or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Android docs reveal before iPhone, Google's plan was a Java button phone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Android docs reveal before iPhone, Google's plan was a Java button phone - Page 4

post #121 of 168
As always.. a follow up to my last post:

Apple and most of all Microsoft has seen that they might do well working together (see Office for iPad). What y'all say to a new Tag Team now that "Blow-hard Ballmer" has retired? Siri could use some help and Cortana (see above linked post) looked like she could keep up using Bing as her backend manager... so who needs Google?

My opinion... but what made Google great in the day, wasn't so much that their search worked so well, but because it was an uncluttered minimal interface both for search and results, as opposed to Yahoo, Excite, AltaVista and other so-called "web portals with search" of the time. They've Google has since become intrusive, cluttered, and worst of all... unreliable in some respects due to their ballyhooed algorithms throwing up ads and SEO-optimized product aggregators and glorified telephone books first. In Germany it's a rather large problem for users that still don't know "how to search", and just click on top results rather than looking at the URLs first. Lots of nasty stuff hidden in those top results that need cleaning up later.
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 #122 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post


If interested, Cortana versus Siri versus Google Now | Windows Phone Central and a major review from Peter Bright at Ars was a good read.

Now ask me if I could give a hoot how good it is or isn't.... 1smoking.gif

Thanks for the link. Microsoft has done a pretty credible job with Cortana, especially as both Apple and Google had a significant head start. I'm surprised actually.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #123 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Repeating something false doesn't make it true, but if you must make shit up at least to make shit up that can't so easily make you words look foolish. You know, maybe innovate a new anti-Apple slogan instead of iterating the same old tired one.
 
iterate |ˈitəˌrāt|
verb [ with obj. ]
perform or utter repeatedly.

innovate |ˈinəˌvāt|
verb [ no obj. ]
make changes in something established, esp. by introducing new methods, ideas, or products

"Repeating something false doesn't make it true"

 

Uh, people do that all of the time as a means of brainwashing.  If you say something (whether it's true or false) people eventually THINK it's true, even though it isn't with enough repetition.  Remember Bush's "read my lips"?  His quote was repeated tons of times enough to convince people to vote for him, even though it turned out not to be true.      People are easily manipulated with repetition.

 

Lots of institutions rely on repeating falsehoods to promote something and for a lot them, it actually works.  

post #124 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philotech View Post

There's good reason to the fundamental principle that there is no (legal) ownership to ideas. I know the US patent system has its difficulties with this principle because it makes it far too easy to overcome, creating a whole industry of patent trolls and legal abuse.
But every time I read how Apple stole an idea from Android, or Google from Apple, of X from Y, and how one copied the other, I am getting sick. All progress comes from copying, even what makes mankind unique compared to all other animals is our ability to copy and learn something new from it (I know, some other species have a similar, but reduced ability to do so too).
So all please get over the conception that using ("copying") and improving upon other people's / companies' ideas is evil.

Fully agree with you.

Idea that, say, Toshiba could have patented laptop form factor and prevent everyone else from making laptops... is frightening. We would probably still have 4cm tick machines and they would all be - Toshibas.

Or if someone could have patented idea of portable music player, as in portable device capable of reproducing music via earphones, powered from internal battery. No iPods, no music playback from smartphones.

We don't really get THAT many new ideas. Most progress comes from improving someone elses ideas. But what improvement is it! From Étienne Lenoir internal combustion engines to nowadays engines powering supercars. From early 4-bit microprocessors to nowadays Xeons and i7 CPUs. From Wright brothers airplane to nowadays fighter jets and passengers.

Not to mention that improvements on others ideas also gives motivation for original inventors to keep on pushing development. Without fierce competition, would iPhone be at 5s level, where it is right now... or would it still be on, say, 3Gs level? Would we impatiently wait for iPhone 4 to be released in September 2014?
post #125 of 168

Just curious if that last slide is part of the formal evidence or something AI came up with?

