I'm truly amazed at the level of blatant "sheeplike" responses here. This is serious business, folks. For what it's worth, Apple's surge to dominance is under attack by Android and Jobs knows it. That's why he made the rare appearance at this type of event to bash Android (as well as Blackberry, which poses little threat).
It's now the war of # of activations, which Google started back in May with 160,000 activations/day, then over 200K/day. Then Jobs countered with a higher number and now again with close to 300K. I'm sure Google will respond in kind as well.
iPhone people take note: as much as you want to deny the stats that show Android is about to overtake iPhone for the foreseeable future (and already has for the past 6 months in sale--the articles are aplenty on that), it really behooves Apple to take action now before they become the next Blackberry.
Let the flames begin!
How would you categorize your responses... and your posts on AI forums, in general?
Your "facts" conveniently overlook the significant fact that the iPhone is only one part of the iOS universe. The iPad, iPod touch, and Apple TV (2nd gen) contribute mightily to the ecosystem that is iOS. Many don't seem to get the important fact that voice telephony is just an app. It is not primary, just historical and will fade as technology and business advance.
It also ignores the fact that a vendor that builds an OS for their HW perhaps should be measured against other HW vendors instead of being lumped together with all HW vendors. Those trolls like to paint Apple as somehow losing money and not having an install base to maintain their interests, when it?s quite the opposite, with vendors using Android are doing so because they were on the brink of dying. Now they are barely trending water along with dozens of other companies. Not exactly the success story and Apple-killer they keep trying to say it is.
At my office, there are now more people with Android phones than iPhones. I personally will be sticking with an iPhone, but this is not an obscure issue, it's very real. Apple's not doomed or failing, they just need to watch their backs or they will be surpassed (again).
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
Everyone at my office that bought an Android phone wishes they'd bought an iPhone.
That may be so, but they still bought Android phones.
That may be so, but they still bought Android phones.
Well, then, what do you think happens when they get their next chance, and the availability of iPhones has greatly increased across carriers and retail locations? Shouldn't take a rocket scientist to see that the iPhone juggernaut is going to continue growing, even while the Android Army, through sheer numbers if not individual size, does the same.
Apple is going to rake in plenty of cash during this market expansion. (I'm not making any market share claims, here.) It is unclear to me which company is going to rake in cash from Android. Motorola is a decent bet so far. Google should make out well if they manage to successfully monetize Android via advertisement. But you know, I am really glad that that won't be the iPhone way. I wager dollars to donuts that Android phones end up with advertisements all over the place as opposed to just in the apps that users elect to install (which is where iAd lives).
Being a low level geek can someone tell me what that cryptic code means? Thanks.
He is showing how easily and tersely one can recompile Android from it's publicly available source code. That implies if you want to change some aspect of Android you have the opportunity to edit the source code, recompile, and then install on your handset. This is nerd nirvana but it is a bit naive on at least two counts. It doesn't account for the venality of handset manufacturers (I'm looking at you, Motorola) who try to stifle this capability. It also presumes that more than a tiny fraction of handset owners have the interest and ability to modify and recompile the kernel.
It is also worth noting that for that small fraction of handset owners who care to explore and modify at a low level, the iPhone has a very active and capable jailbreak community that enable the user root access (go to your local hacker, not the Apple Genius Bar for further information).
How do Android appologists rectify the blatant plagiarism of Google biting huge piece of Apple's iOS/iPhone work? They clearly stole the multitouch UI from the iPhone. I don't get how anybody would get behind someone who just does half assed knock offs?
I think it's more of a character issue, it's easier for talentless morons to critique those that innovate and work their ass of, than it is to respect those with skills. Maybe they feel better about their own irrelevance and laziness when they not only stomach but champion the copy cats.
Seems to me that Apple is finally getting to the place that they should be in the tech industry, the top - and all the brats with egg on their faces now get to collectively whine about having the tail view.
Oh c'mon. Apple gets "called out" all the time these days -- it's expected when you're on top. Why shouldn't Steve/Apple call out the competition once in a while too? It's good competition and I don't mind it. I think it keeps everyone on their toes and keeps things interesting. Just my opinion.
On another note, I did find it interesting when Steve pointed out that there has been no hard data provided from Android handset makers of how many phones are being or have been sold? Is this true? Didn't Google say there are at least 200,000 Android activations a day or something like that? That's a lot of phones.
Ya' know...
It would be interesting to find out what comprises an "activation"
On the iOS side, does plugging an ipad into iTunes for the first time count as an activation (I think it does)
When you activate an iPhone (with the carrier) for the first time does it count as an activation (I think it does).
