The 2014 Google tracker—Everything we know Google is working on this year

Google's plans for Android, gaming, smart homes, healthcare, robots, and much, much more.

Read the whole story

 

[LuDux]

Sooo... what percentage of these will be cancelled or shut down within the year? Given their track record, I'd be surprised if more than about 20% of these make it to 2015.

 

[dawesdust_12]

Also, there's the 2014 Tracker of what Google is tracking:

1) Each and every one of us.

 

[LuDux]

dawesdust_12[/url]":2c33b5nh]Also, there's the 2014 Tracker of what Google is tracking:

1) Each and every one of us.

To be fair though, who isn't?

 

[grommit!]

The company publicly announced to developers that it would be tripling the number of gaming categories on the Play Store in February 2014.

I hope one of those categories is "No In App Purchases".

 

[tacomonstrous]

At Google I/O 2011, Google announced a gaming service back-end called Google Play Games.

Should be 2013.

 

[Deleted member 192806]

Google's only successful living room product is the Chromecast, a $35 HDMI dongle that provides easy streaming from Chrome and a variety of Android apps. The problem with the Chromecast is that it is strictly a streaming stick—it can't run Android apps, and it lacks the power to do any sort of client-side graphics rendering. If Google really wants to take over the living room, it will need something more powerful.

There already is a way of turning one of those Android sticks into a faux pas Chromacast. Best of both worlds.

Google basically is the Internet—estimates put the company at 25 percent of North America's Internet traffic.

Google is the next AOL.

 

[ronamadeo]

tacomonstrous[/url]":16ys4gvu]

At Google I/O 2011, Google announced a gaming service back-end called Google Play Games.

Should be 2013.

Whoops. That was dumb. Thanks.

 

[Zomboe]

I'm slightly terrified to see where Google's life extension research + ad-supported revenue model leads to.

"We will extend your life indefinitely, but in exchange you will be subject to constant advertising through mandatory GoogleEye cyborg eyes."

"Software update: increased frequency and opacity of GoogleEye advertising."

And then just a matter of time till they pipe advertising directly into your brain...


...but I'd still take it over the alternative!

 

[cvnk]

I've never understood why people are so awed when they see a high fidelity game running in a browser. It's not like the browser is doing any work...it's just providing a surface for an underlying engine (e.g. Unreal or Unity) to output to. Sure it's a slightly more convenient way to start a game (maybe) but it's hardly revolutionary.

 

[Digger]

LuDux[/url]":5xh8h53b]

dawesdust_12[/url]":5xh8h53b]Also, there's the 2014 Tracker of what Google is tracking:

1) Each and every one of us.

To be fair though, who isn't?

Well, I'm not ;-)

And the configurable, up-gradable phone, didn't some Scandinavian company debut this earlier in 2013? I swore I saw some kind of cgi product demo for that...

 

[Chemical Tribe]

Joel Moore[/url]":2u5o4d55]I've never understood why people are so awed when they see a high fidelity game running in a browser. It's not like the browser is doing any work...it's just providing a surface for an underlying engine (e.g. Unreal or Unity) to output to. Sure it's a slightly more convenient way to start a game (maybe) but it's hardly revolutionary.

So you mean playing such a game regardless of OS platform isn't revolutionary? That's how I see it anyhow.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

As far as the Nexus 5 launcher thing goes, they've been rolling out the new google search app which is the new launcher or something. I haven't tried it cause, well, CM already had the functionality baked in

 

[dawesdust_12]

Digger[/url]":w9wey29v]

LuDux[/url]":w9wey29v]

dawesdust_12[/url]":w9wey29v]Also, there's the 2014 Tracker of what Google is tracking:

1) Each and every one of us.

To be fair though, who isn't?

Well, I'm not ;-)

And the configurable, up-gradable phone, didn't some Scandinavian company debut this earlier in 2013? I swore I saw some kind of cgi product demo for that...

It was just that.. a CGI concept video. Not a real idea (plus a completely unfeasable idea).

 

[danstl]

I think the onscreen keyboard in chromeOS has some other uses as well.. Considering the upcoming chromebox devices have VESA mounts on them I think Google has digital signage in its sights - and that makes perfect sense for an advertising company. I feel we will see a push in the digital signage market this year as well. The pieces are all there, great managed OS, good touchscreen support, and the advertising power to pull it all together...

EDIT: Not to mention they also just released an HTML5 based advertising design platform...

 

[cvnk]

sprockkets[/url]":14ek79gj]

Joel Moore[/url]":14ek79gj]I've never understood why people are so awed when they see a high fidelity game running in a browser. It's not like the browser is doing any work...it's just providing a surface for an underlying engine (e.g. Unreal or Unity) to output to. Sure it's a slightly more convenient way to start a game (maybe) but it's hardly revolutionary.

