or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google's Schmidt says Apple and Android struggle is the 'defining fight in the industry today'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google's Schmidt says Apple and Android struggle is the 'defining fight in the industry today' - Page 3

post #81 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Apple lost nothing.

That doesn't mean there wasn't a risk. Schmidt having to recuse himself for portions of a meeting because of conflicts of interest had to disruptive.
post #82 of 149
Question for you conspiracy theorists:

Was it wrong in any way for Google, seeing the future of mobile ushered in by the iPhone, to shift the focus of the UI/UX quickly (and work out kinks later) to not be left behind?
post #83 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


I'm puzzled why he wasn't forced off sooner. I can't think of anything, even saving face doesn't fit very well, because billions of dollars at possible risk trump saving face, as far as I'm concerned.

A couple of things come to mind. Steve Jobs may have felt he had more influence over Google than he actually did, thinking that keeping them "in the fold" might slow any plans they had for Android. And too, how better to keep up with Google's mobile planning than to have management on board with them? It's also obvious to me that Apple needed Google's products and cooperation for the iPhone to be the product that Mr. Jobs envisioned at the time.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #84 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

That doesn't mean there wasn't a risk. Schmidt having to recuse himself for portions of a meeting because of conflicts of interest had to disruptive.

True but being that Google bought Android in 2005 and Schmidt joined the board in 2006 any disruption is no fault of Schmidt's.

Not one bad word from the actual Apple superiors even Steve Jobs has come out damning Schmidt. The only people who feel ill of the man are the fanboys.
post #85 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

Question for you conspiracy theorists:
Was it wrong in any way for Google, seeing the future of mobile ushered in by the iPhone, to shift the focus of the UI/UX quickly (and work out kinks later) to not be left behind?

No.

 

Was it wrong to not give credit where credit is due, to shameless copy (or "let" the OEMs do it) UI animations, UI functionality, etc.? yes.

 

At this point, Android =/= Google, Android is much more Samsung than Google. Only Samsung makes money from it.. How many more months can other OEMs handle and support this loosing business?

post #86 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

A couple of things come to mind. Steve Jobs may have felt he had more influence over Google than he actually did, thinking that keeping them "in the fold" might slow any plans they had for Android. And too, how better to keep up with Google's mobile planning than to have management on board with them? It's also obvious to me that Apple needed Google's products and cooperation for the iPhone to be the product that Mr. Jobs envisioned at the time.

Steve wouldn't gamble like that. He'd have straight up said or asked them to slow down or not compete or whatever. He wasn't a chess player. He was a cannon.
post #87 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

No.

Was it wrong to not give credit where credit is due, to shameless copy (or "let" the OEMs do it) UI animations, UI functionality, etc.? yes.

At this point, Android =/= Google, Android is much more Samsung than Google. Only Samsung makes money from it.. How many more months can other OEMs handle and support this loosing business?

No. Android still belongs to Google. Samsung just makes most money off of it. Not sure what your point was.

Google had warned Samsung. Samsung didn't listen and we know how that panned out.

Also Apple isn't suing just Samsung like slavish copying. Apple is suing anyone for anything. HTC sure as hell isn't anything near an Apple clone. Motorola neither. Didn't matter.
post #88 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


Steve wouldn't gamble like that. He'd have straight up said or asked them to slow down or not compete or whatever. He wasn't a chess player. He was a cannon.

That's just what he eventually did. He was apparently willing to live with Google's Android development as long as they drew the line at multi-touch. When Palm introduced the feature and Apple chose for whatever reason not to go after them for it, Brin and Company decided they needed to do the same if they were to compete. That's the part that really set Mr. Jobs off.  IMO Google was doing what they felt was best for their business, just as Apple was. There's no friends in business.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #89 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

That's just what he eventually did. He was apparently willing to live with Google's Android development as long as they drew the line at multi-touch. When Palm introduced the feature and Apple chose for whatever reason not to go after them for it, Brin and Company decided they needed to do the same if they were to compete. That's the part that really set Mr. Jobs off.  IMO Google was doing what they felt was best for their business, just as Apple was. There's no friends in business.

