or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google Chairman Eric tells US senators Apple's Siri could pose 'competitive threat'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google Chairman Eric tells US senators Apple's Siri could pose 'competitive threat' - Page 6

post #201 of 232

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 5/4/12 at 12:28pm
post #202 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Is it?

With Google the complaints here seem to be that the company has used its strength in search to drive disproportionate advantage in other business areas.

But in all fairness, has not Apple's dominance in the mobile space allowed it to acquire capital that it uses to lock out competitors from critically-needed components?

Except you've missed the fact Apple is acting as the customer with these purchases, not the seller.

If Apple was buying 500M widget units per quarter but then only using 50M total units then I could see how this could be an illegal practice of using your market position to unfairly keep competitors out of the market but 1) that doesn't sound very cost effective, 2) that clearly isn't happening with Apple's products as they continue to outsell the market, and 3) Apple only controls 4% of the handset units.

So what anti-competitive law would that fall under? What exactly are you claiming is illegal wih customers buying up as much as they want to sell to a customer that is using as much as they can possibly get their hands on?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #203 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

As we explore definitions of "antitrust" here, we may want to tread carefully .....

Or perhaps you, and some of the the jerks here, should try and actually understand what "antitrust" means.

PS. Here's a clue. It's Google that's up in front of the U.S. Senate antitrust subcommittee... not Apple. Think about that.
post #204 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot View Post

Or perhaps you, and some of the the jerks here, should try and actually understand what "antitrust" means.

PS. Here's a clue. It's Google that's up in front of the U.S. Senate antitrust subcommittee... not Apple. Think about that.

Clearly "anti-trust" means Apple is evil whenever they make good business and good engineering decisions that make the company and their products more efficient and more cost effective which in turn makes them more desirable than other brands¡
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #205 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Is it?

With Google the complaints here seem to be that the company has used its strength in search to drive disproportionate advantage in other business areas.

But in all fairness, has not Apple's dominance in the mobile space allowed it to acquire capital that it uses to lock out competitors from critically-needed components?

Apple leverages deep pockets to gain supply chain edge over rivals - report
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ls_report.html

'Ultrabook' makers squeezed by Apple's control of metal chassis supply
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...is_supply.html

Supply chain expects Apple's Sept launch of iPhone 5 to boost memory prices
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ry_prices.html

As we explore definitions of "antitrust" here, we may want to tread carefully as they may apply equally across the board.

But Apple is buying such large quantities of components to make their own stuff. If Apple were just buying up components and hoarding them, that could be considered "antitrust." But it may well be that they simply want to have enough components to build product.
post #206 of 232
deleted
post #207 of 232
deleted
post #208 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Is it?

With Google the complaints here seem to be that the company has used its strength in search to drive disproportionate advantage in other business areas.

But in all fairness, has not Apple's dominance in the mobile space allowed it to acquire capital that it uses to lock out competitors from critically-needed components?

Apple leverages deep pockets to gain supply chain edge over rivals - report
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ls_report.html

'Ultrabook' makers squeezed by Apple's control of metal chassis supply
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...is_supply.html

Supply chain expects Apple's Sept launch of iPhone 5 to boost memory prices
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ry_prices.html

As we explore definitions of "antitrust" here, we may want to tread carefully as they may apply equally across the board.

But all of these effects on supply chain prices is the result of free market adjustments to Apple's buying power. If Apple can offer cash up front for supply guarantees, does it make them a monopoly? You would have to artificially control supply and pricing in order to prevent the free market from making up its own damn mind, thereby erasing Apple's "edge over rivals". Maybe you should change your handle to MarxRulez

"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 #209 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Sounds fair enough. So what specifically is Google selling in ways that its search provides an unfair advantage for?

I don't see anything offhand that is illegal about Google's practices. It was clear what MS was doing with IE was anti-competitve even if did make sense to tie a browser into an OS by the time the trial was finished. That's how these things work. We'll know — you'll know! — [if] Google was violating anti-trust laws long before they ever come into any real problems with the law over it. It's reactionary, not preventative, so I expect nothing to come of this little chitchat Schmidt had with the committee.