So you mean playing such a game regardless of OS platform isn't revolutionary? That's how I see it anyhow.

But the underlying game engine is what makes that possible, not the browser. The browser is just a delivery mechanism. Which is really all it's ever been. Html 5 is changing that I suppose but as far as I know it's not going to be replacing Unity any time soon.

 

[jdale]

Nest is one of the few companies in the "Internet of things" and "smart home" space actually delivering purchasable products, and that basically makes it an industry leader.

People keep saying things like this but it's nonsense. Nest has a couple good products, it has a good reputation, and very good press. But there are dozens of companies producing home automation products with the possibility of internet connectivity. Not to mention new Kickstarters frequently. This is a crowded space in my opinion.

If Google succeeds here, it won't be due to lack of competition. It will be because of marketing, because of lazy tech writers, and most importantly getting the UI and installation right. In my opinion, they will have to work with existing automation protocols as well.

I still won't buy it, because I don't want Google seeing what I do in my house, but that won't keep everyone away.

 

[jdale]

Besides selling the cars to individuals, Google has also considered the idea of a "Robo-Taxi"—imagine Uber (a Google Ventures investment) without the drivers. It's illegal to not have a driver behind the wheel of a self-driving car, however, so it's unclear how Google expects to ever operate a robo-taxi service.

What I imagine they would do first is partner with a company that operates very large destination travel sites, with very large private properties. That may loophole the laws, by not driving on public streets. It also provides the opportunity for a very large number of people to experience the technology, which will make it much easier to get it accepted.

The best location, in my opinion, would be Disneyland.

 

[nickf]

I have use for only one Google product, and that's Scholar. And profoundly useful it is.

Hard to see how they make any money from it though, so you wonder how long it'll stick around.

 

[praetor_alpha]

dawesdust_12[/url]":1ri8pqxv]Also, there's the 2014 Tracker of what Google is tracking:

1) Each and every one of us.

Better Google than the government.

Oh wait, someone's at the door.

 

[dawesdust_12]

praetor_alpha[/url]":55kh55xv]

dawesdust_12[/url]":55kh55xv]Also, there's the 2014 Tracker of what Google is tracking:

1) Each and every one of us.

Better Google than the government.

Oh wait, someone's at the door.

I'd rather be spied on than have all my personal information sold to advertisers.

 

[Gary Patterson]

It's interesting to compare how upcoming work is publicised by Google, and how it is under a shroud of secrecy at Apple. Google seem unconcerned by competitors being aware, while Apple seem to believe surprise is a competitive advantage.

I see Google throwing a lot of projects at the wall, to see which ones stick. I believe Apple do the same, but you never hear about the ones that failed. In both cases, I reckon the majority will never come to fruition, but the ones that do could well be amazing.

 

[MilanKraft]

AKA "Google's plans to control every piece of information in your life... if you'll let them."

 

[.劉煒]

I'm happy with pretty much all the Google products.

 

[issor]

Joel Moore[/url]":zwk5kbnf]

sprockkets[/url]":zwk5kbnf]

Joel Moore[/url]":zwk5kbnf]I've never understood why people are so awed when they see a high fidelity game running in a browser. It's not like the browser is doing any work...it's just providing a surface for an underlying engine (e.g. Unreal or Unity) to output to. Sure it's a slightly more convenient way to start a game (maybe) but it's hardly revolutionary.

So you mean playing such a game regardless of OS platform isn't revolutionary? That's how I see it anyhow.

But the underlying game engine is what makes that possible, not the browser. The browser is just a delivery mechanism. Which is really all it's ever been. Html 5 is changing that I suppose but as far as I know it's not going to be replacing Unity any time soon.

... But the game engine is written in a format the browser can understand, and it still works, as opposed to compiled C code that most Unreal engines run as. The browser is not simply another window. If I coded up a version of Doom in Excel, would you say "so what, excel is just a viewport"? Granted there is a lot of help with canvas, but you're understating the significance of the unreal engine working in a browser. And Unity? I think they're shooting beyond that. I don't have a Unity compatibility layer on my desktop, but I have a browser.

 

[danstl]

issor[/url]":23wwqn8e]

Joel Moore[/url]":23wwqn8e]

sprockkets[/url]":23wwqn8e]

Joel Moore[/url]":23wwqn8e]I've never understood why people are so awed when they see a high fidelity game running in a browser. It's not like the browser is doing any work...it's just providing a surface for an underlying engine (e.g. Unreal or Unity) to output to. Sure it's a slightly more convenient way to start a game (maybe) but it's hardly revolutionary.

So you mean playing such a game regardless of OS platform isn't revolutionary? That's how I see it anyhow.

