or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Steve Jobs vowed to 'destroy' Google Android, called it a 'stolen product'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Steve Jobs vowed to 'destroy' Google Android, called it a 'stolen product' - Page 6

post #201 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by iKol View Post

Because like maybe he agreed with it?

Maybe. Maybe not.

The fact that you had to use the word "maybe" confirms that it is troublesome to draw conclusions from this out-of-context snippet. Yeah, I know you were being facetious, but that really only works when you know you are right. But you don't, so it doesn't.

Thompson
post #202 of 372

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 5/4/12 at 12:27pm
post #203 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Android is given away for FREE. Thus by that very definition it CANNOT generate earnings for Google. Thus no need to mention it in an earnings meeting.

I beg to differ with your conclusion in a big way. While it's true that Google gets no compensation from the handset makers for their use of Android, Google is doing this (and spending much development $$$ on it) for a reason that comes back around to money.

Eventually, the question must arise: "How is that Android experiment working out for you in terms of capturing advertising revenue via Mobile search?" Data exists that can estimate the answer, and Google already knows the cost. One day, there will be a side-by-side comparison in order to determine Android's return on investment.

Thus, they must eventually mention it, unless the stock holders just decide to turn a blind eye and not ask the question.

Thompson
post #204 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

So the problem isn't the stealing, but merely the frequency of the stealing?

What is the amount of stealing one should find acceptable? Is it a time-weighted rate of theft (e.g., "7 thefts per year") or an aggregate count (e.g., "no more than 20 thefts overall")?

Reminds me of the US Senator who, when confronted about Abu Ghraib, said, "At least we're not Saddam Hussein".

As in every area of life - shockingly - it's the magnitude of the crime that matters. The iOS notification center is activated in a similar way to the Android notification center. It could, quite easily, work a different way. If Google had a patent on the notification center, they could sue Apple, and if Apple lost they could easily fix it. They probably wouldn't lose though, because the way notification center is activated is very similar to the way other tasks are achieved in iOS, and Apple itself created the set of multitouch gestures that define the possibilities in multitouch UIs. Meanwhile, Android owes its entire existence to iOS. It would be a completely different product if iOS had not existed. It's the difference between stealing someone's identity and cleaning out their bank account and taking a grape at the supermarket. So yeah, if you somehow had failed noticed before now, typically the magnitude and, yes, frequency of a crime is both legally and morally relevant.
post #205 of 372

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 5/4/12 at 12:27pm
post #206 of 372

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 5/4/12 at 12:27pm
post #207 of 372
So according to some posters here the fault now isn't that Google copied iOS straight up but rather that, sensing an emerging change in the market, they modified android OS accordingly?

Evil.
post #208 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke View Post

As in every area of life - shockingly - it's the magnitude of the crime that matters. The iOS notification center is activated in a similar way to the Android notification center. It could, quite easily, work a different way. If Google had a patent on the notification center, they could sue Apple, and if Apple lost they could easily fix it. They probably wouldn't lose though, because the way notification center is activated is very similar to the way other tasks are achieved in iOS, and Apple itself created the set of multitouch gestures that define the possibilities in multitouch UIs. Meanwhile, Android owes its entire existence to iOS. It would be a completely different product if iOS had not existed. It's the difference between stealing someone's identity and cleaning out their bank account and taking a grape at the supermarket. So yeah, if you somehow had failed noticed before now, typically the magnitude and, yes, frequency of a crime is both legally and morally relevant.

Should no one else have joined in on the party apple started?

They changed the game sure but they were never the only players and it's foolish of you to hold fault in Google for playing the game.
post #209 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicNReason View Post

I never once said that Apple didn't influence Android. In fact, it influenced it a lot. But since you get so riled up over someone simply disagreeing with you I have no reason to discuss this with you. You're clearly one of those people who have some predetermined speech about Android the moment someone brings it up. Especially since you apparently know more than everyone. I've not once heard of confirmation that Android changed its product design post iPhone. Do I think it did? Hell yes I do. Am I certain it did? No. And neither should you. You see a picture of a very old prototype and make hundreds of conclusions about it. That's not someone I'd like to discuss things with. I'd much rather continue my discussion esummers, sorry.

