or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › NYT: Steve Jobs feels Google betrayed Apple by mimicking iPhone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NYT: Steve Jobs feels Google betrayed Apple by mimicking iPhone - Page 4

post #121 of 345
apple creates, the industry follows

I just wish this time, apple will totally and utterly crush the emulator, forcing the industry to compete with SOMETHING DIFFERENT FOR ONCE !
post #122 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Because trolls, like politicians, believe that if you repeat a lie long enough it will eventually be accepted as fact. Unfortunately they are correct. Makes me wonder about historians too, ancient and modern.

very true, applied specially to ww2 events
post #123 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by k2director View Post

I hope Apple cleans Google's clock on this. Android is a direct copy of the iPhone, with a few tweaks.

Apple does a truly usable software keyboard, and suddenly Google has one.
Apple does an app store, and then, oh look, Google introduces one (an utterly crappy one at that).
Apple does multitouch, and wow, here's Google with multitouch.
Apple introduces the iPad, and a few days later: tada, here's Google showing off its concept of a tablet.

Google's only saving grace is that it gives its OS away for free to a bunch of second-tier companies who can't do the heavy lifting themselves. But Google's not bringing anything truly new or revolutionary to the table, and they don't deserve to be recognized as leaders in this particular space...

Spoken like a true fanboy, sorry.

Google may not have brought anything revolutionary to the table, but they are providing an open OS with none of the ridiculous walled garden stuff Apple cripple the iPhone with. It's my phone, I decide what goes on it, not Apple or anyone else.

Why can't I use an alternate web browser on my iPhone? Or a mail app which actually supports GMail properly? Or a podcatcher like Google Listen which downloads any podcast subscription over 3G? Or install flash? Or play play any game I like? (not just the ones which uncle Steve thinks won't offend anyone the far right/conservative/religious/wacko Fox News watching rednecks) Or in fact just do what the heck I want with my own device... And don't get me started on the lack of multi-tasking.

Android is effectively iPhone without the walls. If you like living in a prison, then keep supporting the iPhone/iPad. If you like Freedom, choose Android. And for what it's worth, the Nexus One is a much nicer piece of hardware than the iPhone. Far, far faster and the screen is light years ahead. If HTC, according to you a 'second tier' manufacturer can beat Apple so completely with the Nexus, what does that say about Apple? Are they now a 'third tier' manufacturer?

Personally though I'm waiting for WinPhone 7, which looks like taking the advances of Android and pairing it with a modern UI.
post #124 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

Maybe this is one of the reasons why Apple is defending their patents?

If I'm not mistaken patent holder are obligated to defend them or risk loosing them... Or is that just with TMs?
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #125 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by davesw View Post

1) Google pulling out of China

2) MS + Yahoo alliance

3) Apple choosing Bing as the default search engine for safari/iphone/ipads



Google's global market share is going to go down. and together with that, their stock price.


bye bye Google.

You think its that easy?
post #126 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The report also corroborated previous claims that Jobs used an expletive to dismiss Google's "don't be evil" mantra. The comment from the Apple co-founder reportedly earned "thunderous applause" from the company employees present at the meeting.

Both have ties with the phone companies which are among the most evil of all companies. Right now a telecoms boss has overtaken Bill Gates as the richest man in the world.

Google at least have a voice app for free calls but they all extort money from customers by charging for calls + texts + data when they can all go over the same line for a single charge and handing out ridiculous contract terms.

Both have open source commitments: Webkit, Darwin, GSoC, Android.

In their core businesses, they both like to lock people into their eco-systems.

The problem I see here is that Google and Apple are a little too much alike and entities that are alike repel because they encroach on each others turf. In the case of Google, it certainly was one way as Apple haven't done search and I wouldn't say iwork impacts much against Google docs or iphoto/picasa but it comes down to what people see happening in future.

Would the iphone ever be a ubiquitous handset? No. So then it's between Symbian, Windows Phone 7, RIM and iPhone OS. Microsoft are now in search and they're already pushing it on RIM and Symbian devices. Imagine if 900,000 out of 1 billion mobiles every year are using Bing instead of Google. That's a big loss and places Microsoft in charge of the web as well as the desktop.

