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 - Page 5

post #161 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


I don't know that it was so much a do-over on the software side as it was about what hardware it would be put on. The iPhone absolutely was a game-changer, no doubt about that at all. Google recognized it and better yet reacted faster than Microsoft, Motorola, Blackberry, Nokia and most anyone else already in the space.

What Google had envisioned for it's first Android entry just wasn't going to cut it so it was a quick pivot to "Dream", forget "Sooner". Considering it's Google and their fun naming conventions I'm surprised they didn't call Dream "Later" instead.1biggrin.gif
That was pretty much what was said in my first post in this thread:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/161257/googles-reaction-to-apples-iphone-unveiling-were-going-to-have-to-start-over-on-android#post_2448108

Had Google made the unwise choice of building the phones themselves they might still be trying to get their first one to market. Instead they were pragmatic about what they could do (they have some of the best engineers on the planet) and what would be best left to those with hardware experience. So separate development paths for Google and Apple paralleling each other to the same market.

 

Except that is not what you consistently insinuate. You seem to want us to believe that somehow Google's entrance into the phone market was on parallel with Apple's vision or the product that Apple bought to market. It was not. A lot of companies already entered the market before Apple or Google. There is no new vision in entering a market. Jobs mentioned entering the market in 2003, it was a natural evolution from the iPod. A Blackberry clone is not visionary device & It was a do over on the software side for Google. What you said in your first post is not where you're logic took you in all of your consequent posts. Somehow you are trying to muddy the water of who did what when. Okay, Apple started working on the iPad in 2003, Which is a mobile touch device. So if we look at it from that perspective & your timeline, Google stated working on touch assisted devices 2 years later. Which of course is nonsense but, that is your timeline. If Apple started working on the tablet in 2003 then the must have discussed the tablet well in advance of 2003. The first link that I posted quoted Scott Forstall directly about the iPhone timeline. I tend to believe him over Mobile-review.com. Having a visionary product is not the same as being pragmatic. For christ sakes I think I saw Dell show off some kind of touch assisted device before Google did. When Google had there "Oh Sh*t" moment who's blueprint did they follow. They didn't say "Oh sh*T" Apple beat us to market with what we were already developing. The quote is "we are going to have to start over." You do know what start over means (& also what it implies), right?

post #162 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post
 

 

Except that is not what you consistently insinuate. You seem to want us to believe that somehow Google's entrance into the phone market was on parallel with Apple's vision or the product that Apple bought to market. It was not. A lot of companies already entered the market before Apple or Google. There is no new vision in entering a market. Jobs mentioned entering the market in 2003, it was a natural evolution from the iPod. A Blackberry clone is not visionary device & It was a do over on the software side for Google. What you said in your first post is not where you're logic took you in all of your consequent posts. Somehow you are trying to muddy the water of who did what when. Okay, Apple started working on the iPad in 2003, Which is a mobile touch device. So if we look at it from that perspective & your timeline, Google stated working on touch assisted devices 2 years later. Which of course is nonsense but, that is your timeline. If Apple started working on the tablet in 2003 then the must have discussed the tablet well in advance of 2003. The first link that I posted quoted Scott Forstall directly about the iPhone timeline. I tend to believe him over Mobile-review.com. Having a visionary product is not the same as being pragmatic. For christ sakes I think I saw Dell show off some kind of touch assisted device before Google did. When Google had there "Oh Sh*t" moment who's blueprint did they follow. They didn't say "Oh sh*T" Apple beat us to market with what we were already developing. The quote is "we are going to have to start over." You do know what start over means (& also what it implies), right?

 

During one interview at All things digital, SJ said the iPad development has begun before the iPhone in the early 2000.  Apple has switch their focus on a phone product because of helps they could get from carriers. 

post #163 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMac2 View Post
 

 

During one interview at All things digital, SJ said the iPad development has begun before the iPhone in the early 2000.  Apple has switch their focus on a phone product because of helps they could get from carriers. 

The truth is out there. It's easy to find & yet we always get this revisionist history nonsense. Look, I could care less what people use. It's a free market make your choice. What I have issues with is the constant muddying up of facts or that somehow a feature like Notification center is somehow on the same level as a paradigm shifting idea, designing the hardware to help that occur, building an actual platform & ecosystem. Imagine all the thinking that others did not have to do because of the iPhone. How does it work, how should it work, how do we do this or that etc., etc., etc. Of course none of that counts with some people. They have the idea that somehow a snowflake is the same as an avalanche because they both contain snow.

post #164 of 216
apple v. samsung 12/19/2013 12:33 PM
"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?"

