or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google's Schmidt: Apple responding to Android with lawsuits, not innovation
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google's Schmidt: Apple responding to Android with lawsuits, not innovation - Page 5

post #161 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by FriedLobster View Post

Sorry i thought you were joking.

Have you tried to read what I wrote ?

Sorry but posting an image of keyboard driven phone doesn't prove Android wasn't capable to work in touch-driven phone (which it was). This was just one of the prototypes. Yet you make claim that they were totally clueless and without Apple, there would never be a touch phone.

BTW, have you ever seen this ?

http://bit.ly/mZCtDB

Looks like prior art to me, perhaps it was Apple who was stealing..what you say ?
post #162 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickmccally View Post

Wow I'M GLAD SOMEONE has common sense here. This is ridiculous. We live in a very broad world. Many people make computers but HP doesn't blame Apple for copying laptops, Ford doesnt blame GM for making a muscle car, they compete. This is the most ridiculous fight. Apple looks stupid, and everyone of you sticking up for them are stupid.

Things evolve. Look how landlines went from the spinner, to the regular buttons, to wireless handsets. Many brands made them, but did they all do the same thing, with similar appearance and carry out the same function?

Most people defending for Apple need to move to China and live with communism. They can put their loyalty in something there, but here it is suppose to be a free market. One where companies can COMPETE for rights to a customer.

You idiots don't understand all this licensing a power button on the top of a phone, or home button at the bottom, or mic at the top for background noise assistance is RAISING YOUR CONSUMER paid prices. Lets all pay more because these greedy ass companies want to have a piss fight.

I love Apple. I am a web developer, all of my computers are apple. Everyone in my family has an iPhone. I own ipods, apple tv, I'm a huge advocate. THIS is taking it too far, defending saying androids are copying the iPhone.. lol


Thanks, this is pretty much my point. I have nothing against Apple, I love the company, all my computers are Apple too, some of my phones and tablets are Apple too (being a mobile developer). I don't understand why so many people wants Android or anyone else to fail. What's the benefit for you ? It will only stall the innovation, and will drive the price for the consumer up, exactly the same way as those lawsuits do, as you correctly pointed out.


Hope the other guy who said you are wrong will try to come with some arguments, but I am afraid that we won't hear any.
post #163 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I never thought you were seriously suggesting it

No, I don't work for Google. Good to see you staying in character tho, ever the funny little guy.

Forgive me if I believe you are construing "work for" in the narrowest sense.
post #164 of 228
Then there wasn't really any reason to answer you then, was there?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #165 of 228
That guy looks a proper creep a**e
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
post #166 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Google's approach to IP is different, partly because they are primarily a server side firm. Mostly rather than patent something such as their search-rank algorithm, they will prefer to keep it as a trade secret. They do have patents for example on MapReduce, but most of their IP crown jewels like BigTable and GFS are closely held secrets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Did you ever use any of those other search engines? Most were slow, all had horrible visual design. Many included advertisers paid links in the search results, along with banner ads and big slow-to-load ads along the side panels. Relevancy was atrocious. Google transformed the search experience with both exceptional speed, exceptionally relevant results and a better advertising model.

Lots of sites had webmail sure, but GMail was transformative - not so much because it has labels instead of folders - but because it gave orders of magnitude more email space. Back when GMail launched it gave users 1GB of mail space, hotmail back then I believe offered 2MB and Yahoo 4MB.

Innovation doesn't just mean making something wholly new, it means making something transformatively better. Much of Google's innovation is in its infrastructure, which allows it to deliver web services with unequalled scale, reliability and performance.

There are plenty of bad things that can be reasonably said about Google, but claiming that they have never innovated isn't one of them.

A true voice of reason, as usual. BTW, I believe they have patents pertaining to Bigtable, search and GFS. Will try and look them up. This is not straight forward because Google does not have a habit of listing the company affiliations of inventors on their patents, making the search a bit trickier.

Here's a quote from a book studying Google Patents: "Google’s database inventions by themselves make it clear that Google’s research unit has superseded Bell Labs and Xerox PARC as the place for technical innovation in the U.S., if not the world." Interesting that Apple is not mentioned.

