or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google's reaction to Apple's iPhone unveiling: 'We're going to have to start over' on Android
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google's reaction to Apple's iPhone unveiling: 'We're going to have to start over' on Android

post #1 of 216
Thread Starter 
The iPhone's 2007 introduction was not only a watershed moment for Apple, but also a turning point for Google's Android team, according to an excerpt from a new book on the subject.

Apple v Samsung
A slide from the Apple v Samsung trial


"As a consumer I was blown away. I wanted one immediately. But as a Google engineer, I thought 'We're going to have to start over,'" former Apple engineering lead and early Android team member Chris DeSalvo is quoted as saying about Apple's handset. DeSalvo was interviewed by author Fred Vogelstein for his new book about the origins of the Android versus iPhone war, an excerpt from which was published in The Atlantic.

Another Apple alum, Android project co-founder Andy Rubin, is also said to have been taken aback by late Apple CEO Steve Jobs's presentation. "Holy crap, I guess we're not going to ship that phone," he reportedly told a colleague, taking about Google's BlackBerry-like "Sooner" device, which was to be the first flagship Android phone.

The Android team's response was to refocus development on a new touch-enabled device --?which would later become HTC's T-Mobile G1 --?and delay their planned public launch by a year. Several features from Sooner were held over, such as the phone's physical keyboard, but the software was completely reworked and redesigned for a touch interface. "Holy crap, I guess we're not going to ship that phone." -- Andy Rubin

Vogelstein's narrative --?that the Android team deliberately changed Android's direction to mimic that of Apple's iPhone --?dovetails with Jobs's stance that Android is a "stolen product."

"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong," Jobs told biographer Walter Isaacson. "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."

Though Apple has not sued Google directly, the companies have waged a proxy war over Android both in court and in the conference rooms of regulators around the world. The war's most famous battle, Apple's landmark lawsuit against Samsung, recently concluded with Apple winning judgements totaling nearly $1 billion as a result of Samsung's infringement.
post #2 of 216

By start over I think they mean copy large portions of the better idea, then start to iterate furiously to avoid litigation.

post #3 of 216

Third-rate copyists.

post #4 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The iPhone's 2007 introduction was not only a watershed moment for Apple, but also a turning point for Google's Android team, according to an excerpt from a new book on the subject.

"As a consumer I was blown away. I wanted one immediately. But as a Google engineer, I thought 'We're going to have to start over,'" former Apple engineering lead and early Android team member Chris DeSalvo is quoted as saying about Apple's handset...

Another Apple alum, Android project co-founder Andy Rubin, is also said to have been taken aback by late Apple CEO Steve Jobs's presentation. "Holy crap, I guess we're not going to ship that phone," he reportedly told a colleague, taking about Google's BlackBerry-like "Sooner" device, which was to be the first flagship Android phone.

The Android team's response was to refocus development on a new touch-enabled device --?which would later become HTC's T-Mobile G1 --?and delay their planned public launch by a year.

In hindsight it was the only decision that made sense. Kudos to the Android team for recognizing it early on rather than trudging forward with what would have been a useless effort. Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry took way too long to come to the same realization that touch events were the way forward. Especially Blackberry who at the time had the leading market position on high-end handsets. Android of course may have had a little headstart over the other laggards since they had already started work on a touchscreen smartphone alongside their "Sooner" trackball phone according to reports and press videos from the time.

By the way, wasn't Mr. Jobs less concerned that Google shifted focus to a touch device but instead incensed over their eventual inclusion of multi-touch which happened well after the G1 was intro'd?
Edited by Gatorguy - 12/19/13 at 9:36am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #5 of 216
Pretty much confirms everything Jobs claimed - that Android was just a knockoff of iOS and the iPhone. What is interesting though, is that it seems to disprove the allegation that Eric Schmidt, who was on Apple's board at the time, was passing along iPhone information to Google ... at least prior to the public unveiling. Not sure how much the board knew about the iPhone before the unveiling, but it appears the Google engineers didn't know about it beforehand.
post #6 of 216
That is logical. Android developers knew the market changed from the product they where making to the apple iPhone. You have to adapt or fail. Google choice was simple adapt.but please do tail me what was stolen from the iPhone?
post #7 of 216
Screen-Shot-2011-10-27-at-16.26.12-1.jpg

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

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

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

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #8 of 216

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

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

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

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #9 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

In hindsight it was the only decision that made sense. Kudos to the Android team for recognizing it early on rather than trudging forward with what would have been a useless effort. Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry took way too long to come to the same realization that touch events were the way forward. Especially Blackberry who at the time had the leading market position on high-end handsets. Android of course may have had a little headstart over the other laggards since they had already started work on a touchscreen smartphone alongside their "Sooner" trackball phone according to reports and press videos from the time.

