Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Will Cut 1,200 More Jobs At Motorola Mobility

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the cutting-deep-to-clean-house dept.

Google 112

alphadogg writes "Motorola Mobility is cutting 1,200 staff, in addition to a reduction of 4,000 staff it announced in August, to focus on high-end devices. 'These cuts are a continuation of the reductions we announced last summer,' said Motorola. 'It's obviously very hard for the employees concerned, and we are committed to helping them through this difficult transition.' Motorola's mobile business has been overwhelmed in the smartphone market by larger players such as Samsung Electronics, Apple, Sony, Huawei Technologies and ZTE."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I boycott Motorola for not supporting HOST files (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116535)

$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.

Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?

Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.

If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.

I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.

Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.

Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.

I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.

If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!

You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his banning he begins to send a variety of abusive emails to the operator of OSY, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke threatening to sue him for libel, claiming that the APK on OSY was fake.

My reputation as a professional in this field clearly shows in multiple publications in this field in written print, & also online in various GOOD capacities since 1996 to present day. This has happened since I was first published in Playgirl Magazine in 1996 & others to present day, with helpful tools online in programs, & professionally sold warez that were finalists @ Westminster Dog Show 2000-2002.

Did you see the movie "Pokemon"? Actually the induced night "dream world" is synonymous with the academic religious induced "HOSTS file" enslavement of DNS. Domains have no inherent value, as it was invented as a counterfeit and fictitious value to represent natural values in name resolution. Unfortunately, human values have declined to fictitious word values. Unknowingly, you are living in a "World Wide Web", as in a fictitious life in a counterfeit Internet - which you could consider APK induced "HOSTS file". Can you distinguish the academic induced root server from the natural OpenDNS? Beware of the change when your brain is free from HOSTS file enslavement - for you could find that the natural Slashdot has been destroyed!!

FROM -> Man - how many times have I dusted you in tech debates that you have decided to troll me by ac posts for MONTHS now, OR IMPERSONATING ME AS YOU DID HERE and you were caught in it by myself & others here, only to fail each time as you have here?)...

So long nummynuts, sorry to have to kick your nuts up into your head verbally speaking.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb. you're completely pathetic.

Disproof of all apk's statements:
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040317&cid=40946043 [slashdot.org]
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040729&cid=40949719 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040697&cid=40949343 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040597&cid=40948659 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3037687&cid=40947927 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040425&cid=40946755 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040317&cid=40946043 [slashdot.org]
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038791&cid=40942439 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3024445&cid=40942207 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038597&cid=40942031 [slashdot.org]
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038601&cid=40942085 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040803&cid=40950045 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040867&cid=40950563 [slashdot.org]
http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040921&cid=40950839 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041035&cid=40951899 [slashdot.org]
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041081&cid=40952169 [slashdot.org]
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041091&cid=40952383 [slashdot.org]
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041123&cid=40952991 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041313&cid=40954201 [slashdot.org]
http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042199&cid=40956625 [slashdot.org]
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029723&cid=40897177 [slashdot.org]
http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029589&cid=40894889 [slashdot.org]
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3027333&cid=40886171 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042451&cid=40959497 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042547&cid=40960279 [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042669&cid=40962027 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042765&cid=40965091 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042765&cid=40965087 [slashdot.org]
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3043535&cid=40967049 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3044971&cid=40972117 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3044971&cid=40972271 [slashdot.org]
http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3045075&cid=40972313 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3045349&cid=40973979 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3046181&cid=40978835 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3046211&cid=40979293 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3050711&cid=41002319 [slashdot.org]
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3118863&cid=41341925 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3131751&cid=41397971 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3138079&cid=41429005 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3146511&cid=41469199 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3146549&cid=41469495 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3154555&cid=41509255 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3164403&cid=41555261 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3222163&cid=41832417 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3224905&cid=41846971 [slashdot.org]
http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3227697&cid=41861263 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3228787&cid=41866351 [slashdot.org]
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3228683&cid=41866627 [slashdot.org]
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3228991&cid=41866737 [slashdot.org]
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3229177&cid=41868513 [slashdot.org]
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3229177&cid=41868567 [slashdot.org]
http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3229179&cid=41869275f [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3229765&cid=41872927 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3472971&cid=42939773 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3483339&cid=42972349 [slashdot.org]
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3486045&cid=42981835 [slashdot.org]
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3486901&cid=42988415 [slashdot.org]
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3500483&cid=43026797 [slashdot.org]
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3501001&cid=43028205 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3503531&cid=43033535 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3504883&cid=43040365 [slashdot.org]
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3506945&cid=43044767 [slashdot.org]
http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3507727&cid=43048175 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3507873&cid=43049019 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3508287&cid=43051385 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3509683&cid=43054221 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3510265&cid=43056879 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3511487&cid=43063711 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3512099&cid=43066627 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3513659&cid=43066843 [slashdot.org]
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3521721&cid=43094323 [slashdot.org]
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3521669&cid=43094855 [slashdot.org]
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3521797&cid=43096277 [slashdot.org]
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3522191&cid=43096733 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3522219&cid=43097179 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3522851&cid=43101761 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3523181&cid=43103421 [slashdot.org]
http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3526293&cid=43109809 [slashdot.org]
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3526893&cid=43114659 [slashdot.org]
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3528603&cid=43115059 [slashdot.org]
AND MANY MORE

Ac trolls' "BIG FAIL" (quoted): Eat your words!

That's the kind of martial arts I practice.

Re:I boycott Motorola for not supporting HOST file (-1, Offtopic)

Sterculius (2856655) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116613)

Do you wear an electrified skullcap?