I use Macs and Windows PCs (along with Linux), and prefer Macs by a long shot. I bought one of the first Macs ever. I have iPhones and Android, but use iP4 as my primary device. I have purchased both iPad and iPad2. Despite this, I feel it is only fair to recognize that Apple's innovation is in integration rather than in fundamental technology development. Multitouch, smartphones, tablets, all-in-one computers, music players etc. have all existed before Apple. If Apple didn't exist, different forms of these products would still be around. Arguably, no one would have made the final package as user friendly as Apple. And perhaps no one could have popularized them the way Apple has done. But still, Apple has NOT developed any fundamental innovations.

Google, on the other hand, has done things at a fundamental level that Apple has not, cannot and will not. In fact, so has Microsoft. It's a tough pill to swallow for those who want to believe Apple shines across the board. But the innovations from Apple and Google are simply very different. Despite all the money I have spent on Apple products, I'd say Google's influence on my life, both personally and as an engineer, has been far more profound.
post #167 of 228
Quote:
Thanks, this is pretty much my point. I have nothing against Apple, I love the company, all my computers are Apple too, some of my phones and tablets are Apple too (being a mobile developer). I don't understand why so many people wants Android or anyone else to fail. What's the benefit for you ? It will only stall the innovation, and will drive the price for the consumer up, exactly the same way as those lawsuits do, as you correctly pointed out.

Post this on a pro-Android forum where people are always rooting against Apple and wishing for their failure. Tell them that competition is good for them and that if Apple fails, it will stall innovation.
post #168 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickmccally View Post

I love Apple. I am a web developer, all of my computers are apple. Everyone in my family has an iPhone. I own ipods, apple tv, I'm a huge advocate. THIS is taking it too far, defending saying androids are copying the iPhone.. lol

Who's defending Apple. As was announced, they won the lawsuit, which means they infringed on Apple's patents. Just like any court case, HTC can appeal it or get it reviewed, but unless there is a glaring mistake in the judgement, I doubt it'll be changed.

I think Google and HTC are the ones to laugh at, they doth protest to much. They look stupid protesting AFTER losing the case. They're just trying to calm their shareholders.
post #169 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickmccally View Post

Wow I'M GLAD SOMEONE has common sense here. This is ridiculous. We live in a very broad world. Many people make computers but HP doesn't blame Apple for copying laptops, Ford doesnt blame GM for making a muscle car, they compete. This is the most ridiculous fight. Apple looks stupid, and everyone of you sticking up for them are stupid.

Things evolve. Look how landlines went from the spinner, to the regular buttons, to wireless handsets. Many brands made them, but did they all do the same thing, with similar appearance and carry out the same function?

Most people defending for Apple need to move to China and live with communism. They can put their loyalty in something there, but here it is suppose to be a free market. One where companies can COMPETE for rights to a customer.

You idiots don't understand all this licensing a power button on the top of a phone, or home button at the bottom, or mic at the top for background noise assistance is RAISING YOUR CONSUMER paid prices. Lets all pay more because these greedy ass companies want to have a piss fight.

I love Apple. I am a web developer, all of my computers are apple. Everyone in my family has an iPhone. I own ipods, apple tv, I'm a huge advocate. THIS is taking it too far, defending saying androids are copying the iPhone.. lol

Actually, Nick, if you would stay on topic then it wouldn't look like you're as much an ass as anyone else in the who copied who fight.

The original news story was about Schmidt's comments... not about who copies who.

Maybe Schmidt could have been closer to the truth by saying that Apple "is" competing in the market place as is Google, that Apple is still innovating as is Google, but also saying that he "feels" that Apple is "unfairly"* fighting some of its battles in the courtroom with patent litigation. [*not that I feel that all of Apple's litigaiton is senseless. ]

So the hassle comes down to Schmidt's words. I'm not sure how Page and Brin feel about those words but when you look at what Schmidt said it sounds fairly silly to say (if this is indeed what he meant) that Apple has stopped innovating and competing fairly and now the only thing left in Apple's arsenal is fighting in the courtroom to gain the upper hand.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #170 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Schmidt's comments echo those made a week ago by a spokesperson for HTC, who said officials at the company are "disappointed" that Apple is suing competitors "instead of competing fairly in the market."