And apparently it's a crime.
post #90 of 149

 

Tallest Skil's post has to be among the top 3 funniest posts I've ever seen here, and I can't even think of any others right now.

 

The funniest part is the pause it takes to figure out what is.  It took me 0.5 seconds to recognize Jeff G and then 1.0 seconds to get the scene.

 

Then 0.000001 seconds to come up with the line.

 

I don't even want to cheapen it by typing it.

 

Well done Sir!

 

[Too Bad it was necessary].

 
post #91 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


No. Android still belongs to Google. (1)Samsung just makes most money off of it. Not sure what your point was.
Google had warned Samsung. Samsung didn't listen and we know how that panned out.
Also Apple isn't suing just Samsung like slavish copying. Apple is suing anyone for anything. (2)HTC sure as hell isn't anything near an Apple clone. Motorola neither. Didn't matter.

(1) Samsung is the only OEM making money from it. Samsung is the only one benefitting from it.

 

(2) So that's why HTC is dying a slow death, selling less and less, making less and less, loosing more and more. Same with Motorola. Same with Sony.

 

I understand that right know, Samsung is the only one really copying apple (thanks to their skin), but since all other OEMs are dying and samsung represents the success of android, they must pay for that. Also, not long ago, pretty much any OEMs used a lot of copyrighted UI features, thinking that apple wasn't strong enough to going head on against all of them. XDA roms still show a huge lack of respect for copyrighted/patented UI features. Android is based on lack of respect and crime.

 

Google should do something about this. Custom apps should be allowed, skins? No.

 

I would really like to play with a Nexus phone.

post #92 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by t2af View Post

the solid evidence was in the goracle trail , showing the google made a massive UI change when Schmidt was on the board and saw the iphone. It was went from a blackberry clone to an iphone clone, there was no dual design path, just one that changed radically. This is why Jobs felt betrayed and was saying to Schmidt "you stole from us". 

 

That's not evidence, that's just your view of things - one that many will disagree with.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kr00 View Post

Google were working on Blackberry style phone with physical keyboards and a stylus, prior to 2007, the year the iPhone was released. Fact. The Android OS was written with no multitouch UI. Fact. Nine months after the iPhone was released, Google announced their iPhone like multitouch phones. Fact. The reason for the touch lag was because the multitouch UI was hastily written over the top of the original Android OS, not written into it. (A total rewrite would have put them a further year behind). Fact. These things are all fact. The fact google were heading down the blackberry path with their phones before the iPhone was developed, then did a 180° and followed exactly what Apple did while Schmidt was on the Apple board, is clear as the nose on your face. Why do your type deny it? Steve Jobs wouldn't claim iOS was stolen by a friend if he didn't actually know it to be true. Steve Jobs wouldn't have declared thermonuclear war on google just on hearsay. 

 

The only FUD being practiced is from those denying that it happen.

 

Do yourself a favour and read some FACTS. http://www.phonearena.com/news/Steve-Jobs-vowed-revenge-on-Eric-Schmidt-over-Android_id23152

 

And where in any of that does it state that Schmidt abused his position while on the Apple board?  Nowhere.  I'm not disputing the fact that Android was influenced by iOS, just this crap that it was Schmidt that did it.  Nobody, ever, anywhere or at any time has provided any sort of evidence that this happened, its all just conjecture and hearsay.

post #93 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I don't really see how this is a "struggle" from Apple's standpoint: these are two platforms that cater to a very different set of demographics. Android caters to the less well-off, freeloading, more techy/nerdy segment of the market while Apple goes for the opposite.
Apple should simply let Google have its low-enders.
 


Just because you can't afford a contractless  Galaxy S 3. Tsssk.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #94 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

 

That's not evidence, that's just your view of things - one that many will disagree with.

 

 

And where in any of that does it state that Schmidt abused his position while on the Apple board?  Nowhere.  I'm not disputing the fact that Android was influenced by iOS, just this crap that it was Schmidt that did it.  Nobody, ever, anywhere or at any time has provided any sort of evidence that this happened, its all just conjecture and hearsay.