Actually many things, it's just hard to acknowledge it now since these features are now looking obvious to us... I'am talking about scrolling (remember scrolling bars in Symbian/winmo?), toggles, lockscreen and many similiar stuff/ideas which makes the UI so user-friendly. If google already had it's touch UI interface with the same features the HTC G1 has (before iPhone announcement), they wouldn't need to hold it's debut for another YEAR. You know what, OK, let's say A YEAR is needed for manufacturing and testing, but guess what? We can't see any Android touch UI based prototypes or OS screenshots/drawings from that time which would look at least remotely similiar to G1. For me it's quite clear that they had to rework the entire touch interface looking at the new iOS, and that's what this is all about.

And to requote Dianne Hackborn's (who worked/works at Google) words posted in previous page, she's saying that UI is not the main aspect of the OS. We may or may not agree, but that's not the case and it won't change the fact that UI is one of the main reasons people buy iPhones in the first place. As to the other big chunk of text saying the Google already had some kind of touch UI before iPhone was released, I've already answered to that...
Edited by SmOgER - 12/24/13 at 5:00am
post #165 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmOgER View Post

apple v. samsung 12/19/2013 12:33 PM
"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?"

Actually many things, it's just hard to acknowledge it now since these features are now looking obvious to us... I'am talking about scrolling (remember scrolling bars in Symbian/winmo?), toggles, lockscreen and many similiar stuff/ideas which makes the UI so user-friendly. If google already had it's touch UI interface with the same features the HTC G1 has (before iPhone announcement), they wouldn't need to hold it's debut for another YEAR. You know what, OK, let's say A YEAR is needed for manufacturing and testing, but guess what? We can't see any Android touch UI based prototypes or OS screenshots/drawings from that time which would look at least remotely similiar to G1. For me it's quite clear that they had to rework the entire touch interface looking at the new iOS, and that's what this is all about.

And to requote Dianne Hackborn's (who worked/works at Google) words posted in previous page, she's saying that UI is not the main aspect of the OS. We may or may not agree, but that's not the case and it won't change the fact that UI is one of the main reasons people buy iPhones in the first place. As to the other big chunk of text saying the Google already had some kind of touch UI before iPhone was released, I've already answered to that...

LG prada is a full touch device which came out before iphone. It included finger scrolling.

What you are implying is that Apple is the one that first invented touch device. It is as ridiculous as saying that apple invented the rectangular form factor.

Apple just took existing tech and make it popular. First Android has more dissimilarity to ios including pull down notification, widget and app drawer, hard buttons. The only common thing between them is the touch UI. But then again apple didn't invent touch UI.

If we are talking about copying then Apple is the one that blatantly copy android UI later on like pull down notification, holo UI.
post #166 of 216
LG Prada did not have flick scrolling, and certainly not acceleration and rubber banding, it used scroll bars.

http://gizmodo.com/233468/lg-prada-phone-ui-walkthrough

Plus, it was announced just a couple of months before the iPhone, Apple didn't have time to copy it, even if they'd wanted to.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #167 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

LG Prada did not have flick scrolling, and certainly not acceleration and rubber banding, it used scroll bars.

http://gizmodo.com/233468/lg-prada-phone-ui-walkthrough

Plus, it was announced just a couple of months before the iPhone, Apple didn't have time to copy it, even if they'd wanted to.

Apple didn't invent flick scrolling either. If you want to be so nitty gritty then Apple stole and copied flick scrolling in the iPhone. Maybe apple implemented it first in a phone (I am not even sure of that)

IPhone did not have pull down notification then but now it has. Maybe Google didn't invent pull down notification but it implemented first. Using your reasoning logic apple also copied android. You cant say no here otherwise you will sound hypocritical.
post #168 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


Apple didn't invent flick scrolling either. If you want to be so nitty gritty then Apple stole and copied flick scrolling in the iPhone. Maybe apple implemented it first in a phone (I am not even sure of that)

IPhone did not have pull down notification then but now it has. Maybe Google didn't invent pull down notification but it implemented first. Using your reasoning logic apple also copied android. You cant say no here otherwise you will sound hypocritical.