But the underlying game engine is what makes that possible, not the browser. The browser is just a delivery mechanism. Which is really all it's ever been. Html 5 is changing that I suppose but as far as I know it's not going to be replacing Unity any time soon.

... But the game engine is written in a format the browser can understand, and it still works, as opposed to compiled C code that most Unreal engines run as. The browser is not simply another window. If I coded up a version of Doom in Excel, would you say "so what, excel is just a viewport"? Granted there is a lot of help with canvas, but you're understating the significance of the unreal engine working in a browser. And Unity? I think they're shooting beyond that. I don't have a Unity compatibility layer on my desktop, but I have a browser.

Chrome is the biggest trojan platform out... If Google can gain developer traction with the chrome platform it would be incredibly disruptive. Not to mention other players would be struggling to regain control.

 

[cvnk]

issor[/url]":3jpctpws]

Joel Moore[/url]":3jpctpws]

sprockkets[/url]":3jpctpws]

Joel Moore[/url]":3jpctpws]I've never understood why people are so awed when they see a high fidelity game running in a browser. It's not like the browser is doing any work...it's just providing a surface for an underlying engine (e.g. Unreal or Unity) to output to. Sure it's a slightly more convenient way to start a game (maybe) but it's hardly revolutionary.

So you mean playing such a game regardless of OS platform isn't revolutionary? That's how I see it anyhow.

But the underlying game engine is what makes that possible, not the browser. The browser is just a delivery mechanism. Which is really all it's ever been. Html 5 is changing that I suppose but as far as I know it's not going to be replacing Unity any time soon.

... But the game engine is written in a format the browser can understand, and it still works, as opposed to compiled C code that most Unreal engines run as. The browser is not simply another window. If I coded up a version of Doom in Excel, would you say "so what, excel is just a viewport"? Granted there is a lot of help with canvas, but you're understating the significance of the unreal engine working in a browser. And Unity? I think they're shooting beyond that. I don't have a Unity compatibility layer on my desktop, but I have a browser.

Your post prompted me to do some further reading and I now realize that I was incorrectly lumping Unity and UDK together in the way they work. I did not realize UDK has been implemented using HTML5 and is not a plugin at all. I see now how that is something new.

 

[just6979]

The biggest reason it's not really creepy: You can always get your data OUT!

Google had always led the way with being able to export your data from their services. Takeout isn't perfect, but it's a far cry from most services, many of which actually claim to own your data (check those EULAs!), let alone give you a reasonable way to get it back.

I stopped using Evernote because I couldn't find an easy way to export my notes. I think the last version I used of the Windows app had an export function, but it was a very strange format, not simple text files and images as I expected (I don't even think I had anything but text notes anyway).

Google lets me have all my Gmails, photos, G+ posts (and +1's even), search history, location history; pretty much anything I consider "mine" that actually lives on their servers, pretty much whenever I want. Textual things are either single plain text files in a reasonable directory structure, or reasonably organized JSON objects, and binary things are either as they were uploaded or reasonable standard formats (JPEG, GIF, KML, GPX, etc)

It's a large part of why I stick with Google. They're not trying to keep my in by making it practically impossible to take my stuff and leave; in fact they're continually making it easier to take my stuff out. Instead, they're trying to keep me in by just making things I want to use.

 

[immanuel_aj]

I'm not so sure about cell phones being the best because gaming platform because "they're the one you have with you," but rather "you already own a cell phone, so why bother buying another gaming system?"

The reason is battery life. If I want to play a high quality game, I can't play it when I'm out and about, that would drain the battery too quickly. I have to be at home. Dedicated gaming handhelds don't have that issue. They've got much larger battery capacities than smartphones and you can play them till the battery runs out. You don't want your phone running out of battery, do you?

So it's really an issue of whether it's worth it spending all that extra money so that you can play high quality games while you're out and about. Chances are, most people won't. Of course, there are people that would buy a handheld to play their favourite game franchise, but those people are hardcore gamers. We don't make up the majority of people out there.

 

[Abdominal Snoman]

Gary Patterson[/url]":2ezsii1e]It's interesting to compare how upcoming work is publicised by Google, and how it is under a shroud of secrecy at Apple. Google seem unconcerned by competitors being aware, while Apple seem to believe surprise is a competitive advantage.

I see Google throwing a lot of projects at the wall, to see which ones stick. I believe Apple do the same, but you never hear about the ones that failed. In both cases, I reckon the majority will never come to fruition, but the ones that do could well be amazing.

I never thought of it this way, but it does serve a purpose as it prevents other people from patenting the same idea much later when it's feasible and commercially ready, and then suing you.

 

[richten]

I can't wait to see which one they will use next to push Google+ down our throats.