What could Google do other than make a reusable mobile OS and phone benchmark to stop this happening? The only other thing they could have done is buy iPhones from Apple and give them away for free or very cheaply and at a loss.

Perhaps people wouldn't stop using Google just because a handset came bundled to use Bing but people keep using IE despite it being vastly inferior to other browsers so I think they would.

I don't think Google wants to harm Apple directly, it's just an unfortunate situation. They even disabled multi-touch by choice to begin with. Apple just needs to communicate better with them to understand why they've made those choices. The arguing is not really necessary if the reasons are justified and they can accept they have different goals. Apple wants a closed system with absolute control, Google wants to embrace open source more fully and allow vendors to push their own hardware with software compatibility, all the while being susceptible to the software fragmentation that happens with that setup.

There's no solution that is right. Apple's solution is limiting and they've shown they can't be trusted with too much control. Google's solution doesn't give the high quality experience Apple's does. You can't really have it both ways because there's simply too few cooks in one and too many in the other.
post #127 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

I guess in the end only time will tell... but its mildly disappointing since I would have liked Apple and Google to continue on with collaborative relationship... Now it seems Apple might actually invite Microsoft to play in their reindeer games and I'm sorry but the only company that makes out in a Microsoft collaboration IS Microsoft. Tell me I'm wrong...

I don't think that reindeer games quite captures it!

I worked for IBM in the 1960-1970 era when they had 97% of the computer market...

A popular saying described the relationship between other companies and IBM:

"When you make love to an 800 lb. Gorilla-- you don't stop when you get tired, you stop when the gorilla gets tired."

*
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #128 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Spoken like a true fanboy, sorry.

Google may not have brought anything revolutionary to the table, but they are providing an open OS with none of the ridiculous walled garden stuff Apple cripple the iPhone with. It's my phone, I decide what goes on it, not Apple or anyone else.

Why can't I use an alternate web browser on my iPhone? Or a mail app which actually supports GMail properly? Or a podcatcher like Google Listen which downloads any podcast subscription over 3G? Or install flash? Or play play any game I like? (not just the ones which uncle Steve thinks won't offend anyone the far right/conservative/religious/wacko Fox News watching rednecks) Or in fact just do what the heck I want with my own device... And don't get me started on the lack of multi-tasking.

Android is effectively iPhone without the walls. If you like living in a prison, then keep supporting the iPhone/iPad. If you like Freedom, choose Android. And for what it's worth, the Nexus One is a much nicer piece of hardware than the iPhone. Far, far faster and the screen is light years ahead. If HTC, according to you a 'second tier' manufacturer can beat Apple so completely with the Nexus, what does that say about Apple? Are they now a 'third tier' manufacturer?

Personally though I'm waiting for WinPhone 7, which looks like taking the advances of Android and pairing it with a modern UI.

Spoken like a true hateboy, sorry.

Have fun with your LosePhone (if/when it comes out). Good luck.
post #129 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Both have ties with the phone companies which are among the most evil of all companies (1). Right now a telecoms boss has overtaken Bill Gates as the richest man in the world.

Google at least have a voice app for free calls but they all extort money from customers by charging for calls + texts + data when they can all go over the same line(2) for a single charge and handing out ridiculous contract terms.

Both have open source commitments: Webkit, Darwin, GSoC, Android.

In their core businesses, they both like to lock people into their eco-systems.

The problem I see here is that Google and Apple are a little too much alike and entities that are alike repel because they encroach on each others turf. In the case of Google, it certainly was one way as Apple haven't done search and I wouldn't say iwork impacts much against Google docs or iphoto/picasa but it comes down to what people see happening in future.

Would the iphone ever be a ubiquitous handset? No. So then it's between Symbian, Windows Phone 7, RIM and iPhone OS. Microsoft are now in search and they're already pushing it on RIM and Symbian devices. Imagine if 900,000 out of 1 billion mobiles every year are using Bing instead of Google. That's a big loss and places Microsoft in charge of the web as well as the desktop.

What could Google do other than make a reusable mobile OS and phone benchmark to stop this happening? The only other thing they could have done is buy iPhones from Apple and give them away for free or very cheaply and at a loss.