I think Schmidt would have been convicted very, very fast, if it so were.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #95 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I don't really see how this is a "struggle" from Apple's standpoint: these are two platforms that cater to a very different set of demographics. Android caters to the less well-off, freeloading, more techy/nerdy segment of the market while Apple goes for the opposite.
Apple should simply let Google have its low-enders.
All Apple should worry about is making sure there is sufficient room for growth left both in market expansion and the replacement market (for those whom it already has as a customer). Apple currently seems to have no problems with either. Indeed it's the opposite: people cannot seem to get enough of -- and Apple cannot make enough of -- any new product.

Excellent suggestion! 

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #96 of 149
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post
Apple lost nothing.

 

 

That statement grates on me like the meatbags people who say, "People who have their movies, music, and applications pirated don't lose anything."

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #97 of 149

I love the "compare" shots that don't actually compare the SAME things. Those two map shots are clearly not at the same zoom level so the detail is expected to be different.

 

And at least for myself I prefer the faster navigation a less cluttered screen offers.

post #98 of 149
Maybe he should be ceo of Apple now.
post #99 of 149
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post
Maybe he should be ceo of Apple now.

 

Google's founders wanted Steve Jobs to be their CEO.


Can you imagine? So that when Steve came back to Apple, he would have been bringing not only the OS to save them, but also the search engine to not only tear down Yahoo!, but become the foundation for what would become Spotlight within OS X itself.

 

And NONE of this crap would be happening now. "Google" would just be an old name of a product within Apple.

 

Of course, you'd have to think of the tradeoffs. There'd probably be no self-driving car initiative (the one that has still yet to be released or show anything for), no advertising (so, probably some actual privacy), no… 

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #100 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Excellent suggestion! 

Thanks for noticing my main point! ;-)
post #101 of 149

I nearly always do. You seldom mince words even if you and I don't often agree.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #102 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

These behemoths end up extinct vis-à-vis MS. Stay stong and carry on.

You are delusional if you think Microsoft has a chance at the consumer handset market.  MS made its money by having a shitty operating system that was adopted by businesses and needed a team of IT staff to keep it running.  The IT staff and MS are interdependent on each other to ensure their existence in a corporate environment.  I'm confident that business will continue to print money for the foreseeable future. However, MS and the bufoons running that company have zero chance of being a player in the consumer electronics market.  

 

Here are the reasons: First, Microsoft can't pimp its software because Android is free.  Why would anyone pay for MS software when they can get Android for free?  Secondly, MS can't compete in the hardware business because they don't have consumer electronics distribution channels, they don't have an attractive brand, and they don't have a high volume manufacturing machine in place.

 

MS is desperately trying both approaches, but they are failing.  They partnered with Nokia, which has manufacturing and distribution channels, but Nokia is on its way down.  If MS wanted to succeed, it should have partnered with a company with growth potential, like Samsung and they should have done it in 2008.  Of course, MS wasn't ready in 2008 (mostly because it didn't have its CEO sitting on the board of Apple to get inside information that could be used to betray apple).  In the market today, companies with growth potential will not use MS software unless it is free like Android.  With regard to the second approach, they are trying to manufacture their own hardware and set up stores, but it is too little too late.  Apple had stores to sell other products like iPods and the accessories that go with them (and their own line of computers).  It was quite easy to add tablets and phones to the existing culture.  In contrast, MS has a chicken vs egg problem.  It can't justify thousands of stores without hundreds of millions in sales, but it can't get hundreds of millions in sales without thousands of stores.  Google on the other hand had a different way to make money off its free OS (i.e., advertising) and it was the first one to partner with companies that had manufacturing and distribution channels (because it had inside knowledge of the Apple products).

 

Anyone that thinks there is any competition between Apple and Microsoft doesn't understand the current market.    

post #103 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash View Post

 

This has got to be the dumbest question of the whole interview.  There is no way Apple would let this guy near the CEO position.  Not to mention Google already removed Schmidt (supposedly a promotion) as CEO and Apple kicked him off the board.  And Schmidt's response about the "most cash" is really quite a commentary on his leadership of Google vis-a-vis Jobs.  So why would any of those three companies want this joker as CEO?  