 

In the original trial they wanted to show the somewhat famous pictures of Samsung phones that don't look like the iPhone, then the iPhone alone, then Samsung phones after the iPhone that look like the iPhone.  What they excluded are the phones that looked like the iPhone *before* the iPhone was released.  I believe Apple even forced the issue forcing the removal of some Samsung models that looked like the iPhone before it was release saying that they were not 'part of the lawsuit'  Samsung wanted to show pictures of the F700 which was released the year prior to the iPhone.  Apple removed it from the list of infringing devices and objected to Samsung showing pictures of it at the trial.  Smart.   Shady.  But smart.

 

If that last picture is part of the evidence I'm surprised they included the Danger Sidekick.  They craftily included only different colored ones and only showed them in the 'open keyboard' position, but it opens the door for the Samsung defense to include pictures of black closed ones, which look very similar to the iPhone and show that that is one general direction of where things were headed with cell phone evolution.  How can a phone that looks like the iPhone have been released 5 years before the iPhone?

post #126 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

You'll notice that I wrote usually, which means that there are sometimes exceptions to the rule.

So you did. My apologies. 

Always happy to debate an issue with anyone. Once it turns into name calling, I am out of there. 
Reply
Always happy to debate an issue with anyone. Once it turns into name calling, I am out of there. 
Reply
post #127 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

Fully agree with you.

Idea that, say, Toshiba could have patented laptop form factor and prevent everyone else from making laptops... is frightening. We would probably still have 4cm tick machines and they would all be - Toshibas.

Or if someone could have patented idea of portable music player, as in portable device capable of reproducing music via earphones, powered from internal battery. No iPods, no music playback from smartphones.

We don't really get THAT many new ideas. Most progress comes from improving someone elses ideas. But what improvement is it! From Étienne Lenoir internal combustion engines to nowadays engines powering supercars. From early 4-bit microprocessors to nowadays Xeons and i7 CPUs. From Wright brothers airplane to nowadays fighter jets and passengers.

Not to mention that improvements on others ideas also gives motivation for original inventors to keep on pushing development. Without fierce competition, would iPhone be at 5s level, where it is right now... or would it still be on, say, 3Gs level? Would we impatiently wait for iPhone 4 to be released in September 2014?

I think Apple would have been fine. There was competition before and Apple still made the iPhone.
post #128 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Spot on. Serious people here don't give a rat's a** about the Schmidt/Board nonsense. Just straw-men pulled out by some regulars...

Agree with both you and DED. It's a totally silly accusation doesn't deserve repeating over and over.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #129 of 168
Patent law is there to protect your property in what form it comes in every company has patterns and they protect them

And charge for the use of

And patterns are time bound

Some People copy DVDs it's Piracy is against the law but some people believe it's okay ,
Even selling the DVDs . you can justify anything if you try hard enough

Theft is theft
post #130 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macnewsjunkie View Post

Bigger is not innovating. It is simply iterating.  Make a new product category and we can all say you are innovating.  Make one a little bit better and you are iterating.  

Heh. It's innovation when Samsung does it, right? 1wink.gif

"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 #131 of 168

what is a pure idea?

 

such as, if someone said that there should be a smart phone without any specifications

 

what is an idea with full specs and implementation?

 

iphone, all specifications on screen size, internal component, and software design, etc. when iPhone came out in 2007, it was NOT just an idea, it was a full product.

 

before iPhone appeared in 2007, there were many "smartphone" around, such Sony/Ericsson Pa990 or something like that. thus iphone-like or iPhone basically should be patented by apple so that no one else need to be shy away from coping it.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


Fully agree with you.

Idea that, say, Toshiba could have patented laptop form factor and prevent everyone else from making laptops... is frightening. We would probably still have 4cm tick machines and they would all be - Toshibas.

Or if someone could have patented idea of portable music player, as in portable device capable of reproducing music via earphones, powered from internal battery. No iPods, no music playback from smartphones.

We don't really get THAT many new ideas. Most progress comes from improving someone elses ideas. But what improvement is it! From Étienne Lenoir internal combustion engines to nowadays engines powering supercars. From early 4-bit microprocessors to nowadays Xeons and i7 CPUs. From Wright brothers airplane to nowadays fighter jets and passengers.