I'm not riled up. I like a lot of what Android brings. But where you Android was 'inspired' I see they cloned. Samsung just took it a step further and made the cloning more blatant. Google has certainly done some new and innovative stuff with Android, but at it core, it's foundational UX is meant to mimic the iPhone.

To be fair, I work in RIM-town as a software developer (not at RIM) and until last year Google's Canadian development office was around the corner from me and in that office they have been doing a lot of mobile development, pre-iPhone launch and way before Android. They don't all contribute to Android proper, but certainly are very involved with Android as a platform. We are a fairly small city and developers mingle a lot. The people I've known from the Reqwireless days right up to Google today don't kids themselves the way you do. They are under no illusions that Android was more than inspired, but they are proud of what they have done since to differentiate themselves since.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #210 of 372
Is there a video up of that presentation Tim gave in the last picture?
post #211 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99 View Post

Kettle mean pot

Palm TX from 2005

Are you seriously trying to compare that horrible stylus using, shitty browsing, low-rez, clunky, thing with nav arrows to the original iPhone?

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #212 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Are you seriously trying to compare that horrible stylus using, shitty browsing, low-rez, clunky, thing with nav arrows to the original iPhone?

Hey now. It doesn't seem to matter if the way it looks or even works is different. Remember?

-_-
post #213 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Are you seriously trying to compare that horrible stylus using, shitty browsing, low-rez, clunky, thing with nav arrows to the original iPhone?

2005 had certain technological limitation. Nevertheless, some companies were trying even then. Everyone who followed learned from their experience and example. It's a good thing.
post #214 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Hey now. It doesn't seem to matter if the way it looks or even works is different. Remember?

-_-

You still don't get it. The Palm and the iPhone have similarities based on features that are common at some level, but at some other level of implementation their differences and merits of said differences can be debated. Some people believe that the differences between certain mobile devices and their respective OSes are trivial when compared at a level that is pertinent to their function, whereas other areas of differentiation create vastly different functionality. You see a great chasm between iOS and Android, others see a tiny crack. Your defense of your perception isn't going to change theirs. Get over it.
post #215 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

A little knowledge of the history of Apple's relationship with Xerox during that time would help greatly at this point... but I can't be bothered...

Exactly, island hermit. Ignorance is what it is and should be ignored for to feed it only generates more ignorance. And we have enough of that around.

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Reply
post #216 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Hey now. It doesn't seem to matter if the way it looks or even works is different. Remember?

-_-

To be fair, the Palm doesn't have rounded corners and has a nifty handgrip shape. Plus the "home" button doesn't look recessed.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #217 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Should no one else have joined in on the party apple started?

They changed the game sure but they were never the only players and it's foolish of you to hold fault in Google for playing the game.

The way the game is played, you either avoid stepping on other people's toes or you innovate on top of past innovation extensively enough that you have something other people want, and then you're in a position to negotiate. Google operates by copying something and giving it away for free. Its innovation is in sales. It's also the case that typically people "joining the party" have some connection with the party already, whereas Google is joining because it's worried about revenue for a completely unrelated product, and that's why its IP position is/was so abnormally weak.

I think what Google's doing here is an example of exactly why we need IP law. A company that relies on a revenue stream from a different market, entered another market and copied the IP of another company, simply because it wanted to ensure that company wouldn't become the market leader. If patent trolls are the dark side of having IP law, what Google did is the dark side of not having enforceable IP law, where innovators have their products stolen by companies whose goal is simply to ensure that they don't succeed because they're worried about their own market position.

I don't know what the outcome of all these patent suits will be - I suspect Google will get away with it - but quite apart from the minutiae details of IP law, I think if Google does get away with it, that's every bit as much an injustice as patent trolls who do nothing but collect patents and earn a living suing people.
post #218 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

To be fair, the Palm doesn't have rounded corners and has a nifty handgrip shape. Plus the "home" button doesn't look recessed.

