Why not? Google has no qualms about competing with Apple in the mobile device front, so why should Apple keep the gloves on when it involves search engines?
Google doesn't do anything great except search, everything else is underbaked, never will innovate on Apple's level - another copycat. Premium quality will always trump freeware. The fact that Apple looks at Microsoft as an option for search shows that Apple has a special kind of confidence in its own ability to innovate. Remarkable!
Definitely agree.
Google is a one-hit wonder. they're good at search (and maybe mail). but other than that their products are 2nd-rate half-baked wannabes.
And steve is right when he said google was evil.
Google has censored search results in China for FOUR YEARS.
Google's mantra seems to be "don't do evil. unless it involves money".
Why not? Google has no qualms about competing with Apple in the mobile device front, so why should Apple keep the gloves on when it involves search engines?
Apple should make a search engine that kills google. It would serve them right.
1) MS and Google were writing programs for Macs when their marketshare was much, much lower. And since the market has grown the number of Mac sales and their installed base is more than sufficient to be worth of support.
2) Your changing up your argument now. Your previous suggestion made no mention of Macs or it being an issue of low Mac marketshare, but of MS and Google not writing any SW for Apple.
3) It's foolish to think that publicly traded companies will choose to make less money because of some argument. These company can work together and fight at the same time. They are multi-faceted and complex structures with a simple goal: make money.
4) Just the other week a popular gaming company announced they are porting their popular gaming engine to OS X. Maybe they'll use it for the iPhone OS, but it really doesn't matter as games aren't exactly a good argument against Mac development as a whole as Apple has never supported games well in HW and SW.
While Mac may be increasing in the market today. By arguing over patents makes Apple look childish and weak. If they allowed their patents open for other companies to use, then they could still make money off of them. While Mac is popular for its inventions and ingenuity, they are kept versatile through MS and Google. If Jobs plans to remove Flash, fine. If Jobs plans to remove FoxFire, fine. But when you piss off MS and Google they will just try even harder to make items on the market that prove better then Apple has all together. Hard to believe I know, but just imagine.
While Mac may be increasing in the market today. By arguing over patents makes Apple look childish and weak. If they allowed their patents open for other companies to use, then they could still make money off of them.
So let me get this straight. You do think companies should spend money obtaining patents, but when it comes to owning them you don't think they should not protect them? Seriously?
Quote:
If Jobs plans to remove Flash, fine. If Jobs plans to remove FoxFire, fine.
Jobs or Apple has made no statement or move to remove Flash. It comes pre-installed on every single Mac.
I have no idea what your removal of Firefox statement is on about and everything else you wrote has already been addressed in an earlier post.
Lots of hyperventilation here. Unnecessary, in my view.
This is a great battle, and one that Apple is poised to win in the long run. Why? Four reasons:
1) Unlike Apple, Google has no clue regarding hardware. Apple creates a cohesive hardware/software system that Google can never match (and will cost them a lot to try and match).
2) Along the same lines, selling a physical product involves a lot of understanding of different elements the value chain that Google simply has no clue on: dealing with parts suppliers, inbound and outbound logistics, quality control, dealing with wholesalers and retailers an own retail outfits, customer service, warranties, dealing with environmental/emissions issues, and on and on. Google has absolutely no grasp of any of these. They will discover that it is somewhat complicated.
3) Google is heavily dependent on ads for a living and to be able to disrupt a market (that is how they are able to subsidize free email, free GPS, free news, free video). Advertising is a fickle business. It is a market that will come and go in cycles, lurching across different media, different platforms, different brand names, all depending on what is 'du-jour' (newspapers one day, TV next, online after that, maybe social networking after that etc etc).
4) Google is in an awkward position of competing with just about everyone they also collaborate with, in almost every sphere of activity -- basically, their partners in one sphere (say, Mobile OS) are competitors in another (mobile phones). This is not only a schizophrenic way to make a living, but soon, many of their collaborators/competitors will start to tread very wearily.