Re:I boycott Motorola for not supporting HOST file (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116863)

Is it just me, or has MyCleanPC gotten really creepy lately?

Re:I boycott Motorola for not supporting HOST file (0)

jythie (914043) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118183)

If not 'creepy'.. something. I am assuming the person is trying to sell software or something, but is coming across like the cube world guy.

Re:I boycott Motorola for not supporting HOST file (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116971)

Haha! Disregard that, I suck cocks!

Re:I boycott Motorola for not supporting HOST file (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43119277)

If you ever find yourself in a situation that has the potential to turn into a legal problem, here is how my company handles it on the web. My way might not be the best for everyone (I am certainly not a lawyer) but we are 2-0 following this advice to date.

I received an email yesterday from Alexander Peter Kowalski. He was upset that a program he created was identified as a malicious piece of spyware by the Schrock Innovations Maintenance Checkup Home Edition anti-spyware software as well as by Computer Associates.

Here is the email he sent me, edited for length:

          was not written for any malicious purpose -> apkapp2backgrounddaemonprocessengine.exe
        (it was in fact, written so folks with older versions of Apache Webserver
        could lanuch it & not see it onscreen.

        So – answer me this:

        What is it doing there in your tools under “Threat Details”. Above all else, why didn’t you write me, & ask me about it – as I am easily found online, since my program has “resource strings” that are visible showing my name?

        Remove my program from your lists as a malicious tool, as it associates me in a “threat details” list.

        My reputation as a professional in this field clearly shows in multiple publications in this field in written print, & also online in various GOOD capacities since 1996 to present day. This has happened since I was first published in Windows NT Magazine in 1996 & others to present day, with helpful tools online in programs, & professionally sold wares that were finalists @ Microsoft Tech Ed 2000-2002 for EEC Systems.

        It’s rather insulting. Please remove it as a “threat”, it is NOT one, not by a long shot & smears MY GOOD NAME.

        Thanks.

        Alexander Peter Kowalski

My first impression of this email was to think, ok so he has a program that is being detected falsely by our software. It’s Sunday and I am at Platte River State Park watching my son and his cousin play. I will have Adam look into it on Monday morning. He sounded pretty upset, so I replied to let him know we were on it. Here’s what I said:

        The MCHE is designed for home use and not enterprise or server use. Your program makes it on our list if at least 2 of 3 independent sources deem it a threat.

        Send me the names of the files in question, and we will double check their detection status.

        Sent from my iPhone.

LESSON ONE: Be very nice in your first email if you want to get what you want. If I trusted every jerk who emailed me about why his spyware application is detected by our software I would go blue in the face. Even though this guy’s email was poorly written and rambled about things that were of no consequence to his question, he was well on the path of getting what he wanted.
After I was home from the park and my son was down for his nap, I got this email from the same man:

        1 site has already responded, & has removed apkapp2backgrounddaemonprocessengine.exe already! Write he to verify if need be, here:

        I am giving you every opportunity to do this in a nice quiet way, & I’d appreciate that, as I feel you may have been misled. Here is why:

        CA (Computer Associates) will be contacted in the a.m. & if it is not removed by they, I am suing for libel. In fact, I feel that they intentionally misprinted my name (missing my first name & listing it under Peter Kowalski only, here:

        http://ca.com/us/securityadvisor/pest/pest.aspx?id=51276 [ca.com]

        Listing ONLY “Peter Kowalski” not my full name, easily apparent in the program itself, as Alexander Peter Kowalski. Thus, I’d never find it online) & this would be part of the grunds I am suing on if need be for libelling me online since 2004. This is not an idle threat, it is a certainty. I am rather insulted & furious regarding this incident that has long been hidden from myself via what I feel are nefarious means.

        This is libel, no questions asked.

LESSON TWO: Don’t threaten in your email, and definitely don’t use words you don’t understand. The fastest way to destroy any goodwill when you are asking for cooperation is to threaten someone. If for one second Pete thinks I care about the other company that removed his software or the fact that he is calling Computer Associates in the morning he is mistaken. This email from him accomplished nothing and actually put me on guard that this might become a legal situation.
Again, I am not a lawyer, but on a point of reference for something to be libel there has to be an intentional and malicious intent to harm another person in print. Pete feels slighted that Computer Associates listed his problem as malware and then had the audacity not to use his proper name in the threat database.
You can’t have it both ways Pete. Either they wanted to harm you (and therefore would have identified you properly) or they spent 30 seconds reading the documentation in your code and slapped it in the detections. The latter is more likely.
I did not always understand these “get it done” concepts myself completely in the past. If I had, I might be 1-0 instead of 2-0 in my company’s legal battles. I decided to give Pete some advice for his call with Computer Associates the next morning. Here is what I told him:

        Once again, I would warn you not to threaten a lawsuit. Our corporate policy is to let people who threaten go ahead and spend the thousands of dollars in Federal court to sue us. In fact once you threaten to sue you are actually breaking the law if you don’t follow through.

I have to admit, I was a little surprised by his reply:

        My attorney will be met with by myself tomorrow in regards to this & we shall see what is what, in regards to Computer Associates, Spybot, AdAware, or any others involved at this point, including yourself apparently. I was fair about this to you in asking nicely that you remove it. Now, it is time to do what I have to.

        (Trust me, I intend to follow thru on consulting her in this matter since you are now apparently involving yourself in this as well in refusing to remove my wares from your lists)

        No need for reply.

serves them right (5, Funny)

Sterculius (2856655) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116545)

That's what those workers deserved. I'm sure they were making more than some third world country worker would work for. They can all go out and start their own businesses.