Not to mention that improvements on others ideas also gives motivation for original inventors to keep on pushing development. Without fierce competition, would iPhone be at 5s level, where it is right now... or would it still be on, say, 3Gs level? Would we impatiently wait for iPhone 4 to be released in September 2014?
post #132 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Agree with both you and DED. It's a totally silly accusation doesn't deserve repeating over and over.
You you serious? You don't think a partner who has been secretly planning to compete with you in every market you are in doesn't have an advantage having their CEO sit on your board? Do you think if Apple knew there were doing so he would have ever been there? One way to tell is how Google handled the info. The company that tells everything they are working on long before it's ready, kept the fact that they were going into these markets from their closest partner who had a place on Apple's board. That's why Jobs was so angry with him.
post #133 of 168
@hill60

The Kogan Agora did eventually ship. It's just another cheap Android phone http://www.kogan.com/au/buy/agora-50-dual-core-smartphone/
post #134 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank pope View Post

I am a Doctor, Lawyer, and Indian Chief
besides being pope.

Let me see now
Where did the iPod,iPhone,iPad
Products that generated billions of dollars of trade
Shoot, copies of these items generate billions of dollars in trade
come from?

Europe - land of the freetards
Or
USA - land where the daring innovator gets protection for a short period of time
(as stipulated in the Constitution)
?

Times up.
Pencils down!

Wait, wait, wait, you're the Pope, and you say Europe is a land of "freetards"?

post #135 of 168
Great article.
post #136 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondm16 View Post
 

 

Sorry but that last line I find offensive. I may now use an Android device but I started out with the first 3 iPhones. My reasoning in changing to Android was features that were then lacking and some that still are from the iPhone and the greater choice and customisation available. I can afford any iPhone right now so brand anyone who buys anything but an iPhone as cheap is utterly wrong.

 

I prefer the craftsmanship that went into this 64 bit powerhouse to any piece of cheap Android junk which is the majority of the 80%.

 

Some suckers are conned by Samsung's marketing into paying more than an iPhone for plastic coated crap.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #137 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


My apologies. I mistakenly thought you believed in the fairytale of how Schmidt stole from Apple.

So speaking to your suggestion that as a matter of ethics Schmidt should have recused himself from iPhone related discussions that 's just what was reported by independent news organizations. Schmidt did voluntarily bow out whenever discussion of the iPhone arose in Apple Board meetings. Still unethical?

Very odd that you seem to have no apparent concerns about either Levinson, now part of yet another Google project (is he stealing information on Apple's health initiatives to benefit Google latest health-focused investment Calico?) or Bill Campbell who had an opportunity to play both sides against the middle. Two of the three remained involved with both Google and Apple after Schmidt had already stepped away and one is still involved in some manner.

 

Schmidt,

is the shit,

who did,

it!

 

I prefer poems to fairytales.

 

Google is an ad agency of the lowest of the low products, they rank somewhere between used car salesmen and compensation lawyers in the scheme of things.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #138 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Absolutely and why Apple has taken them to court.

Unfortunately, it appears that you can take whatever you want, confuse consumers if you're fast enough, create a "dead-ringer copy" (pun intended) and drag the innovator through the dirt by paying off media outlets and purchase channels to push your copy-cat device.

THAT is what is so despicable about Samsung.

THAT is what is so very frustrating for Apple fans and should be looked down upon by any and all a technophile.

THAT is what is at stake here for future tech gadgets and serious innovation.

The very demanding profession of engineering is at stake, because you will not be paid much more than those that only reverse engineer your products and science. Your timespan to recoup investment (ROI) is not 1, 2, 5, or even 20 years... it just became about 6 months.