I'm not an expert on Schmidt, but don't you think calling him a "joker" is a bit off the mark.  Steve Balmer is a joke, but what has Schmidt done to deserve to be placed in the same category?  Hasn't Google been successful under Schmidt? The fact that Schmidt was a scoundrel for using his position on the board at Apple to position Google to compete with Apple doesn't make him a joker.  It makes him a dirty SOB.  Nevertheless, it was a shrewd thing to do and hugely benefited Google.  I don't think it disqualifies him for running any those companies.  

 

In fact, maybe Apple should hire Schmidt.  I'm sure he would have no problem throwing Google under the bus if Apple paid him some money to do it.  Hey, business is business right.

post #104 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

Err, maybe because Schmidt did nothing wrong?  Makes me laugh whenever this is brought up.  Please, show me some solid evidence that Schmidt did anything underhand whilst on the Apple board.  And by evidence I don't mean hearsay and the thoughts of paranoid posters on this forum.

 

People seriously need to stop posting this piece of FUD.

Despite what many think, circumstantial evidence is admissible in court (see Federal Rules of Evidence section 401).  The circumstantial evidence in this case is reasonably adequate. Android was a blackberry knockoff and then became an iOS knockoff 3 years before the rest of the industry could produce an iOS knockoff.  There is no way Android came to market so fast and so good without working on it prior to the iPhone release.  We're just now seeing MS release a knockoff and RIM won't have their knockoff until next year.  Those three years were absolutely critical. 

 

The argument that Apple and Google compete in different markets doesn't hold water.  There are many people that would pony up for an iPhone if there weren't a suitable alternative.  The argument that Apple can't meet demand is also baseless.  Apple only fails to make demand at launch.  What about the other 3-12 months of the year.  That is when Apple would have kept selling more devices but for Google.  Apple may have had 60-80% of the market right now, but for Schmidt's breach of fiduciary duty to Apple shareholders.

post #105 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

(1) Samsung is the only OEM making money from it. Samsung is the only one benefitting from it.

(2) So that's why HTC is dying a slow death, selling less and less, making less and less, loosing more and more. Same with Motorola. Same with Sony.

I understand that right know, Samsung is the only one really copying apple (thanks to their skin), but since all other OEMs are dying and samsung represents the success of android, they must pay for that. Also, not long ago, pretty much any OEMs used a lot of copyrighted UI features, thinking that apple wasn't strong enough to going head on against all of them. XDA roms still show a huge lack of respect for copyrighted/patented UI features. Android is based on lack of respect and crime.

Google should do something about this. Custom apps should be allowed, skins? No.

I would really like to play with a Nexus phone.

Google nor any manufacturer can control what a dev makes their ROM look like. Check out MIUI ROMS, they're made by Chinese devs and looks even more like iOS than Touchwiz did. HTC made the mistake of releasing a very nice phone on Tmobile and releasing crap on ATT and VZW.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #106 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

Despite what many think, circumstantial evidence is admissible in court (see Federal Rules of Evidence section 401).  The circumstantial evidence in this case is reasonably adequate. Android was a blackberry knockoff and then became an iOS knockoff 3 years before the rest of the industry could produce an iOS knockoff.  There is no way Android came to market so fast and so good without working on it prior to the iPhone release.  We're just now seeing MS release a knockoff and RIM won't have their knockoff until next year.  Those three years were absolutely critical.

Ash, do yourself a favor and check when Schmidt became a member of Apple's board and then when the iPhone and it's features were publicly announced by Apple. Then tell me how you arrive at that giving Google a three year head start on MS and Blackberry even if he had an iPhone hidden in his back pocket the first day he walked out of the boardroom at Apple.

 

(hmmmm... Aug. 29, 2006 to January 7th, 2007 is how long?)