PS: If Apple continues to dominate the tablet market expect a civil suit against Apple claiming anti-trust, just like we saw with FairPlay in 2005 and with the AT&T/iPhone in 2008. The former being silly because Apple didn't require FairPlay — the content owners did — which is their right, and the latter is not something only Apple and AT&T partake in. Some might consider the latter illegal tying but there is a clear and obvious nature between a cellphone and a cellphone plan that doesn't make that practice anti-competitive.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #210 of 232
deleted
post #211 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

How can one believe that there's nothing illegal about Google's practices and also that those practices violate the law?

Way to leave off the first part of the sentence, DB. I did leave out the word 'if' but the context should have been more than enough.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #212 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Apple avoids being investigated for anti-trust only to the degree that its success is limited.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

But in all fairness, has not Apple's dominance in the mobile space allowed it to acquire capital that it uses to lock out competitors from critically-needed components?

How 'bout this for a considerate response?

Dominant or limited success? Make up your fucking mind!
post #213 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Is it?

With Google the complaints here seem to be that the company has used its strength in search to drive disproportionate advantage in other business areas.

But in all fairness, has not Apple's dominance in the mobile space allowed it to acquire capital that it uses to lock out competitors from critically-needed components?

Apple leverages deep pockets to gain supply chain edge over rivals - report
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ls_report.html

'Ultrabook' makers squeezed by Apple's control of metal chassis supply
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...is_supply.html

Supply chain expects Apple's Sept launch of iPhone 5 to boost memory prices
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ry_prices.html

As we explore definitions of "antitrust" here, we may want to tread carefully as they may apply equally across the board.

What you are describing is called a monopsony which also has rules like a monopoly, however, Apple hasn't broken any of those rules. Apple would need to use its cash reserves to buy up almost all components but NOT use them for the sole purpose of locking others out of the market OR use its buying power to force vendors to not sell to its competitors. What Apple is currently doing is simply open market forces at work and nothing untoward.
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 #214 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by freckledbruh View Post

What you are describing is called a monopsony which also has rules like a monopoly, however, Apple hasn't broken any of those rules. Apple would need to use its cash reserves to buy up almost all components but NOT use them for the sole purpose of locking others out of the market OR use its buying power to force vendors to not sell to its competitors. What Apple is currently doing is simply open market forces at work and nothing untoward.

I forgot about the monopsony claim. I can see why some would argue that but I don't see it since we're dealing with Apple securing a component from a vendor or vendors, not securing all components within a product category. Even if they were we'd still need proof Apple was securing them for preventing their competition from using them, not specifically using them themselves.

It's been over a half-decade since Apple was the largest NAND buyer in the world and I've yet to see any federal office come down on Apple for buying up NAND at great prices. As I understand it, since Apple is paying for built items, not naturally occurring items like silicon or bananas, there is no possible illegal lockout that Apple can be making to the market.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #215 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I forgot about the monopsony claim. I can see why some would argue that but I don't see it since we're dealing with Apple securing a component from a vendor or vendors, not securing all components within a product category. Even if they were we'd still need proof Apple was securing them for preventing their competition from using them, not specifically using them themselves.

It's been over a half-decade since Apple was the largest NAND buyer in the world and I've yet to see any federal office come down on Apple for buying up NAND at great prices. As I understand it, since Apple is paying for built items, not naturally occurring items like silicon or bananas, there is no possible illegal lockout that Apple can be making to the market.

Yep. That's why I wanted to point out that what he was describing is an actual economic term with rules and consequences and Apple has done nil, zilch, nada in that realm that would cause the government to intervene regarding its buying power.
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 #216 of 232
deleted
post #217 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Having already made such proud contributions, you can relax now and save your vocabulary for 2012.

You do all stick together, don't you?

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 #218 of 232
deleted
post #219 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

That rings a familiar bell...

And you have absolutely nothing better to do than to sift through thousands of posts from hundreds of users.

That clinches it for me. The trolls here are paid, and it's their ONLY job.

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 #220 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

... Maybe you should change your handle to MarxRulez

Best suggestion since he joined AI
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #221 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Best suggestion since he joined AI

I think he also joined under the name MacTripper in a previous life but I like this new name.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #222 of 232
deleted
post #223 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

That meme has already been addressed.

