Google buys Motorola

[Archaic`]

From the BBC

Google to buy Motorola Mobility for $12.5bn
Google logo, PA The deal comes seven months after Motorola split in two
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

Motorola phones return to profit

Internet giant Google has announced a deal to buy Motorola Mobility for $12.5bn (£7.7bn).

A joint statement said the boards of both companies had unanimously approved the deal, which should be completed by the end of this year, or early in 2012.

Earlier this year, Motorola split into two separate companies.

Mobility develops and manufactures mobile phones, while Motorola Solutions covers wider technologies for corporate customers and governments.

The price of $12.5bn, or $40 per share, represents a 63% premium on the closing share price of Motorola Mobility on Friday, the joint statement said.

The deal would allow Google to "supercharge" its Android operating system, the company said.

It added that it would continue to run Mobility as a separate business.
'New opportunities'

"Motorola Mobility's total commitment to Android has created a natural fit for our two companies," said Larry Page, Google's chief executive.

Sanjay Jha, his counterpart at Mobility, said: "This transaction offers significant value for [our] stockholders and provides compelling new opportunities for our employees, customers and partners around the world."

The deal is subject to shareholder and regulatory approval.

Motorola was once one of the world's most successful mobile phone manufacturers, but has fallen behind the likes of Apple, Samsung and HTC in recent years.

Many of its handsets already use Google's Android operating system

Somehow, I have the feeling this purchase may have actually been defensive, a way for Google to make sure it got its hands on certain patents relating to mobile phones so as to prevent certain suits being made against their Android phones.

[Skgoa]

Well, patents or not, this is a smart move. By controlling the hardware platform, they reduce the risk of other hardware vendors fucking up. (Microsoft was in big trouble with the Vista launch due to that.) And just by being in the market, they get a certain amount of leverage. Just look at how Apple (originally a computer builder), Microsoft (originally an OS company), Google (originally a Web Search service) and the Mozilla Foundation (founded by Netscape with the sole purpose of being in the browser market) set policy and decide what technologies will be utilized on the internet. With the possible exception of Microsoft, none of these companies want to provide a good web browser - they just don't want any of the other ones to have the market locked up.

[Dalton]

Somehow, I have the feeling this purchase may have actually been defensive, a way for Google to make sure it got its hands on certain patents relating to mobile phones so as to prevent certain suits being made against their Android phones.

Also they now have a line of hardware in which they can develop and market proprietary hardware to be a more direct competitor against Apple. I wouldn't be surprised to see Google phones and tablets coming soon.

[Terralthra]

Well, do remember Google already tried to make a phone. It was fairly terrible. Buying Motorola gives them a platform of good phones on which to build.

[Steel]

Well, do remember Google already tried to make a phone. It was fairly terrible. Buying Motorola gives them a platform of good phones on which to build.

Are Motorola actually good?

Every time I have had a Motorola phone in the last decade or spoken to someone else with one they've had at least one major flaw and been generally crapper than similar phones on the market. Do I just live in a bubble of people who think they're rubbish?

[Pu-239]

The google phones (Nexus One) were made by HTC, and were actually pretty good- the problem was they weren't sold in retail stores which limited uptake. The Nexus S was made by Samsung and is/was available on Sprint and T-Mobile and was sold at Best Buy, but was slightly obsolete upon release.

[Terralthra]

Battery life on the Nexus One was absolutely terrible, and the low RAM - even for a 1st gen droid - made the OS run like it was anemic.

[Mr Bean]

Are Motorola actually good?

Every time I have had a Motorola phone in the last decade or spoken to someone else with one they've had at least one major flaw and been generally crapper than similar phones on the market. Do I just live in a bubble of people who think they're rubbish?

I swear by my Droid 2, the Droid line has been in my experience excellent phones and the usability life is clocking in at just shy of 11 hours of contentious usage. I'd be happy to by Motorola again even if yes some of their phones are crap. There lines are divided into the excellent tier, the basic tier and the shit tier, basically anything not set up as an Android falls into the other two groupings.

*Edit
Usability refers to in my case continuous usage as I tend to listen to audiobooks or podcasts while out and about or at work so when I say 11 hours I mean being turned on and listening to audio for 11 hours near continuously.

[Pu-239]

Battery life on the Nexus One was absolutely terrible, and the low RAM - even for a 1st gen droid - made the OS run like it was anemic.