Edited by Gatorguy - 10/11/12 at 12:58pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #107 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471 View Post

There is no way Android came to market so fast and so good without working on it prior to the iPhone release.  We're just now seeing MS release a knockoff and RIM won't have their knockoff until next year.  Those three years were absolutely critical.

iPhone introduced & shown to the world January 2007, for sale June 2007. First Android phone for sale, October 2008. It wasn't that great either. How is getting a touch screen Android out nearly two years later an impossible thing?
post #108 of 149
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post
How is getting a touch screen Android out nearly two years later an impossible thing?

 

Because they're not Apple. That's really part of it.

 

Look, Google had Android in 2005! They had that stuff, the knockoff of BlackBerryOS, the foundation for the entire phone OS, all the way back then. And they threw all that UI out the door when the iPhone knowledge came to them (however it came). And even then, when the first Android phone went out the door, it didn't have multitouch. It's astonishing how much time seems to have been wasted when you compare it with Apple's development. 

 

And now it's really just churning out the absolute bare minimum crap possible as fast as humanly possible. And there's penetration; because of perceived price. 

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #109 of 149
Get ready for Godwyn:

I think a lot of hatred leveled at Schmidt, is because of his Germanic last name and uncanny resemblance to the Nazi commandant in Indiana Jones - Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #110 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by perpetual3 View Post


Dichotomously polarizing people into two extreme categories, while conceptually convenient, fails to accurately describe reality.  In fact, these kind of statements distort the truth, and historically and philosophically, contribute to the wide scope of problems which characterize the human condition.

 

The generalization made is not only "conceptually convenient" it's mostly true, it's easy to understand and it gets to the point.

I get Anan's point...and he also responded with relevant facts/statistics.

Sometimes, people need to just absorb/understand the point being made (unless it's at the expense of unnecessary hate, violence or oppresion...which it obviously wasn't) instead of taking it personally.

post #111 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Because they're not Apple. That's really part of it.

 

Look, Google had Android in 2005! They had that stuff, the knockoff of BlackBerryOS, the foundation for the entire phone OS, all the way back then. And they threw all that UI out the door when the iPhone knowledge came to them (however it came). And even then, when the first Android phone went out the door, it didn't have multitouch. It's astonishing how much time seems to have been wasted when you compare it with Apple's development. 

 

And now it's really just churning out the absolute bare minimum crap possible as fast as humanly possible. And there's penetration; because of perceived price. 

Heck TS, you almost sound as tho you're on the side that Schmidt didn't steal a darn thing from Apple. Three years after the iPhone was announced before Android had multi-touch? Two years after the iPhone before they could even get a smartphone to market at all? Geesh a good thief woulda had better secrets than that. 

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #112 of 149
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post
I think a lot of hatred leveled at Schmidt, is because of his Germanic last name and uncanny resemblance to the Nazi commandant in Indiana Jones - Raiders of the Lost Ark.

 

I'm not really seeing it. You must be crazy.

 


Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post
Geesh a good thief woulda had better secrets than that. 

 

Thing about copying is that when that's all you know how to do, you can't do very much else very well at all.

 

Maybe they should have copied the tricks of Daniel Ocean.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #113 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Get ready for Godwyn:

I think a lot of hatred leveled at Schmidt, is because of his Germanic last name and uncanny resemblance to the Nazi commandant in Indiana Jones - Raiders of the Lost Ark.


Maybe, but I think it is because he gnaws the heads off of puppies.
post #114 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kermitos View Post

So can you tell me what are those programs that installed chrome to you without users authorization?

None to me, as I steer right away from Google crap, bu thanks for your concern.
Read post 37, it explains it, come on now, don't be lazy
post #115 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by lunchmeat78 View Post

So much animosity and hate towards this man and Google. This is almost as bad as our political system. Does a certain product that we use define us as a people? Walking around with that white/silver piece of fruit on your phone or laptop garner so much pride and conviction. I appreciate a good product, but at the end of the day its just not as important as you guys make it out to be.
Apple is great company. Google is also a great company. They are both going to be pushing one another to the benefit of those who care about innovative mobile technology.
Fan boys of both platforms are so myopic and ridiculous. My belief is that, if one guy enjoys his IPhone, that's great. Then another guy should be able to enjoy his Galaxy Nexus or Galaxy S3 without being looked down upon.
Come on now! Its not that serious.

