Biographer says Steve Jobs was legitimately infuriated by Android - Page 4

Wow. How does Apple attract so many of this type of person?

P.S. Is Apple also the truth and the light?

He sincerely believed that he was infertile.


/s

Well, Apple took the idea, hired the ORIGINAL engineers and re-invented it to make it a REAL product for the average consumer, which Xerox wasn't interested in doing and THEN Microsoft and everyone and their mother did. Tim has actually been running the company on a day to day basis for years as the COO, it is just that they get media attention on issues that got to the point because of Foxconn's management. Corporate Dividends is NOT Tim's idea, it comes from the Board of DIrectors. If they weren't ready to issue dividends, then that comes down from the Board of Directors.

You have to also understand that a lot of problems that are of legal nature have to have it go through the Legal Counsel's entire digestive tract a few times before they act on it. You know Corporate Attorneys are.

Anyone with a properly working frontal lobe knows Android is an blatant rip-off of the iPhone. I have no interest, and and am not the least bit convinced, by the trolls here that try to argue otherwise.

So why hasn't Apple sued Google to the ground for such obvious copy-catting and IP theft? There are no simple answers because the situation is quite complex.

What made the first iPhone so groundbreaking and game-changing was how it combined an exhaustive suite of Apple-owned inventions, patents, and UI breakthroughs, with existing licensed technologies into an industry disrupting device. It set the mobile industry scrambling for a competitive response.

But the iPhone's brilliance can be ascribed to the sum of its various technological parts, and that sum is not patentable. So what Apple did was patent the hundreds of inventions that went into the whole. That should have been enough to prevent a copycat like Android from happening. But it wasn't. Why?

First, let's take a look at Google and Apple's business models:

Apple's product: Consumer electronics
Apple's customer: You (consumer)

Google's product: You (your personal information)
Google's customer: Advertisers

Google doesn't care about consumers, and is not directly interested in making great products for people. That's why Google's customer service is non-existent. It doesn't care about you. It only wants your personal, and preferable private, information. That is why its services are 'free'. The real price you pay is your privacy.

So Google wants as much personal information from as many people as possible, and a huge part of this strategy is mobile. That is why it bought Android, which was a Blackberry clone. When iPhone was announced, Google rightfully changed course and started reworking Android to be an iPhone competitor. However Google didn't have anything close to Apple's levels of originality and innovation. So it copied, which was a calculated gamble. And ultimately a smart business move.

Google played its part brilliantly at making an iPhone clone. For example Google made enough minor modifications to each of its me-too features that would hopefully limit potential patent violation.

Meanwhile Apple licensed certain Google services such as Google Maps, so a direct lawsuit between the two giants would endanger those agreements and hurt Apple more than Google.

Also, there are anti-trust issues with Apple trying to take down a competitor, especially if the iPhone concept as a whole can't be defended.

Finally, Apple obviously did the math and realized that going head-to-head with Goggle would cause significant damage to both companies. So it went after third party hardware licensees instead.

As we've known for a while, Google is officially evil. It is not a company in the market of selling great technology but a company in the business of selling your personal information to advertisers. And having a dominant mobile platform is crucial to advancing that MO.

What I find most amusing are Google fanboys who are duped into the buying Android's "open" philosophy. Android is only open because Google is incapable of making Apple-like hardware (so far), and only desires to amass as much personal information as possible. If Google were able to copy Apple's end-to-end ecosystem, it would do so in a heartbeat.

I don't think Apple can take down Android. What it can and will do is continue to innovate while better protecting itself against copycats and clones. Hopefully that will lead to competitors that offer true alternatives and their own innovation (Windows Phone 7, although problematic, is on the right track).

As for Android. I actually had a Droid X for a year as a company phone. It was not very good mostly due to a sluggish UI, intermittently unresponsive keyboard, malware, inability to run OS updates, app incompatibility, terrible Flash performance, and poor half-day battery life. This is what I got when I chose a company that didn't care about consumers, and chose to copy instead of innovate.

To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.--Soft you now!
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins remember'd!
― William Shakespeare, Hamlet

I tried to get them banned but somehow the admin people are sleeping. These Trolls you mention stepped over some serious border lines. These postes are far beyond anything acceptable and they push this forum deliberately into a s@@t pit.