Bottom line: Google's business model has a soft underbelly in the long run. (This also perhaps explains why they seem to be constantly lurching from one product to another, throwing lots of things at the wall, hoping that something will stick. It is a very scattered, unfocussed, and haphazard strategy, in my view).
So let me get this straight. You do think companies should spend money obtaining patents, but when it comes to owning them you don't think they should not protect them? Seriously?
Jobs or Apple has made no statement or move to remove Flash. It comes pre-installed on every single Mac.
I have no idea what your removal of Firefox statement is on about and everything else you wrote has already been addressed in an earlier post.
They should protect them of course! However making the patents open to the market like shareware would perhaps solve a lot of their problems. If MS uses one of Apple's patents and improves on it, great! Then it would be the same goes for MS if Apple uses that patent instead. I like the open market patent share idea, it allows for people like you or me to take an idea and improve on it without any legal problems.
iPad uses only Safari, that is why the comment about FireFox.
They should protect them of course! However making the patents open to the market like shareware would perhaps solve a lot of their problems. If MS uses one of Apple's patents and improves on it, great! Then it would be the same goes for MS if Apple uses that patent instead. I like the open market patent share idea, it allows for people like you or me to take an idea and improve on it without any legal problems.
What is the point of patents if you aren't going to protect them? The whole point of a patents, copyrights and trademarks are to protect your IP, which occasionally means having to sue others who violate it. Apple has lost to others when it was deemed they were in violation of patent use. Should these smaller companies also have open patents that they can only share, but not profit from?
Apple does invent/write protocols, SW and HW that is submits to standards bodies. Same goes for Google for MS, but make no mistake these are done to further their profits. One of the latest from Apple is HTTP Live Streaming currently used in OS X.
I am a big fan of Google Voice... I will be getting iPhone this Summer, and I'd like to have GV on it as an installed app, not browser based as is the case now, if I understand that correctly...
I have been giving out my GV Ph# to a lot of people as my Main #. If Apple creates a similar App, or better yet, includes that App as part of their Mobile Me, I'd be interested, but... I doubt that I'll be able port - transfer - carry over my GV Ph# to that "Apple Voice", unless FCC orders Google, Apple to open those doors, so that all Ph## are PORTABLE!
Thus, in all this argument, GV is a big concern for me...
In earlier Comments, it was mentioned that Larry and Sergei considered Jobs to be their mentor, and the implication was that if only it was possible to take Eric Schmidt out of that whole picture, things would return to normal, back to good old days of love fest between Apple and Google... I'd love that to be that simple, and possible, but I doubt it... I don't think Google will ever get out of their Android OS. Hopefully Windows Mobilie will bloody Android enough, so that iPhone stands alone, unopposed... Palm is not much of a concern, if any...
But, until there is something better than GV, and preferably Free, or included in Mobile me, with Ph# Portability, this Apple - Google War is a concern for me...
On one hand, I understand that Google didn't want to ignore phones, on other hand, it seems like more about Greed... The could have kept making more $$$ and been a solid ally of Apples, but their ego led them into phones, and now they can't make U-Turn, cause that would make them look like a punished child, as opposed to All Mighty Monstrosity...
For me, going from GV to ATT and Landline Voicemail combo will probably feel like a step down... Also, it'd be a nightmare trying to download all my GV Voicemails, never mind Text Transcripts... We'll see how this all plays out... I doubt that this Apple - Google tension is Good Cop - Bad Cop con, diversion too fool MSFT..., and that behind scenes Apple - Google are laughing buddy buddies.. That would be too much of a Conspiracy Theory..., not to say that I wouldn't mind it to be true, but I doubt it is...
The Other BIG CONCERN is Google crippling Apple on YouTube! How in the world can Apple fight that, when the whole world seems to be MOSTLY on YouTube?
Apple should just give users the ability to change the default search engine from Google to something else on Safari and provide several different choices for people to choose from.
You mean like what Firefox does? Gives you a choice?
Oh no, you can't have that, not with the corporate bickering going on.