 

[koolraap]

LuDux[/url]":1baifc4d]Sooo... what percentage of these will be cancelled or shut down within the year? Given their track record, I'd be surprised if more than about 20% of these make it to 2015.

Gotta love the Ars voting system, anonymous haters get to downvote an attributed comment which is a completely valid opinion. Cowards get rewarded, people not into groupthink get publicly humiliated. It really encourages debate (that's sarcasm).

/rant.

On topic: I think it's fantastic Google is prepared to invest and divest. If it sticks to the wall it's a keeper. If it slides to the ground, never mind, move on try something new. It's pretty clear Google is making strategic investments following their (current) plan. Consumer goods. Browser=the operating system. Android=Google in control, carriers and OEMs on the outer.

@Ron, great article.

 

[Lobotomik]

Joel Moore[/url]":31pdanry]

sprockkets[/url]":31pdanry]

Joel Moore[/url]":31pdanry]I've never understood why people are so awed when they see a high fidelity game running in a browser. It's not like the browser is doing any work...it's just providing a surface for an underlying engine (e.g. Unreal or Unity) to output to. Sure it's a slightly more convenient way to start a game (maybe) but it's hardly revolutionary.

So you mean playing such a game regardless of OS platform isn't revolutionary? That's how I see it anyhow.

But the underlying game engine is what makes that possible, not the browser. The browser is just a delivery mechanism. Which is really all it's ever been. Html 5 is changing that I suppose but as far as I know it's not going to be replacing Unity any time soon.

The revolutionary part is that a game using a c-language framework that builds graphics using OpenGL can be compiled into a processor-agnostic kind of language and then delivered over the web to almost any machine. Sort of like Flash, but far more powerful, without plugins, and without the dependence on Adobe (or Google, for that matter). And it can take advantage of a lot of already written c-code frameworks and games.

 

[Lobotomik]

dawesdust_12[/url]":2rzxds8p]

praetor_alpha[/url]":2rzxds8p]

dawesdust_12[/url]":2rzxds8p]Also, there's the 2014 Tracker of what Google is tracking:

1) Each and every one of us.

Better Google than the government.

Oh wait, someone's at the door.

I'd rather be spied on than have all my personal information sold to advertisers.

To tell the truth, your personal information is not being sold to anybody, it is Google's personal treasure. Advertisers tell google who they think they want, and based on that and on its own knowledge of you (which it does have, as it watches you browse and it reads all your email), it serves YOU the ads. When YOU click on the ad is when you reveal yourself to the advertiser.

So yes, the program that serves you your gmail analyzes the text and keeps a database of your activity, but this knowledge of yourself is sandboxed and hidden in the bowels of Google.

 

[Mad_Bunny]

LuDux[/url]"1cm5b41]

dawesdust_12[/url]"1cm5b41]Also, there's the 2014 Tracker of what Google is tracking:

1) Each and every one of us.

To be fair though, who isn't?

That's not a fair grouping: Google's off in it's own category - out of everyone who tracks me, the only company I know that will harass, lie and attempt to manipulate me if I don't do what they want, is Google.

 

[Rathadin]

Interesting that the author compares Google to Buy'N'Large. I think he's committed a crude blunder. It would be more apt to compare them to Weiland-Yutani. They start off interested in projects that help humanity, their leaders are fairly charismatic and personable, and in 200 years or so, they discover and unleash devastating biological superweapons across the galaxy.

I could see this version of Google becoming a reality. Especially if things go wrong with Calico.

 

[alanmies]

Mad_Bunny[/url]":17el2qq8]Google's off in it's own category - out of everyone who tracks me, the only company I know that will harass, lie and attempt to manipulate me if I don't do what they want, is Google.

Care to elaborate on that?

 

[1337 poster]

koolraap[/url]":83gn31un]

LuDux[/url]":83gn31un]Sooo... what percentage of these will be cancelled or shut down within the year? Given their track record, I'd be surprised if more than about 20% of these make it to 2015.

Gotta love the Ars voting system, anonymous haters get to downvote an attributed comment which is a completely valid opinion. Cowards get rewarded, people not into groupthink get publicly humiliated. It really encourages debate (that's sarcasm).

It gets downvoted because it's a pointless comment that adds nothing to the debate. I'm quite happy to vote for comments which I don't agree with as long as they're relevant, articulate and thought provoking.

Edit: Grammar

 

[Me Myself And I1]

Most of what Google is working on is pure vaporware, prototypes or just concepts.

Not to mention the diabetes contact lens blunder - diabetes folks are advised NOT TO wear contact lenses.

 

[Me Myself And I1]

LuDux[/url]":2g7o5tsb]Sooo... what percentage of these will be cancelled or shut down within the year? Given their track record, I'd be surprised if more than about 20% of these make it to 2015.

Exactly my thoughts.