Re:serves them right (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116829)

As a former Motorola employee, they actually did deserve it. I left the company because they were fulfilling the 80/20 Pareto principle. I was part of the 20% of people doing 80% of the work and not getting jack above the bare minimum to show for it. Google has been salivating at the thought of cutting loose all that extra dead weight and getting the batwings back into a lean, mean shape, but they just can't do it too fast.

Re:serves them right (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117045)

Let's hope they cut the right people!

The Federal Government (0)

ub3r n3u7r4l1st (1388939) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117323)

should learn from Google on how to cut people.

Re:The Federal Government (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43118417)

Why? You all (the voters that is) keep voting in such a way as to send the message that you don't want that. You seem to want bigger gov't and not be responsible for yourselves. Once enough of you figure it out and vote against the current problem, we'll get there. However, based on the current trends, I don't see that ever happening.

your lost chance (1)

mynameiskhan (2689067) | about a year and a half ago | (#43119287)

Romney did give you a chance, but guess what, somebody did not take him on his offer.

Re:your lost chance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43119609)

Romney really wouldn't have done much different than Obama. He would have cut ObamaCare and this endless bickering about guns would be a bit lighter but everything else would be business as usual. The Republican party just doesn't have the right people behind it anymore.

Re:your lost chance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43120043)

Romney did give you a chance, but guess what, somebody did not take him on his offer.

Yeah, all those marginal voters went out and cast their ballots for the Muslim, not the Mormon...... strangely enough American civilisation as we know it hasn't ended yet.

Re:serves them right (1)

jythie (914043) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118153)

The strange thing is, the Motorola Mobility in my area is actually hiring, though from reading threads about the site it appears they have a VERY high turn overrate and very shark infested culture.. so I guess the particular location fires so many people every year that even with the cuts the still need to hire more.

Re:serves them right (1)

Roachie (2180772) | about a year and a half ago | (#43120297)

Probably hiring so they will have somebody to fire in the future.

Re:serves them right (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43119283)

As a former Motorola employee, they actually did deserve it. I left the company because they were fulfilling the 80/20 Pareto principle. I was part of the 20% of people doing 80% of the work and not getting jack above the bare minimum to show for it. Google has been salivating at the thought of cutting loose all that extra dead weight and getting the batwings back into a lean, mean shape, but they just can't do it too fast.

Posting anon... I have nothing to add except that 1) I worked in Motorola also, and 2) you are absolutely right on the money. Some companies are burdened by fat. Motorola, however, it is burdened by malignant growths.

Actually, I have something to add: Outsiders and ex-Motorolans like to complain that it was the executive overlords, the always maligned pointy-haired bosses who screwed the company.

WHAT. A. LOAD. OF. BULLSHIT.

There were incompentent parasites across the board. The 80/20 Pareto principle the poster above mentioned was present everywhere. In marketing, in admin, in engineering. There were career-lifers there sucking the living juices out of it doing nothing. Young grads were hired to do menial work, never giving them a chance to acquire meaningful work experience (careers were destroyed in the process, so sad.)

Can't wait to see the axe coming down soon enough. That's the only way to bring the company (or whatever is left of it) to turn around.

Re:serves them right (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117037)

Actually they need to cut the dead weight at the top more than anything. I still remember the jackass exec that mouthed off that anyone interested in rooting their phones should buy it from somebody else. I bought a Samsung and he can kiss my ass. That kind of attitude is why I'm glad they are suffering. Too bad about the worker bees but when you've got that kind of management it's bound to happen.

Re:serves them right (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117083)

If you'd actually have read the article, you'd see that it's mostly people in China already. Perhaps they're switching to a made-in-the-USA approach?

Re:serves them right (1)

ThatsLoseNotLoose (719462) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117589)

Mostly in China? What part of the article says that?

"The layoffs will affect workers in the U.S., China and India, according to the newspaper."

Ouch... (-1, Troll)

mystikkman (1487801) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116547)

The same would have happened to Nokia if they went with Android like some people wanted them to. Samsung is the only one making any real money followed by ZTE with cheap crap phones. HTC, LG, Sony, Motorola etc. are either in deep losses or just scraping by.

Google - "Holy Crap these patents are expensive" (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116565)

The running charge for purchasing those patents must be getting too large to ignore.

Re:Google - "Holy Crap these patents are expensive (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116749)

I imagine the plan all along was to gut the company - Google was just after the patents.

The partner companies were useful when Android needed to be established, but now they're in the way (similar to the situation Microsoft finds itself in now). Fortunately for Samsung, they are bigger than Google... but note that Samsung is pursuing alternatives.

Re:Google - "Holy Crap these patents are expensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116803)

But the patents aren't all that great.

Part of the Moto deal being approved was that they can't use the patents aggressively and those patents are heavily encumbered with FRAND terms and even the H264 patents that Moto held are next worthless as evidenced withe recent agreement with MpegLA.

Google seem too have spent a lot of money for nothing of any value

Re:Google - "Holy Crap these patents are expensive (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117041)

I think Google just wanted the patents so they couldn't be used against them and also to fend off attacks in the coming patent wars.

Re:Google - "Holy Crap these patents are expensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43121107)

They didn't have to buy the division to get that. They could have negotiated an agreement that would accomplish the same thing.

Re:Google - "Holy Crap these patents are expensive (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117149)

They don't have to be great. There just has to be enough of them to so that anybody that threatens to sue Google for patent infringement can be counter-threatened with 10,000 billable man-years of legal work to prove that the other company isn't infringing on Google's patents (i.e. they can be used defensively). A portfolio like that can also be used for shakedowns of smaller companies:

Big Company: Nice little business you've got here. Hate to see it fail due to you failing to pay any patent royalties you owe us.