Even if Apple gave us a choice, Yahoo is in bed deep with Microsoft, Bing is Microsoft's too and any other search Microsoft could buy they would.
Google is taking Microsoft's share of the smart phone market that Apple doesn't want.
With Apple buying those ad agencies or whatever, with the NC data center going up, I suspect Apple could be copying Google's search/ad system and make it standard on all their hardware somehow.
Apple might be doing something like, "it's our customers and you got to pay us to reach them"
iPad uses only Safari, that is why the comment about FireFox.
Apple doesn't let any interpreted code in apps. There are ways around this by rendering a page on a server and then send the much smaller data to your app. Opera and Skyfire have apps on other platforms with this ability.
Of course, this doesn't help those who want Gecko on their iPhone, butI have to wonder why you want the Gecko engine over the faster WebKit, especially when Mozilla has just release Firefox Mobile for Maemo and they don't even have it for Android so it's silly to think that it's even an option being held back by Apple.
Also, iPhone OS doesn't have to only use Safari, you can make your browser as wish so long as it uses the WebKit framework. There are plenty of browsers available on the App Store that do many different things, and many apps that have browsers built in so you don't have to leave the app to use the "web".
The Other BIG CONCERN is Google crippling Apple on YouTube! How in the world can Apple fight that, when the whole world seems to be MOSTLY on YouTube?
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
¿Que?
Yes, I meant it as a question... And while at it, almost the same with Gmail... It seems like as far as Free Web Mail, it's mainly between Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail.... Probably in that order, but I don't now what that Market Share Pie Chart looks like... Mobile me is probably tiny slice on there, right?
Hope these YouTube and Gmail Qs are addressed here... I am really curious...
Comments
Google doesn't do anything great except search, everything else is underbaked, never will innovate on Apple's level - another copycat. Premium quality will always trump freeware. The fact that Apple looks at Microsoft as an option for search shows that Apple has a special kind of confidence in its own ability to innovate. Remarkable!
Definitely agree.
Google is a one-hit wonder. they're good at search (and maybe mail). but other than that their products are 2nd-rate half-baked wannabes.
And steve is right when he said google was evil.
Google has censored search results in China for FOUR YEARS.
Google's mantra seems to be "don't do evil. unless it involves money".
I hope Apple cleans Google's clock on this. Android is a direct copy of the iPhone, with a few tweaks.
Goggle has never once innovated. They betrayed Steve. Worst of all, they hurt his feelings. Google is the most evil.
2) MS + Yahoo alliance
3) Apple choosing Bing as the default search engine for safari/iphone/ipads
Google's global market share is going to go down. and together with that, their stock price.
bye bye Google.
Why not? Google has no qualms about competing with Apple in the mobile device front, so why should Apple keep the gloves on when it involves search engines?
Apple should make a search engine that kills google. It would serve them right.
How about http://www.mahalo.com/ ?
It's more interesting the cuil.
I wonder what Jason Calacanis would say to an offer from Steve Jobs?
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/
1) MS and Google were writing programs for Macs when their marketshare was much, much lower. And since the market has grown the number of Mac sales and their installed base is more than sufficient to be worth of support.
2) Your changing up your argument now. Your previous suggestion made no mention of Macs or it being an issue of low Mac marketshare, but of MS and Google not writing any SW for Apple.
3) It's foolish to think that publicly traded companies will choose to make less money because of some argument. These company can work together and fight at the same time. They are multi-faceted and complex structures with a simple goal: make money.
4) Just the other week a popular gaming company announced they are porting their popular gaming engine to OS X. Maybe they'll use it for the iPhone OS, but it really doesn't matter as games aren't exactly a good argument against Mac development as a whole as Apple has never supported games well in HW and SW.
While Mac may be increasing in the market today. By arguing over patents makes Apple look childish and weak. If they allowed their patents open for other companies to use, then they could still make money off of them. While Mac is popular for its inventions and ingenuity, they are kept versatile through MS and Google. If Jobs plans to remove Flash, fine. If Jobs plans to remove FoxFire, fine. But when you piss off MS and Google they will just try even harder to make items on the market that prove better then Apple has all together. Hard to believe I know, but just imagine.