Says the mole.
post #171 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Getting insider info by being an Apple director, then stealing that info to make a product - innovative crime imho. Schmidt is a scumbag.

I couldn't agree more! What a nerve talking about Apple's need to innovate. Google's innovation is in industrial espionage!
post #172 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainless View Post

OMG, this is beyond funny. How you explain that ES got to the Apple's Board of Directors ? Do you think he bribed Jobs or something, or perhaps wore an invisible suit, sitting in the corner and recorded everything ? It was move of Apple as they thought it might help them...as you probably know, Apple was deep in trouble in that time.
Information about Google acquiring Android was public, so it was no secret to Apple that Google was creating their own mobile OS...yet Apple decided to do no move, and it is Schmidt who takes all the blame, even if it is not clear if he really "stole" anything during his BOD stay ?

There is a positive thing about these lawsuits, that those ridiculous patents, that clearly cover insane broad concepts or prior art, hopefully get examined by the court and get voided as a result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Actually, Nick, if you would stay on topic then it wouldn't look like you're as much an ass as anyone else in the who copied who fight.

The original news story was about Schmidt's comments... not about who copies who.

Maybe Schmidt could have been closer to the truth by saying that Apple "is" competing in the market place as is Google, that Apple is still innovating as is Google, but also saying that he "feels" that Apple is "unfairly"* fighting some of its battles in the courtroom with patent litigation. [*not that I feel that all of Apple's litigaiton is senseless. ]

So the hassle comes down to Schmidt's words. I'm not sure how Page and Brin feel about those words but when you look at what Schmidt said it sounds fairly silly to say (if this is indeed what he meant) that Apple has stopped innovating and competing fairly and now it is only fighting in the courtroom in order to gain the upper hand.

Doesn't really matter where this started, I am fighting for what the United States and free market stand for. I'd clearly label this a suitable topic, and I think they are suing competition away and charging me the lawyer fee's.
post #173 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickmccally View Post

Doesn't really matter where this started, I am fighting for what the United States and free market stand for. I'd clearly label this a suitable topic, and I think they are suing competition away and charging me the lawyer fee's.

Oh bullshit... now you sound just as stupid as Schmidt.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #174 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post

Surely, if Apple felt so strongly about Schmidt acting unethically, they would have been rather dumb to keep him as a director for two years after the launch of the iPhone, particularly since Google acquired Android a few years earlier. In fact, the evidence suggests that Apple was not particularly smart in keeping Schmidt on. If indeed Google learned a few tricks via this relationship, shouldn't Apple shoulder the blame at least in part for missing the obvious? To repeat, Google bought Android in 2005!!!

That's an interesting point. If we keep dwelling on Schmidt stealing secrets at Apple board meetings, we are just calling out Apple for being stupid. Can a company be both innovative and stupid? Apparently so! :LOL:

Let the insults come. Just remember that I didn't raise this point first!
post #175 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

That's an interesting point. If we keep dwelling on Schmidt stealing secrets at Apple board meetings, we are just calling out Apple for being stupid. Can a company be both innovative and stupid? Apparently so! :LOL:

Let the insults come. Just remember that I didn't raise this point first!

I often wonder if Steve made the error of believing that he and Schmidt were a team, collaborating against the rest of the pack. Then Steve got super pissed when he found out that Google was also developing a mobile OS... something that Schmidt may have forgotten to mention.

A little 80s deja vu...

[I'm speculating]
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #176 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Oh bullshit... now you sound just as stupid as Schmidt.

Eric Schmidt has a PhD from Berkeley in computer science. He was the co-author of lex. He has worked at PARC and Sun, and was hired to two companies to be CEO. Stupid? How many of us qualify to label him as that? I wish I were so stupid.
post #177 of 228
1.
Not innovating = Android. Very, very much an iOS clone.
(Colleagues using Android phones have no problem admitting this.)