I personally can't wait for some of the new devices Apple has rumored to actually come to market... especially wearables. At this point everyone "knows" it can't be protected no matter what Apple files in the way of patents, trademarks or copyrights. No matter what those wearables may be or look like, "exact copies" (lookalikes really) will be on the market within 6 months. At this point it wouldn't even surprise me to see a "faux Apple logo" being legally sold and "marketed" from assorted blog and media outlets. The faux logo was the only thing missing from the first Samsung Galaxy packaging and accessories if anyone cares to remember.

This whole scam is surely far more frustrating for Apple employees and engineers: they are expected... no... demanded to recreate/redefine another device/market every 6 months... or else they are DOOMED! Some of those employees and engineers have a lot of their sweat, tears and hard sacrifice paid in stock options and benefits that are tied to the market well-being of Apple. Who's going to want to do this anymore, when it's easier to skip over to Google or Samsung's new SV spy office and reverse engineer/scan what their colleagues at Apple created ... for the same compensation... maybe more! Former Apple engineers are quite valuable I've heard.

Software, trade dress, and assorted tech patents and protections aren't ideal at the moment and should be reformed. The powers that be better have something planned to stem the tide of "court sanctioned IP theft", or this is going to be the last straw that broke America's back.

You've handed manufacturing on a silver platter to Mexico, Latin America and most of all Asia. You allow massive holes in your tax code to allow even Apple to drive a truck with billions through them without recourse. So now you're on the road to allowing massive reverse engineering of your IP to be sold alongside your American innovations for practically nothing, calling into question why anyone would want to study math, physics and engineering.

In summary, it's not Apple that is doomed. Technology and innovation itself is doomed if this injustice is allowed to proceed in the direction it seems to be heading. You will be "communizing" tech... rather than democratizing it. Is that really what we want?

The definition of injustice encapsulated in a nutshell.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #139 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post

Here's my explanation of why Apple is suing Samsung rather than Google.  It has to do with an element of patent law termed Indirect Infringement.  


First, let's speak about direct infringement:

Google, when it markets and sells its Nexus line of phones and tablets incorporating Android, can be accused of direct infringement of Apple's patents. Direct infringement is the act of developing and selling a product that infringes another company's patent. If Google never sold a Nexus device, but merely kept Android in a lab somewhere, then there would be no evidence that Google directly infringed Apple's patents; there would truly be no harm done and so no reason for Apple to litigate against Google. But Google does sell Android devices and so could be sued by Apple over parts of Android Apple feels infringes its patents.  However, the fact that Google sells relatively few Nexus devices means that the harm done by Google's direct infringement is relatively minor.


Now let's discuss indirect infringement.



If a company develops a technology, in this case Google's development of Android, and then licenses that technology to another company (doesn't matter for what licensing fee or no fee at all) and the licensing company (Samsung, for example) then incorporates that technology into its products, that company can be accused of indirect infringement. Of course, the company would have to be reasonably aware that the licensed technology infringed another company's patents. And it's the responsibility of the licensor to inform its licensees of any potential areas for infringement. But it's reasonable, given the high visibility and awareness of the presence of patents in the consumer electronics industry, that Google knew Android contained technology Apple would claim as its intellectual property and it's reasonable that Samsung would also know this, so there's little argument that could be made Samsung didn't know this.  Therefore, Samsung can be accused of indirect infringement, which carries the same burden of damages as does direct infringement. And since Samsung is the company that sells the most product containing technology Apple claims as their intellectual property, it's Samsung, not Google, that represents the most damage to Apple and therefore reasonable that Apple would sue Samsung rather than Google.



Finally, Apple's action against Samsung is also a salvo against Google. When licensing technology for use in an end product, as Samsung licensed Android for use in its phones and tablets, a smart company will insist that the licensing agreement include an indemnity clause, where the licensor (Google) agrees to indemnify the licensee (Samsung) in the event the incorporated technology is found to do harm. If Samsung has such language in the license agreement with Google, then Samsung will be able to go after Google to recover damages it is forced to pay Apple. Then Google and Samsung can fight it out between them with respect to which infringing parts came from Android and which were later added by Samsung on top of Android (slide to unlock, for example, appears to be a Samsung addition). To Apple, it matters not how the subsequent battle between Samsung and Google unfolds; Apple, if successful in its lawsuit against Samsung, will have recovered damages from the entity that was proximate in causing the most damages. 



