I really wish there was a broad conversation about what exactly is American Conservatism. What exactly do these people think they are conserving? What are their core values? I thought American Conservatism was at its core about preventing tyranny, which would really mean abhorring the idea of a powerful President. I thought their prime directive would be to maintain the checks and balances between the branches of government, and basically to maintain the good things that the Founders of the United States established.
#I think fundamental to that prime direct is that the means are as important as the ends. For example, one may define "preventing tyranny" as preserving liberty, but that must mean liberty for everyone. In other words, you can't be preserving your liberty at the expense of someone else's liberty because that is exactly what is tyranny. Putin's tyranny preserves his liberty and the liberty of his supporters at the the expense of the liberties of others who do not support him.
#What appears to really be occurring is people looking out for their own perceived rights and could care less about the rights of others. From a winner's perspective it's most expedient to have a "benevolent" dictator to preserve their rights rather than a messy democracy that relies on the community to preserve rights. Such a mindset doesn't really care about democracy or maintaining checks and balances or preventing tyranny of the other so long as they are the winners. The problem is that when you put the preservation of your rights in the hands of a small number of people you become beholden to their whims. One day a person like Trump loves you because he sees you as a loyal follower, and the next day Trump hates you for reasons you don't know and your rights become taken away.
#
- I don't get the idea that turning a tablet in to a smart display, basically a 2-in-1 home hub, will result in more sales. At that point, are you talking about more tablet sales or more home hub sales? I guess being able to dock and charge a tablet would be useful but I think of that more like a wireless charging solution. If you dock a tablet then why not keep the display on to show photos, news or a dashboard of some sort? To me, these are incremental improvements but not something that would spur sales. #
- Today, if someone wants or needs a tablet they are likely going to think iPad first. If one is going to primarily read books with their tablet, they will likely look at Amazon's products. Those who are anti-Apple or like Samsung are going to buy Samsung's tablets. If they are a business user they will likely look at the Microsoft Surface. So, where in all of that is there any opportunity for Google? Such an opportunity sits first with those few people who are committed to a Google ecosystem, to the extent that it exists. (Which, by the way, is likely during the Google fall even they strongly promoted the idea of a Google ecosystem, as if saying the words will make it in to existence.)#
- I am the type of person who one would consider being favorable to Google's ecosystem, I prefer Android smartphones and thus I have stuck with Wear OS watches and I have in the past used Android tablets even while owning iPads since they first were released. The problem is, Google dropped the ball when they had the opportunity 6 years ago to establish their tablets but they did not commit themselves toward developing a really good tablet UI for Android and that lack of commitment lead to a lack of developer commitment and thus sealed the fate for Android tablets. I moved on to iPad and even while I own a Lenovo Duet it's not really a primary or secondary tablet. Right now I use an iPad for work and an iPad Mini for everything else and strongly considering to only replace the Mini with another in the future.#
- So, if I am Google, given that you bought Nest and that product line needs a hub with display to compete with Amazon, why not make those hubs 2-in-1s, and use Android for that UI because you can and probably for relatively little additional cost. But, I wouldn't count those tablet sales, and I wouldn't be marketing it as a Pixel Tablet, I would market it as a Nest Hub. #
- By the way, Google also has a tablet strategy with Chrome OS that honestly looks and works pretty well, but the problem again is that those are viewed by the market as Chrome OS devices and not even tablets let alone Android tablets. Remember the ill-fated Pixel Slate? It was probably the right strategy for a tablet but Google grossly overpriced it to pit it against the iPad Pro and that was a huge mistake.#
- Why does Google even feel the need to provide a Pixel Tablet? There is a serious problem in tech were companies feel compelled to make products simply because perceived competitors produce a product. Is a tablet the one missing piece from completing some grand strategy, to the extent one exists? Or does Google simply think they must have a Pixel tablet because they see themselves in competition with Apple? Does a lack of a tablet impact Pixel phone sales? #
- It's amazing to me given how much praise is generally given to how Steve Jobs' "saved" Apple after he came back that nobody, seemingly even the current management at Apple, is willing to follow his methodology. Jobs specifically refused to produce any product simply because a perceived competitor did, remember his strong, negative reaction to a 7-inch tablet. Apple, Steve Jobs said, did not need to complete with the Google Nexus 7. Jobs turned Apple into a huge success by specifically changing course from Apple trying to produce every product and multiple varieties of products that everyone else sold, to just making a handful of products very, very well. In other words, resist the urge of greed and instead try to do a few things better than everyone else, and be happy with that success, and accept the fact that you have (and even need) competitors.#