April 06, 2015, 05:49:57 PM »
Electric cars are already here and relatively affordable. I have 2, and they are cheaper (total cost of ownership) than my cheap gasoline cars were. It will take maybe 20 years before the average person realizes how great they are, batteries get even cheaper, and the vehicle fleet turns over enough for them to be 50% of cars on the road. And in 20 years they will be self-driving too. Imagine as we get to almost no oil consumption for motor vehicles. That could dramatically change geopolitics. All the countries in the Middle East and Africa that are unstable because of their oil wealth might finally be able to develop normally. We wouldn't have more wars for oil.
Electric cars are dirtier than gasoline cars until solar hits in a big way.  If you plug your electric car into an outlet, you're getting your power from a COAL power plant. (Coal currently accounts for 70% of all CO2 emissions from US generated power.)  All you did was move your pollution from your exhaust pipe to the power plant (only coal is many times worse for the environment than gasoline.)

SOLAR plus electric cars are the actual winning combination.

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7396
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #30 on: April 06, 2015, 07:22:52 PM »
Electric cars are already here and relatively affordable. I have 2, and they are cheaper (total cost of ownership) than my cheap gasoline cars were. It will take maybe 20 years before the average person realizes how great they are, batteries get even cheaper, and the vehicle fleet turns over enough for them to be 50% of cars on the road. And in 20 years they will be self-driving too. Imagine as we get to almost no oil consumption for motor vehicles. That could dramatically change geopolitics. All the countries in the Middle East and Africa that are unstable because of their oil wealth might finally be able to develop normally. We wouldn't have more wars for oil.
Electric cars are dirtier than gasoline cars until solar hits in a big way.  If you plug your electric car into an outlet, you're getting your power from a COAL power plant. (Coal currently accounts for 70% of all CO2 emissions from US generated power.)  All you did was move your pollution from your exhaust pipe to the power plant (only coal is many times worse for the environment than gasoline.)

SOLAR plus electric cars are the actual winning combination.

Actually, even if 100% coal power is used to generate the electricity that the car uses, an electric car causes the emissions of slightly less CO2 than similar gasoline-powered cars. But coal is less than half of US electricity generation and has been declining steadily for years. In some parts of the country, like California, an electric car is much cleaner than even a Prius. In Georgia, the mix is something like 1/3 each of gas, coal, and nuclear, so the emissions are better than the average car. And as more renewable energy is brought online, electric cars get even cleaner. California is on pace to hit 33% electricity generation from renewable sources by 2020, and has a goal of 50% by 2030.

http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/images/2014/08/electric-cars-global-warming-emissions-fact-2.jpg
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/smart-transportation-solutions/advanced-vehicle-technologies/electric-cars/emissions-and-charging-costs-electric-cars.html#.VSMvFvl4pcQ
http://content.sierraclub.org/EVGuide/myths-vs-reality
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php

You're on track with solar. Solar panels are actually getting cost competitive with gas and coal, and installations are increasing around the nation. Electric cars are going to get even cleaner. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/rising-sun/

Ricky

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 842
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #31 on: April 06, 2015, 10:30:03 PM »
Though I currently own zero GOOG last I checked, I don't see any company in the next 50 years replacing Google. I'm not sure why Apple is getting mentioned as they don't really compete with Google. Google is synonymous with a great universal browser, search, maps, email, and online video. Apple is not synonymous with any of those. My opinion is that self driving cars will neither make or break Google. They will not grow another 20% because of their self driving car segment. I could be totally wrong, but I just don't see it scaling quickly enough or having the same margins or exponential growth as online advertising.

Their business model is very diversified if you ask me. Yes, their primary revenue source is ads, but they basically own the infrastructure that 99% of people use when browsing the web. Again: search, maps, video, etc.

I don't see Google falling from the top online advertising platform in terms of revenue and volume no more than I see any company replacing Walmart, or JPMorgan going out of business anytime soon.

Facebook has reached critical mass to actually stick around, but they will be gone long before Google. Also, the fact that Yahoo is somehow still around leads me to believe Google will literally be here until the end of America.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2015, 10:43:22 PM by Ricky »

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #32 on: April 07, 2015, 08:41:57 AM »
So Yeah, obviously I agree with some points on Google dominating. 

I am a bit surprised that Apple has been mentioned as I assumed their best years were behind them.  Samsung is pretty much kicking their ass on every front. 

Still you gotta admire Apple.   Not so much a tech company as a brand marketing company with very fat margins.   I think as long as they can stick to their aspirational appeal they'll own a share of the market.     