Oh please spare us your drivel. Lumping evil Google with Apple only makes you appear silly. Run along now.
post #116 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

Err, maybe because Schmidt did nothing wrong?  Makes me laugh whenever this is brought up.  Please, show me some solid evidence that Schmidt did anything underhand whilst on the Apple board.  And by evidence I don't mean hearsay and the thoughts of paranoid posters on this forum.

People seriously need to stop posting this piece of FUD.

I'm so tired of you android supporters asking for proof. When we ask for your proof none is given. I hope you understand now.
post #117 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Mr. Schmidt, are you able to differentiate Chrome installations by users that directly downloaded your Chrome package and those installations that were sneakily included in other programs and defaulted to download outside of the user's direct knowledge?
I've removed Chrome on so many PC's that users had no idea what is was for, and how it got on their machines. I consider Chrome more crapware than software simply because of how devious it gets put on people's computers.
Shame on Google, andth vendors that included package in their software as a default download.

I've never seen Chrome bundled with 3rd party software, nor that it's installed without their knowledge, but it's certainly possible someone has. Which software is installing Chrome behind users' backs?. Perhaps you're thinking of that Ask Toolbar, which isn't the easiest thing to get rid of?

 

EDIT: I just noticed several pages back that you've already had fun with the Ask Toolbar. That's a particularly sneaky install. I've seen it buried a few pages in. The Yahoo Toolbar is another that seems to appear out of nowhere.


Edited by Gatorguy - 10/11/12 at 2:35pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #118 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Not great. The vendor is getting kickbacks to include it in their package if the user installs it.
That Ask! Toolbar just recently corrupted a few PC's at a site I was working at. Junk.
I'm okay with Chrome, I don't really use it as I'm a Safari/Firefox fan. I just hate the way Chrome gets installed and how it phones the Google mothership.

Don't expect an answer from him.
I read somewhere that it calls home under strange situations, I don't remember these but I read it to be very evil.
post #119 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

I prefer safari, but i'm using chrome right know. Why? I like to try a few browsers, a few products once in a while.

Chrome is great and since i do not want a stand alone flash on my mac, i use chrome. Chromes has great security so i feel more secure when browsing and watching ads, videos, etc.

Safari 6.0 for mac is the best browser experience any computer can give, but chrome is great and i use windows (once in a while) too.

We should get this straight.. Google is a great company that makes very nice products that i enjoy to use. Thanks to Google people can buy great phones (compared to 2005) for 300dollars contract free, search better, have a free and decent email account, great free maps, wich is awesome. Obviously the iphone is the best, but don't you see the valor of google? shmidt and others like him are just little pricks.. google is much more than that.

You contradicted yourself, you mentioned security. Don't you know it calls home constantly. Are you happy with this. Do you like to be ad targeted ? Do you like the idea that they are tracking you ? If so, enough said, but wow.
post #120 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kr00 View Post

Google were working on Blackberry style phone with physical keyboards and a stylus, prior to 2007, the year the iPhone was released. Fact. The Android OS was written with no multitouch UI. Fact. Nine months after the iPhone was released, Google announced their iPhone like multitouch phones. Fact. The reason for the touch lag was because the multitouch UI was hastily written over the top of the original Android OS, not written into it. (A total rewrite would have put them a further year behind). Fact. These things are all fact. The fact google were heading down the blackberry path with their phones before the iPhone was developed, then did a 180° and followed exactly what Apple did while Schmidt was on the Apple board, is clear as the nose on your face. Why do your type deny it? Steve Jobs wouldn't claim iOS was stolen by a friend if he didn't actually know it to be true. Steve Jobs wouldn't have declared thermonuclear war on google just on hearsay. 

The only FUD being practiced is from those denying that it happen.

Do yourself a favour and read some FACTS. http://www.phonearena.com/news/Steve-Jobs-vowed-revenge-on-Eric-Schmidt-over-Android_id23152

Sorry but you are wasting your time in explaining this well known and proven fact to these people. Just wait for the reply (if you even get one), it will be hilarious.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google's Schmidt says Apple and Android struggle is the 'defining fight in the industry today'