It's like I said in my previous post. Some people always come back to Notification center as if their main argument. A snowflake is the same as an avalanche.

post #169 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


Apple didn't invent flick scrolling either. If you want to be so nitty gritty then Apple stole and copied flick scrolling in the iPhone. Maybe apple implemented it first in a phone (I am not even sure of that)

IPhone did not have pull down notification then but now it has. Maybe Google didn't invent pull down notification but it implemented first. Using your reasoning logic apple also copied android. You cant say no here otherwise you will sound hypocritical.

It's like I said in my previous post. Some people always come back to Notification center as if their main argument. A snowflake is the same as an avalanche.


That's your argument. What avalanche? Looks like android is the avalanche. Apple has a slight head start but now android has 4 to 5 times more market share than iphone.

Apple may have jump start (but not invent) the touch device trend just like Nokia has popularized the smartphone trend with its mass market Symbian phones. Android then took the smartphone trend even further.
post #170 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

Apple didn't invent flick scrolling either. If you want to be so nitty gritty then Apple stole and copied flick scrolling in the iPhone. Maybe apple implemented it first in a phone (I am not even sure of that)

IPhone did not have pull down notification then but now it has. Maybe Google didn't invent pull down notification but it implemented first. Using your reasoning logic apple also copied android. You cant say no here otherwise you will sound hypocritical.
How is that my "reasoning logic"? My reasoning is that stealing and copying are actions that require time and intent, not just a precedent.

Flick scrolling existed before the iPhone you say? Maybe it did, but if you want to say that Apple stole or copied it with credibility then you need to do two things:
1. State where it existed before the iPhone
2. Show a direct link or evidence that Apple used knowledge of the pre-existence to inform the iPhone.

Apple copied a pull down gesture from Android you say? And I'm hypocritical if I say otherwise? Well thanks for implying I'm a hypocrite before even giving me a chance to reply. Actually I'd say that notifications appearing in an area of a screen predates Android; see menu bars and system trays on the desktop. Also, gestures, drawers and logs of events have existed for a long time too. That Android got there first in putting the banners and a pull down drawer at the top of the screen I'd consider mainly a question of timing for implementing an obvious feature. So did Apple copy Android, or did they just take a bit longer to get to an obvious idea? At the very least it's debateable.

That Google and Samsung's hardware and software designs were inspired by the iPhone is not so debatable. Clearly they were. Released internal communications have shows that to be the case.
Edited by Crowley - 12/25/13 at 12:34pm

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #171 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

A common misunderstanding among fandroids is copying = innovation.

Well Apple did get some inspiration from android for its notification bar, and then built on it to make it its own. Same thing for the flat interface from iOS7. I don't see an issue it's great. It would be stupid to ignore good ideas from other companies. And I'm a fandroid, and an apple fanboy, and a Microsoft fan when they make great products.
post #172 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

Apple didn't invent flick scrolling either. If you want to be so nitty gritty then Apple stole and copied flick scrolling in the iPhone. Maybe apple implemented it first in a phone (I am not even sure of that)

IPhone did not have pull down notification then but now it has. Maybe Google didn't invent pull down notification but it implemented first. Using your reasoning logic apple also copied android. You cant say no here otherwise you will sound hypocritical.
How is that my "reasoning logic"? My reasoning is that stealing and copying are actions that require time and intent, not just a precedent.

Flick scrolling existed before the iPhone you say? Maybe it did, but if you want to say that Apple stole or copied it with credibility then you need to do two things:
1. State where it existed before the iPhone
2. Show a direct link or evidence that Apple used knowledge of the pre-existence to inform the iPhone.

Apple copied a pull down gesture from Android you say? And I'm hypocritical if I say otherwise? Well thanks for implying I'm a hypocrite before even giving me a chance to reply. Actually I'd say that notifications appearing in an area of a screen predates Android; see menu bars and system trays on the desktop. Also, gestures, drawers and logs of events have existed for a long time too. That Android got there first in putting the banners and a pull down drawer at the top of the screen I'd consider mainly a question of timing for implementing an obvious feature. So did Apple copy Android, or did they just take a bit longer to get to an obvious idea? At the very least it's debateable.

That Google and Samsung's hardware and software designs were inspired by the iPhone is not so debatable. Clearly they were. Released internal communications have shows that to be the case.

That's the hypocrisy there. When android used flick scrolling you said it copied from Apple but when apple used pull down notification you said it is not copying but apple is inspired and innovate.