Small Company: But we don't infringe on any of your patents, and we can prove it too.

Big Company: How many billable hours for you to prove you don't infringe on any of our 10,000 patents?

Small Company: That's extortion!

Big Company: Such an ugly name for a business proposition. Just pay the protection money and we'll call off our lawyers.

That's not some far fetched scenario. I worked for a small company that was shaken down like that, and we wound up paying the protection money just to stay in business. It's not just patent trolls that do it. This was a larger company (who's name I'll avoid mentioning) that had actual products and stuff. It's just a sideline. It's well known that IBM did that to Sun in its early days. AFAIK Google hasn't done it, but it's always a possible sideline.

Re:Google - "Holy Crap these patents are expensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43120071)

They don't have to be great. There just has to be enough of them to so that anybody that threatens to sue Google for patent infringement can be counter-threatened with 10,000 billable man-years of legal work to prove that the other company isn't infringing on Google's patents (i.e. they can be used defensively). A portfolio like that can also be used for shakedowns of smaller companies:

Big Company: Nice little business you've got here. Hate to see it fail due to you failing to pay any patent royalties you owe us.

Small Company: But we don't infringe on any of your patents, and we can prove it too.

Big Company: How many billable hours for you to prove you don't infringe on any of our 10,000 patents?

Small Company: That's extortion!

Big Company: Such an ugly name for a business proposition. Just pay the protection money and we'll call off our lawyers.

That's not some far fetched scenario. I worked for a small company that was shaken down like that, and we wound up paying the protection money just to stay in business. It's not just patent trolls that do it. This was a larger company (who's name I'll avoid mentioning) that had actual products and stuff. It's just a sideline. It's well known that IBM did that to Sun in its early days. AFAIK Google hasn't done it, but it's always a possible sideline.

s/Big Company/Google/g

Re:Google - "Holy Crap these patents are expensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117085)

Aside from the 12 billion they spent on Motoral (and additional .5+ billion on losses since the acquisition), they also spent $2 billion on patents from IBM. All this for Android ($100 million or so?) which doesn't generate any profit on a pro-forma basis.

1st! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116571)

First!

Not Evil (1, Troll)

pellik (193063) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116615)

Buying companies to gut them and fire the employees is not evil, otherwise Google would never do it.

Re:Not Evil (3, Interesting)

ADRA (37398) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116825)

No firings after an aquisition is like telling raging barbarians not to rape and murder. It just doesn't happen. Some companies will actually pump resources into its new appendage, but thats a lot more common when you acquire very young companies that couldn't self capitalize expansion.

Re:Not Evil (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116877)

If Google hadn't bought them, Motorola would have either been out of business or even smaller by now. They're not killing anybody, just asking people to find new jobs. That's tough, but it won't kill them.

I don't see how getting a company into shape where they're not losing money is supposed to be "evil".

Either we pull our weight in this world, or somebody else pulls it for us. Who is supposed to pull Motorola's weight?

Re:Not Evil (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117019)

Motorola sold off there cable box parts to others after Google took them over.

Seriously.. (4, Interesting)

tech.kyle (2800087) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116633)

Am I the only one that was hoping Google would take Motorola and do a complete 180 to start developing really awesome phones that aren't locked down? What are their plans for the company? I think Google is starting to turn evil, guys.

Re:Seriously.. (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116763)

People have been saying this for a long time. Either you're late, or Google is just keeping the evil to a low simmer, which I fear is about the best we can hope for in a world full of corporations.

Re:Seriously.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116773)

I think Google is starting to turn evil, guys.

starting

Starting? STARTING??? Where the hell have YOU been?

Re:Seriously.. (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116785)

What are their plans for the company?

Keep the patents, toss the rest.

Re:Seriously.. (-1, Troll)

TigerPlish (174064) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116811)

I think Google is starting to turn evil, guys.

Starting to? They've been evil since they took their first dollar from selling advertisement.

Re:Seriously.. (2)

jesset77 (759149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116927)

So I'm sure if they offer fiber in your neighborhood you wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole. :>

Re:Seriously.. (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117011)

So I'm sure if they offer fiber in your neighborhood you wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole.

No, because I'm evil too. Of course I'd take it.

Re:Seriously.. (2)

TigerPlish (174064) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117139)

So I'm sure if they offer fiber in your neighborhood you wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole. :>

I probably wouldn't touch it. You probably said it with a humorous inflection, but I'm dead serious -- I don't want to give Google a single penny. Vote with your wallet, they say.

Re:Seriously.. (1)

bhagwad (1426855) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118841)

So...you'll get your connection from what? AT&T? And you find a telecom company more trustworthy than Google?

Re:Seriously.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43121399)

Well there's that "Devil you know vs the one you don't, thing."

Re:Seriously.. (2, Insightful)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116947)

I think Google is starting to turn evil, guys.

Google: do no evil

Haven't you ever heard of the Big Lie theory? [wikipedia.org]

Re:Seriously.. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117039)

I've worked in Motorola before it was split to Mobilty and Solutions. I have contacts there and had a good understanding of what was going on in Mobility. I'll bet Google had no idea the mess of a company they were buying. Mobility was a disaster, talent and culture-wise. If anything, Google probably hasn't gutted Mobility enough if they want to get something productive out of the purchase. There are some really good people there, but they were really opposed and held back by culture, management, and incompetent co-workers.

Re:Seriously.. (1)

wift (164108) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118157)

That sounds like every company/government/group/band ever.