Why does compete have to mean 'kill'?
This sounds more like irrational paranoia than anything else...
While Mac may be increasing in the market today. By arguing over patents makes Apple look childish and weak. If they allowed their patents open for other companies to use, then they could still make money off of them.
So let me get this straight. You do think companies should spend money obtaining patents, but when it comes to owning them you don't think they should not protect them? Seriously?
If Jobs plans to remove Flash, fine. If Jobs plans to remove FoxFire, fine.
Jobs or Apple has made no statement or move to remove Flash. It comes pre-installed on every single Mac.
I have no idea what your removal of Firefox statement is on about and everything else you wrote has already been addressed in an earlier post.
This is a great battle, and one that Apple is poised to win in the long run. Why? Four reasons:
1) Unlike Apple, Google has no clue regarding hardware. Apple creates a cohesive hardware/software system that Google can never match (and will cost them a lot to try and match).
2) Along the same lines, selling a physical product involves a lot of understanding of different elements the value chain that Google simply has no clue on: dealing with parts suppliers, inbound and outbound logistics, quality control, dealing with wholesalers and retailers an own retail outfits, customer service, warranties, dealing with environmental/emissions issues, and on and on. Google has absolutely no grasp of any of these. They will discover that it is somewhat complicated.
3) Google is heavily dependent on ads for a living and to be able to disrupt a market (that is how they are able to subsidize free email, free GPS, free news, free video). Advertising is a fickle business. It is a market that will come and go in cycles, lurching across different media, different platforms, different brand names, all depending on what is 'du-jour' (newspapers one day, TV next, online after that, maybe social networking after that etc etc).
4) Google is in an awkward position of competing with just about everyone they also collaborate with, in almost every sphere of activity -- basically, their partners in one sphere (say, Mobile OS) are competitors in another (mobile phones). This is not only a schizophrenic way to make a living, but soon, many of their collaborators/competitors will start to tread very wearily.
Bottom line: Google's business model has a soft underbelly in the long run. (This also perhaps explains why they seem to be constantly lurching from one product to another, throwing lots of things at the wall, hoping that something will stick. It is a very scattered, unfocussed, and haphazard strategy, in my view).
So let me get this straight. You do think companies should spend money obtaining patents, but when it comes to owning them you don't think they should not protect them? Seriously?
Jobs or Apple has made no statement or move to remove Flash. It comes pre-installed on every single Mac.
I have no idea what your removal of Firefox statement is on about and everything else you wrote has already been addressed in an earlier post.
They should protect them of course! However making the patents open to the market like shareware would perhaps solve a lot of their problems. If MS uses one of Apple's patents and improves on it, great! Then it would be the same goes for MS if Apple uses that patent instead. I like the open market patent share idea, it allows for people like you or me to take an idea and improve on it without any legal problems.
iPad uses only Safari, that is why the comment about FireFox.
They should protect them of course! However making the patents open to the market like shareware would perhaps solve a lot of their problems. If MS uses one of Apple's patents and improves on it, great! Then it would be the same goes for MS if Apple uses that patent instead. I like the open market patent share idea, it allows for people like you or me to take an idea and improve on it without any legal problems.
What is the point of patents if you aren't going to protect them? The whole point of a patents, copyrights and trademarks are to protect your IP, which occasionally means having to sue others who violate it. Apple has lost to others when it was deemed they were in violation of patent use. Should these smaller companies also have open patents that they can only share, but not profit from?
Apple does invent/write protocols, SW and HW that is submits to standards bodies. Same goes for Google for MS, but make no mistake these are done to further their profits. One of the latest from Apple is HTTP Live Streaming currently used in OS X.
I have been giving out my GV Ph# to a lot of people as my Main #. If Apple creates a similar App, or better yet, includes that App as part of their Mobile Me, I'd be interested, but... I doubt that I'll be able port - transfer - carry over my GV Ph# to that "Apple Voice", unless FCC orders Google, Apple to open those doors, so that all Ph## are PORTABLE!