It is also hypocrisy to say flick scrolling is a new invention and not a natural progression of finger scrolling but the pull down notification is just a natural progression which apple would think of eventually.
post #173 of 216
Since I never said Android copied flick scrolling or that flick scrolling was a new invention you can take your hypocrisy accusations and toddle off.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #174 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Since I never said Android copied flick scrolling or that flick scrolling was a new invention you can take your hypocrisy accusations and toddle off.

I am sorry to implied that you said that. I may have confused you with another poster.

If this the case what did android copied from Apple? Why are many here felt apple was screwed when android come about?

Apple did not invent the flick scrolling or the grid of icons or a rectangle slate or the smartphone os or 2g/3g/4G/wifi tech used or slide to unlock or ARM chipset.

All I am saying is if we want to accuse Google of copying then you must also accuse apple of copying as well. It is hypocritical otherwise (in general not referring to anyone).
post #175 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

Apple did not invent the flick scrolling or the grid of icons or a rectangle slate or the smartphone os or 2g/3g/4G/wifi tech used or slide to unlock or ARM chipset.

All I am saying is if we want to accuse Google of copying then you must also accuse apple of copying as well. It is hypocritical otherwise (in general not referring to anyone).

So if Apple didn't invent a technology it means they copied it? So now Apple copied ARM? Good one¡

"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 #176 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

Apple did not invent the flick scrolling or the grid of icons or a rectangle slate or the smartphone os or 2g/3g/4G/wifi tech used or slide to unlock or ARM chipset.

All I am saying is if we want to accuse Google of copying then you must also accuse apple of copying as well. It is hypocritical otherwise (in general not referring to anyone).

So if Apple didn't invent a technology it means they copied it? So now Apple copied ARM? Good one¡

So can your statement be interpreted as apple didn't invent those things in iPhone but apple is anal to sue and accuse others of copying. lol.gif
post #177 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

So can your statement be interpreted as apple didn't invent those things in iPhone but apple is anal to sue and accuse others of copying. lol.gif

Are you seriously equating stealing as licensing technology? Show me where Apple stole anything from ARM or Intel or just do us all a favour and leave.

"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 #178 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

So can your statement be interpreted as apple didn't invent those things in iPhone but apple is anal to sue and accuse others of copying. lol.gif

Are you seriously equating stealing as licensing technology? Show me where Apple stole anything from ARM or Intel or just do us all a favour and leave.

Show me where android stole anything from ios?

Apple sued for slide to unlock and it has been shown that was prior art.

Voice search, rectangular design and grid of icons have been around since ages ago way before apple.

Do you have the rights to say someone is stealing when they are using something that aren't yours to begin with.
post #179 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

Show me where android stole anything from ios?

Good try on trying to change the subject and put me on the defensive but your comment has nothing to do with what Android or any other vendor did or didn't do; it's about foolish statements by you. Particularly, equating licensing ARM as being the same as bank heist.

"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 #180 of 216
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post
[who cares what the post contains]

 

Shouldn’t be that hard to answer his question if you’re not wrong. You don’t seem to have done so, though.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #181 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


That's your argument. What avalanche? Looks like android is the avalanche. Apple has a slight head start but now android has 4 to 5 times more market share than iphone.

Apple may have jump start (but not invent) the touch device trend just like Nokia has popularized the smartphone trend with its mass market Symbian phones. Android then took the smartphone trend even further.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


LG prada is a full touch device which came out before iphone. It included finger scrolling.

What you are implying is that Apple is the one that first invented touch device. It is as ridiculous as saying that apple invented the rectangular form factor.

Apple just took existing tech and make it popular. First Android has more dissimilarity to ios including pull down notification, widget and app drawer, hard buttons. The only common thing between them is the touch UI. But then again apple didn't invent touch UI.

If we are talking about copying then Apple is the one that blatantly copy android UI later on like pull down notification, holo UI.

It's a metaphor. The snowflake is Notifications ( a small idea)...which you & your kind keep repeating as if it was some kind of paradigm shifting concept. The avalanche is the iPhone ( a big idea)... the paradigm shifting concept that changed the industry. I said nothing about marketshare in any of my post. Android did nothing to change an industry. It's a knock off product. Please check my other posts. Also WIDGETS have been around on the Mac for years. They go back to the classic Mac OS. I think they used to be called desktop accessories back then & were later called Widgets in OSX. They could be accessed from an icon in the Dock, which would open up a separate space where all your widgets are. (hmmmmm sounds like Android's App Drawer) or a keyboard shortcut.  App drawer? How is App drawer innovative in any way? I tap a button. I see all my apps! Wow! Never seen anything like this before! Pull down menus (Notifications)! Yeah, that's new!

post #182 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


I am sorry to implied that you said that. I may have confused you with another poster.