Re:Seriously.. (5, Insightful)

mlts (1038732) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117169)

Devil's advocate:

One of the reasons I am guessing that Google is being conservative with the Motorola division is the concern about being viewed as a monopoly. If Google does too much with MM, other Android makers (Samsung, Huawei, ZTE) will jump ship for other operating systems like Windows 8.

There is also the fact that there is the fear of being viewed as a monopoly by the EU.

Regardless, it would be nice if Motorola would do like what Sony, HTC, and others offer, and give a way to unlock the bootloader. I like Motorola phones, but I won't buy another one unless there is a way to do this.

Re:Seriously.. (1)

Miamicanes (730264) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117197)

You're preaching to the choir. I'd *kill* for a totally-open & unlocked best-of-breed awe-inspiring Moto Nexus-M w/4000mAH extended battery. Hell, I don't even care if it's chained to AT&T, as long as the bootloader isn't locked & the kernel modules are either open source or built for the latest kernel's ABI. Moto makes awesome hardware, crippled by management-imposed crippled & locked down firmware.

Re:Seriously.. (2)

mlts (1038732) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118431)

If it were up to me, I'd be seeing about more of the computer-replacement technology that appeared in the Atrix, the Atrix 2, and other devices before it was axed. Couple that with a USB port so a keyboard and mouse could be attached, and this could function as a terminal for Citrix, RDP, or ssh if need be.

Of course, "fastboot oem unlock" would be on all devices, as well as a method of re-flashing ROMs that don't require a special program for FXZ, SHX or other files.

Re:Seriously.. (1)

idontgno (624372) | about a year and a half ago | (#43119039)

The last bastion of that was the Razor and Droid 4 with lapdock.

I have them (Droid 4 and Lapdock 500). Yes, it's pretty awesome. Although the Droid 4 has probably the best slider keyboard on the market, so SSH without the lapdock is actually pretty good too.

But my experiences with the Droid 4 pretty much embody much of what's being said here: Great engineering, crippled by lack of support and upgrades (I'm still running Android 4.0.4, and I don't think I'm gonna catch a sniff of 4.1 or 4.2 before the phone is EOL'd). And the whole issue where apparently I'm not really Motorola's customer; Verizon is Motorola's customer, and I'm the product. The fairly aggressive bootlocking and simlocking approach Moto took pretty much means that Moto is pimping my ass to Verizon, and I'll smile and like it until I care to buy my way out of my contract, and retire my Droid 4 as a phone. (It'd still make a pretty good microtablet, slider keyboard and all, but since I don't imagine it'll ever be unlocked, it'll never be any good as a phone anywhere else ever again.)

Re:Seriously.. (1)

Andrio (2580551) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117245)

The purchase was completed just last year. But even at the time of the purchase, the internal "gears" of Motorola were still turning, indifferent to the purchase. They had like at least a year's worth of pre-Google roadmap to complete.

Those gears are winding down finally, and Google will be free to turn them any way they want. It's already happening, with the "Nexus X" phone rumored to come out this year.

As for the layoffs... my sympathy to the workers and their families, but this was Motorola's doing, not Google's. Motorola was in an unprofitable state when Google bought it. Motorola had nothing successful for years between the Razr, and the original Droid. The original Droid was a great spike in business for them, but then they let HTC (and later Samsung) take their business away.

Re:Seriously.. (1)

mlts (1038732) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118513)

I'd like to see Google get Motorola to make devices, not one for each provider, but devices that are either CDMA/LTE, GSM/LTE, or perhaps best of all, both. That way, it would be less about having rudimentary support for different phones, but being able to focus on a few devices at a time for ROM updates. It would be nice to see Android updates for a phone that would go past the 6-12 month mark.

Of course, doing like HTC and having source for the drivers and other parts of the ROM would be nice, perhaps even work with Cyanogen so their ROM is easily ported with full functionality.

Re:Seriously.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117257)

As far as anyone can tell, that's exactly what Google has been trying to do, but failing at due to how much utter dreck Motorola had in the pipeline already. And flushing the pipeline would cost more than just letting the crap finish its course.

Now they're ejecting the Motorola baggage and attempting to right the ship.

Re:Seriously.. (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117279)

Am I the only one that was hoping Google would take Motorola and do a complete 180 to start developing really awesome phones that aren't locked down?

No, lots of people were saying that from the first time reports of a Google buying Motorola appeared. Of course, the dev pipeline for a mobile phone is not short, and we haven't even gotten to the point where a product that was started after the acquisition would be out of the pipeline, so its quite possible they are still planning on doing that.

What are their plans for the company?

Obviously, the patents were a big part of the deal. Though there are lots of signs that Google is interested in getting into the consumer hardware market in a significant way that complements its online services and operating system offerings (Chromebook Pixel, Google Glass, the Nexus Q effort, etc.), and there's obviously room for Motorola Mobility to play a significant role there.

But its also not particularly surprising that on the way there'd be significant downsizing and retooling.

I think Google is starting to turn evil, guys.

Not turning out new-design unlocked phones from Motorola as fast as you would like is evil now?

Re:Seriously.. (1)

kidgenius (704962) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117827)

They likely ARE developing really awesome phones. You just haven't seem them yet. It takes about 12-18 months before a new phone can come out from when development begins.

Re:Seriously.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117981)

It's takes 9-12 months, not 18...

Re:Seriously.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43120389)

It seems so. They had been community minded, but have been turning their back in several places.

Google drive is not being released for Linux clients, even though the Android and ChromeOS versions are.

Its not a technical challenge, its doing what apple did to the MP3 - commoditized it.