Perhaps people wouldn't stop using Google just because a handset came bundled to use Bing but people keep using IE despite it being vastly inferior to other browsers so I think they would.

I don't think Google wants to harm Apple directly, it's just an unfortunate situation. They even disabled multi-touch by choice to begin with. Apple just needs to communicate better with them to understand why they've made those choices.(3) The arguing is not really necessary if the reasons are justified and they can accept they have different goals. Apple wants a closed system with absolute control(4), Google wants to embrace open source more fully and allow vendors to push their own hardware with software compatibility, all the while being susceptible to the software fragmentation that happens with that setup.

There's no solution that is right. Apple's solution is limiting(5) and they've shown they can't be trusted with too much control(6). Google's solution doesn't give the high quality experience Apple's does. You can't really have it both ways because there's simply too few cooks in one and too many in the other.

You make the world sound worse than all the wars put together. The worse part, you call yourself a Global Moderator, which may imply to some that you are an authority in your commentating.

IMO, much of what you claimed is incorrect and you can't substantiate any of them.

I personally like #2. I gather from your comment that I should be able to drive on the New York Thruway and my toll fare for a car, motorhome or bus should be the same and include any gas, emergency repairs or food. Afterall, they all travel on the same pavement, don't they. Yes, my response is just as stupid as yours.

It is a good thing that blogging supersedes yelling "Fire" in a crowded theatre. Otherwise, the Truth may be told.
post #130 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

I suspect it's going to be Apple's processing "cloud" so all one has to do is carry around a nearly dumb lightweight terminal like a iPad Pro.

The NC data center is centrally located in the most populous region of the US instead of being located a bit more north where the summers are cooler, suggests some things over others.

I suspect Apple will also build a data center on the west coast too with the land they got.

The NUMMI (Toyota/General Motors) plant in Fremont, California will be available in April.

Though, I think Apple could get better deals in Southern Nevada, Utah or Texas.

*
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #131 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

Apple needs to keep Jobs as a point man for technology and design, but get him the hell out of the CEO position and get someone in there who wont start wars that cant be won, first with MS in the 80s and now with Google.

His design skill is amazing, but to fumble this acquisition, and to fumble the Google alliance in the first place would get any other CEO fired. Not to mention the fact that the iphone has been pretty much stagnate since 2.0, that is 2 yeqars of no real innovation, just catching up with 5 year old Blackberry voice dialing tech. Between Windows Phone 7, the new builds of android and blackberrys webkit based browsers coming soon, Apple and the iPhone will soon be religated to a small minority cult like Apple Mac was in the 90s.

i have a nexus one. half assed programs do not one up the iphone. android is just like a linux distro except the nexus one ain't cheaply priced. that is, it has copy cat programs but is never really up there with os x or even windows 7.
i don't agree with everything apple does but i never understood why apple went with 'mobileme' and a pay model for cloud. stupid.
steve needs to put the same focus he has on hardware into apples cloud and compete with google.
post #132 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Spoken like a true hateboy, sorry.

Have fun with your LosePhone (if/when it comes out). Good luck.

Was that really the best retort you could come up with? No reasoned argument, no bullet points, no facts and figures... not even an amusing anecdote!

Really poor effort.

When you have a valid argument why Android isn't a better OS than the iPhone OS, please check back.
post #133 of 345
When Eric was first on Apple's Board, Android and Chrome were not issues [that Google was talking about anyway]. Google was merely pushing it's search empire. From Apple's perspective, the relationship was beneficial to Apple and Google because both companies had a common enemy in Microsoft. Apple would help Google expand search on mobile hardware, and Google would help Apple cement it's dominant position in the phone hardware sales.

Apple seemingly carried out it's role. Google seems to have gotten a little Apple envious and used it's insider role against Apple. If Google had interest in hardware predating the iPhone, it should have never allowed Eric on Apple's board. The conflict is obvious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

One of the things that I couldn't understand was why Apple and Google each shared BOD members. Seems like Google had more to gain than Apple. Apple has said that they aren't in the not in the search engine business.
post #134 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Was that really the best retort you could come up with? No reasoned argument, no bullet points, no facts and figures... not even an amusing anecdote!