Low RAM? It had 512, which is still what the average single-core phone has. Prior to it, the most powerful Android phone was the original Droid, which had 256MB.I haven't heard much about the nexus being particularly worse w/ battery life than other android phones (they're all pretty bad, especially HTC, which did make the N1). It did have fairly low ROM space for applications though. The N1 was also the first gigahertz Android phone.

[Lonestar]

This won't play that well with the other members of the "Open Handset Alliance." After all, now Google is essentially competing with it's licensees.

[The Kernel]

This won't play that well with the other members of the "Open Handset Alliance." After all, now Google is essentially competing with it's licensees.

It'll play just fine with them, although HTC, Samsung and LG may not LOVE the fact that Google is buying up a competitor they are certainly happy that Android is building a warchest of patents to shield them from the likes of Apple and Microsoft.

The thing to remember here is that Google has precisely ZERO interest in becoming a hardware company. It's antithetical to their entire worldview and it serves them zero purpose to get into this market. I frankly wouldn't be surprised to see Moto Mobility spun off in another couple years once it has been sucked dry of its patent portfolio.

[The Kernel]

Are Motorola actually good?

Every time I have had a Motorola phone in the last decade or spoken to someone else with one they've had at least one major flaw and been generally crapper than similar phones on the market. Do I just live in a bubble of people who think they're rubbish?

Moto builds fine Android phones, the Droid series are all very decent and the new Atrix is probably the best Android phone on the market right now thanks to its winning combination of excellent qHD screen, dual core processor, good battery life and excellent ergonomics. The Droid3 is also nice by combining all that makes the Atrix great with a keyboard and GSM hardware to make a worldphone.

The only problem with Motorola is the same thing that is wrong with every Android maker: they try to insert their own unique blend of Android via things like MotoBLUR. It's all useless shit, but if you can stomach it Moto's phones hold up pretty well.

[Dalton]

The thing to remember here is that Google has precisely ZERO interest in becoming a hardware company. It's antithetical to their entire worldview and it serves them zero purpose to get into this market. I frankly wouldn't be surprised to see Moto Mobility spun off in another couple years once it has been sucked dry of its patent portfolio.

I wouldn't count on that. Google has to embrace hardware to remain competitive, and I doubt they're so against hardware for a company that designs its own servers.

[The Kernel]

I wouldn't count on that. Google has to embrace hardware to remain competitive,

Sorry but no. I've been working as a competitor to Google for a while and I know tons of their people personally. Hardware is purely an enabling technology for them and they have no interest in it whatsoever. Furthermore, they are simply not going to risk disrupting Android by showing preferential treatment to Moto, this entire move was about PROTECTING the other Android OEMs from lawsuits.

I know more about this that I'm not at liberty to discuss but suffice to say that I am completely right about this.

and I doubt they're so against hardware for a company that designs its own servers.

When you own the most massive datacenters on the planet, it makes sense to invest in customizing your own hardware to your needs. Just because they developed this doesn't mean they are going to start competing with Dell.

[Dalton]

I defer to your expertise.

[Steel]

snip

I have to admit, I hadn't seen any of the Motorola android phones, only their standard ranges. Good to hear they actually produce good quality products at the top end.

[NoXion]

Well, do remember Google already tried to make a phone. It was fairly terrible. Buying Motorola gives them a platform of good phones on which to build.

Are Motorola actually good?

Every time I have had a Motorola phone in the last decade or spoken to someone else with one they've had at least one major flaw and been generally crapper than similar phones on the market. Do I just live in a bubble of people who think they're rubbish?

I've got a Motorola C139 that's been my personal phone for the past 5 years and is still functioning despite being dropped goodness knows how many times since then. The only thing I've had to replace is the charger after drunkenly losing it (along with an £80 fishing vest I was rather fond of) on a train.

I suspect it's ruggedness has something to do with it's simplicity.

[phongn]

Sorry but no. I've been working as a competitor to Google for a while and I know tons of their people personally. Hardware is purely an enabling technology for them and they have no interest in it whatsoever. Furthermore, they are simply not going to risk disrupting Android by showing preferential treatment to Moto, this entire move was about PROTECTING the other Android OEMs from lawsuits.

Might this drive something like "pure" Android phones via Motorola and some sort of new flagship Nexus series?

I know more about this that I'm not at liberty to discuss but suffice to say that I am completely right about this.