Thus, in all this argument, GV is a big concern for me...
In earlier Comments, it was mentioned that Larry and Sergei considered Jobs to be their mentor, and the implication was that if only it was possible to take Eric Schmidt out of that whole picture, things would return to normal, back to good old days of love fest between Apple and Google... I'd love that to be that simple, and possible, but I doubt it... I don't think Google will ever get out of their Android OS. Hopefully Windows Mobilie will bloody Android enough, so that iPhone stands alone, unopposed... Palm is not much of a concern, if any...
But, until there is something better than GV, and preferably Free, or included in Mobile me, with Ph# Portability, this Apple - Google War is a concern for me...
On one hand, I understand that Google didn't want to ignore phones, on other hand, it seems like more about Greed... The could have kept making more $$$ and been a solid ally of Apples, but their ego led them into phones, and now they can't make U-Turn, cause that would make them look like a punished child, as opposed to All Mighty Monstrosity...
For me, going from GV to ATT and Landline Voicemail combo will probably feel like a step down... Also, it'd be a nightmare trying to download all my GV Voicemails, never mind Text Transcripts... We'll see how this all plays out... I doubt that this Apple - Google tension is Good Cop - Bad Cop con, diversion too fool MSFT..., and that behind scenes Apple - Google are laughing buddy buddies.. That would be too much of a Conspiracy Theory..., not to say that I wouldn't mind it to be true, but I doubt it is...
The Other BIG CONCERN is Google crippling Apple on YouTube! How in the world can Apple fight that, when the whole world seems to be MOSTLY on YouTube?
The Other BIG CONCERN is Google crippling Apple on YouTube! How in the world can Apple fight that, when the whole world seems to be MOSTLY on YouTube?
¿Que?
Apple should just give users the ability to change the default search engine from Google to something else on Safari and provide several different choices for people to choose from.
You mean like what Firefox does? Gives you a choice?
Oh no, you can't have that, not with the corporate bickering going on.
Even if Apple gave us a choice, Yahoo is in bed deep with Microsoft, Bing is Microsoft's too and any other search Microsoft could buy they would.
Google is taking Microsoft's share of the smart phone market that Apple doesn't want.
With Apple buying those ad agencies or whatever, with the NC data center going up, I suspect Apple could be copying Google's search/ad system and make it standard on all their hardware somehow.
Apple might be doing something like, "it's our customers and you got to pay us to reach them"
Apple does a truly usable software keyboard, and suddenly Google has one.
Apple introduces the iPad, and a few days later: tada, here's Google showing off its concept of a tablet.
Apple uses a keyboard different than QWERTY?
Wasn't the Android Tablet revealed prior to the iPad?
iPad uses only Safari, that is why the comment about FireFox.
Apple doesn't let any interpreted code in apps. There are ways around this by rendering a page on a server and then send the much smaller data to your app. Opera and Skyfire have apps on other platforms with this ability.
Of course, this doesn't help those who want Gecko on their iPhone, butI have to wonder why you want the Gecko engine over the faster WebKit, especially when Mozilla has just release Firefox Mobile for Maemo and they don't even have it for Android so it's silly to think that it's even an option being held back by Apple.
Also, iPhone OS doesn't have to only use Safari, you can make your browser as wish so long as it uses the WebKit framework. There are plenty of browsers available on the App Store that do many different things, and many apps that have browsers built in so you don't have to leave the app to use the "web".
Originally Posted by macologist:
The Other BIG CONCERN is Google crippling Apple on YouTube! How in the world can Apple fight that, when the whole world seems to be MOSTLY on YouTube?
¿Que?
Yes, I meant it as a question... And while at it, almost the same with Gmail... It seems like as far as Free Web Mail, it's mainly between Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail.... Probably in that order, but I don't now what that Market Share Pie Chart looks like... Mobile me is probably tiny slice on there, right?
Hope these YouTube and Gmail Qs are addressed here... I am really curious...