2.
When announcing the iPhone 4,5 years ago Steve Jobs said "and boy have we patented it."
Now Apple is protecting their IP. Surprised? Really?

3. Let's not even talk about Schmidt having been an Apple board member at the "right" time.

Ridiculous.
post #178 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

I often wonder if Steve made the error of believing that he and Schmidt were a team, collaborating against the rest of the pack. Then Steve got super pissed when he found out that Google was also developing a mobile OS... something that Schmidt may have forgotten to mention.

A little 80s deja vu...

[I'm speculating]

Google bought Android in 2005. If Apple couldn't figure out their intentions until 2009, shame on them. In all the rants ensuing the breakup between Schmidt and Apple, the issue of Schmidt lying to Apple about Google's mobile intentions was never, ever raised. Until there's such evidence, I don't see how we can accuse Schmidt of being deliberately deceptive. And if deception was involved, why has Apple not taken Google to court? They have not been afraid to go after everyone else?
post #179 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post

Here and elsewhere, Google has been criticized for not defending their Android licensees. Now they are finally speaking up and vowing to defend their allies, as they should. Yet, Schmidt is not only being criticized but is in fact trashed for it.

I guess you haven't bothered to read the forum. 95% of what Schmidt is being trashed for is his inane accusation that Apple is litigating INSTEAD OF innovating. Also, he's being trashed for his unethical position of remaining on Apple's board while meanwhile stealing Apple's design ideas. Finally, he's being trashed for just plain stupidity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by artificialintel View Post

Google isn't really worried about the legal threats to android, because they don't make any money from android. They make money from ads on android - and other phones - so all they care about is that they have good ad-serving access. They have to at least make the appearance of defending their partners, of course, because being papa GOOG is part of what guarantees them entree, but HTC suffers a huge financial setback it doesn't cost them anything.

They don't want android to crater, of course, because it's a critical source of leverage in mobil advertising, but I'm not sure they really care as long as it remains a player.

But, unfortunately for Google, the fact that they don't make money directly from Android is not a defense. They could still end up paying out millions of dollars in fines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Google, because it prospers from searching, does not respect intellectual property.

Google NEVER respected intellectual property from anyone but themselves. At one point, they seriously proposed scanning every printed work ever made and putting it online for sale - without permission (or even knowledge) of the authors.

Imagine the stink you'd have if you put the source code to Google search online without permission.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

This seems like a pretty reckless thing to say, although not atypical for Schmidt. Google can throw money at litigation but they can't guarantee victory

Even worse, by saying that Google will guarantee that HTC doesn't lose, Google is potentially liable for any damages HTC might face - not just the legal costs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

I wonder if Google has a patent on its search engine. And will it defend its patent.

Not a patent, but a whole slew of copyrights. And, of course they will defend it. They just went after Microsoft not too long ago for what they considered to be illegal use of Google's search.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickmccally View Post

Wow I'M GLAD SOMEONE has common sense here. This is ridiculous. We live in a very broad world. Many people make computers but HP doesn't blame Apple for copying laptops, Ford doesnt blame GM for making a muscle car, they compete. This is the most ridiculous fight. Apple looks stupid, and everyone of you sticking up for them are stupid.

The difference, of course, is that none of the examples you cite are as blatant in the theft of intellectual property as the iPhone examples.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #180 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauerg View Post

When announcing the iPhone 4,5 years ago Steve Jobs said "and boy have we patented it."
Now Apple is protecting their IP. Surprised? Really?

...

Ridiculous.

Google acquired Android in 2005. Surprised about them releasing a mobile OS in 2008 ? Really?

Ridiculous.

The only surprise is that it took them so long.
post #181 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Eric Schmidt has a PhD from Berkeley in computer science. He was the co-author of lex. He has worked at PARC and Sun, and was hired to two companies to be CEO. Stupid? How many of us qualify to label him as that? I wish I were so stupid.