Ahhhhh, so this is the source of your misplaced anger. I mentioned setting a bad example earlier, I really hope you try to not speak poorly of their father around your step children. Even if he's terrible, and I'll take your word for it that he is, kids try to be like their parents naturally. Telling a child their parent is bad doesn't help the child avoid the same mistakes, it just ruins their self esteem.
Sometimes calling a spade a spade is a bad choice and not nearly as brave as people think. Sometimes it's destructive. In this case, to children.

Wow. Ok, my first computer, I built from scratch. I laid out the PCB, etched it, populated it, etc. It was from my own design. This was because in the 1980s it was pretty expensive to buy a computer and I wanted to learn anyway. I've been around technology for those decades in question, and am well aware of the state of the art in UI over that period.

When you tell a blatant lie like you did above, and you act smug about it, you really just embarrass yourself.

The sad thing is, I think you lack the self awareness sufficient to be embarrassed about it.

And that, I am kinda shocked at.

I am starting to think these android scum are 18 years old... which means they were 13 when the iPhone came out, which means as long as they've been "conscious" touch screen phones have been standard.

They project their own ignorance onto us and think they we can't just point to the history books.

So, not only shameless and uneducated and dishonest, but stupid too.

Here is my take. There is a very large amount of fragmentation with Android. They don't have a very good way of creating THEIR own egosystem. Apple is just flat out better at it. Google is seen as a search company that bought YouTube. Google's whole way of doing business is EVERYTHING IS FREE except ad clicks, which they want people to do. Personally, I think some things with Open Source is good, but sometimes it creates a FREE FOR ALL and that creates chaos and uncertainty of the direction. Corporations, many individuals, other institutions don't want chaos. Chaos isn't good.

Judging from Google's corporate culture and surroundings, it looks like a playground for tech children with no structure. They don't have what I see as any real taste in their GUI, their web site design, their marketing, etc. They obviously have a sense of humor that is cute, but sometimes it is kind of immature for a company of their size. The name alone is something synonymous with a company not to be taken seriously. Would you buy a car from a company named Google? It sounds like they make high tech toy doll.. Hey, it's a Google. That's my first impression with them when I first heard the name. And they still haven't made me take them seriously. Hey, I have a Samsung Galaxy with Google Android version Ice Cream Sandwhich. WTF!! That sound like a problem not a business or communication tool.

I have to say I do think Android is currently on it's way to oblivion. The fault lines that exist now among manufacturers and Google are pretty obvious. Not all of them will break out their own version, but just enough will to make the current mess that is the Android market look organized. Apple's real strength is in their ability to play the cell companies off against each other. If ATT and Verizon have enough clout they will force the manufacturers to cut them in on the revenue stream and this will create chaos with each country having it's own couple of versions of Android.

The real question about any settlement is how much money will Apple get and how crippled will the version that works around all of the Apple patents they are unwilling to license. If Apple gets 10 times Googles current take or $17.50 a handset and don't have to give all Android access to all their IP, then it will only be a matter of time until Android dies.

The children of Android are another question. What will some one do with the current source code after they have forked it? Will Microsoft and Nokia claw their way back from the graveyard? Can Samsung learn to innovate rather than copy?

Well, if they fork the android source, they're still going to be in violation of the patents, which means either they can't' do business for 20 years, or they have to pay Apple licensing fees.

I assume that this is the android prototype you're referencing:


Here is the HTC Dream aka G1, widely considered the first android phone, released approx 1 year after the iphone:


So, what drastic changes did google make to android to make it a verbatim copy of iOS?

The notification system remained largely unchanged, and completely different from the one on the iPhone.
The desktop functionality was expanded to include widgets... instead of being reduced to a grid of icons, like the iPhone.
The dock was replaced with a shortcut to the app drawer... unlike the iPhone
The standard android buttons remained the same, and not replaced with a single home button, like the iPhone.
The form factor went from a candybar portrait QWERTY to a landscape slide out QWERTY, instead of the candybar form of the iPhone.

If google's intent was to copy iOS verbatim, they could've done a much better job.

Ok, name this touch screen cell phone, with apps, and multi-touch that existed in 1992.

The cellphone industry barely existed, let along smartphones.

But if you're right, you should be able to name one.

So name it.


You think there was an iPhone in 1992 and I'm the "dimwit". All you have are insults and lies, which tells us everything we could want to know about you,.