Motorola (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116677)

I have the latest Motorola razr phone. It's friggen beautiful. Hard to believe they are cutting jobs.

Re:Motorola (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116739)

Why is it hard to believe that when one company buys out another, some employees are no longer needed?

Example: A parent company buys another company that uses a platform very similar to one that is already in use by the parent company, except the one in use costs about half as much to support and develop. The other company is being moved onto the parent company's platform, what do you think is going to happen to the workers at the other company who maintained their platform?

Re:Motorola (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117079)

Bad management means that no matter how great your products might be you are still screwed. Commdore Business Machines made more money their last year in business than ever before but the massive hole the idiots running the place (Mehdi Ali and Irving Gould) had blown in the bottom of the boat meant they couldn't bail enough water to possibly stay afloat. It takes savvy businessmen as well as great engineering to make a profitable company.

Re:Motorola (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117333)

Unless you got the HD version it has a pathetic screen. Locked bootloader is never beautiful.

This is where running a high-flying tech company (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43116705)

starts become less fun. They bought Motorola not because they wanted to, but because they couldn't think of a decent alternative for competing with Apple, Samsung, and Microsoft. And with Motorola comes all kinds of financial, legal, environmental, supplier-related, inventory-related, and workforce-related problems that Google is not accustomed to having to deal with.

But they still have Google glass...

Wake up Google (3, Interesting)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116827)

You bought a cellphone manufacturer but then use other companies to make Nexus products, and those companies are unable to keep up with even the limited demand of the Nexus brand.

Then you are carrying on your back's a company that has been unable to offer a compelling product since the original Droid phone (which turned out to be a dismal phone).

How about axing Motorola and rebranding them as Nexus, period. Throw out anybody that made decision about Motorola phones for the last 10 years and hire some new innovative people to manage that division.

Honestly, sometimes it just seems like Google doesn't now how to run themselves in spite of billions in profit. The are succeeding in spite of themselves.

Re:Wake up Google (2)

bgarcia (33222) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117203)

This was upvoted?

You bought a cellphone manufacturer but then use other companies to make Nexus products

Dude, the deal with LG to make the Nexus 4 was in place before they bought Motorola. It takes a while to develop new hardware. Have patience.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117243)

Throw out anybody that made decision about Motorola phones for the last 10 years

Why? The latest Moto phones are awesome. Oh, that's right, modern management strategy: change things to show you're "doing something". Don't worry about silly things like what was being done well in the past. When your big screwup (oops, I mean change) becomes apparent, just blame it on some uncontrollable and unforeseeable factors, like evil spirits.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117373)

Which ones are those?

All the RAZRs, but the HDs have pathetic screens. Blur sucks, and they paid to created it. Find the idiot in charge of that and fire him. Locked bootloaders cost money to do and again attract no buyers, but do earn you bad PR. Being months behind on updates is also shit. Finally the RAZRS are getting 4.1, now in March! They should be on 4.2.2 by now.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year and a half ago | (#43119103)

Which ones are those?

All the RAZRs, but the HDs have pathetic screens.

Which ones? You said it yourself - the RAZR's (I'll take you word on the HD's as I'm not that familiar with them). But the OP said "throw out anybody that made decision about Motorola phones for the last 10 years", which is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#43119121)

The RAZRs suck too. Just for other reasons. Honestly everyone who made those decisions should never be able to get a job in that industry again.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117317)

You bought a cellphone manufacturer but then use other companies to make Nexus products

The Open Handset Alliance is arguably more valuable to Google than Motorola is, plus, they haven't owned Motorola long enough for a new design to get through the pipeline anyway.

How about axing Motorola and rebranding them as Nexus, period.

If Google wanted to be Apple, that's probably what they would have done. Google, apparently, doesn't want to be Apple.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117331)

Honestly, sometimes it just seems like Google doesn't now how to run themselves in spite of billions in profit. The are succeeding in spite of themselves.

OTOH there I agree with you. Obviously they've been enormously successful, but it all goes back to a better search engine and ad revenue. They've certainly made some nice acquisitions, like YouTube, Google Maps and Android. Maybe Moto if they don't screw it up, but an Internet services company and a hardware manufacturer are very different things. But do they really have a strategy? They've got so much cash that it seems like they fish in every pond they can find, hoping to catch another big one. Maybe in their position that's the right thing to do, but I'm skeptical of any great strategy.

In Silicon Valley fashion though one thing they are great at is hype. The automated cars? Interesting project that they hype to the hilt, but do people realize that many other companies, like Toyota and Mercedes, have been working on things like that for years?

Re:Wake up Google (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117461)

Google knows how to run an ad network, very successfully. This doesn't immediately translate to product centric businesses.

Re:Wake up Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43118033)

look,

even if you wanted to build nexus products. or any products anyone wanted.. you would still end up firing most of the staff at MM. they just wanted 5% of assets it had(95% was liabilities, including most of the staff)

Conflict of interest (0)

mcrbids (148650) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118047)

Google bought Motorola because of Patent trolling by Microsoft / Apple. They don't want Motorola to dominate the industry because it's more important for Google to have everybody using Android than Motorola grow. I get the feeling that the Nexus line being thrown to other companies was all about promoting trust despite owning one of the industry's big players, and it's worked.

Compare that to the industry's stance on the Microsoft Surface.... Dell/HP are pissed as hell. Dell is openly selling Android tablets side-by-side with their Windows tablets.

BTW: I have a Razr Maxx HD and I LOVE it. Nice bright screen, fast, great reception, great sound quality...