I don't give a shit if he or anyone else has degrees up their ass... they can still make stupid statements. [ or have you missed the news for your entire life? ]

... and I feel that this particular statement concerning Apple is just that... stupid.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #182 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Google bought Android in 2005. If Apple couldn't figure out their intentions until 2009, shame on them. In all the rants ensuing the breakup between Schmidt and Apple, the issue of Schmidt lying to Apple about Google's mobile intentions was never, ever raised. Until there's such evidence, I don't see how we can accuse Schmidt of being deliberately deceptive. And if deception was involved, why has Apple not taken Google to court? They have not been afraid to go after everyone else?

Steve J.'s comment about Google stepping into Apple's space and not the other way around is what I'm basing my speculation upon...

Apple tried going after look and feel in the 80s... fail... so now they are smart enough to go after particular patents.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #183 of 228
Why go through innovation when litigation can take care of the violation?
post #184 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainless View Post

Have you tried to read what I wrote ?

Sorry but posting an image of keyboard driven phone doesn't prove Android wasn't capable to work in touch-driven phone (which it was). This was just one of the prototypes. Yet you make claim that they were totally clueless and without Apple, there would never be a touch phone.

BTW, have you ever seen this ?

http://bit.ly/mZCtDB

Looks like prior art to me, perhaps it was Apple who was stealing..what you say ?


Yeah I read what you wrote. Typical android garbage.

Bottom line:

Google = 2nd rate copy cats who's main goal is to serve us crappy ads and spyware

Android = crappy, 2nd rate iOS copy cat

CNN: Obamacare largest tax increase in American history

 

FORBES: ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Middle class

Reply

CNN: Obamacare largest tax increase in American history

 

FORBES: ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Middle class

Reply
post #185 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickmccally View Post

Doesn't really matter where this started, I am fighting for what the United States and free market stand for. I'd clearly label this a suitable topic, and I think they are suing competition away and charging me the lawyer fee's.

Which "United States and free market" would that be? Because it sounds to me like you are talking out your arse. According to the US Constitution: Article 1, Section 8 (Powers of Congress):
Quote:
"The Congress shall have Power ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"

Article One of the US Constitution says the free market doesn't mean a free-for-all for someone else's invention.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #186 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Eric Schmidt has a PhD from Berkeley in computer science. He was the co-author of lex. He has worked at PARC and Sun, and was hired to two companies to be CEO. Stupid? How many of us qualify to label him as that? I wish I were so stupid.


..and Steve Jobs is a college drop out and yet Steve jobs >>>>>>>> Eric Schmidt


Eric Schmidt is an idiot.

CNN: Obamacare largest tax increase in American history

 

FORBES: ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Middle class

Reply

CNN: Obamacare largest tax increase in American history

 

FORBES: ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Middle class

Reply
post #187 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

So the hassle comes down to Schmidt's words. I'm not sure how Page and Brin feel about those words but when you look at what Schmidt said it sounds fairly silly to say (if this is indeed what he meant) that Apple has stopped innovating and competing fairly and now the only thing left in Apple's arsenal is fighting in the courtroom to gain the upper hand.

Agree with you Island Hermit. A poor choice in words, more suited for a soundbite.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #188 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by snailer View Post

So true! Schmidt is copying the Conservative politicians most successful tactic of the last decade; if you repeat the same lies enough, most people will believe it. Think; "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and lately "Don't tax the job creators".

So if they keep repeating the message; "Apple doesn't innovate" and millions of people will start repeating it and it will become a "truth".

Seriously, there's a forum for politics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

No one has mentioned - why didn't Google support HTC way back at the beginning? If they had any integrity, they would have been involved in defending HTC (and the others) from the start - not after Apple already won.

You note the point perfectly. HTC and other partners are the ones taking the slings and arrows.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post

Here and elsewhere, Google has been criticized for not defending their Android licensees. Now they are finally speaking up and vowing to defend their allies, as they should. Yet, Schmidt is not only being criticized but is in fact trashed for it. I wonder why some of you need to attack someone you don't know in such a denigrating manner. What is the source of your venom? I love my Apple products; however, I just don't feel the need to spit on the competition of Apple. Is there something wrong with me? Or perhaps some of you need to put on a new pair of glasses to properly see the world? Relax! Chill! Enjoy what you have and let others make their own choices!

