NYT: Steve Jobs feels Google betrayed Apple by mimicking iPhone

191012141518

Comments

  • Reply 221 of 344
    daveswdavesw Posts: 406member
    Is Google becoming a ravenous rat?





    Google is a one hit wonder and they know it.



    That is why Google seems to be everywhere, launching or announcing half-assed 2nd-rate wannabe products and throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. They add or change features and modify the business model.



    Other than that there is absolutely very little innovation in Google products.



    Some Google products have nice features and are actually helpful, but there's nothing that I can think of that can make me say.."wow that's brilliant".



    They're good at search (and maybe mail). that's it.



    and if you think Google is the model company everyone think they are. Think again. They're one of the most evil companies out there.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google











    iPhone = Android



    iPad = Chrome OS Tablet



    iTunes = Youtube/Google Video/Google Music Search



    Apple App Store = Android Market



    Twitter/Facebook = Google Buzz / Orkut



    Yahoo Mail!/Hotmail = Gmail (this one's ok but can still be categorized as a "wannabe" product)



    MS Office/Outlook = Google Docs/Google Apps



    Paypal = Google Checkout



    IE/Firefox/Safari = Chrome



    Amazon/eBay/Shopping.com = Product Search



    Flickr = Picasa



    Amazon/Barnes and Noble = Google Books



    and so on...







    apple is the inovator



    google is the immitator
  • Reply 222 of 344
    easy288easy288 Posts: 80member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davesw View Post


    Is Google becoming a ravenous rat?





    Google is a one hit wonder and they know it.



    That is why Google seems to be everywhere, launching or announcing half-assed 2nd-rate wannabe products and throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. They add or change features and modify the business model.



    Other than that there is absolutely very little innovation in Google products.



    Some Google products have nice features and are actually helpful, but there's nothing that I can think of that can make me say.."wow that's brilliant".



    They're good at search (and maybe mail). that's it.



    and if you think Google is the model company everyone think they are. Think again. They're one of the most evil companies out there.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google











    iPhone = Android



    iPad = Chrome OS Tablet



    iTunes = Youtube/Google Video/Google Music Search



    Apple App Store = Android Market



    Twitter/Facebook = Google Buzz / Orkut



    Yahoo Mail!/Hotmail = Gmail (this one's ok but can still be categorized as a "wannabe" product)



    MS Office/Outlook = Google Docs/Google Apps



    Paypal = Google Checkout



    IE/Firefox/Safari = Chrome



    Amazon/eBay/Shopping.com = Product Search



    Flickr = Picasa



    Amazon/Barnes and Noble = Google Books



    and so on...







    apple is the inovator



    google is the immitator





    I do get the point of your post. However, many of the items listed on the left were NOT Apple products. So the point of your post gets 'lost' in all this information.
  • Reply 223 of 344
    replicantreplicant Posts: 121member
    The NYT article is really worth reading.



    As mentioned in the article, I do hope Apple gives Google a black eye with Bing for their betrayal. Personally, the search results between both engines are not that different. Try it.



    People are tired of Google preaching this Don't be evil mantra while acting like the corporate beast that they are. And they are always yapping about open source. Well, it's only because it serves them, i.e. advertising business. And people swallow it because hey, a bunch of geeks can do no evil, right? Well, open your eyes folks.



    Why don't they open source their search algorithm if they are so "good".



    I changed my default search engine to Bing because I favor Apple. Google is the new Microsoft.
  • Reply 224 of 344
    daveswdavesw Posts: 406member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by easy288 View Post


    I do get the point of your post. However, many of the items listed on the left were NOT Apple products. So the point of your post gets 'lost' in all this information.



    my point: Google products are 2nd rate half-baked products copied from MULTIPLE companies, not just Apple. And Google is willing to do EVIL things if it involves money, like screwing their partners (Motorola Droid vs. Nexus One for example). censorship in china, etc.
  • Reply 225 of 344
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davesw View Post


    my point: Google products are 2nd rate half-baked products copied from MULTIPLE companies, not just Apple. And Google is willing to do EVIL things if it involves money, like screwing their partners (Motorola Droid vs. Nexus One for example). censorship in china, etc.