If this the case what did android copied from Apple? Why are many here felt apple was screwed when android come about?

Apple did not invent the flick scrolling or the grid of icons or a rectangle slate or the smartphone os or 2g/3g/4G/wifi tech used or slide to unlock or ARM chipset.

All I am saying is if we want to accuse Google of copying then you must also accuse apple of copying as well. It is hypocritical otherwise (in general not referring to anyone).

Nope but hey were early contributors to some...

In the late 1980s Apple Computer and VLSI Technology started working with Acorn on newer versions of the ARM core. In 1990, Acorn spun off the design team into a new company named Acorn RISC Machines Ltd., which became ARM Ltd when its parent company, ARM Holdings plc, floated on theLondon Stock Exchange and NASDAQ in 1998.

The new Apple-ARM work would eventually evolve into the ARM6, first released in early 1992. Apple used the ARM6-based ARM610 as the basis for their Apple Newton PDA (Which had apps in a grid). In 1994, Acorn used the ARM610 as the main central processing unit (CPU) in their RiscPC computers. Where was Google in the 1990's?

 

I remember reading somewhere that they invested money in Texas Instruments to develop a "Wi-fi" chip that would make it affordable for consumer use. Apple ahas been building hardware & designing software & interfaces for over 30 years. Google?


Edited by Splif - 12/26/13 at 10:14pm
post #183 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


I am sorry to implied that you said that. I may have confused you with another poster.

If this the case what did android copied from Apple? Why are many here felt apple was screwed when android come about?

Apple did not invent the flick scrolling or the grid of icons or a rectangle slate or the smartphone os or 2g/3g/4G/wifi tech used or slide to unlock or ARM chipset.

All I am saying is if we want to accuse Google of copying then you must also accuse apple of copying as well. It is hypocritical otherwise (in general not referring to anyone).

Nope but hey were early contributors to some...

In the late 1980s Apple Computer and VLSI Technology started working with Acorn on newer versions of the ARM core. In 1990, Acorn spun off the design team into a new company named Acorn RISC Machines Ltd., which became ARM Ltd when its parent company, ARM Holdings plc, floated on theLondon Stock Exchange and NASDAQ in 1998.

The new Apple-ARM work would eventually evolve into the ARM6, first released in early 1992. Apple used the ARM6-based ARM610 as the basis for their Apple Newton PDA (Which had apps in a grid). In 1994, Acorn used the ARM610 as the main central processing unit (CPU) in their RiscPC computers. Where was Google in the 1980's?

 

I remember reading somewhere that they invested money in Texas Instruments to develop a "Wi-fi" chip that would make it affordable for consumer use. Apple ahas been building hardware & designing software & interfaces for over 30 years. Google?


But hey samsung is one of the main contributor to 3g /4G. Without some of samsung 4g/lte frand licensing none of the iPhones are possible. But then Apple still refuses to pay for them. So apple is still the bigger jersey here by first stealing and suing first.
post #184 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


But hey samsung is one of the main contributor to 3g /4G. Without some of samsung 4g/lte frand licensing none of the iPhones are possible. But then Apple still refuses to pay for them. So apple is still the bigger jersey here by first stealing and suing first.

 

You do know what FRAND Licensing is don't you? Apple did not refuse to pay Samsung for FRAND licensing. They refused to pay quite a bit more than Samsung was charging other companies. They also offered to license Samsung some of their patents. Samsung refused. HTC made an agreement with Apple though.


Edited by Splif - 12/26/13 at 10:11pm
post #185 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


That's your argument. What avalanche? Looks like android is the avalanche. Apple has a slight head start but now android has 4 to 5 times more market share than iphone.

Apple may have jump start (but not invent) the touch device trend just like Nokia has popularized the smartphone trend with its mass market Symbian phones. Android then took the smartphone trend even further.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


LG prada is a full touch device which came out before iphone. It included finger scrolling.

What you are implying is that Apple is the one that first invented touch device. It is as ridiculous as saying that apple invented the rectangular form factor.