I don't know anything about iPod touches.
What happens if you change SIMS in phones (hand-me-downs) and reactivate them... does that count?
What about OS upgrades/restores to any iOS device -- do those count?
I know nothing about the Android side-- bur there are activations, OS upgrades and routings... How are these counted?
What I am saying is:
Until we know what comprises an "activation" it is rather meaningless to use it for comparison.
Apple [mostly] breaks out its iDevice sales in quarterly reports. These are new, unique, iDevices sold.
According to Steve, the other handset/device OEMs do not [all] report unique device sales.
Where do the companies, that compare the various OS and Device sales, get their numbers?
Yeah, he's starting to sound like any other whiny idiot and the reality distortion field doesn't seem to work at all when it's audio only. I listened to his remarks and they just sounded bad to me.
A lot of what he says is technically true, but is so terribly "spun" that it's transparently kind of not true at all. He looks ridiculous saying some of these things when they are obviously very slanted remarks. Does he really expect us to just believe everything he says when it doesn't even make sense?
He sounds more than a bit irrational to me lately.
Whereas you have been a paragon of rationality lately. Projection? I notice you got appl's approval on that one. How does that feel?
Seriously, though, he has been sounding more rational to me, in this sense: he's pulled off the greatest coup in recent American business history (making a line of transformative consumer technical products that the rest of the world actually respects and wants), while he has to take flack from the likes of Google, an advertising company trading in personal behavior. Are you forgetting the sleazefest of Apple-hate-baiting that was the last Google I/O event?
It would be irrational of him to keep quiet about this, on the occasion of Apple's first $20B quarter. He is explaining why Apple's approach is working. But I admit I don't why he brought up RIM. Just free advice? A grudge from some previous episode?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro
In summary, you are lying. Making stuff up. Quoting phantasms. Given that the below barely qualifies as drivel.
appl does indeed deserve this lashing, since he seems to be a paid agent of discord on this forum. Transparent to me, anyway.
The infantile amateur psychologizing here re Jobs here ought to stop. It's disgraceful how y'all are failing to grasp the historical importance of what Apple has accomplished under his doctrine: making great things that people can actually enjoy using.
even if they only have one version, they still have to test it across multiple devices and software configurations. Some non-developers significantly underestimate the amount of effort it takes to test things, probably because they assume the test results are green across the board. Having lived through the test/revise/test/revise/test/etc cycle numerous times, i appreciate what steve is talking about here. As a matter of fact, i would venture the opinion that it is actually harder to perform that cycle for one version of software that is supposed to work across the multiple configurations. It can be maddening when the "fix" for an issue on one configuration introduces problems on several others.
Yeah, remember that comment. You will be see how wrong it is. Apple should enjoy their current successes. It won't be long until people get tired of Steve deciding what they can, and can't, run on their smart devices. I think Apple will not like the answer.
Btw, I don't know how "Antennagate" put anyone else back on their heels. Not sure how Steve telling people they are holding their phones wrong is "puting them back on their feet".
Apple has demonstrated that a closed and proprietary system works extremely well in the mobile space. My mobile life is within that space.
But this does not excuse Steve from misappropriating what 'open' means. You can split that bastard a thousand ways but in a nutshell should mean free to use and modify. He did it with h264 and he's doing it here, subtly redefining what open means.
Open does not mean 'ease of implementation' which, among other things, seems to be the thrust of his 'TwitterDeck' comments. Nor does it mean, 'available to use' or 'ubiquitous' which was the tenor of his comments regarding video on the web.
It does mean, however that you can get multiple and different versions of the same thing out in the wild as there are no restrictions on what one may do with open software.
Whether that is better for the consumer is a question for discussion but that in no way feeds into whether something is 'open' or not.
Personally I only care about 'open' in terms of the end user. I do wish all all document formats were 'open' ie platform independent and software independent. The last one with caveats, of course. I don't expect Word to open PS files. Thank god email and texting are 'open'.
Any content buckets and communication protocols should be open formats.
Text, Numbers (finance) Audio, Video, Social, Emotional and Celestial.
Apple [mostly] breaks out its iDevice sales in quarterly reports. These are new, unique, iDevices sold.
According to Steve, the other handset/device OEMs do not [all] report unique device sales.
Numbers are meant to be manipulated by both sides.
There is a huge iphone/ipad grey market economy around the world and nobody knows how many are actually sold to end-users (and not sitting on some shelf in a grey-market store somewhere in China).