    Yes indeed, and this is exactly where the Google evilness comes from. Google is in the business of undermining other companies intellectual properties and businesses in order to make profits in the advertising market. They copy other companies technologies and give it away for free in order for Google to make profits in the ads market.



    Someone needs to teach Google a lesson by giving away advertising on the Web and Mobile devices for free. That would undermine Googles business and really make them feel the heat.



    Someone needs to redefine the advertising market and I think Apple may be just the company to do it.



    Time will tell.
  • Reply 226 of 344
    gariongarion Posts: 62member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    My bet is on Cuil.



    http://www.cuil.com infused with a $1 Billion from Apple and you'd see Apple quickly switching from Google and not missing a thing.



    Very interesting. Thanks for the link. I had never heard of this search engine before, but it sure looks like an interesting candidate for a buy-out should Apple choose to challenge Google in search. I for one would like to see that happen.
  • Reply 227 of 344
    foo2foo2 Posts: 1,077member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Brainless View Post


    No, facts don't support Jobs and your post is contradictory. Apple "officially" entered phone business in 2007. It is not known to public when exactly they started to work on it - probably sooner than Google bought their group, but not by much. Or you think Google entered phone business in the end of 2008 ?



    Nice try. I've provided quite a bit of consistent info that happens to contradict you, including the fact that Google was about 2 years later to market than Apple (even longer if you count multitouch), along with some rather important dates associated with just one of Apple's iPhone patents. I therefore think it's about time for you to put up some relevant info.
  • Reply 228 of 344
    -ag--ag- Posts: 123member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    I'll take the next generation search engine by the original designers who made Google what it became over Mahalo, if I had to choose.



    http://www.cuil.com/info/management/





    As another fan of Cuil it may interest other mac users that you can use it instead of Google as your default search in safari...



    http://www.cuil.com/info/faqs/guides/safari.php
  • Reply 229 of 344
    -ag--ag- Posts: 123member
    Quote:

    davesw



    RED=recommendations



    iPhone = Android



    iPad = Chrome OS Tablet



    iTunes = Youtube/Google Video/Google Music Search



    Apple App Store = Android Market



    Twitter/Facebook = Google Buzz / Orkut Not really relevant to an apple argument



    Yahoo Mail!/Hotmail = Gmail Maybe if you mentioned MobileMe this one would have held more ground



    MS Office/Outlook = Google Docs/Google Apps Again iWork would have been better comparison



    Paypal = Google Checkout One click in itunes store??



    IE/Firefox/Safari = Chrome Just safari would have been enough



    Amazon/eBay/Shopping.com = Product Search relevance??



    Flickr = Picasa How about iphoto or aperture instead?



    Amazon/Barnes and Noble = Google Books Obvious one here iBookstore!!



    If you are going to try and make a point try to only use the products that apple makes.
  • Reply 230 of 344
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    Not much to ad and I do not wish to distract.



    I do, however, want to thank all of the posters in this thread (well, most of them anyway) for the best reading on a weekend that I can recall in a long, long time.



    Not to mention a lovely stroll down memory lane.
  • Reply 231 of 344
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by justflybob View Post


    Not much to ad and I do not wish to distract.



    I do, however, want to thank all of the posters in this thread (well, most of them anyway) for the best reading on a weekend that I can recall in a long, long time.



    Not to mention a lovely stroll down memory lane.



    Seconded.
  • Reply 232 of 344
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post


    Someone needs to teach Google a lesson by giving away advertising on the Web and Mobile devices for free. That would undermine Googles business and really make them feel the heat.



    That would, indeed be HUGE. Do unto them......
  • Reply 233 of 344
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post


    Nice try. I've provided quite a bit of consistent info that happens to contradict you, including the fact that Google was about 2 years later to market than Apple (even longer if you count multitouch), along with some rather important dates associated with just one of Apple's iPhone patents. I therefore think it's about time for you to put up some relevant info.