1. Not a meme.
2. That is in no way definitive.

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 232
It's a slippery slope.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=stelligent;1982781]To all those accusing Google of copying Apple, consider this:

Did Apple copy Google (and many others) by entering the Cloud computing field?

? What this makes absolutely no sense..."The Cloud" idea has been around a while, Apple did it's version of that UNIVERSAL idea, How can you stop someone from building server related services?

Did Apple copy Google with its iOS5 notification scheme?

Seems Google has no patents on notifications...I wonder who they borrowed it from?

Did Apple copy Google by adding speech recognition (even if they executed it better)?

No, because speech recognition is not Googles idea & has been around for years. Apple has had some sort of speak rec. in it's products for years, even before Google was Google. Siri is something completely different than speech recognition.

What is original about the whole Android concept/package, the big idea? Nothing. Tossing a few features on to something is not the same thing as a paradigm shifting grand idea. You seem to want to compare a snowflake to an avalanche & tell everybody that they are the same thing.
post #225 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

You logged back in just to add that?

Tip: You can only win one outstanding achievement award per year.

Having already made such proud contributions, you can relax now and save your vocabulary for 2012.

Oh you're keeping a score? How sweet.
post #226 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I don't discuss (or need to justify) my vote with anyone... Secret ballot!

...but I reserve the right to question anyone seeking my vote!

Exactly my point - question in advance of casting your ballot, once the outcome of the election is announced, live with it. No one asked for you to disclose your vote.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #227 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

It's a slippery slope.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

To all those accusing Google of copying Apple, consider this:

Did Apple copy Google (and many others) by entering the Cloud computing field?

? What this makes absolutely no sense..."The Cloud" idea has been around a while, Apple did it's version of that UNIVERSAL idea, How can you stop someone from building server related services?

Did Apple copy Google with its iOS5 notification scheme?

Seems Google has no patents on notifications...I wonder who they borrowed it from?

Did Apple copy Google by adding speech recognition (even if they executed it better)?

No, because speech recognition is not Googles idea & has been around for years. Apple has had some sort of speak rec. in it's products for years, even before Google was Google. Siri is something completely different than speech recognition.

What is original about the whole Android concept/package, the big idea? Nothing. Tossing a few features on to something is not the same thing as a paradigm shifting grand idea. You seem to want to compare a snowflake to an avalanche & tell everybody that they are the same thing.

Oh c'mon. Slippery slope my ass. You could easily say:

Did Google copy Windows Mobile with the phone app?

Did Google copy Windows Mobile with cut-copy-paste?

Did Google copy Windows Mobile with multitasking?

Did Google copy Apple with its revolutionary capacitive multitouch UI?

Did Google copy Linux by literally forking Linux to make Android?

Did Google copy Yahoo! with its Internet search engine (even if they executed it better)?

Did Google copy Sun/Oracle with its Java-ish VM, Dalvik?

"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 #228 of 232
deleted
post #229 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Oh c'mon. Slippery slope my ass. You could easily say:

Did Google copy Windows Mobile with the phone app?

Did Google copy Windows Mobile with cut-copy-paste?

Did Google copy Windows Mobile with multitasking?

Did Google copy Apple with its revolutionary capacitive multitouch UI?

Did Google copy Linux by literally forking Linux to make Android?

Did Google copy Yahoo! with its Internet search engine (even if they executed it better)?

Did Google copy Sun/Oracle with its Java-ish VM, Dalvik?

What the heck did you do? 2/3 of the words you attribute to me aren't even mine.

Regardless ... We can go on all day with this but, to me, the most important thing is that it's silly to keep insisting Google only copies and does not innovate (not saying that's your premise, but many others seem to insist on this). BTW, Apple did NOT invent multitouch - capacitative or otherwise. So the question "Did Google copy Apple with its revolutionary capacitive multitouch UI?" is a non-starter.

As for "Did Google copy Sun/Oracle with its Java-ish VM, Dalvik?" The answer seems to be yes.
post #230 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

It's a slippery slope.

To all those accusing Google of copying Apple, consider this:

Did Apple copy Google (and many others) by entering the Cloud computing field?

? What this makes absolutely no sense..."The Cloud" idea has been around a while, Apple did it's version of that UNIVERSAL idea, How can you stop someone from building server related services?