I was going to say the same thing, but you beat me to it. Well said. Blackberry (RIM), Microsoft, and Nokia just buried their heads in the sand and thought they could keep their existing smartphone OS's while the iPhone sucked all the air out of the room. Only Google and Palm reacted quickly enough -- and Palm stumbled on execution.

"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 #10 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

In hindsight it was the only decision that made sense. Kudos to the Android team for recognizing it early on rather than trudging forward with what would have been a useless effort. Microsoft, Nokia, and Blackberry took way too long to come to the same realization that touch events were the way forward. Especially Blackberry who at the time had the leading market position on high-end handsets. Android of course may have had a little headstart over the other laggards since they had already started work on a touchscreen smartphone alongside their "Sooner" trackball phone according to reports and press videos from the time.

By the way, wasn't Mr. Jobs less concerned that Google shifted focus to a touch device but instead incensed over their eventual inclusion of multi-touch which happened well after the G1 was intro'd?

The New Oxford American Dictionary 3rd edition defines genius as "exceptional intellectual or creative power or other natural ability" and "a person who is exceptionally intelligent or creative, either generally or in some particular respect." To me, that's just being talented but I define genius as being something else entirely. My definition is "being able to express something unique and have it immediately be seen as the only viable model going forward." That is what we saw in 2007 with the iPhone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

That is logical. Android developers knew the market changed from the product they where making to the apple iPhone. You have to adapt or fail. Google choice was simple adapt.but please do tail me what was stolen from the iPhone?

Why is it now logical? I have read for years and year on many sites that Google had been working on touch-based versions of the released Android long before Apple announce the iPhone.
Edited by SolipsismX - 12/19/13 at 10:16am

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #11 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

That is logical. Android developers knew the market changed from the product they where making to the apple iPhone. You have to adapt or fail. Google choice was simple adapt.but please do tail me what was stolen from the iPhone?

 

Going to just step in here for the 99.9% here. Google stole all of Apple's IP.  Duh.

 

But seriously, I agree with you. Obviously Google responded to the iPhone through mimic of design, generally speaking, as they well should have.  The iPhone and iOS ushered in a new standard of smart phone design and following that lead was necessary.  Regardless of Jobs' grandiose delusion of burying Google over "stealing", competition is good, healthy and necessary.  Doubtful that iOS would have evolved to what it is today without said competition. 

post #12 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I was going to say the same thing, but you beat me to it. Well said. Blackberry (RIM), Microsoft, and Nokia just buried their heads in the sand and thought they could keep their existing smartphone OS's while the iPhone sucked all the air out of the room. Only Google and Palm reacted quickly enough -- and Palm stumbled on execution.

Palm's management was foolish. They thought releasing an unfinished product so long as they did it the month before Apple released the next iPhone was better than releasing a solid product after the iPhone was mid-way through its cycle.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #13 of 216

Item One Of 'Start Over' Plan:

 

Crank Up The Xerox Machines.

post #14 of 216

"We're gonna need a bigger boat."

post #15 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

Third-rate copyists.

Couldn't disagree more... They are absolutely first rate copyists!

post #16 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Third-rate copyists.

True. But the real story here is that by disrupting the smartphone market, the iPhone opened the door for someone to become THE iPhone OS clone that the other handset manufacturers could rally around. Only Google and Palm reacted quickly enough, but Palm f'd up on execution because rather than license their new webOS, they wanted to bolster their own hardware business with it, and it was their hardware that sank them.