It isn't competition if it is theft. Look if Google wants to do nothing but copy, I suppose that can be their choice, but don't call it innovation. Doing search after half a dozen others, being sued by Oracle, Apple and others about various Android related "copying", that isn't innovation regardless. You don't end up in a six front war because you are out innovating the planet. You end up in it because you are stealing from everyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstep View Post

So copying someone else's term paper is now a good thing, or to take it to an extreme, if someone steals your car, you're just a whiner if you file a police report when it's so obvious you should just be quiet and go buy another one?

Google would LOVE to see some more innovation without Apple protecting their IP since it would just give them more things to copy.

Remember, it isn't copying, it is innovating! You aren't copying someone's term paper. You are innovating on their term paper. You are stealing their car. You are innovating their car. See how well that works?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstep View Post

Google isn't doing any evil, they're letting their partners do it for them. See, no moral problem.

BTW, great new case for the Samsung iTab, huh? What a bunch of friggin' copying wankers. You could be handed one of those tablets in that case and not know which product you're holding - which is exactly why these design infringement suit DO have merit. Instead of trying to do their own thing, they keep copying even more. Unreal.

Anyway, the OS side isn't any better - where it differs, it's generally more complicated and less polished.

Samsung and their "approved" partners are no different than Google. Theft is theft and I had a thread about that before Apple even sued wondering why action wasn't being taken on it. I'm glad now it is because they've already got the suit in and the level of copying is clearly ridiculous at this stage.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #189 of 228
deleted
post #190 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You honestly believe Steve Jobs wasn't aware of what Google was doing with Android? And there's a claim by Apple that Schmidt violated NDA's? Apple management certainly hoped they wouldn't aggressively push Android as a mobile OS free for use. And Mr. Jobs probably was disappointed when they showed him their initial mockups and made it clear they were moving forward. But they were very open with Apple from all the reports I've seen, even inviting Apple engineers into the Google labs. And I'd be shocked if Mr. Jobs didn't pick Andy Rubin's brain for iPhone ideas. No, I don't think Schmidt was stealing from Apple. Steve Jobs would have failed Apple stockholders if he thought that was going on and didn't immediately remove him from the board. That he stayed on until 2009, when he voluntarily resigned, should be proof enough that he wasn't slinking around the Apple back corridors.

As for the original Google mockup that's mentioned every time this comes up, even Blackberry's don't look like Blackberry's from three years ago. It was an obvious choice to go with a touchscreen once Apple had shown it would be accepted by consumers. \ Surely you're not arguing that only Apple has the right to a touchscreen, or that every other phone manufacturer should have stubbornly clung to an old inferior interface. Big cans of worms. . .

So AFAIK, Steve Jobs has never said Eric Schmidt was stealing anything from Apple/doing things behind his back. It all came down to Google becoming a competitor and less valuable to Apple as a hedge against Microsoft. I'd imagine it was "do things our way or the highway".

Makes a better story to claim theft tho. . .

As CEO, Steve Jobs doesn't get any say on who is on Apple's board of directors, that is up to the shareholders. Further, since it is the board of directors that chooses the CEO, it would be a conflict of interest to have the decision up to Jobs. Its pretty clear that Steve was very pissed about Android when he saw they were including Apple patented tech, such as pinch to zoom, but he couldn't "fire" Schmidt. Thats why he held iPad development from parts of the board (i.e. Schmidt) until he could garner enough support from the rest of the board/shareholders to force Schmidt out. Legal proceedings against Schmidt probably haven't happened because he probably didn't technically break any law, or there is alot of gray area, but what he did was definitely unethical
post #191 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Steve J.'s comment about Google stepping into Apple's space and not the other way around is what I'm basing my speculation upon...

Apple tried going after look and feel in the 80s... fail... so now they are smart enough to go after particular patents.

