Follow-up on Google’s EU decision, and a reminder that Google really good for consumers. Then, Google’s strong quarterly results, and why the understanding Facebook’s strategic advantages may be divorces from their stock price.
Facebook was down dramatically after its last earnings; to decide if it is justified it is worth looking at the company through many different lenses, both financial and strategic.
Examining the history of Android explains why the European Commission may be right to fine Google for its actions around Android, even as the reasoning feels off.
Section 230, which shields Internet companies from liability, is getting more attention: the only attention it should get is as a model for other regulations.
Netflix’s subscriber numbers were disappointing; does the company have a customer acquisition cost problem? Then again, customer acquisition costs should include content, which might not have been good enough.
Amazon’s rumored move into Switches is being framed as being about Cisco, but I suspect it’s about Microsoft. Then, Adobe is making Photoshop for iPad, which benefits from subscriptions.
A corporate espionage case involving Apple gives clues about Project Titan. Better news is Apple’s new organization. Plus, the App Store turns 10 and Apple won’t change its approach there.
Uber is investing in Lime along with Google: is the real competition between Uber and Google Maps? Then, AT&T is considering big changes for HBO — or are they?
Xiaomi’s IPO shows a company that has come full circle but still has a long ways to go. Then, Samsung remains reliant on components for profit, and both companies show that the Smiling Curve applies to smartphones more than ever.
Facebook provides a useful example of how automated filtering goes wrong, even as the E.U. mandates exactly that. A recent court case about Yelp shows that the U.S. has the best approach to content law.