Apple just took existing tech and make it popular. First Android has more dissimilarity to ios including pull down notification, widget and app drawer, hard buttons. The only common thing between them is the touch UI. But then again apple didn't invent touch UI.

If we are talking about copying then Apple is the one that blatantly copy android UI later on like pull down notification, holo UI.

It's a metaphor. The snowflake is Notifications ( a small idea)...which you & your kind keep repeating as if it was some kind of paradigm shifting concept. The avalanche is the iPhone ( a big idea)... the paradigm shifting concept that changed the industry. I said nothing about marketshare in any of my post. Android did nothing to change an industry. It's a knock off product. Please check my other posts. Also WIDGETS have been around on the Mac for years. They go back to the classic Mac OS. I think they used to be called desktop accessories back then & were later called Widgets in OSX. They could be accessed from an icon in the Dock, which would open up a separate space where all your widgets are. (hmmmmm sounds like Android's App Drawer) or a keyboard shortcut.  App drawer? How is App drawer innovative in any way? I tap a button. I see all my apps! Wow! Never seen anything like this before! Pull down menus (Notifications)! Yeah, that's new!


No. If apple didn't come along the smartphone would still have achieved tremendous growth. It is not like smartphone has no growth before apple came along. That trend was already in a big upward swing before iphone. Why apple didn't come out with a feature phone? It didn't because it recognized and followed the smartphone trend which has already started. It wouldn't be right to say apple copied the smartphone which was pioneered by sony ericsson and nokia just like it wouldn't be right to say everyone else copied apple touch based device since touch based devices existed before iphone.

On UI argument, did the original iphone has pull down or widget or app drawer or hard menu or back button? Back and menu buttons existed on existing os like symbian and window. Iphone doesn't have that. There are so many dissimilarities that it is ridiculous to say it is a copy. What google did was make the os more finger friendly which was more receptive for the market due to trend started by Apple.
post #186 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


No. If apple didn't come along the smartphone would still have achieved tremendous growth. It is not like smartphone has no growth before apple came along. That trend was already in a big upward swing before iphone. Why apple didn't come out with a feature phone? It didn't because it recognized and followed the smartphone trend which has already started. It wouldn't be right to say apple copied the smartphone which was pioneered by sony ericsson and nokia just like it wouldn't be right to say everyone else copied apple touch based device since touch based devices existed before iphone.

On UI argument, did the original iphone has pull down or widget or app drawer or hard menu or back button? Back and menu buttons existed on existing os like symbian and window. Iphone doesn't have that. There are so many dissimilarities that it is ridiculous to say it is a copy. What google did was make the os more finger friendly which was more receptive for the market due to trend started by Apple.

 

Look at smartphone offerings before the iPhone. Show me something that says CONSUMERS were buying smartphones or thought they even needed one.You didn't NEED AN APP DRAWER ON THE ORIGINAL IPHONE YOU WOULD JUST SWIPE to the next window full of applications. When you chose an Apple application the choices in the dock would change specific to the application you were in (convenient & efficient). So now hitting a button to get to my apps so that I can swipe through them is somehow an innovation. Back & menu buttons...are you serious? The buttons on the original iPhone were SPECIFIC TO THE APPLICATION THAT YOU WERE WORKING in. YES, they would take you back to specific points within an application. My point was to show you that most of the UI concepts that you brought up were not original concepts. Hard menu? Didn't Blackberry have a hard menu?

post #187 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


No. If apple didn't come along the smartphone would still have achieved tremendous growth. It is not like smartphone has no growth before apple came along. That trend was already in a big upward swing before iphone. Why apple didn't come out with a feature phone? It didn't because it recognized and followed the smartphone trend which has already started. It wouldn't be right to say apple copied the smartphone which was pioneered by sony ericsson and nokia just like it wouldn't be right to say everyone else copied apple touch based device since touch based devices existed before iphone.

On UI argument, did the original iphone has pull down or widget or app drawer or hard menu or back button? Back and menu buttons existed on existing os like symbian and window. Iphone doesn't have that. There are so many dissimilarities that it is ridiculous to say it is a copy. What google did was make the os more finger friendly which was more receptive for the market due to trend started by Apple.