Really poor effort.

When you have a valid argument why Android isn't a better OS than the iPhone OS, please check back.

touch type is not as good as iphones.
battery life isn't better than iphone.
it doesn't support exchange calender syncing.
messaging fails about every 5th time i try to text.
the native facebook app fails every 3rd time.
the nexus one is difficult to hold and type (to slippery and narrow)
the autorotate for the screen is crap. it will just get stuck one way and you have to turn it completely opposite to get it back (if it goes back at all).
the voice to text features are a bit laughable. it gets close to what you say about 1 in 4 or else it fails completely and give an error.
the nexus one has 512meg with a wopping 4gig microsd card.
apps can only work in the 512 area.
thats all i got right now.
post #135 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

i have a nexus one. half assed programs do not one up the iphone. android is just like a linux distro except the nexus one ain't cheaply priced. that is, it has copy cat programs but is never really up there with os x or even windows 7.
i don't agree with everything apple does but i never understood why apple went with 'mobileme' and a pay model for cloud. stupid.
steve needs to put the same focus he has on hardware into apples cloud and compete with google.

I agree with your final point, would love to ditch my Google Account in favour of MobileMe for tighter integration with my iPhone/Mac (bookmark, contact, photo syncing etc.).

It should just be a benefit of owning an Apple product - free like Mac OSX is free when you buy a new Mac.
post #136 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroubleStarter View Post

Google, on the other hand, wants smartphones to have open, nonproprietary platforms so users can freely roam the Web for apps that work on many devices."

this is the same bs propaganda that has been used against apple for years and google just jumping on that. open standards are about creating open data and networking standards so technology can cooperate, not to force vendors to give their IP away or demand that everything is free. these standards are created by vendor neutral standards bodies like IETF, IEEE, ISO, MPEG, W3C, ANSI. the iPhone when released was one of the most standards compliant devices of its kind. it supported standards based email (imap, pop), standards based internet (html, css, and no flash is not a standard), standards based data (MPEG-1 audio level 1, MPEG-4 AAC/AVC, etc).

google is merely trying to commoditize anything "outside of search" and they are using the "for the good of the people" bs to do it. if google were really wanted everything that way, they would...

"open up their search technology and adware technology to create a non-propreitary search platform where users, vendors and information can freely find each from a variety devices"...i see no evil in that.

at best, they are a bunch of hyprocratic smart engineers with great technology and poor leadership (like sun). at worst, they are ruthless corporation stealing from their partners (like ms).
post #137 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

When you have a valid argument why Android isn't a better OS than the iPhone OS, please check back.

Does it occur to you that I could care less if Android was better/worse/the same? Unlike you, I would not waste my time venting in Android forums, since the product is irrelevant to me.

Unlike some folks who seem to have nothing better to do with their time than hang out in places to bitch about products they supposedly think are inferior or useless, I actually have a life. (I've got a recommendation for you where you can find lots of validation and positive strokes: Just go to engadget.com and click on any Apple-related story to vent; you'll see that it's kotatsu-nirvana. Be happy).
post #138 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Both [Apple & Google] have ties with the phone companies which are among the most evil of all companies.

No argument there whatsoever. If one really wants to get into a true "racket," then launching a telecom business seems to be the Yellow Brick Road. I think that you could almost equate them with the banks.

Ditto for the rest of your post -- too few/many cooks is right!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I don't think that reindeer games quite captures it!

I worked for IBM in the 1960-1970 era when they had 97% of the computer market...

A popular saying described the relationship between other companies and IBM:

"When you make love to an 800 lb. Gorilla-- you don't stop when you get tired, you stop when the gorilla gets tired."

*



How appropriate!
post #139 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

There's a big history there, at least of Microsoft screwing Apple. One instance is QuickTime. When it was first developed, it was far ahead of any other computer media player. Apple sent Microsoft the code to QuickTime so that the Microsoft OS could interact with it, under strict conditions. Gates then took the code (stole it), copied it into Windows Media Player, and did everything he could to kill QuickTime, including threatening to bankrupt Apple if Apple continued to develop QuickTime for Windows.