I agree that's a good statement to rationalize around. But Jobs didn't go as far as saying Schmidt stole secrets from them, which is what some here are accusing (not you, I believe). My point (also raised by one or two others, I think) is that Apple has never ever accused Google of outright infringement or thievery. If so, what facts would support us making such accusations (again, not directed at you, Mr. Hermit)?
post #192 of 228
deleted
post #193 of 228
deleted
post #194 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane08 View Post

As CEO, Steve Jobs doesn't get any say on who is on Apple's board of directors, that is up to the shareholders.

Of course Jobs has a lot of say. Shareholders vote for or against directors. But if Jobs suggests for an individual to be nominated, I doubt they wouldn't be at least considered. To say Jobs doesn't have any say is not true of how any company runs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane08 View Post

Further, since it is the board of directors that chooses the CEO, it would be a conflict of interest to have the decision up to Jobs. Its pretty clear that Steve was very pissed about Android when he saw they were including Apple patented tech, such as pinch to zoom, but he couldn't "fire" Schmidt.

Steve Jobs is considered the most iconic and powerful CEO in tech. If he suspects someone of stealing secrets from Apple, how can anyone believe he couldn't get enough board support to not only kick that individual off the board but also to go after him legally?
post #195 of 228
deleted
post #196 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

But I thought Facebook was also the enemy du jour since they're making an app to bypass the app store.

Man, with so many perceived enemies to hate it must make an Apple zealot's head cave in trying to keep 'em all straight.

I don't think the zealots are keeping 'em straight, which is why many posts don't make sense.
post #197 of 228
Schmidt knows all about Apples innovations. Or Android phones would still be clones of the Palm Treo.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #198 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Really?

Ah, the descent continues.

Next up: how Schmidt eats kittens for breakfast.

Pssst - here's a tip: I hear he's a Satan worshiper too! And a space alien!

Godwin's Law in three....two...

I was holding back, but I agree. It's time.

Earlier I suggested that "Apple would rather litigate than innovate" was quickly becoming a mantra for the Android camp. Had I taken it a step further I would have added that the nazi's and hitler enjoyed spreading propaganda too.

Seriously though, I wanna see a picture of Schmidt (or just about any notable person) feeding on dead kittens.
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #199 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Steve J.'s comment about Google stepping into Apple's space and not the other way around is what I'm basing my speculation upon...

That SJ comment is classic example of his "distortion of reality field". As far as I know, Apple never produced any mobile phones (except the joint product with Motorola). They never made public that they are developing iPhone until it was announced, so they entered the mobile business in that January 2007 keynote.

On the other hand, the information that Android, a creator of mobile OS, has been acquired by Google was public information since 2005, so technically, Google entered the mobile business before Apple and thus it might be ES pissed at SJ, not other way around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Apple tried going after look and feel in the 80s... fail... so now they are smart enough to go after particular patents.

As said earlier, the only great thing about the patent lawsuits is that majority of those ridiculous patents get voided by the court. Boy they patented it, but they know both multitouch and pinch-to-zoom is prior art and will be primal candidate for such dismissal, if ever brought to court.
post #200 of 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

Google acquired Android in 2005. Surprised about them releasing a mobile OS in 2008 ? Really?

Ridiculous.

The only surprise is that it took them so long.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainless View Post

That SJ comment is classic example of his "distortion of reality field". As far as I know, Apple never produced any mobile phones (except the joint product with Motorola). They never made public that they are developing iPhone until it was announced, so they entered the mobile business in that January 2007 keynote.

On the other hand, the information that Android, a creator of mobile OS, has been acquired by Google was public information since 2005, so technically, Google entered the mobile business before Apple and thus it might be ES pissed at SJ, not other way around.


The point that you're both missing is that before the iPhone came out, Android phones looked like a cheap copy of the Blackberry.

After the iPhone came out, Android started looking like a copy of iOS.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Google's Schmidt: Apple responding to Android with lawsuits, not innovation
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google's Schmidt: Apple responding to Android with lawsuits, not innovation