 

Look at smartphone offerings before the iPhone. Show me something that says CONSUMERS were buying smartphones or thought they even needed one.You didn't NEED AN APP DRAWER ON THE ORIGINAL IPHONE YOU WOULD JUST SWIPE to the next window full of applications. When you chose an Apple application the choices in the dock would change specific to the application you were in (convenient & efficient). So now hitting a button to get to my apps so that I can swipe through them is somehow an innovation. Back & menu buttons...are you serious? The buttons on the original iPhone were SPECIFIC TO THE APPLICATION THAT YOU WERE WORKING in. YES, they would take you back to specific points within an application. My point was to show you that most of the UI concepts that you brought up were not original concepts. Hard menu? Didn't Blackberry have a hard menu?


Well, thank you very much. You have validated my point that android was so dissimilar to iphone that it is wrong to say android copied from iphone.

So can we stop this rhetoric nonsense that everyone copied from Apple.
post #188 of 216
For an article acknowledging both perspectives without falling into the trap of seemingly obligatory emotional rhetoric:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #189 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

For an article acknowledging both perspectives without falling into the trap of seemingly obligatory emotional rhetoric:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/

This article gives no credit for the work Apple has done in touch interfaces. It is the usual geek culture BS that Apple steals everything & claims it is theirs. Apple offers nothing & does nothing to further technology. Apple didn't work on touch based interfaces in the 80's & 90's? Where is the credit in the article for that? The original argument that you made was about Google having the same product vision as Apple. They didn't & it's obvious. Also, Fingerworks was a company that did plenty of research into gesture based products & input devices. Apple bought Fingerworks so wouldn't they own whatever patents Fingerworks owns also. In the article you posted plenty of this work was research work. Of course Apple does no research work. They just steal. The article was not very even handed. Technology, like most things creative, are a progression of works by many people. For some reason Apple's contributions are always theft or trivialized. Microsoft was also working on touch based devices. The fruit of their labor was Surface. The size of a foosball table. Apple's solution fit in the palm of your hand & in your pocket.


Edited by Splif - 12/27/13 at 2:57pm
post #190 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


Well, thank you very much. You have validated my point that android was so dissimilar to iphone that it is wrong to say android copied from iphone.

So can we stop this rhetoric nonsense that everyone copied from Apple.

 

I didn't say everyone copied from Apple. Which version of Android are you referring to? What did Google develop as far as UI that was unique? You haven't mentioned a thing.

post #191 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

This article gives no credit for the work Apple has done in touch interfaces.

It is the usual geek culture BS that Apple steals everything & claims it is theirs. Apple offers nothing & does nothing to further technology. Apple didn't work on touch based interfaces in the 80's & 90's? Where is the credit in the article for that? The original argument that you made was about Google having the same product vision as Apple. They didn't & it's obvious. Also, Fingerworks was a company that did plenty of research into gesture based products & input devices. Apple bought Fingerworks so wouldn't they own whatever patents Fingerworks owns also. In the article you posted plenty of this work was research work. Of course Apple does no research work. They just steal. The article was not very even handed. Technology, like most things creative, are a progression of works by many people. For some reason Apple's contributions are always theft or trivialized. Microsoft was also working on touch based devices. The fruit of their labor was Surface. The size of a foosball table. Apple's solution fit in the palm of your hand & in your pocket.

Exactly!

Legend has it that Apple was working on multi-touch glass screens in the early 2000's... first for a tablet device but then for a phone.

Yes... the concept of "multi-touch" had existed for some time. But it was Apple's implementation of multi-touch that was so groundbreaking. That's the part that people seem to ignore.

So what was Apple working on in the years leading up to the iPhone launch?

I agree with you... that article gave no credit for any of the work Apple did.
post #192 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


Well, thank you very much. You have validated my point that android was so dissimilar to iphone that it is wrong to say android copied from iphone.

So can we stop this rhetoric nonsense that everyone copied from Apple.

 

I didn't say everyone copied from Apple. Which version of Android are you referring to? What did Google develop as far as UI that was unique? You haven't mentioned a thing.


Dont back pedal. This debate is about android copying ios.

Does the original iphone/ios has app drawer, pull down notification, back and multi task key, widget screen, live wallpaper or menu? NO!

Now ios has pull down and live wallpaper which came after android.
post #193 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

Dont back pedal. This debate is about android copying ios.

Does the original iphone/ios has app drawer, pull down notification, back and multi task key, widget screen, live wallpaper or menu? NO!

Now ios has pull down and live wallpaper which came after android.

If the debate is about Android copying iOS then why are you the one claiming that Apple is stealing by licensing from ARM? It sounds like you're the one backpedaling.