But there's nothing like waking up in the morning, realizing that you forgot to plug in the phone last night but it doesn't really matter because you still have more than 3/4 battery life left from the previous day. It's a much more liberating feeling than I would have expected. It doesn't let me down, even when I fly Coast-to-Coast red-eye watching movies the entire way at the end of a long work day.

Woah!

Re:Conflict of interest (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43119199)

I own your phone as well, and you are honestly mistaken if you believe this is fast. Every time I load into my home screens having been anywhere else when I've unlocked my phone it has to completely reload my widgets, as well as I've noticed literally no speed difference between my previous Droid RAZR MAXX, and this HD version despite the increased processor that isn't even qmap anymore.. I would certainly love to move to a different ROM, but then I have to go through a bunch if unnecessary crap in order to get to that point. So I instead said: hang it, and bought phone insurance.. Blur is bullshit, and causes many apps to misbehave as well..

Re:Conflict of interest (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43120133)

Google bought Motorola because of Patent trolling by Microsoft / Apple.

So they saw Apple/Microsoft do it and thought "That's a nifty capability" we need some of that, sounds plausible.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

ducomputergeek (595742) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118093)

If google got into the hardware business watch how fast Samsung et. al. ditch Android either by forking it and creating their own incompatitable version or going elsewhere for a mobile OS.

Remember, kids these days are buying Samsung phones because they are "hip". Not because they are running Android. If Samsung could still create the hip factor with Windows 8 or their own version of the Android OS, which they have the size and ability to do, they would.

It's no different than Microsoft building their Surface tablets and all other Windows Tablets Makers saying, Fuck you we're not even going to get into the business.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43119057)

Supporting anecdote: On a visit to my friend's house recently, my friend's 17 year old daughter (don't be creepy, fellas) was excited to tell me that she had a new phone. She was pretty happy about it, as she had spent several months saving up the money from her part-time job to make the purchase - it was her first "fancy" phone.

I said to her, "Very cool, what phone did you get?"
She pulled it out - a shiny new Galaxy S III.
I said, "Ah, good choice, you got an Android phone!"
She looked at me, puzzled, and said very slowly, "No, it's a Samsung Galaxy," like I was a retarded cousin.
I then explained to her that Android was the software on her Samsung phone, much like Windows was the software on her Dell laptop.

There's the face of your mass-market adoption, Fandroids - people aren't buying it because "it's Android," they're buying it because it has a "big screen" or "looks good." In fact, my friend's daughter was about as equally excited by the sparkly pink case she bought for the phone, as she was by the phone itself. It's a damn good phone that *happens to be damned good looking and have a damned nice screen.* They're not buying it because "it has an unlocked bootloader," or "comes with 17 microSD slots," or has "17 teraflops of gigabytes with hertzomatic self correcting Ice Cream Sandwich Gingerbread."

I like my HTC phone, and my next purchase will probably be a Galaxy S3 or its successor... but all this "We believe in one Google, and Android is the way, the truth, and the light of the world," nonsense here on Slashdot gets pretty fucking old.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year and a half ago | (#43120121)

Seventeen is getting kind of old for tech stuff. Whenever I have a question I ask my nine year old daughter. She's very helpful, but then gives me a look and says "daddy, I thought you were an electrical engineer". Me: shut up kid.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

darkmeridian (119044) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118307)

Nothing moves and stops on a dime. I read somewhere that there is an eighteen-month long logistics train that leads up to the release of a smartphone product. That is to say, a cellphone on the market today was designed, manufactured, assembled, inventoried, marketed, etc. starting from 18 months ago. So not only did Google have to sell the products that they already committed themselves to, the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, the LG Nexus 4, and the Asus Nexus 7, they also had to sell the current Motorola devices. The bottom line is that we are about to see the new Motorola/Google device in a few months, which is about consistent with that eighteen month lag period.

Re:Wake up Google (2)

Animats (122034) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118449)

Honestly, sometimes it just seems like Google doesn't now how to run themselves in spite of billions in profit. The are succeeding in spite of themselves.

Google's business is pay-per-click ads. They're really good at pay-per-click ads. Most of their other activities lose money. Google has tried a wide range of products and services, looking for the Next Big Moneymaker. So far, fail.

This is their second try at phones. In a year, we'll know if it generates profits.

Re:Wake up Google (1)

mlts (1038732) | about a year and a half ago | (#43118559)

Devil's advocate:

Motorola has some things they are good at. For example, their radios tend to be top of the line for call quality in my experience, at least on par with iPhones.

MM's problems are not impossible to solve. One key that Motorola has advertised is enterprise-level friendliness and security. Google could run with that to help get their devices more entrenched into businesses.

After that, choose a niche for MM. Do they compete on the low-end with Huawei and ZTE, the high-end against Samsung and Apple, or midrange offerings? I'd say take the high/middle range if it were me.

Re:Wake up Google (2)

dragonquest (1003473) | about a year and a half ago | (#43119949)

I agree here. Motorola was one of the few companies whose handsets felt good. Their hardware was the only thing that came close to Nokia. This is before Apple came along. And no, Samsung was not in the same league. I still believe Motorola could make good high end phones. Couple this with Google's money and the preferential software cohesiveness and we might see a great comeback.

moto still employs people? (2)

swschrad (312009) | about a year and a half ago | (#43116911)

by now the echoes in the buildings should have died down with all the cuts.

Great work Google! (1)

Kingkaid (2751527) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117091)

I never thought it possible, but Nokia is actually seeming more stable than a Google backed Motorola...

Doesn't anyone read their 10-K filings? (2)

tlambert (566799) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117103)

Doesn't anyone read their 10-K filings?