My daughter (the one who drinks half cups of Starbucks and is 80K in student loan debt)  actually says to me Sunday ---"I really want an Apple TV."   No shit,  she actually said that.    Of course she was wearing her Nikes and a North Face jacket drinking a cup of Starbucks while eating organic strawberries when she said it.     

I'm pretty sure these aren't even manufactured yet or ever will be.  So that is the power of the brand.    On the other hand Samsung makes about 50 TV models,  80 phones,  25 tabs.

 "Samsung Electronics displaced Apple Inc. as the world's largest technology company in 2011 and is a major part of the South Korean economy. In June 2014 Samsung published the Tizen OS with the new Samsung Z.

Samsung Electronics has been the world's-largest memory chip maker since 1993. In 2009 it started mass-producing 30 nm-class NAND flash memories.[74] It succeeded in 2010 in mass-producing 30 nm-class DRAMs and 20 nm-class NAND flashes, both of which were the first time in the world.[75]"

Not a Samsung ad,  just saying.   


Pedestrian

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #33 on: April 07, 2015, 08:53:17 AM »
Take AI for instance -   One day it won't be working so well and then "singularity" will be reached.  Within 24 hours the intelligence will go from equaling that of the entire human race to one million times that.   Amazing shit really.

Wait But Why recently published an excellent two-part article on this:

The AI Revolution

zurich78

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 180
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #34 on: April 07, 2015, 09:11:23 AM »
Though I currently own zero GOOG last I checked, I don't see any company in the next 50 years replacing Google. I'm not sure why Apple is getting mentioned as they don't really compete with Google. Google is synonymous with a great universal browser, search, maps, email, and online video. Apple is not synonymous with any of those. My opinion is that self driving cars will neither make or break Google. They will not grow another 20% because of their self driving car segment. I could be totally wrong, but I just don't see it scaling quickly enough or having the same margins or exponential growth as online advertising.

Their business model is very diversified if you ask me. Yes, their primary revenue source is ads, but they basically own the infrastructure that 99% of people use when browsing the web. Again: search, maps, video, etc.

I don't see Google falling from the top online advertising platform in terms of revenue and volume no more than I see any company replacing Walmart, or JPMorgan going out of business anytime soon.

Facebook has reached critical mass to actually stick around, but they will be gone long before Google. Also, the fact that Yahoo is somehow still around leads me to believe Google will literally be here until the end of America.

Agree with this post.  Google is so much broader reaching than Apple.  Apple is essentially a device company.  Google reaches out much wider than that, so I do agree they have a much greater likelihood in being able to shape the future mainly because of the one thing they have substantially more of than anyone, including Apple:  data.

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #35 on: April 07, 2015, 09:18:26 AM »
I'm a bit surprised on the Samsung optimism. I don't share the same view. They've had five straight quarters of declining profits, their overall market share is decreasing (for mobile share), they are getting their butts kicked in China by low cost hand set carriers and on the high end by Apple. Their margins on their handsets are tiny (relative to Apple). Since 2/3 of their operating profit comes from handsets, I'm not sure how this could be considered a success story. For them to turn this around, they're going to need to find a segment that they can own. Maybe part of the problem is that they are trying to compete in all segments at once. In a way, it reminds me a little of Nokia. Nokia tried to segment the market and make a phone for everyone.

Apple on the other hand makes an exceptional product demands incredibly high margins. They control the entire ecosystem which allows them to ensure a level of quality on the end-to-end experience. They are kicking butt in the high end in China. They also make a non-trivial amount on the App Store, media.

Are you sure your daughter wasn't talking about the AppleTV (apple.com/appletv) and not a physical TV?

 

astvilla

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 234
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #36 on: April 07, 2015, 09:59:27 AM »
What about quantum computing? Supposedly it can hack and crack anything in the world, the sheer power of it would tear anything today to shreds. Quantum computing would make having privacy protection useless maybe?

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum

Wolf359

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 137
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #38 on: April 07, 2015, 03:31:13 PM »
Quote
Quote
Electric cars are dirtier than gasoline cars until solar hits in a big way.  If you plug your electric car into an outlet, you're getting your power from a COAL power plant. (Coal currently accounts for 70% of all CO2 emissions from US generated power.)  All you did was move your pollution from your exhaust pipe to the power plant (only coal is many times worse for the environment than gasoline.)

SOLAR plus electric cars are the actual winning combination.