You raise some good points. Regardless of intent however, it's clear that the public at large took his comments as a commentary, if not attack, on 'open', so I think other wording indicating that Google's approach to 'open' with Android isn't necessarily effective compared to the iOS model would have been a better way to go.
I doubt that the "public at large" even knew about Apple's earnings call (or iOS or Android) -- many, may not know who Steve Jobs is.
We, inside the tech bubble, parse every syllable of every arcane pronouncement ever made by an individual if it will further our point.
Comments
I'm truly amazed at the level of blatant "sheeplike" responses here. This is serious business, folks. For what it's worth, Apple's surge to dominance is under attack by Android and Jobs knows it. That's why he made the rare appearance at this type of event to bash Android (as well as Blackberry, which poses little threat).
It's now the war of # of activations, which Google started back in May with 160,000 activations/day, then over 200K/day. Then Jobs countered with a higher number and now again with close to 300K. I'm sure Google will respond in kind as well.
iPhone people take note: as much as you want to deny the stats that show Android is about to overtake iPhone for the foreseeable future (and already has for the past 6 months in sale--the articles are aplenty on that), it really behooves Apple to take action now before they become the next Blackberry.
Let the flames begin!
How would you categorize your responses... and your posts on AI forums, in general?
.
Your "facts" conveniently overlook the significant fact that the iPhone is only one part of the iOS universe. The iPad, iPod touch, and Apple TV (2nd gen) contribute mightily to the ecosystem that is iOS. Many don't seem to get the important fact that voice telephony is just an app. It is not primary, just historical and will fade as technology and business advance.
It also ignores the fact that a vendor that builds an OS for their HW perhaps should be measured against other HW vendors instead of being lumped together with all HW vendors. Those trolls like to paint Apple as somehow losing money and not having an install base to maintain their interests, when it?s quite the opposite, with vendors using Android are doing so because they were on the brink of dying. Now they are barely trending water along with dozens of other companies. Not exactly the success story and Apple-killer they keep trying to say it is.
Originally Posted by mytdave
At my office, there are now more people with Android phones than iPhones. I personally will be sticking with an iPhone, but this is not an obscure issue, it's very real. Apple's not doomed or failing, they just need to watch their backs or they will be surpassed (again).
Everyone at my office that bought an Android phone wishes they'd bought an iPhone.
That may be so, but they still bought Android phones.
Wasn?t Android bought by Google in 2005? Weren?t there prototypes of Android OS on a phone years before the iPhone was even demoed?
You might have also asked what the Android UI looked like before the iPhone was introduced.
(Answer: Android looked like every other P.O.S. smartphone OS that came before the iPhone.)
That may be so, but they still bought Android phones.
Well, then, what do you think happens when they get their next chance, and the availability of iPhones has greatly increased across carriers and retail locations? Shouldn't take a rocket scientist to see that the iPhone juggernaut is going to continue growing, even while the Android Army, through sheer numbers if not individual size, does the same.
Apple is going to rake in plenty of cash during this market expansion. (I'm not making any market share claims, here.) It is unclear to me which company is going to rake in cash from Android. Motorola is a decent bet so far. Google should make out well if they manage to successfully monetize Android via advertisement. But you know, I am really glad that that won't be the iPhone way. I wager dollars to donuts that Android phones end up with advertisements all over the place as opposed to just in the apps that users elect to install (which is where iAd lives).
Thompson
That may be so, but they still bought Android phones.
... fool me once...
Being a low level geek can someone tell me what that cryptic code means? Thanks.
He is showing how easily and tersely one can recompile Android from it's publicly available source code. That implies if you want to change some aspect of Android you have the opportunity to edit the source code, recompile, and then install on your handset. This is nerd nirvana but it is a bit naive on at least two counts. It doesn't account for the venality of handset manufacturers (I'm looking at you, Motorola) who try to stifle this capability. It also presumes that more than a tiny fraction of handset owners have the interest and ability to modify and recompile the kernel.
It is also worth noting that for that small fraction of handset owners who care to explore and modify at a low level, the iPhone has a very active and capable jailbreak community that enable the user root access (go to your local hacker, not the Apple Genius Bar for further information).
I think it's more of a character issue, it's easier for talentless morons to critique those that innovate and work their ass of, than it is to respect those with skills. Maybe they feel better about their own irrelevance and laziness when they not only stomach but champion the copy cats.
Seems to me that Apple is finally getting to the place that they should be in the tech industry, the top - and all the brats with egg on their faces now get to collectively whine about having the tail view.