An iPhone OS alternative was inevitable because Apple would never license iOS to other hardware makers. Microsoft didn't react fast enough, nor did RIM and Nokia. Their market positions eroded very quickly. This is ultimately Ballmer's biggest career failure: Apple was never their competitor for Windows Mobile licensing: it was always Android.

"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 #17 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Item One Of 'Start Over' Plan:

Crank Up The Xerox Machines.

. . . Xerox . . . 1wink.gif
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #18 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Why is now logical? I have read for years and year on many sites that Google had been working on touch-based versions of the released Android long before Apple announce the iPhone.

I stopped keeping track of Fandroid talking points. It's gonna shift constantly.

"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 #19 of 216
Before iPhone's public unveiling, Google did not have access to specifics about it, despite Schmidt being an Apple trustee at the time.

But Schmidt knew something huge was underway:
- Apple was pouring huge resources in a phone project
- Jobs was convinced this project would be a revolution for the industry and I am pretty sure it showed when he was talking to people he was trusting. That and how Blackberry was utter crap for him.
- According to Jobs it was bigger than the first Mac.

Schmidt is not stupid. He knew !damn well Apple was on the verge of delivering a new kind of phone far above what BB had to offer at the moment, hence far superior to Google own prototypes. Plus, Jobs despised physical keyboard and Apple had many patent about multi-touch technology.

Also, Apple was already in talk to use GoogleMaps: how many handsets were able to display GoogleMaps at 640x480px and let users interact with it without a keyboad in 2006 ?

Google had huge hints at what the iPhone was capable of and what it would not be in no small part thanks to Schmidt so, it is really naive to think they did not use this knowledge to move Android development in new directions (if just to cover a worst case scenario%u2026) well before Apple unveiled the iPhone%u2026 And it would not have been possible if Schmidt had not been working with Jobs on a daily basis at this time%u2026

Google may not have stolen the iPhone "features" by se but they had enough inside info to be much more prepared than their competitors and pour much more resources to back their project and ensure it would, one day, lead the competition by a wide margin%u2026
post #20 of 216
Not to excuse any copying or parent infringement, but I wonder what Steve Jobs expected to happen after the iPhone launched. That he got so angry about Android would seem to suggest that he thought the rest of the mobile industry would... just carry on as it always had? Let Apple run away with every prize?

Maybe it's the benefit of hindsight, but given how good the iPhone was (to paraphrase SJs own words: "five years ahead of the competition"), it seems pretty much inevitable that the iPhone would trigger some degree of following/inspiring/copying.

Again, not excusing it, just wondering if SJ was as genuinely surprised and angered by it as much as his "thermo-nuclear war" comments would suggest.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #21 of 216
I recall reading that internally, RIM's first response to the iPhone unveiling was "that's impossible". Based upon their understanding of available tech, RIM believed that the device Jobs demonstrated and claims Jobs made were not technically feasible. This is likely why they were slow in responding. First, RIM had to come to grips with reality.
post #22 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

Going to just step in here for the 99.9% here. Google stole all of Apple's IP.  Duh.

But seriously, I agree with you. Obviously Google responded to the iPhone through mimic of design, generally speaking, as they well should have.  The iPhone and iOS ushered in a new standard of smart phone design and following that lead was necessary.  Regardless of Jobs' grandiose delusion of burying Google over "stealing", competition is good, healthy and necessary.  Doubtful that iOS would have evolved to what it is today without said competition. 

Well what exactly was copied? I don't mean to be a "troll" however you are making a claim and I will like to see some evidence supporting it.
post #23 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Why is it now logical? I have read for years and year on many sites that Google had been working on touch-based versions of the released Android long before Apple announce the iPhone.

 

I bet there's some misleading sense in which something vaguely like that could be said and be true in an unimportant way. I'd love to see the evidence about what Google was REALLY doing with Touch before they suddenly went so closely iPhone-like. Is that something that gets repeated with reliable links or screenshots, or just Fox News-style myth that gets repeated on forums? I've heard that too, but if I ever saw a link it made no impression on me--and I'll immediately stop crediting Apple with the modern smartphone if I see evidence to point toward Google coincidentally doing the same thing.