Actually, even if 100% coal power is used to generate the electricity that the car uses, an electric car causes the emissions of slightly less CO2 than similar gasoline-powered cars. But coal is less than half of US electricity generation and has been declining steadily for years. In some parts of the country, like California, an electric car is much cleaner than even a Prius. In Georgia, the mix is something like 1/3 each of gas, coal, and nuclear, so the emissions are better than the average car. And as more renewable energy is brought online, electric cars get even cleaner. California is on pace to hit 33% electricity generation from renewable sources by 2020, and has a goal of 50% by 2030.

http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/images/2014/08/electric-cars-global-warming-emissions-fact-2.jpg
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/smart-transportation-solutions/advanced-vehicle-technologies/electric-cars/emissions-and-charging-costs-electric-cars.html#.VSMvFvl4pcQ
http://content.sierraclub.org/EVGuide/myths-vs-reality
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php

You're on track with solar. Solar panels are actually getting cost competitive with gas and coal, and installations are increasing around the nation. Electric cars are going to get even cleaner. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/rising-sun/
Coal is 40% of US generated power, but accounts for 70% of all power generation emissions.  It is significantly dirtier than gasoline.  Your Sierra Club link also states this -- in Western states which have more renewable generated power, electric cars are cleaner.  In areas that still have significant coal plants, a hybrid is cleaner.  Since the national average is 40% coal, and Georgia is 30% coal, an electric car in Georgia is probably worse than a hybrid.

You can offset this by buying renewable power generation (if your power company and state allows this), or by plugging in a solar panel.  But MORE THAN HALF of Americans (55%, according to your first link) live in an area where an electric car is worse than a gasoline car.

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7396
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #39 on: April 07, 2015, 06:26:13 PM »
Quote
Quote
Electric cars are dirtier than gasoline cars until solar hits in a big way.  If you plug your electric car into an outlet, you're getting your power from a COAL power plant. (Coal currently accounts for 70% of all CO2 emissions from US generated power.)  All you did was move your pollution from your exhaust pipe to the power plant (only coal is many times worse for the environment than gasoline.)

SOLAR plus electric cars are the actual winning combination.

Actually, even if 100% coal power is used to generate the electricity that the car uses, an electric car causes the emissions of slightly less CO2 than similar gasoline-powered cars. But coal is less than half of US electricity generation and has been declining steadily for years. In some parts of the country, like California, an electric car is much cleaner than even a Prius. In Georgia, the mix is something like 1/3 each of gas, coal, and nuclear, so the emissions are better than the average car. And as more renewable energy is brought online, electric cars get even cleaner. California is on pace to hit 33% electricity generation from renewable sources by 2020, and has a goal of 50% by 2030.

http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/images/2014/08/electric-cars-global-warming-emissions-fact-2.jpg
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/smart-transportation-solutions/advanced-vehicle-technologies/electric-cars/emissions-and-charging-costs-electric-cars.html#.VSMvFvl4pcQ
http://content.sierraclub.org/EVGuide/myths-vs-reality
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php

You're on track with solar. Solar panels are actually getting cost competitive with gas and coal, and installations are increasing around the nation. Electric cars are going to get even cleaner. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/rising-sun/
Coal is 40% of US generated power, but accounts for 70% of all power generation emissions.  It is significantly dirtier than gasoline.  Your Sierra Club link also states this -- in Western states which have more renewable generated power, electric cars are cleaner.  In areas that still have significant coal plants, a hybrid is cleaner.  Since the national average is 40% coal, and Georgia is 30% coal, an electric car in Georgia is probably worse than a hybrid.

You can offset this by buying renewable power generation (if your power company and state allows this), or by plugging in a solar panel.  But MORE THAN HALF of Americans (55%, according to your first link) live in an area where an electric car is worse than a gasoline car.

It sounds like we agree that we'd prefer renewables to coal. But the UCS link says that throughout the country electric cars are better than most gasoline cars, and at worst are the same as a Prius. It's due in part to the fact that internal combustion engines only harness about 20% of the energy in the gasoline to move the car forward. And then a lot of that energy is wasted through braking and not recaptured. The good news is that as the grid gets cleaner (which it will slowly), electric vehicles get cleaner too--even if they are already on the street. Gasoline vehicles just stay the same or get slowly dirtier.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 05:46:22 AM by forummm »

aspiringnomad

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 864
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #40 on: April 07, 2015, 09:18:35 PM »
[snip]
« Last Edit: August 24, 2015, 08:29:45 PM by dcmustachio »

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7396
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #41 on: April 08, 2015, 05:53:11 AM »
Samsung doesn't have much brand power. It produces products in many different product lines. But nearly all of those product lines are highly competitive, low-margin, near commodity type items. Giant HDTVs? Very low margin. Even cell phones are somewhat commoditized. The difference is that Apple as been able to differentiate itself in the minds of consumers for decades. They put out a product and everyone wants it. They put out a minor upgrade and everyone wants it. There's a psychological moat of brand power there. They have to maintain that, but it's hugely valuable while they can keep it. They can sell a phone for $600 that cost them $200 in development and manufacturing cots. Samsung does not have that.