Not so much. First of all, Steve Jobs wasn't even involved in Apple when all of the disputes over QuickTime occurred, so the argument that he and Gates have a bitter history is, at best, an exaggeration. Second, it was Jobs himself who engineered the 1997 deal that settled the patent disputes which he'd inherited when he returned to Apple.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #140 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Well, if Apple really wants to take a bite out of Google's lunch, they should start to buy up every specialized search engine out there and ally with Bing. They have the money, but I don't think they really want to encroach on Google's turf to really bring the fight to the forefront.

Apple should go into the search engine business and kill Google dead!
post #141 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLuv View Post

Apple should go into the search engine business and kill Google dead!

yes they should get into the search business, but fire whoever came up with the name 'mobileme'. and MS should fire whoever came up with 'bing'. god i hate those names lol.
post #142 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

There's a big history there, at least of Microsoft screwing Apple. One instance is QuickTime. When it was first developed, it was far ahead of any other computer media player. Apple sent Microsoft the code to QuickTime so that the Microsoft OS could interact with it, under strict conditions. Gates then took the code (stole it), copied it into Windows Media Player, and did everything he could to kill QuickTime, including threatening to bankrupt Apple if Apple continued to develop QuickTime for Windows.

Never heard of that one. If accurate, just how foolish was Apple's management in the past...
post #143 of 345
I am curious if Google's CEO excused himself from any discussions regarding Apple's iPad as well? I find it laughable that Apple executives didn't kick Schmidt off of Apple's board after the first time he pulled his "I need to excuse myself now routine...". What were they thinking?

Google makes lots and lots of money by having their content displayed on screens... With the industry moving away from traditional computer monitors and onto smart phone, TV, and other smart devices, it makes sense for Google to try and get their search content on those devices, but also push the development/adoption of such devices to benefit them...

On a funny side note. Google has their phones, tablets, and chrome browser, but what they don't have is a AppleTV clone.... Apparently, the AppleTV was never discussed at Apple's board of director meeting...
post #144 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post


Google is taking Microsoft's share of the smart phone market that Apple doesn't want.


Google is trying to kill the iPhone. That is totally evil.

Can you imagine if they succeeded? You would not be abloe to use your iPhone anymore because it would be dead!
post #145 of 345
I kept reading, expecting something beyond the NYT article I'd already read.
post #146 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

Not to mention the fact that the iphone has been pretty much stagnate since 2.0, that is 2 yeqars of no real innovation, just catching up with 5 year old Blackberry voice dialing tech.

Apple sold over 8 million iPhones in the last quarter, at a time when the 3GS is widely considered to be heading into the end of its product life. That's not the kind of performance that gets anybody fired.

Quote:
Originally Posted by emulator View Post

I like many of their products, but as companies, they are both corporate evils. Don't trust either of them!

Respectfully, I'm very tired of this attitude. It's all over the place. People have begun throwing around the word "evil" to describe anything they don't like, for any reason at all. When a "corporation" ooh, dirty word! starts rounding up people and sending them to death camps, we can talk about evil. Until then, let's lay off the hyperbole. It just clouds the issues and makes conversation tiresome and tedious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

Apple, if you are that aggrieved, then get into the search business and compete with Google on those terms as well.

Unless you're LexisNexis, there's no such thing as a search business. Searching the Internet is not a way to make money. It makes no more sense to talk about Apple getting into "the search business" than it does to talk about them getting into the "burn cash for heat in the winter" business.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Google may not have brought anything revolutionary to the table, but they are providing an open OS with none of the ridiculous walled garden stuff Apple cripple the iPhone with

which sucks. It might seem tempting to argue that one product is somehow politically or morally superior to another, but it really doesn't get you anywhere when that product stinks out loud.

Quote:
Why can't I [long list of stuff practically no one cares about]

You know what a bell curve looks like, yeah? Shaped like, well, a bell. People who buy phones that is to say, people in general fall along a bell curve. At the far left end, we have people who just want to dial; they don't care about voicemail or caller ID or anything else. At the right right end, we have people like, well, you. People who (and I'm sincerely trying to fairly summarize your point of view here) see their phones as toys to be played with. That junk you rattled off is on the far end of the bell curve. Apple could add those features, but it would be a heck of a lot of work. And they'd sell what, eight million and three phones a quarter instead of eight million? Not to mention the fact that adding those things would necessarily make everybody else's phones harder to use and less reliable.