Nor a capacitive touch screen, nor multitouch, nor a real browser, nor a decent music/audio playback, nor usable screen for mutimedia, nor built in store to buy music.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #219 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by iKol View Post

Again sounds like you should never allow a competitor on you board in the first place. Looks like trying to gang up on RIM and MSFT simply backfired.

Apple didn't have a competitor on their board. At the time Apple accepted Google onto the board, Google was not a competitor. As soon as Google became a competitor, they threw them off the board.

If Google had a shred of ethics, Schmidt would have designed the minute Google started talking about getting into mobile phones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

That's true but the million dollar question is would iOS exist today if it weren't for the crappy mobile OSs that preceded it?

Well, if there were GOOD mobile phones, Apple might have decided that it was a market they didn't want to compete in. Apple might have chosen to go after a different market instead. But who cares? Unless you have a way to change history, the fact is that Apple saw a void a few years ago and went after it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

In other words:

We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas. - Steve Jobs[/url]

You can't protect an idea - ever. If he thinks he's the only one who can steal ideas he's a big fucking hypocrite.

It never ceases to amaze me how little the phandroid shills know about intellectual property.

IDEAS can not be protected by trademarks, patents, copyright, trade dress or any other intellectual property rights. Ideas are free for the world to use - so there's nothing wrong with Jobs' statement.

IMPLEMENTATION, OTOH, can be protected by trademarks, copyright, patents, trade dress, and so on. Google, Samsung, HTC, etc have copied Apple's implementation. It's not the fact that they used the same ideas that's an issue. It's the fact that they chose to use exactly the same implementation as Apple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

And what happens when WP7 and it's exact use of multi-touch gestures becomes popular? What happens when Windows 8 comes out? You going to wage war with them too Tim Cook?

If they violate Apple's patents, then Apple very well might.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

It is ridiculous. Last time I checked, fine art like a Warhol isn't sold in the canned goods section of a grocery store. A picture of a can of soup is not a rip off of soup.....its art. Android is not making a collage of iPhones, their making iPhone clones. It is distasteful and repugnant and has nothing to do with genius of "stealing" in the context of art. Sheesh, is everyone going to start calling juvenile delinquents "geniuses" because they do lots of stealing?

Exactly. If Samsung wanted to paint a picture of an iPhone and have it displayed at the Louvre, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The claim that Samsung's phones can copy the iPhone because they're art is insane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

This is where Jobs really lost most of his grip on reality. Without Android, we'd prob be stuck with no multitasking, classic garbage notifications and no cloud-like services. If the Android platform were to suddenly fall into the abyss, you clowns would be wise to hope for a new worthy competitor to rise from the ashes.

Nonsense. Apple has an unrelenting drive to improve their own products even when there's no real competition. Mac OS improved significantly from 1982 to 1990 - even though Windows didn't yet exist. Similarly, look at the early iPhones. iPhone 3G and 3GS were marked improvements over the original iPhone even though there was no real competition. iPad 2 was a major improvement over the original - again, even though there was no competition.

Now, competition might tell Apple where to focus their energies and might have an impact on future products, but claiming that Apple would not have improved without competition is absurd. Apple's efforts are largely directed at making the greatest products that existing technology can handle. From a business perspective, the faster they can improve existing products, the more rapidly customers replace their existing products - even if there's no competition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

So the problem isn't the stealing, but merely the frequency of the stealing?

No. It's the difference between 'stealing' an idea which is not protected and stealing an implementation which is.

It is also the difference between buying rights to use a technology from a willing seller (Siri or Xerox, for example) and simply taking it without permission (Google, Samsung)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99 View Post

Kettle mean pot

Palm TX from 2005

ROTFLMAO.

If you want to cite the Palm TX, you really should show the Newton from around 1992. That's far more similar to the TX than the TX is to the iPhone.
"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 #220 of 372
Steve Jobs can destroy me anytime.....
post #221 of 372
You see?