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #42 on: April 08, 2015, 08:15:58 AM »
Samsung doesn't have much brand power. It produces products in many different product lines. But nearly all of those product lines are highly competitive, low-margin, near commodity type items. Giant HDTVs? Very low margin. Even cell phones are somewhat commoditized. The difference is that Apple as been able to differentiate itself in the minds of consumers for decades. They put out a product and everyone wants it. They put out a minor upgrade and everyone wants it. There's a psychological moat of brand power there. They have to maintain that, but it's hugely valuable while they can keep it. They can sell a phone for $600 that cost them $200 in development and manufacturing cots. Samsung does not have that.

From our discussion so far I'm assuming both Apple and Samsung are out as far as creating the future.  A brand does not a future make.  And I don't really see cell phones,  TVs,  data mining, tablets and wearable toys as futuristic items.  They are pretty much the present.   I agree that many electronic products are now commoditized.  In the midterm future one can easily imagine standard cell phones being practically disposable and selling for under $10.  Same with tablets and to some extent with most screens.    (If I paid $100 for my Motorola Republic smart phone I'm guessing that in 2-3 years a similar model will cost $50 and within 6 years they will be $25) 

But really who will lead the biotech, nanotech, Energy,  AI revolution that is sure to come?   I'm not that familiar with various companies so this is a question I don't have a good idea about.   I indicated Google because they seem to have tons of cash, a leading name and to be putting money into lots of fields that appear to have no immediate share holder value but have potential huge future value.   

Here are some quick blurbs on Google that don't even cover self driving cars and quantum computing.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/10/google-buys-lift-labs-in-further-biotech-push/?_r=0
http://www.seobythesea.com/2015/03/google-files-patent-wearable-anti-cancer-technology/
http://www.google.com/green/energy/investments/

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7396
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #43 on: April 08, 2015, 09:00:40 AM »
From our discussion so far I'm assuming both Apple and Samsung are out as far as creating the future. 

...

But really who will lead the biotech, nanotech, Energy,  AI revolution that is sure to come?   I'm not that familiar with various companies so this is a question I don't have a good idea about.   I indicated Google because they seem to have tons of cash, a leading name and to be putting money into lots of fields that appear to have no immediate share holder value but have potential huge future value.   

Here are some quick blurbs on Google that don't even cover self driving cars and quantum computing.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/10/google-buys-lift-labs-in-further-biotech-push/?_r=0
http://www.seobythesea.com/2015/03/google-files-patent-wearable-anti-cancer-technology/
http://www.google.com/green/energy/investments/

I think we agree. It's hard to predict the future. But if it looks like the past (as it occasionally does), Google may be the Xerox or the AT&T that is funding the PARC or Bell Labs that creates technology that becomes unbelievably transformative. In those cases, it was other companies that saw the technology, recognized it as valuable (while Xerox and AT&T did not), and turned it into revolutionary products--some of which I'm using right now. It may be Google that sees something of value and capitalizes on it. It may be someone else.

But the big changes are probably going to come from somewhere unexpected. Some people in another field doing something totally under the radar that seems kind of out there and maybe boring. Then someone else sees it, has a vision, and brings it over into a new application that we can't imagine.

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2947
  • Age: 61
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #44 on: April 08, 2015, 10:45:34 AM »
From our discussion so far I'm assuming both Apple and Samsung are out as far as creating the future. 

...

But really who will lead the biotech, nanotech, Energy,  AI revolution that is sure to come?   I'm not that familiar with various companies so this is a question I don't have a good idea about.   I indicated Google because they seem to have tons of cash, a leading name and to be putting money into lots of fields that appear to have no immediate share holder value but have potential huge future value.   