Quote:
Android is effectively iPhone without the walls.

And without ease of use, stability and security. But hey, it's an alternative product, and it's there for that tail end of the bell curve to buy or not. Of course, there's the little matter of infringing Apple's patents that needs to be settled, but I'm sure Google can find ways around those things. After all, being able to install any app you want, regardless of quality or stability, is more important to that segment of the market than ease of use, stability or security anyway, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

If I'm not mistaken patent holder are obligated to defend them or risk loosing them... Or is that just with TMs?

The word is "losing," and you're thinking of trademarks. Trademark protection lapses if the owner of the trademark doesn't make a good-faith effort to protect it. That's why words like "aspirin" and "thermos" aren't trademarked any more.
post #147 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidch14 View Post

....
at best, they are a bunch of hyprocratic smart engineers with great technology and poor leadership (like sun). at worst, they are ruthless corporation stealing from their partners (like ms).

everyone talks about how smart google employees are. has anyone actually used any of googles products? except for search what has worked really well and doesn't seem to just languish once it is out there?
google apps? they are taking their sweet time with that but it is better.
wave? thats a ghostown and deserves the 'beta' tag. 'buzz'? yes that is a big hit too..not. latitude? god. you tube? (oh thats right, their design failed and they bought out youtube instead).

googles biggest problem is that the founders never had to actually do anything outside the confines of 'school' and think they are still living at stanford. everything is a great new student project.
google is one bad publicity day from losing big time.
post #148 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

Never heard of that one. If accurate, just how stupid was Apple's management in the past...

Trust betrayed, in hindsight, can make anyone feel (and potentially look,) stupid. Doesn't mean that one is stupid but feelings and truth often enjoy only a tenuous association.
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #149 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

everyone talks about how smart google employees are. has anyone actually used any of googles products? except for search what has worked really well and doesn't seem to just languish once it is out there?


Gmail, Google Earth, Google Maps to name three...
post #150 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

yes they should get into the search business, but fire whoever came up with the name 'mobileme'. and MS should fire whoever came up with 'bing'. god i hate those names lol.

Agree 100%. Add 'iPad' to that. Ridiculous name.
post #151 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbaxter View Post

I kept reading, expecting something beyond the NYT article I'd already read.

What do you think the Comment section is all about?
post #152 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

Gmail, Google Earth, Google Maps to name three...

you forgot orkut or whatever its called.
post #153 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
So let me get this straight. You do think companies should spend money obtaining patents, but when it comes to owning them you don't think they should not protect them? Seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RussellSakay View Post

They should protect them of course! However making the patents open to the market like shareware would perhaps solve a lot of their problems. If MS uses one of Apple's patents and improves on it, great! Then it would be the same goes for MS if Apple uses that patent instead. I like the open market patent share idea, it allows for people like you or me to take an idea and improve on it without any legal problems.


A brief excerpt from Leonard Peikoff's Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand

The "profit motive," speaking broadly, means a man's incentive to work in order to gain something for himself in economic terms, to make money. By Objectivist standards, such a motive, being thoroughly just, is profoundly moral. Socialists used to speak of "production for use" as against "production for profit." What they meant and wanted was: "production by one man for the unearned use of another."

http://www.peikoff.com/opar/profit_motive.htm

*
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #154 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorBenway View Post

No they didn't - the deal with the stock purchase prior to Apple's 1979 IPO was to examine the IP at PARC. It wasn't a patent license deal - it was an agreement for a tech-demo (one that was half-assed enough that Jobs complained and got a second demo - the one that the Xerox Parc employees panicked about).

According to Jef Raskin, he arranged the tour of Xerox PARC in order to convince Steve Jobs that a GUI-based computer was worth pursing. It worked so well that Jobs fired Raskin and took over the Mac project himself. What Apple developed for the Mac (and even the Lisa) had virtually no basis for comparison with the Alto. Apple substantially advanced the art of the user interface.