 

(I'd think every phone compnay was doing "something" with touch: you could say PDAs have had some sort of touch ever since the Newton, and some  old-style PDA/"smartphones" too. Every laptop as well, since Apple popularized the trackpad. "Touch-based" in theory could be like DaVinci's helicopter: all wrong, but he could claim to have done something!)

post #24 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

I bet there's some misleading sense in which something vaguely like that could be said and be true in an unimportant way. I'd love to see the evidence about what Google was REALLY doing with Touch before they suddenly went so closely iPhone-like. Is that something that gets repeated with reliable links or screenshots, or just Fox News-style myth that gets repeated on forums? I've heard that too, but if I ever saw a link it made no impression on me--and I'll immediately stop crediting Apple with the modern smartphone if I see evidence to point toward Google coincidentally doing the same thing.

From about the 3 min mark on there's some touch interface demos. This particular video is from early Nov 2007.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FJHYqE0RDg

OSNews also had a somewhat Android-friendly article about the same thing (doesn't make the claims necessarily wrong despite the slant) .

Edited by Gatorguy - 12/19/13 at 10:51am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #25 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post

Well what exactly was copied? I don't mean to be a "troll" however you are making a claim and I will like to see some evidence supporting it.

You have to work on that Korean - English translation software. It isn't working too well. You have your tenses mixed up. 1tongue.gif
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #26 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post
 

 

Going to just step in here for the 99.9% here. Google stole all of Apple's IP.  Duh.

 

But seriously, I agree with you. Obviously Google responded to the iPhone through mimic of design, generally speaking, as they well should have.  The iPhone and iOS ushered in a new standard of smart phone design and following that lead was necessary.  Regardless of Jobs' grandiose delusion of burying Google over "stealing", competition is good, healthy and necessary.  Doubtful that iOS would have evolved to what it is today without said competition. 

 

Mimic of design?  As they should have?  That's utterly pathetic.  If we are to believe Google's stated development timeline, their own creation was a total failure and a pretty big sign that they should have picked a different market to enter.  Maybe now they wouldn't be faced with embarrassing and precarious position of being at Samsung's mercy for continued existence in the low end of the market, where usage stats barely blip the radar.  Worse considering, that there are no licensing fees to collect for Android and their only profit is personal data from the least valuable segment of the internet market from a commerce/advertising perspective.  

 

The iPhone announcement should have been a wake up call for Google to get out of OS development, because this admission crystalizes that they had no idea what they are doing, and were totally in over their heads.  Google would probably been a better company had they focused on their strengths, than mistaking rote duplication for competition.  A much wiser strategy than looking at your own failed, un-shippable work and then saying, "scratch all this, we'll just copy Apple".  This poor decision making process is further reflected in their meager IP portfolio and spastic acquisition strategy.  

post #27 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

I bet there's some misleading sense in which something vaguely like that could be said and be true in an unimportant way. I'd love to see the evidence about what Google was REALLY doing with Touch before they suddenly went so closely iPhone-like. Is that something that gets repeated with reliable links or screenshots, or just Fox News-style myth that gets repeated on forums? I've heard that too, but if I ever saw a link it made no impression on me--and I'll immediately stop crediting Apple with the modern smartphone if I see evidence to point toward Google coincidentally doing the same thing.


(I'd think every phone compnay was doing "something" with touch: you could say PDAs have had some sort of touch ever since the Ne
wton, and some  old-style PDA/"
smartphones" too. Every laptop as well, since Apple popularized the trackpad. "Touch-based" in theory could be like DaVinci's helicopter: all wrong, but he could claim to have done something!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FJHYqE0RDg&feature=youtube_gdata_player
post #28 of 216
Andy Rubin: Holy crap ....

Yes, that's exactly how he talks! One piece of shit copcat moron of century!

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply
post #29 of 216

It's a freaking shame.  Apple had a huge head-start with the iPhone but gave it completely away to Google's Android.  That's the biggest problem with Apple.  They've never quite figured out how to hold onto market share.  Steve Jobs practically gave the keys of the iPhone empire away to Eric Schmidt.  Pure negligence on Steve Jobs part.  I guess his genius didn't quite fathom that he would be completely backstabbed.  iOS's IP was up for grabs and Schmidt quickly grabbed it.  Steve Jobs is now turning over in his grave because "going thermonuclear" turned into an Apple disaster.