 



Dilger and other columnists and analysts may be excused for not speaking to the indirect infringement angle as to the reason Apple is going after Samsung; I wouldn't expect these folks to be especially conversant in patent law. However, it does cast some light on Mueller that he hasn't made this point. Given that it's a point in favor of Apple behaving rationally in its actions, one must wonder why such an obvious point about patent law would fail to warrant mention.



Very insightful, thank you! I learn something new here every day.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #140 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I think Steve should have mentioned the fact that it was also a mobile applications device in addition to the other three.  That would have been even more effective in his presentation.

The App Store came a year later.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #141 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post


The App Store came a year later.

 

WebApps were immediately available.

 

Goodbye Flash, hello HTML 5.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #142 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipsy View Post


In the case of Eric Schmidt he did excuse himself for the iPhone meetings of the board, that became clear with the communication by Apple when Schmidt quit the board.
“Eric has been an excellent Board member for Apple, investing his valuable time, talent, passion and wisdom to help make Apple successful,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “Unfortunately, as Google enters more of Apple’s core businesses, with Android and now Chrome OS, Eric’s effectiveness as an Apple Board member will be significantly diminished, since he will have to recuse himself from even larger portions of our meetings due to potential conflicts of interest. Therefore, we have mutually decided that now is the right time for Eric to resign his position on Apple’s Board.”

There are two stories going around, the one about Eric Schmidt knowing about the iPhone before release and that of Android suddenly changing course after the presentation of the iPhone (which DED is making an attempt to defend here). Both stories can't be right at the same time, they contradict each other. If Eric Schmidt saw the iPhone before release then Google wouldn't be surprised. It's one or the other or neither, but the Eric Schmidt story seems very unlikely to be true.

Both stories can certainly be true. If Schmidt knew about the iPhone before its release and promptly changed Android's direction, it would look as though he had spied on Apple. By waiting until the iPhone was released, he could avoid that charge.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #143 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

Both stories can certainly be true. If Schmidt knew about the iPhone before its release and promptly changed Android's direction, it would look as though he had spied on Apple. By waiting until the iPhone was released, he could avoid that charge.

Huh?? After the iPhone was released everyone knew about it. If Schmidt kept whatever he knew to himself and didn't share it with the Android guys, at least until it was public knowledge. . . well just sayin.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #144 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Do you think Apple would have invited him to serve as a director if there were questions about his honesty and ethics?

Anyway. if you want to know a bit more about him this article has some background.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/eric-schmidt-is-the-executive-chairman-of-google-really-the-arrogant-defender-of-tax-avoidance-that-his-critics-claim-8418153.html

People change. Remember the Steve Jobs/Schmidt cafè chat? The falling out was widely publicised.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #145 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

People change. Remember the Steve Jobs/Schmidt cafè chat? The falling out was widely publicised.

I can't remember the details of what that conversation supposedly was. What were they talking about?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #146 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I can't remember the details of what that conversation supposedly was. What were they talking about?

How the Giants were doing that year. Android, most likely.
post #147 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

iPhone was unveiled at the beginning of 2007. 
Schmidt left Apple’s board in late 2009 after Google's release of ChromeOS.

A lot happened in those roughly 30 months, a period of time longer than it took Google to launch Android. 

Google started denigrating the iPhone and tying its features (like Maps) to Android. Apple had to compete directly against Android, even as Schmidt was making dismissive, arrogant comments about how Android would/was/will destroy iOS. So he had to go. 

There were more strategies to leak after the iPhone shipped than at launch. Where would Apple take the iPhone SDK? iOS 3? iOS 4? What about the iPad? Had Schmidt stayed, it would have been harder for Apple to stay ahead of Android. 

Since his departure, Apple has earned all the money in mobile, even if the media and Android Enthusiasts have decided Android was winning because it was serving the low end of the market.