He wanted to stifle competition.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #222 of 372


Samsung i330

Circa 2002

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #223 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

He wanted to stifle theft.

Fixed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Samsung i330

Circa 2002

APPLE OBVIOUSLY COPIED THIS. THIS IMAGE IS IRREFUTABLE PROOF.

Seriously, stay out of this argument. You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #224 of 372
Didn't Android have wireless synching a couple years before iOS, among other features?

Are Apple products 100% original ideas that Jobs pulled out of his ass with no influences?

Hypocrite much?
post #225 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Didn't Android have wireless synching a couple years before iOS, among other features?

Are Apple products 100% original ideas that Jobs pulled out of his ass with no influences?

Hypocrite much?

Go back and read my last post.

There's a big difference between using an idea and an implementation. Apple does the former. Google thrives on the latter.
"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 #226 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

There's a big difference between using an idea and an implementation. Apple does the former. Google thrives on the latter.

So what is the difference then? Explain it. Clearly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Fixed.
APPLE OBVIOUSLY COPIED THIS. THIS IMAGE IS IRREFUTABLE PROOF.

Seriously, stay out of this argument. You don't have a clue what you're talking about.


You cant say that Apple was the originator/inventor of a touch screen based PDA + phone.

There is nothing "revolutionary" Apple has done at least on the product side.

What they HAVE "revolutionized" is in the way ordinary people now knew of a technology product.

All of this was thanks to Apple's marketing team, aka the fluff.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #227 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Go back and read my last post.

There's a big difference between using an idea and an implementation. Apple does the former. Google thrives on the latter.

what implementations has Android "Stolen" btw?
post #228 of 372
Android is no more "stolen" from iOS than iOS is "stolen" from Windows Mobile, which is to say Windows Mobile is "stolen" from Palm.
post #229 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

You cant say that Apple was the originator/inventor of a touch screen based PDA + phone.

Oh, good. Glad we cleared that up. Except no one is saying that, so your argument is meaningless.

Quote:
What they HAVE "revolutionized" is in the way ordinary people now knew of a technology product.

Define "knew of". What does "knew of" mean to you?

Quote:
All of this was thanks to Apple's marketing team, aka the fluff.

Except nope. It pretty much entirely hinges on iPhone OS and its ability to do what no other system prior had.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #230 of 372
Not really.


Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99 View Post

Kettle mean pot

Palm TX from 2005


iPhone
post #231 of 372
Not Picasso, but T.S. Elliot.
Quote:
One of the surest tests [of the superiority or inferiority of a poet] is the way in which a poet borrows. Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is unique, utterly different than that from which it is torn; the bad poet throws it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest.

For those unable to see the distinction:
http://brianericford.tumblr.com/post.../great-artists
Quote:
  • Copying involves reproducing something wholesale and leaving the original intact.
  • Stealing involves taking something and making it your own; the original owner is left with nothing.

This was linked to by Gruber, whom I completely detest, but he is right. And Ford is dead on when he says the T.S. Elliot's comment is "the most apt description of the difference between Apple’s vision for iOS and Google’s for Android I’ve ever read." It really is.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #232 of 372
Or if you prefer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99 View Post

Kettle mean pot

Palm TX from 2005


iPhone
post #233 of 372
And they all are stolen from Apple's Newton.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shidell View Post

Android is no more "stolen" from iOS than iOS is "stolen" from Windows Mobile, which is to say Windows Mobile is "stolen" from Palm.
post #234 of 372
And the Palm kind of looks like this. Hmmm.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Nor a capacitive touch screen, nor multitouch, nor a real browser, nor a decent music/audio playback, nor usable screen for mutimedia, nor built in store to buy music.
post #235 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

And they all are stolen from Apple's Newton.

Is your argument that because Apple created the Newton in 1987 (or thereabout), that no designer of mobile technology should be able to use any abstract idea involved in it? Form, function, design, color, input, output, etc.?

This argument is ridiculous. Would you argue that Ford should claim intellectual property on the Model T, and that all other vehicles are stealing from his design?