Did Apple copy Google with its iOS5 notification scheme?

Seems Google has no patents on notifications...I wonder who they borrowed it from?

Did Apple copy Google by adding speech recognition (even if they executed it better)?

No, because speech recognition is not Googles idea & has been around for years. Apple has had some sort of speak rec. in it's products for years, even before Google was Google. Siri is something completely different than speech recognition.

What is original about the whole Android concept/package, the big idea? Nothing. Tossing a few features on to something is not the same thing as a paradigm shifting grand idea. You seem to want to compare a snowflake to an avalanche & tell everybody that they are the same thing.

If you examine carefully your own words and my original questions, you will see that you have answered yourself. But first, please fix the quotes because it's leading to a mess.
post #231 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Agreed.

People are arguing over whether Google has a "monopoly" or not but ignoring the fact that true absolute monopolies rarely if ever exist. Oligarchical control is essentially the same thing. In Canada for instance there are three big cell companies that control 80-90% of the market. They are all separate companies and no one has a "monopoly," but they all have the same prices and the same plans and they all treat the customers like dogs.

Chasing after the "true monopoly" and trying to peg Google or Microsoft with that term is a hopeless and essentially useless task. All of these companies are far too big and have far too much control over our lives. They have more control that the average Government and yet no one voted them in and no one can tell them what to do.

But that's what happens when you live in an essentially fascist society. :-/

How is Apple almost getting there? It's not even close. It has higher prices than its competition and a much lower market share and is content to make it's money with a lower market share.
post #232 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

So, why is "big government" (that the citizen has some modicum of control over), a bad thing and "big corporations" (which the citizen has no control at all over), "good."

I don't really expect you to answer anything reasonable here as your comment about how we control companies "through our dollars," shows a rather complete lack of understanding about politics and economics. I'm just pointing out the giant gaping hole in your argument/ideology with the arctic wind raging through it.

I think it's hilarious you think that "we" have control over the government - the exact same forces you cite as impotence against big corporations is squared when it comes to government.

You want the shining example? In America if you vote for democrat or a republican congratulations - your part of the problem and why "we" have little control over the political process. This whole two-party system bullshit is a fabricated system that works perfectly at keeping everyone talking about trivial bullshit and not of issues of substance.

Quote:
Americans are always going on about the evils of big government but they let huge, un-elected corporations rule the country (and most of the rest of the world), essentially unchecked and without even guidelines as to how these entities are supposed to act, let alone actual rules and regulations.

Really? We have more regulations than at any other time. The US Code is so unwieldy, it's not uncommon to hear lawyers who deal with it every day comment that it's probably illegal to cross the street in there somewhere.

We have MORE than enough regulations. Now, if you want to argue we don't have enough enforcement or oversight - on that I will wholeheartedly agree.

But again this class warfare bullshit of "corporations" evil and "government" good (or vice versa) is counter-productive. Corporations and governments are both creations of men. As long as people are involved, they will be imperfect and flawed and therefor should be monitored.

The problem is that takes actually paying attention, possibly getting out of your comfort zone getting involved and not just buying off on the soundbite or label. There are tons of keyboard jockey's like on these forums that are willing to pontificate about these subjects and pretend to be smarter than they are - but unless you are hitting the pavement, trying to educate and sway people to pay attention your just flapping in the wind and as much a problem as that which you criticize.

Quote:
Americans are always also going on about "freedom" and letting the people decide what they want to do for themselves, but individual american citizens have demonstrably fewer freedoms than European or Canadian citizens, and no protection at all from corporate "mega-citizens who actually enjoy more rights and freedoms than the people themselves.

And who's fault is that? History - indeed, American history in particular, has proven that the people have the power. What I want to know is when are the American people going to wake up, reject the bullshit two parties and move in a new direction for real and sincere change? And no, crap like "occupy wall street" isn't the answer - its the same old establishment BS disguised as counter-culture. Counter culture to me was the civil rights movement - occupy wall street are a bunch of anarchists and media whores with quite a few liberal shills sprinkled in...

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain indeed (excellent movie that was on the other night and I caught the end of...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Google Chairman Eric tells US senators Apple's Siri could pose 'competitive threat'
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google Chairman Eric tells US senators Apple's Siri could pose 'competitive threat'