Here are some quick blurbs on Google that don't even cover self driving cars and quantum computing.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/10/google-buys-lift-labs-in-further-biotech-push/?_r=0
http://www.seobythesea.com/2015/03/google-files-patent-wearable-anti-cancer-technology/
http://www.google.com/green/energy/investments/

I think we agree. It's hard to predict the future. But if it looks like the past (as it occasionally does), Google may be the Xerox or the AT&T that is funding the PARC or Bell Labs that creates technology that becomes unbelievably transformative. In those cases, it was other companies that saw the technology, recognized it as valuable (while Xerox and AT&T did not), and turned it into revolutionary products--some of which I'm using right now. It may be Google that sees something of value and capitalizes on it. It may be someone else.

But the big changes are probably going to come from somewhere unexpected. Some people in another field doing something totally under the radar that seems kind of out there and maybe boring. Then someone else sees it, has a vision, and brings it over into a new application that we can't imagine.

Yeah,  I'm old enough to remember that Microsoft didn't even realize the internet was coming and basically ceded a lot of stuff it could have had to others.

Then there is Facebook (why didn't Google think of that?   YouTube - Why didn't google think of that?)

It appears that companies have a difficulty thinking of great ideas more than once or twice for some odd reason.   

Of course lots of folks are thinking of nano, bio and energy so I think the "owning" the right companies will be a big deal.

The way the exponential growth of AI is apparently structured (if you believe the experts who have been right for the last 20 years) a 1% completion is half way there and within a really, really short period of time it will go from a cool useful thing to "the" thing.   

So whoever has the handle on that will win a huge deal.   I'm guessing most likely that it will be the US Government who will lead this in partnership with some of the big players.  At very least the US military industrial complex will get their hooks into asap.   

The AI can be very scary stuff.   


Chuck

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Northern VA
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #45 on: April 08, 2015, 12:39:14 PM »
I wouldn't count Apple out of the whole "future" thing. They made the home desktop affordable, the mp3 player popular, the smartphone mandatory, the tablet marketable...

I mean, really.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 28238
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #46 on: April 08, 2015, 12:54:39 PM »
So Yeah, obviously I agree with some points on Google dominating. 

I am a bit surprised that Apple has been mentioned as I assumed their best years were behind them.  Samsung is pretty much kicking their ass on every front.

Huh?  In what way is Samsung beating Apple?

Quote
Still you gotta admire Apple.   Not so much a tech company as a brand marketing company with very fat margins.   I think as long as they can stick to their aspirational appeal they'll own a share of the market.     

My daughter (the one who drinks half cups of Starbucks and is 80K in student loan debt)  actually says to me Sunday ---"I really want an Apple TV."   No shit,  she actually said that.    Of course she was wearing her Nikes and a North Face jacket drinking a cup of Starbucks while eating organic strawberries when she said it.     

I'm pretty sure these aren't even manufactured yet or ever will be.  So that is the power of the brand.

Uh.. Apple TV has been around for over 8 years.  Since before the iPhone.

http://store.apple.com/us/appletv

You may need to ask your kids (or Google) about the latest technologies.  ;)

I agree that Google has a head start in most areas over most companies, but I also agree "the field" has a better chance, as does "company not yet invented."  But Google's doing a damn fine job of creating the future.

Surprised I haven't seen Amazon mentioned (a brief footnote aside).
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, spent some time traveling the world full time and are now settled with three kids.
If you want to know more about us, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #47 on: April 08, 2015, 08:26:00 PM »
I think it's a bit of a mistake to label Apple as a just a brand marketing company. They do everything they focus on extremely well. Brand marketing is certainly the most visible, but they are probably one of the best in supply chain management as well (if not the best). Their products are incredible and at their core, they may be more of a usability company than anything. It may be easy to think that people want them just because the marketing is awesome (which it is), but that's not the only reason. Everything about their products is through end to end, but at the core is making sure the products are more usable than anything else. They also do platforms extremely well. iOS is unquestionably the best mobile platform out there. Ask a mobile dev which platform they'd rather develop on and you'll get a consistent answer. This has created a network effect of increasing developers and users on iOS and has resulted in a handsome profit for Apple.

On of the key strengths of Apple is focus. They don't try to do everything. They pick a few things and then they do them better than anyone else out there. This is why their market cap has doubled over the past four years, while other companies at the $300 billion market cap level have remained relatively flat. You simply can't be the best at everything. You need to choose. Choosing is hard and nobody wants to do it. It requires extreme discipline.