History is interesting but the future is even more so. For instance, how will Google take the high end back from Apple after failing to even get the low middle with the failure of Moto X, Nexus 7, etc? And what will happen to Android if Apple releases a low end iPhone to sell in developing countries?

I find those questions far more interesting and relevant than "what do predisposed fans who didn’t have any real access to the relevant facts think about Schmidt’s role in his position on Apple’s board?" I leave that to GatorGuy and the rest of the Android spin-defense team.

Well said, Sir.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #148 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roly View Post

Oh that'd be awesome!!!


Originally Posted by Marvin


What I'd rather see as an outcome of the lawsuits is not any financial exchange but for Google to be forced to put a message somewhere inside Android that says 'inspired by Apple' and it would be somewhere Android users would have to see it frequently.

I'd prefer to see a message on Android devices saying:

This is a pale imitation of Apple's flagship OS, hastily scrambled together because we are thieves with no moral compass.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #149 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

WebApps were immediately available.

Goodbye Flash, hello HTML 5.

They never took off though, until they found their home as Android apps.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #150 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Huh?? After the iPhone was released everyone knew about it. If Schmidt kept whatever he knew to himself and didn't share it with the Android guys, at least until it was public knowledge. . . well just sayin.

The implication I was trying to make was that if Schmidt got advance warning of the iPhone, he could have forewarned Google, who could then have reformulated their strategy behind closed doors, before explicitly announcing their abrupt change of direction in April 2007.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #151 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I can't remember the details of what that conversation supposedly was. What were they talking about?

Oh, I can't remember the details-ask DED for those. But as I recall, it was supposed to be about Jobs unsuccessfully trying to persuade Schmidt to do something. It might have been the Maps issue; was Jobs annoyed that Google weren't providing Apple with the same level of maps that Android were getting?
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #152 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post


The implication I was trying to make was that if Schmidt got advance warning of the iPhone, he could have forewarned Google, who could then have reformulated their strategy behind closed doors, before explicitly announcing their abrupt change of direction in April 2007.

 

There was 5 months pre-public announcement in January of 2007 since Schmidt joined the board in '06. There was 22 months post announcement since Android 1.0 was released with the G1. Anyone who has used Android 1.0 should know that it was far from anything but a hastily put together response to the iPhone...it sucked...it was no threat. And Android had no legs until the Moto Droid which was a success due to Advertising (which Verizon hastily destroyed).

 

I just don't get how the Schmidt thing makes sense in context of timeline...nor do I get what it's supposed to prove. Everything is possible exactly as it happened without the added step of corporate espionage. It's borderline ad hominem  or whatever the appropriate fallacy is.

post #153 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

How the Giants were doing that year. Android, most likely.

Eli threw 3 home runs, but then threw an interruption. lol.gif
Edited by dasanman69 - 4/15/14 at 7:00am
"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 #154 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

The implication I was trying to make was that if Schmidt got advance warning of the iPhone, he could have forewarned Google, who could then have reformulated their strategy behind closed doors, before explicitly announcing their abrupt change of direction in April 2007.

Ah, gotcha now. So Rubin may have faked being surprised to throw off those who might have suspected Schmidt. Well I suppose anything is possible, including Eric Schmidt doing just what he should have and keeping his two positions separate just like Levinson and Campbell supposedly did.
Edited by Gatorguy - 4/15/14 at 12:08pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #155 of 168
I miss my Palm Treo. That thing was literally a brick,
I also miss my Palm Pre.
I often wish Apple would release a small, simple phone just to mess with the market.

F
post #156 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by junkdrop1 View Post

I miss my Palm Treo. That thing was literally a brick,
I also miss my Palm Pre.
I often wish Apple would release a small, simple phone just to mess with the market.

F

Mess with which market, exactly? 2013 had 1B smartphone buyers; the end of the dumb phone is near:




http://readwrite.com/2013/08/14/the-death-of-the-dumb-phone-is-near#awesm=~oBw18mYjkuMVV4
http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/13/smartphones-outsell-dumb-phones-globally/
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #157 of 168

This is exactly like when a guy hits on a hot girl and after she turns him down he tells everyone she's an ugly slut -- and then dates her twin sister.

post #158 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Ah, gotcha now. So Rubin may have faked being surprised to throw off those who might have suspected Schmidt. Well I suppose anything is possible, including Eric Schmidt doing just what he should have and keeping his two positions separate just like Levinson and Campbell supposedly did.