Well, there's still the worry that Motorola may get some preferential treatment (similar to how Nokia will from Microsoft), surely?

[The Kernel]

Might this drive something like "pure" Android phones via Motorola and some sort of new flagship Nexus series?

I thought so initially too, but from what I hear Google has every intention of still spreading around their reference designs. Google likes to keep as neutral a stance as possible (HTC, Samsung and Moto have all created reference designs for Android before) that I expect this trend to continue.

Well, there's still the worry that Motorola may get some preferential treatment (similar to how Nokia will from Microsoft), surely?

The worry is certainly there, but I think most of the OEMs (especially HTC) are happier about this move then they might initially appear. Expect that the first thing that Google does after closing this deal is to offer broad cross-licensing deals to any Android OEM that asks for it to give them legal cover for their pending IP lawsuits. Notice how Moto sued Apple first over mobile related patents? Pretty telling that they have a pretty strong portfolio to offer.

Remember, Apple isn't going after Google with these lawsuits because they know that Google is pretty capable of taking care of themselves. They are attacking what they see as the weakest link: the Android OEMs. HTC doesn't have the cash to vigorously defend themselves against a company like Apple so by Google essentially giving away their defensive patent portfolio they are giving HTC and other OEMs a huge gift with which to fight off the legal challenges from Apple/Microsoft.

Really thought, I expect this entire experience has taught Google a valuable lesson about patents. Google has historically been one of the most lax companies in patent filing (probably for ideological reasons as patents are pretty much bullshit in the software business) but they are starting to understand that even if you aren't interested in becoming a patent troll, it's still critical to build up patents for defensive reasons.

Anyway, the Microsoft thing is a different kettle of fish entirely. At this point I'd say there is a 50/50 chance of an outright acquisition and for Microsoft they haven't had nearly the success of Android with licensing WP7 so they have much less to lose by alienating their OEM partners with giving Nokia favored status.

And it's not even a question of "whether" Nokia gets favored status, it's already been announced that they will. No OEM but Nokia has gotten approval for custom WP7 UI skins.

[Sarevok]

Meh I cant really feel excited about this even though I develop android apps for a living.

The problem with Android has always been the apps not the phone hardware. Android users still dont buy apps as much as iphone. So developers dont feel encouraged to sink resources making quality games and apps.As long this continues it does not matter how many Android devices are out there or who makes them. The user experience is still going to be bland compared to the iOS.

This deal may result in more android phones reaching more users. But for me it just represents more people who wants free stuff.

[The Kernel]

Meh I cant really feel excited about this even though I develop android apps for a living.

The problem with Android has always been the apps not the phone hardware. Android users still dont buy apps as much as iphone. So developers dont feel encouraged to sink resources making quality games and apps.As long this continues it does not matter how many Android devices are out there or who makes them. The user experience is still going to be bland compared to the iOS.

This may have been true a year ago, but Android app usage and sales have been rising pretty steadily. The biggest problem in developing on Android is twofold:

1) Device fragmentation. There are simply a lot of different types of Android devices out there and it is a bear to support them all.

2) Lack of a clear cross platform development UI framework. This is more of a problem with apps than games though since games just say "fuck it" and do the whole UI layer in OpenGL with the rest going through C++ NDK making porting to iOS pretty trivial.

All of these issues are solvable. If you develop for Android long enough, you learn that there are ways to deal with the device fragmentation issue, although there are always some individual OEM quirks that popup. Still it's vastly better than the feature phone days where you were creating a separate custom app for each phone model.

Actually if anything Android and iOS are pretty easy to target with a single product and share a lot of the same code as long as you keep most of the components in C/C++ (who would have thought that C++ would end up being the cross platform language of choice?) it's the other platforms that become a bitch to deal with. BlackBerry Java doesn't have the capability to do jack shit (hopefully QNX will come along and put it out of its misery) since it doesn't have a C++ SDK and Windows Phone 7 forces everyone into C#/Silverlight (they have a native C++ SDK but you aren't allowed to use it without extremely favored status).

This deal may result in more android phones reaching more users. But for me it just represents more people who wants free stuff.

This is a pretty outdated conception. The reason why a lot of Android apps don't sell well is because Android devs in general produce lower quality product since the barriers to entry aren't as high. If Google implemented the same controls as Apple on the app publishing side these numbers would even out.