"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 #194 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

Dont back pedal. This debate is about android copying ios.

Does the original iphone/ios has app drawer, pull down notification, back and multi task key, widget screen, live wallpaper or menu? NO!

Now ios has pull down and live wallpaper which came after android.

If the debate is about Android copying iOS then why are you the one claiming that Apple is stealing by licensing from ARM? It sounds like you're the one backpedaling.

I didn't say anything about Apple stealing from Arm at all. Please read properly. 1tongue.gif

All I said was apple didn't invent arm chipset set but is using it. Android is using flick scrolling which apple didn't invent. I said if you called the latter stealing then the former must be stealing as well (which is not the case here i.e neither is considered stealing)
post #195 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post


But hey samsung is one of the main contributor to 3g /4G. Without some of samsung 4g/lte frand licensing none of the iPhones are possible. But then Apple still refuses to pay for them. So apple is still the bigger jersey here by first stealing and suing first.

 

You do know what FRAND Licensing is don't you? Apple did not refuse to pay Samsung for FRAND licensing. They refused to pay quite a bit more than Samsung was charging other companies. They also offered to license Samsung some of their patents. Samsung refused. HTC made an agreement with Apple though.


This is so laughable. I owned something and I want to sell it at a price. If you don't like then don't buy it. Why apple give stupid excuses? Because samsung wanted to charge more? Apple priced its phone higher outside of U.S. Can I take one home for free since I don't like the higher price charged? A thief is still a thief.
post #196 of 216
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post
I owned something and I want to sell it at a price.

 

No, see, that’s not how it works. 

 
Because samsung wanted to charge more? Apple priced its phone higher outside of U.S.

 

If you cared about anything you’ve said anywhere in this thread, you’d know this isn’t anywhere near a comparable argument.

 
A thief is still a thief.

 

Prove Apple stole anything.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #197 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post
I owned something and I want to sell it at a price.

 

No, see, that’s not how it works. 

 
Because samsung wanted to charge more? Apple priced its phone higher outside of U.S.

 

If you cared about anything you’ve said anywhere in this thread, you’d know this isn’t anywhere near a comparable argument.

 
A thief is still a thief.

 

Prove Apple stole anything.


Didn't the itc ruled that apple infringed samsung frand patents and have the 3gs/4 banned? How did the one who stole got away? By getting its country president to veto it. The great American nepotism to protect a thief at play.
post #198 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

This is so laughable. I owned something and I want to sell it at a price. If you don't like then don't buy it. Why apple give stupid excuses? Because samsung wanted to charge more? Apple priced its phone higher outside of U.S. Can I take one home for free since I don't like the higher price charged? A thief is still a thief.

You obviously don't know what FRAND is.
post #199 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

I didn't say anything about Apple stealing from Arm at all. Please read properly. 1tongue.gif

All I said was apple didn't invent arm chipset set but is using it. Android is using flick scrolling which apple didn't invent. I said if you called the latter stealing then the former must be stealing as well (which is not the case here i.e neither is considered stealing)

You wrote, "Apple did not invent the flick scrolling or the grid of icons or a rectangle slate or the smartphone os or 2g/3g/4G/wifi tech used or slide to unlock or ARM chipset. All I am saying is if we want to accuse Google of copying then you must also accuse apple of copying as well."

You mention copying after you state Apple is using ARM. Your implication is clear. You even segued into the next sentence with "All I am saying is…"

"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 #200 of 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobim08 View Post

I didn't say anything about Apple stealing from Arm at all. Please read properly. 1tongue.gif

All I said was apple didn't invent arm chipset set but is using it. Android is using flick scrolling which apple didn't invent. I said if you called the latter stealing then the former must be stealing as well (which is not the case here i.e neither is considered stealing)

You wrote, "Apple did not invent the flick scrolling or the grid of icons or a rectangle slate or the smartphone os or 2g/3g/4G/wifi tech used or slide to unlock or ARM chipset. All I am saying is if we want to accuse Google of copying then you must also accuse apple of copying as well."

You mention copying after you state Apple is using ARM. Your implication is clear. You even segued into the next sentence with "All I am saying is…"

Yeah. I mentioned "if". So if you want to ridiculously accuse android of copying something apple didn't invent then I can also ridiculously do the same to apple. You want to do a insanely nonsensical debate please go ahead. I won't indulge you.
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