    He won't because he can't. That's the trouble with these uninformed trolls.
  • Reply 234 of 344
    daveswdavesw Posts: 406member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davesw View Post


    my point: Google products are 2nd rate half-baked products copied from MULTIPLE companies, not just Apple. And Google is willing to do EVIL things if it involves money, like screwing their partners (Motorola Droid vs. Nexus One for example). censorship in china, etc.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by -AG- View Post


    RED=recommendations



    iPhone = Android



    iPad = Chrome OS Tablet



    iTunes = Youtube/Google Video/Google Music Search



    Apple App Store = Android Market



    Twitter/Facebook = Google Buzz / Orkut Not really relevant to an apple argument



    Yahoo Mail!/Hotmail = Gmail Maybe if you mentioned MobileMe this one would have held more ground



    MS Office/Outlook = Google Docs/Google Apps Again iWork would have been better comparison



    Paypal = Google Checkout One click in itunes store??



    IE/Firefox/Safari = Chrome Just safari would have been enough



    Amazon/eBay/Shopping.com = Product Search relevance??



    Flickr = Picasa How about iphoto or aperture instead?



    Amazon/Barnes and Noble = Google Books Obvious one here iBookstore!!



    If you are going to try and make a point try to only use the products that apple makes.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davesw View Post


    my point: Google products are 2nd rate half-baked products copied from MULTIPLE companies, not just Apple. And Google is willing to do EVIL things if it involves money, like screwing their partners (Motorola Droid vs. Nexus One for example). censorship in china, etc.







    that was my reply to a similar post.
  • Reply 235 of 344
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JaylikeBird View Post


    Steve Jobs needs to get over himself.



    That's the same clap trap you posted on Macrumors.
  • Reply 236 of 344
    molermoler Posts: 11member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTel View Post


    All of these companies are in a fight for mindshare as it is called competition. Will they ever really kill-off each other: no. They'll just take it to the next level of whatever future tech battleground that will be...



    Until Jobs started whining about Google "being evil" it was normal business, now it is a soap opera.



    Imagine that there is no Android OS and other multitouch phones. iPhone 3G would cost 599$ with 3 years contract and 3GS would be 999$ with 5 years contract (and a pint of blood for tethering).

    Jailbreaking the iPhone would be a felony and copy/paste would (still) be the most wanted iPhone's feature.
  • Reply 237 of 344
    g3prog3pro Posts: 669member
    Didn't the LG Prada get announced before the iPhone?



    http://gizmovil.com/files/2007/05/img_9025.jpg
  • Reply 238 of 344
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Didn't the LG Prada get announced before the iPhone?



    http://gizmovil.com/files/2007/05/img_9025.jpg



    You people really need to get some new material.
  • Reply 239 of 344
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    This is the infamous "look and feel" case, which is perhaps not quite what you think it is. Apple was essentially forced to do a license agreement with Microsoft in 1985 for certain elements in the Mac interface, in order to keep Microsoft in the Mac software development business. Microsoft then used this license as a partial defense in the look and feel case, but it's not clear (from the legal discussions I've read) that Apple ever had much of a chance to win, in any event.



    I vaguely remember the judge in this case saying something to the effect, "The desktop GUI arrangement is similar to the arrangement of a 'home's living room' and you can't patent a home's living room!" ergo Apple loses...what a dink!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Reply 240 of 344
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Moler View Post


    Until Jobs started whining about Google "being evil" it was normal business, now it is a soap opera.



    Imagine that there is no Android OS and other multitouch phones. iPhone 3G would cost 599$ with 3 years contract and 3GS would be 999$ with 5 years contract (and a pint of blood for tethering).

    Jailbreaking the iPhone would be a felony and copy/paste would (still) be the most wanted iPhone's feature.





    Brilliant and right on!
Sign In or Register to comment.