I think this is why I wouldn't mention Amazon. They are certainly one of the most ambitious companies on the list but they are trying to do everything rather than just focus on their strengths. Their online business is exceptional. AWS is insane. Their warehousing technology is incredible. Their customer service is in its own category. Where they have been having problems is product/market fit for their hardware/software products. This should help illustrate how phenomenal Apple is that they are able to execute and create products like no other company. Amazon's phone sold an estimated 25k units along with an estimated $400MM write off.

Amazon is one exceptional company and I feel as though if they could focus their efforts, they'd be that much more formidable.

I feel like there a natural tendency to think that a company will have a breakthrough technology that will change everything and will reap all the benefits, but that's only one part of the equation. There are several other questions that are equally if not more important, such as will it meet the customer use case better than anything else and how will the company handle distribution? There are so many companies with exceptional products and exceptional products that fail or can't get traction because they can't distribute the product in a cost effective manner.

There's also somewhat of a myth with first mover advantage. There is a tendency to think that the first company with the product will be the company that takes all. This is frequently not the case. Google wasn't the first search engine. In fact, the space was arguably crowded when they entered, but they invented the Page Rank algorithm which drastically improved search results, but they didn't have a way to monetize the traffic until they replicated Overture's pay per click ad bidding platform. Before that, their business model was selling search devices for corporate networks (IIRC).

Even relatively straight forward use cases that seem completely obvious to an entire industry can be incredibly difficult to gain adoption.

Take Google Pay. for example. There had been several in the industry that had been claiming that NFC was the next big thing for such a long period of time. Pay with your phone. Who wouldn't want that? Apple was arguably late to the game on this one in terms of the NFC hype cycle.

Who do you think will win a bigger portion of the payments space? Google or Apple?

I love the discussion by the way. Great thread and some very insightful comments.

aspiringnomad

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 864
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #48 on: April 08, 2015, 10:18:16 PM »

From our discussion so far I'm assuming both Apple and Samsung are out as far as creating the future.  A brand does not a future make.
...
Yeah,  I'm old enough to remember that Microsoft didn't even realize the internet was coming and basically ceded a lot of stuff it could have had to others.


Microsoft was obviously aware of the internet and much of its potential. Precisely because they wanted to be the gatekeepers of the internet, they infamously bundled IE with Windows and successfully crowded out Netscape. In fact, building a moat through aggressive tactics that many considered monopolistic was a key ingredient to both their success and eventual decline. Fortunately for them a few key products have held up, particularly in the business space, and continue to be cash cows.

But Apple is very different from Microsoft. Thedudeabides is right that one key ingredient in their success is their focus. They look at every major product from just about every angle possible before it goes to market (with a few exceptions on the software side). While they may not seem like players in the fields you mentioned, they have the track record, logistical capabilities, and financial resources to be major players in any of them. In my opinion, to dismiss their past success as branding and to lump their future potential with other gadget companies is a little silly.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 10:53:48 PM by dcmustachio »

Thedudeabides

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Does Google own the future? Who else does?
« Reply #49 on: April 08, 2015, 10:43:14 PM »
Another company that has huge potential: Über.

An incredible amount of focus for this company and they are absolutely relentless.

Some will raise eyebrows at their current valuation, but the numbers that I've seen that are public are crazy and make me realize they are not far off.

They have a crazy mission too. They want to make Über cheaper than owning a car. Who knows if they will be able to achieve that. However what would happen if Über was able to secure 1% of the personal transportation market? I don't know what that would equate to from a market cap perspective, but considering that Amazon owns about 1% of retail and Google owns about 1% of the total advertising market, it would be an undeniably large market cap.

There is a network effect with Über as well. More riders attract more drivers, more drivers means better service which attracts more riders, which then attracts more drivers. The network effect makes their business more and more defensible. The riders go where the drivers are and vice versa. Anyone competing with them would have to pay massive customer acquisition costs to get app downloads, drivers, etc.

All the while, Über is building a realtime logistics system which is also highly defensible. Where do we predict that riders will be? How do we distribute cars so that a given wait time for a customer is minimal. These are hard problems and Über is solving them incredibly well.

Über also released ÜberPool in SF, which helps match riders not only with a driver but also with other riders. Each rider pays a flat rate for anywhere in SF ($7). This sheds a bit of light on what is possible with a realtime logistics system.

Also, speaking of self-driving cars, who do you think will be one of the first to jump on this opportunity? From Über's perspective, it would require very little change. Instead of a driver manually confirming that they will pick up a fare, Über's systems would automatically dispatch. Of course, that is a long way off. There is so much room for growth even before then.

It's always hard to say what will happen to a company that is so young and doesn't disclose many numbers publicly, but wow they have potential.