Wow. This really is a lost cause. You point out their lies are lies and they just make up more lies.

I think they're pathological. Its like a religion. They'll never see because they're incapable of seeing anything other than their ideological perspective.

This is why they don't care about the facts or history, or any of it.

Like mindless zombies.

I reported your post for breaking forum rules. Try having an argument without insulting, it only reflects back on you anyway.

If you're so savvy about technology, then you should know about the technology preceding the iPhone. Symbian had apps and app stores; resistive, infrared, and capacitive touch phones had been made; and multitouch was demoed by Microsoft among others years before the iPhone. So your original post was wrong. I may have been wrong about "decades", it certainly feels like that now, but even a couple of years before is still before the iPhone.

You started with the insults. 1992? That assumes two decades back from now, which can be inferred from my post where I used the same word as you had; the gist was that those things existed before the iPhone, which is only 5 years old.

Please... this phone is obviously a rip-off of the Nokia 770 Internet Tablet from 2005. They just slapped a GSM radio on it... /s

Symbian has not been around for "decades", the Ericsson R380, the first Symbian phone was released in 2000.

You are kidding!

Nothing can be as bad as this thread. And no Mods or Admins to stop this garbage.

It's still much older than the iPhone. Don't get hung up on the "decades" poor word choice, I explained that above already.

What lies am I making up in my post. If I was mistaken in any of my assertions, please point them out.

Everyone gets an opinion. You can even pretend you have all the facts and render judgements on the worth of another person.

Personally I'm glad to have discovered the motivation behind someone being a jerk. Lots of times I'm left wondering why, but not this time.

"What'cha doing dad?"

"Oh, just trolling an internet forum like a 12 year old."

"Why"

"Because I think it's funny to get people irritated and see if they lose their shit."

"I wish I had a grownup dad."

Look, everything you've reasoned is clear and accurate. Everything you've ascribed to his comments is as well, including his attempt to disavow his own BS and credit it to you! But why are you bothering?

That person obviously meant to name himself "Dr.Trollio", but he can't spell any better than he thinks or argues.

And you clearly know that, too, so, again, why are you bothering with the idiot?

Here is my response to Android fans that bash Apple.

http://androidcommunity.com/signal-i...date-20120405/

READ AND WEEP. ICE CREAM SANDWHICH IS MELTING!!!! OH NO!!!!!!!

Actually, and I've said it before, I think some of these guys are paid by AI to get up the click count.

Too late.

J.

No, seriously, he might be at lunch or having fun reading the comments of adding more stories to cover.

That statement is full of irony.

Before January 2007:

NOTHING looked like the iPhone.

As of March 2012:

EVERYTHING looks like the iPhone.

THEY'RE HOLDING IT WRONG!!!!!!


Looool!!!!!!!!!

Hahahahah, best joke eva!!!!

help me I been possessed by a fandroid

Mwuahahahahah!!!

The only redeeming feature about reading through this foodfight was seeing Zither get in bed with Hellacool. These two were meant for each other.

I used to build computers back in the 1970's for a small company (Comark, anybody ever heard of it?). I remember the engineers being ecstatic when cases became available with a detachable keyboard.

The first computer I bought was an Apple. At the time, it was a good machine. 128k of RAM!

Google can't do anything right!



/fanboi

I've been to religious forums. I've been to political forums.

And I've never seen any forum like this one. Apple fans are ardent.

Proof we shouldn't leave Latin lying around for the kids to misuse.

It's not complete proof, as in a criminal trial. It is, however, very good circumstantial evidence.

I'm thinking you don't mean, "legitimately," which means the case is still to be proven. I think you mean "really." Steve was really very mad.

Just ask larry he knows! Steve Jobs was just trying to rally the troops he didn't really mean it.

Lol Page is such a dope

It's fascinating how so many tech nerds got suckered into Android's "open" BS. All Google is doing is finding ways to cast the widest net for people's personal info. And having Android be open source is one way to do it.

Google is not the least bit interested in 'open'. It's fantasy to compare Android to genuine open projects like Linux.

That's because Google is not in the business of making great technology. Google is in the business of selling your personal information. You are the product. Hence their non-existent customer service.

"Don't be Evil' my arse lol.

Also, DrDoppio should look up the Fallacists Fallacy. Not that Post hoc ergo propter hoc actually applies here unless one insists on the most superficial version of the facts.