 

Google had someone on Apple's board of directors when they were developing the iPhone -- and Jobs had a gentleman's agreement that Google wasn't going to make a phone. That's why Steve Jobs got so mad at one time he said; "We're going to war" -- if my memory serves me.

 

The other advanced warning for the competition was that the iPhone as assembled at Samsung's facilities -- so they'd know every detail of how to build one.

 

Both companies had a privileged relationship with Apple and they both stabbed them in the back -- like when Bill Gates took the Apple API and called it Windows -- after helping to rip off CP/M for IBM and calling it DOS of course.

 

I guess that's just business -- but why are the courts and everyone else acting like everybody didn't copy Apple? It's a hell of a lot more than just a grid of icons on a screen -- there were a million OTHER ways a smart phone could have been designed. All the companies that ripped off Apple are still around, and all the companies that didn't did quite poorly. It's almost like the lesson of nuclear proliferation; get nukes however you can -- those without them get invaded for their adherence to treaties.

 

Most people are good, most companies act like Hyenas but without the fancy etiquette. 

post #159 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post

Google had someone on Apple's board of directors when they were developing the iPhone -- and Jobs had a gentleman's agreement that Google wasn't going to make a phone. That's why Steve Jobs got so mad at one time he said; "We're going to war" -- if my memory serves me.

I don't think your memory is serving you well. I've not ever seen a mention of any gentleman's agreement about not building a phone. Google was signaling an upcoming "Google Phone" long before the iPhone ever became public. It wasn't any secret, didn't catch Apple off-guard, and Mr. Jobs would have known about it before Eric Schmidt was ever invited to join Apple's BOD.

What you probably were thinking of was Mr. Jobs telling Sergey and Co. not to offer multi-touch capabilities, something already baked into Android but not activated out of deference to his request. Not long afterwards Palm came out with a touch-enabled phone OS and a smartphone offering multi-touch and altho Mr Jobs threatened he never followed thru and allowed Palm to continue selling it, never bringing a lawsuit. At that point Android would have been odd man out, the only one of the three not having the feature. Google made the only business decision that made sense if Android was going to be offered; activate the multi-touch Android already had. That's what pissed Mr. Jobs off according to popular accounts of it.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #160 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post

Google had someone on Apple's board of directors when they were developing the iPhone -- and Jobs had a gentleman's agreement that Google wasn't going to make a phone. That's why Steve Jobs got so mad at one time he said; "We're going to war" -- if my memory serves me.

The other advanced warning for the competition was that the iPhone as assembled at Samsung's facilities -- so they'd know every detail of how to build one.

Both companies had a privileged relationship with Apple and they both stabbed them in the back -- like when Bill Gates took the Apple API and called it Windows -- after helping to rip off CP/M for IBM and calling it DOS of course.

I guess that's just business -- but why are the courts and everyone else acting like everybody didn't copy Apple? It's a hell of a lot more than just a grid of icons on a screen -- there were a million OTHER ways a smart phone could have been designed. All the companies that ripped off Apple are still around, and all the companies that didn't did quite poorly. It's almost like the lesson of nuclear proliferation; get nukes however you can -- those without them get invaded for their adherence to treaties.

Most people are good, most companies act like Hyenas but without the fancy etiquette. 

And the iPhone wasn't built in Samsung facilities.

The timetable allows for everything to have happened as it did without a super spy, a good actor, and a Samsung built iPhone. A wholly different part of the Samsung conglomerate manufactured a few components of the iPhone and that's it. I'm not sure if it was that way then but now the chips are still Apple's designs anyways.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Android docs reveal before iPhone, Google's plan was a Java button phone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Android docs reveal before iPhone, Google's plan was a Java button phone