A lot of people within academia and industry were perusing graphical user interfaces at the time. Apple didn't steal anything, and Microsoft really didn't either. Microsoft's big sin IMO was that with the years and tons of money they had at their disposal to develop their own approach, they utterly failed to advance the art. The first two versions of Windows were beyond laughable, the third only modestly functional, and the fourth an almost complete rip-off of the MacOS. And Windows 95, lest we forget, came more than eleven years after the Mac.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #155 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

Gmail, Google Earth, Google Maps to name three...

i have never looked into it but here is this info from wikip

EarthViewer 3D, and was created by Keyhole, Inc, a company acquired by Google in 2004 (now called 'google earth')

Google Maps first started as a software application developed by Lars and Jens Rasmussen for the company Where2. In October 2004 the company was acquired by Google Inc

but they did go gmail completely in house. and it ain't too bad.
post #156 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

Never heard of that one. If accurate, just how foolish was Apple's management in the past...

Additional information above, but the fact is, we don't really know how much of this is accurate. All we really do know is that Apple and Microsoft were embroiled in a patent dispute which dragged on for many years and which involved QuickTime code somewhere at its center. Microsoft ended up dropping a bunch of money on Apple in 1997 to settle it, but they also got access to Apple's patents at the same time.

The point being, all of Microsoft's current and potential partners know now if they didn't before, how treacherous they can be. If anybody knows how to deal with Microsoft, it's Steve Jobs.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #157 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroubleStarter View Post

This is the part that got my attention the most:

"Apple believes that devices like smartphones and tablets should have tightly controlled, proprietary standards and that customers should take advantage of services on those gadgets with applications downloaded from Appleā€™s own App Store.

Google, on the other hand, wants smartphones to have open, nonproprietary platforms so users can freely roam the Web for apps that work on many devices."

I have an iPhone and I like it a lot, but I'm always for open standards instead of closed platforms. If not for that, we would still be all working on IBM mainframes and mini-computers.

Yes, that part got my attention too, but only because it was so revealing of the writer's incredibly naive bias. The idea that Google's goal is that, "users can freely roam the Web for apps that work on many devices," is absurdly mistaken. Google, more than anyone else in the tech industry since Microsoft in its heyday, is all about locking users into Google solutions, controlling people's access to information (even to their own information), and essentially spying on their users for profit.

Yes, Apple sells proprietary systems. But the idea that Google's systems are open is stretching things more than a bit. And, at least Apple's proprietary systems down try to own you and your data in the way the Google's so-called open systems do, by locking you into their cloud.

It's also historically inaccurate, to say the least, to state that open systems had anything significant to do with IBM's loss of ascendancy in the tech industry.

Steve Jobs has come to the realization of who Google are and what they are about, and he's completely spot on in his assessment of them. They are nothing more than a pack of vultures and thieves with no respect for the law, no respect for privacy and no respect for the boundaries of propriety. A thoroughly immoral company with a record of theft of IP and who's only sense of morality is that whatever they can get away with is right.

As far as stopping them, if Microsoft (read Ballmer) had any sense at all they would shut down Bing and saddle Google with a de facto monopoly in search.
post #158 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Yes, Apple sells proprietary systems. But the idea that Google's systems are open is stretching things more than a bit. And, at least Apple's proprietary systems down try to own you and your data in the way the Google's so-called open systems do, by locking you into their cloud.

Absolutely. The most abused word in the language these days has to be "open" -- to the point where it has become effectively meaningless. These are all proprietary systems. Choose based on what works the best, not on some notional concept of openness. It doesn't really exist.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #159 of 345
Wow, that was a mature and completely technically based response...
post #160 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Android is effectively iPhone without the walls. If you like living in a prison, then keep supporting the iPhone/iPad. If you like Freedom, choose Android.

It's really hard to comprehend that there are really people out there who are this blindly naive. The walls around the iPhone are for keeping the barbarians out, not for keeping the citizens in. The walls around Android are for making sure the citizens don't ever leave the city with anything of value by making them pass through the Google checkpoints on their way out.

"All your data are belong to us." -- Eric Schmidt
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › NYT: Steve Jobs feels Google betrayed Apple by mimicking iPhone