 

Now 80% of the world is using Android and Apple is left with some insignificant percentage that makes the entire mobile industry believe that Apple is doomed to oblivion.  Google is now Wall Street's favorite tech company and Apple has become a second-class tech company for investors.  Being the first to have something is nice but it's much better to hold onto the lead and not let anyone take it away.  The entire mobile industry says that Android devices are so much better than iPhones and Android OS offers a far longer features list than iOS.

 

I don't know why authors have to keep dredging up such a painful memory about how Google's Android ruined Apple's iPhone business.  It just makes Apple look completely incompetent as a tech company.  Tim Cook certainly doesn't have the skills to get Apple out of this huge hole while Android just gets stronger by the day.  The student surpassed the master and there's no turning back the hands of time.  All us Apple shareholders have to keep eating crow and truthfully speaking, the taste sucks.  Honestly, it's rather embarrassing to see such a wealthy hardware company get blown away by a lesser company offering a completely free OS.

post #30 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by redefiler View Post

 If we are to believe Google's stated development timeline, their own creation was a total failure and a pretty big sign that they should have picked a different market to enter...
The iPhone announcement should have been a wake up call for Google to get out of OS development, because this admission crystalizes that they had no idea what they are doing, and were totally in over their heads.  This poor decision making process is further reflected in their meager IP portfolio and spastic acquisition strategy.  

Yes, it's quite sad and telling that consumers just never accepted Android as a competitive answer to iOS. 1rolleyes.gif Then there's all that worthless IP. . . 20,000 patents + and counting.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #31 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post
 

 

Going to just step in here for the 99.9% here. Google stole all of Apple's IP.  Duh.

 

But seriously, I agree with you. Obviously Google responded to the iPhone through mimic of design, generally speaking, as they well should have.  The iPhone and iOS ushered in a new standard of smart phone design and following that lead was necessary.  Regardless of Jobs' grandiose delusion of burying Google over "stealing", competition is good, healthy and necessary.  Doubtful that iOS would have evolved to what it is today without said competition. 

Putting the definition of "stealing" aside for the moment, by your assertion, Apple should just copy from Google now and Google from Apple like a ping pong match. That might be how you keep shareholders happy but that's not how you innovate. Sometimes you have to just start over from scratch and focus intently on where you want the consumer experience to be. Nothing truly changes unless there is a chance of losing everything. Google took the obvious and easy way out. Blackberry took the lazy way out. I don't see anyone taking the brave path (except possibly Microsoft - never thought I would write that) except for Apple.

post #32 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

The New Oxford American Dictionary 3rd edition defines genius as "exceptional intellectual or creative power or other natural ability" and "a person who is exceptionally intelligent or creative, either generally or in some particular respect." To me, that's just being talented but I define genius as being something else entirely. My definition is "being able to express something unique and have it immediately be seen as the only viable model going forward." That is what we saw in 2007 with the iPhone.

Agreed, but recognizing genius is almost as equally as important. Whilst others downplayed the iPhone Google saw that the future of smartphones would be one with a touch screen UI. Those that quickly followed Apple's lead, or copied it are the ones that have flourished, the others are on a downward spiral or no longer exist.
"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 #33 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Agreed, but recognizing genius is almost as equally as important. Whilst others downplayed the iPhone Google saw that the future of smartphones would be one with a touch screen UI. Those that quickly followed Apple's lead, or copied it are the ones that have flourished, the others are on a downward spiral or no longer exist.

No argument here on the importance of recognizing paradigm shifts but I would say hubris and ignorance are the probably the two most common reasons not to notice it. Blackberry né RiM basically said inconceivable until they drank their own lidocaine powder. Steve Jobs is rare in that he saw the future many, many times in his life. From the future of personal computing to what Wozniak could offer, to the GUI that Xerox saw only as skunkworks, to the Pixar, and on and on up through his death as I'm sure there are things that still haven't come to fruition. Not that Jobs was infallible, his naming choices were definitely crap. MacMan? Really?