The recent ones pretty much say plain as day that the carriers are all pushing for higher ARPU (Average Revenue Per User) by driving up the cost of data plans which at the same time deemphasizing voice services. This basically means everyone wants to sell smart phones, and could care less about feature phones or voice-centric phones which are primarily being used for calls and/or text messages.

This has been in their 10-K filings with the SEC for the last 3 years that they have been headed this direction. It the same reason the European feature-phone and voice-centric phone manufacturers are also doing so terribly in most markets as higher speed data services are being rolled out: they are piss-poor vehicles for getting higher ARPU numbers when the cell phone market has basically come so close to saturation that many people are getting rid of their land lines in favor of cell phones (specifically, smart phones).

So this has basically been their plan of record for two years before Google got involved with them at all.

Yeah, Google gets a pretty good defensive patent portfolio out of it, but the Nortel portfolio that Apple, Microsoft, Rim. Sony,and Ericson got their grubby mitts on in July 2011 - 6,000 fairly important patents which cost them a combined $4.5B dollars. And unlike the Motorola, which are FRAND licensed to all comers, the Nortel patents are not.

Re:Doesn't anyone read their 10-K filings? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117237)

Those 10K filings are gloom and doom on advice of the lawyers as a pre-emptive measure against shareholder lawsuits down the road. They always have page after page of "we've got this problem, could be serious... and there's that problem, could be bad... don't forget this other problem, yikes..."

Re:Doesn't anyone read their 10-K filings? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43118105)

are you like 9 years late? nokia already buried every other european feature phone manufacturer and most asians and MM twice(or thrice, depending on how you count, but they just wouldn't die because they had other assets. in the end they ended up with not having those assets as they were chopped from the mobile phone business which was constantly losing money).

so they had NO featurephone division left! NONE! ZIP ZERO! so what are you rambling about?

A few comments having worked there recently.. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117111)

The handset segment of Motorola's business has suffered for nearly a decade with very lackluster management, and had an excellent engineering staff (all those innovations and patents didn't just magically appear). Each successive management team took more and more money out of the company, culminating with the largest exporter of cash, Dr. Sanjay Jha.
Google. Under Dennis Woodside (an M&A lawyer, not a technologist), is not much different. In the last six months, they have let go the inventor of the most lucrative patent they have litigated against Apple, they have RIF'd their most prolific inventor, let go the design chief of the most popular and profitable smartphone design to date (not Jim Wicks, unfortunately). The Google CFO blames lackluster results on "an aging pipeline of products", and it takes "18 months to deliver new ones". Well, sorry folks.. it doesn't take 18 months, it takes 9...those products should be out by now...
Google is managing this subsidiary like it's a internet software company, and then following the Apple-Samsung strategy of doing fewer designs (when apple and Samsung are now branching out, and doing more). The wrong HR strategy, the wrong market strategy, and the wrong outside management, it is no small wonder the remaining technology talent are leaving in droves. The only difference between MMI and the Titanic? The Titanic, at least, had a band.

Re:A few comments having worked there recently.. (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43118083)

hmm...let's see...you throw out a lot of names except there are no names! You vaguely hint a lot of things - the most prolific patent (I dont think Google actually fought Apple in courts yet), the most lucrative inventor and some design specialist.

Either come up with names or admit you're full of it.

Re:A few comments having worked there recently.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43118339)

The guy who invented this(along with 2 others), was laid off:
http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/12/motorola-mobility-wins-german-patent.html
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/wisconsin/wiwdc/3:2010cv00662/29072/82/

Take a look at this guy in Googles own patent database, and cross reference:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/bill-alberth/5/536/462

Now that I've done your job, Mr Headhunter, where's my fee?

It's all about the patents (1)

ScottForbes (528679) | about a year and a half ago | (#43117339)

Google is to Motorola as an excited six-year-old is to a box of cereal with a prize inside: Moto's patent portfolio was the only part Google cared about. They rest of the company is filler, except to the extent that it generates more patents.

Re:It's all about the patents (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117953)

Except that Google's management fired their most prolific inventors.

Rooting their phones sucks (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117417)

Motorola is also notorious in the phone rooting community for being one of the most painful to work with. Anyone including that as criteria when considering a new phone immediately discounts them.

Re:Rooting their phones sucks (1)

speedlaw (878924) | about a year and a half ago | (#43119827)

That's not a bug, it's a feature. Hams and business radio users also have to back to Moto to get their radios programmed. In Moto World, there is no such thing as user modifications.

yoKu insensitiv3 clod! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43117815)

project. Today, as yOu need to succeed

give me a break (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about a year and a half ago | (#43119293)

"It's obviously very hard for the employees concerned, and we are committed to helping them through this difficult transition."

Helping them == Walking with them to the car in the parking lot.

GTFO!!!

It was about the patent chest from day 1... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43120163)

Back when the acquisition happened everybody pointed out that this was all about the patent. Google know has enough patent to play the unwinnable global thermonuclear mobile phone patent war and that is sufficient to keep all the "honest" players mostly honest...

Probably that the ones the employees they still have are the ones filling patents ; )

About Par For the Course (1)

Roachie (2180772) | about a year and a half ago | (#43120239)

Eventually there will be NO Motorola employees.

The last guy will come to the conclusion that he will have to fire himself.

Do something about it (1)

Your Nick Here (2860829) | about a year and a half ago | (#43120919)

There's a whitehouse petition online now to try to curb H1B abuses. Maybe if it wasn't so easy to bring in cheap labor, companies like Google and Motorola might treat their people a little better: http://wh.gov/7BqR [wh.gov]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?