Is that really your agument? Or do you simply want someone to acknowledge that Android has derived in some way from an Apple Newton?
post #236 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post



Samsung i330

Circa 2002

Are you still droning on about touch screens? The capacitive touch screens are one of the ways Apple set their iPhone apart (unlike that resistive POS you pasted). Were there other phones using capacitive touch? Maybe, but none implemented it in a user-friendly, intuitive, multi-touch manner the way Apple did. No one. You can't say that about Android because there is always the iPhone getting in the way.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #237 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Quote:
There's a big difference between using an idea and an implementation. Apple does the former. Google thrives on the latter.

So what is the difference then? Explain it. Clearly.

I already did.

Ideas can not be legally protected. It is impossible to get a valid copyright, patent, trademark, or design patent on an ideal.

IMPLEMENTATION can be patented, trademarked, copyrighted, etc - so it is legally protectable.

There is nothing legally wrong with using an idea. It IS wrong to use an implementation which is protected by intellectual property laws.

Example:

Idea: connecting devices wirelessly

Implementation: Using a specific circuitry and specific radio wave communication covered by patent xxxxxxxxx.
"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 #238 of 372
Why is Apple fracking with Samsung anywho? Do they NOT make the processors in the phones? Do they NOT hold VALUABLE patents?
post #239 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post

A lot of people quote this prototype picture as evidence that google drastically changed android post iphone to copy it. Yet, if you actually look at the OS, it seems that the opposite is true; the core of android remained mostly the same.

This is what google eventually released:


So, show me what has drastically changed, because I don't see it:

The notification system is largely the same as the prototype; they didn't change it to match iOS'.
The desktop was expanded to include widgets; a feature that iOS doesn't have.

The 'desktop' was expanded to fit app icons, which were previously limited to the app launcher dock. It was also made larger to make it more functional as a multimedia device, something that was, at best, as secondary consideration prior to the iPhone (and shitty walkman/MP3 phones don't count)
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post

The dock was already in place in the prototype, so its not copied from iOS.

No. Their dock was the home for all app icons. It was the app launcher instead of just a home for the 4 most common apps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post

The navigation buttons remained the same; they didn't copy iOS' singular home button.

keyboardless phones, were almost unheard of and an major point of derision when the iPhone launched. The Android you show does have a keyboard, but it is obvious the best selling Android models are moving away from dependence on physical keyboard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post

The prototype was already touch capable, so they didn't lift that from iOS either.

It was not the primary input source. The UI was not built completely around a touch screen. It was not multitouch. It was resistive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post

The form factor changed from a candybar QWERTY keyboard to a slide out QWERTY keyboard, so even that is not copied from the iPhone.

The slideout keyboard is an afterthought meant to appease those users that still think they need a physical keyboard, but since the needed to go toward the iPhone-like larger screen, then had to make it a slideout. Otherwise you end up with a 9" long phone. The slideout was copied from Apple, obviously, but it was made necessary by their other rip on Apple, a full screen device.

Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post

Now, did the iPhone affected android in ways? Of course, you'll be delusional to think that google didn't consider features in the iPhone prior to releasing Android. However considering how similar the core of the final release of android is to the prototype, you have to be equally as delusional to think that google drastically changed android to be a clone of iOS.

The prototype was more similar, in almost every way to the BlackBerry of it's time. Not surprising, since Android was birthed to be a BB clone and not a iPhone clone. You could hardly look at most Androids and think the are now more similar to BB's than to iPhones (except those BB's that are very obvious reactions to the iPhones success).

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #240 of 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Android stole UI elements from iOS.

Okay, so let's play the hypothetical game. Let's say Android did steal UI elements from iOS.

Are you angry that Android stole those elements?

If you are, are you equally angry at Apple for stealing Android's notification system, or wireless update system, for iOS?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Steve Jobs vowed to 'destroy' Google Android, called it a 'stolen product'
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Steve Jobs vowed to 'destroy' Google Android, called it a 'stolen product'