PS: Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #34 of 216
For a second there, from the title, I thought "starting over" was about Apple's 64-bit chip...
post #35 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by redefiler View Post
 

 

Mimic of design?  As they should have?  That's utterly pathetic.  If we are to believe Google's stated development timeline, their own creation was a total failure and a pretty big sign that they should have picked a different market to enter.  Maybe now they wouldn't be faced with embarrassing and precarious position of being at Samsung's mercy for continued existence in the low end of the market, where usage stats barely blip the radar.  Worse considering, that there are no licensing fees to collect for Android and their only profit is personal data from the least valuable segment of the internet market from a commerce/advertising perspective.  

 

The iPhone announcement should have been a wake up call for Google to get out of OS development, because this admission crystalizes that they had no idea what they are doing, and were totally in over their heads.  Google would probably been a better company had they focused on their strengths, than mistaking rote duplication for competition.  A much wiser strategy than looking at your own failed, un-shippable work and then saying, "scratch all this, we'll just copy Apple".  This poor decision making process is further reflected in their meager IP portfolio and spastic acquisition strategy.  

 

So you're saying that any company that is in the middle of developing a product which adjusts to remain competitive is pathetic?   I know you like to live in your Apple bubble and hate every other brand, but the competition is GOOD and not only for Apple, but the entire industry.  Apple has leveraged off of Google and others' ideas/features heavily ever since the first iPhone and to deny it is just plain stupid.

post #36 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Yes, it's quite sad and telling that consumers just never accepted Android as a competitive answer to iOS. 1rolleyes.gif Then there's all that worthless IP. . . 20,000 patents + and counting.

IP from that Motorola Mobility acquision?  Like Ad Mob, they were baited into buying and over-paying for the wrong company and got a whole bunch of worthless IP.  They do amazing things at Google though, they are a website right?   :smokey: Super competitive being 6 characters in a url address away from irrelevency at any moment.

 

But your right about customers never accepting Android.  Seems it even lies dormant on the majority of cell phones its shipped on.  

I'm sure Google is making great use of the Android targeted ads for the bottom 15% of mobile consumers, sounds like a total win.

post #37 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by wigby View Post

Sometimes you have to just start over from scratch and focus intently on where you want the consumer experience to be. Nothing truly changes unless there is a chance of losing everything.

You act like that's something that can easily be done. It is not and sometimes there's only one good way to accomplish something which is the 'tried and true' method. For instance the best mouse traps are the ones that most closely resemble the original mouse traps and I've tried them all. In this case Apple found out what works and what closely resembles it is what is popular, and the efforts of others trying to be different has not been beneficial.
"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 #38 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


From about the 3 min mark on there's some touch interface demos. This particular video is from early Nov 2007.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FJHYqE0RDg
 

That video suggests that although google had to redesign the UI for touch, some of the plumbing of the OS was already in place when google first heard about the iPhone. The guy demonstrates several features characteristic of modern-day android, such as an early version of the notification bar as well as what seems like an early incarnation of the intents system for passing data between apps (contacts to maps in the video).

post #39 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


You act like that's something that can easily be done. It is not and sometimes there's only one good way to accomplish something which is the 'tried and true' method. For instance the best mouse traps are the ones that most closely resemble the original mouse traps and I've tried them all. In this case Apple found out what works and what closely resembles it is what is popular, and the efforts of others trying to be different has not been beneficial.

Electric mousetraps look nothing like traditional ones but are much more effective. That only comes from thinking outside of the box.

post #40 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

No argument here on the importance of recognizing paradigm shifts but I would say hubris and ignorance are the probably the two most common reasons not to notice it. Blackberry né RiM basically said inconceivable until they drank their own lidocaine powder. Steve Jobs is rare in that he saw the future many, many times in his life. From the future of personal computing to what Wozniak could offer, to the GUI that Xerox saw only as skunkworks, to the Pixar, and on and on up through his death as I'm sure there are things that still haven't come to fruition. Not that Jobs was infallible, his naming choices were definitely crap. MacMan? Really?


PS: Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line.

Complacency is also a big factor. How many businesses have been replaced by another business that really didn't offer anything much different? Too many companies rest on their laurels only to see all go to another company that did things just a little different.
"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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Google's reaction to Apple's iPhone unveiling: 'We're going to have to start over' on Android
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google's reaction to Apple's iPhone unveiling: 'We're going to have to start over' on Android