Oh c'mon. Apple gets "called out" all the time these days -- it's expected when you're on top. Why shouldn't Steve/Apple call out the competition once in a while too? It's good competition and I don't mind it. I think it keeps everyone on their toes and keeps things interesting. Just my opinion.
On another note, I did find it interesting when Steve pointed out that there has been no hard data provided from Android handset makers of how many phones are being or have been sold? Is this true? Didn't Google say there are at least 200,000 Android activations a day or something like that? That's a lot of phones.
Ya' know...
It would be interesting to find out what comprises an "activation"
On the iOS side, does plugging an ipad into iTunes for the first time count as an activation (I think it does)
When you activate an iPhone (with the carrier) for the first time does it count as an activation (I think it does).
I don't know anything about iPod touches.
What happens if you change SIMS in phones (hand-me-downs) and reactivate them... does that count?
What about OS upgrades/restores to any iOS device -- do those count?
I know nothing about the Android side-- bur there are activations, OS upgrades and routings... How are these counted?
What I am saying is:
Until we know what comprises an "activation" it is rather meaningless to use it for comparison.
Apple [mostly] breaks out its iDevice sales in quarterly reports. These are new, unique, iDevices sold.
According to Steve, the other handset/device OEMs do not [all] report unique device sales.
Where do the companies, that compare the various OS and Device sales, get their numbers?
How are they normalized?
.
Yeah, he's starting to sound like any other whiny idiot and the reality distortion field doesn't seem to work at all when it's audio only. I listened to his remarks and they just sounded bad to me.
A lot of what he says is technically true, but is so terribly "spun" that it's transparently kind of not true at all. He looks ridiculous saying some of these things when they are obviously very slanted remarks. Does he really expect us to just believe everything he says when it doesn't even make sense?
He sounds more than a bit irrational to me lately.
Whereas you have been a paragon of rationality lately. Projection? I notice you got appl's approval on that one. How does that feel?
Seriously, though, he has been sounding more rational to me, in this sense: he's pulled off the greatest coup in recent American business history (making a line of transformative consumer technical products that the rest of the world actually respects and wants), while he has to take flack from the likes of Google, an advertising company trading in personal behavior. Are you forgetting the sleazefest of Apple-hate-baiting that was the last Google I/O event?
It would be irrational of him to keep quiet about this, on the occasion of Apple's first $20B quarter. He is explaining why Apple's approach is working. But I admit I don't why he brought up RIM. Just free advice? A grudge from some previous episode?
In summary, you are lying. Making stuff up. Quoting phantasms. Given that the below barely qualifies as drivel.
appl does indeed deserve this lashing, since he seems to be a paid agent of discord on this forum. Transparent to me, anyway.
The infantile amateur psychologizing here re Jobs here ought to stop. It's disgraceful how y'all are failing to grasp the historical importance of what Apple has accomplished under his doctrine: making great things that people can actually enjoy using.
even if they only have one version, they still have to test it across multiple devices and software configurations. Some non-developers significantly underestimate the amount of effort it takes to test things, probably because they assume the test results are green across the board. Having lived through the test/revise/test/revise/test/etc cycle numerous times, i appreciate what steve is talking about here. As a matter of fact, i would venture the opinion that it is actually harder to perform that cycle for one version of software that is supposed to work across the multiple configurations. It can be maddening when the "fix" for an issue on one configuration introduces problems on several others.
Thompson
qft
.
'open' is a ruse.
Yeah, remember that comment.
Btw, I don't know how "Antennagate" put anyone else back on their heels. Not sure how Steve telling people they are holding their phones wrong is "puting them back on their feet".
But, i am sure you are right.
http://www.businessinsider.com/steve...e-rant-2010-10
Dude, it's a YouTube video of a telephone conference call.
Apple should buy Yahoo or get into search business...
Well, that ain't gonna happen. Yahoo is currently relying on Google for their searches (someone correct me if I'm wrong).
But this does not excuse Steve from misappropriating what 'open' means. You can split that bastard a thousand ways but in a nutshell should mean free to use and modify. He did it with h264 and he's doing it here, subtly redefining what open means.
Open does not mean 'ease of implementation' which, among other things, seems to be the thrust of his 'TwitterDeck' comments. Nor does it mean, 'available to use' or 'ubiquitous' which was the tenor of his comments regarding video on the web.
It does mean, however that you can get multiple and different versions of the same thing out in the wild as there are no restrictions on what one may do with open software.
Whether that is better for the consumer is a question for discussion but that in no way feeds into whether something is 'open' or not.
Well, that ain't gonna happen. Yahoo is currently relying on Google for their searches (someone correct me if I'm wrong).
I think Yahoo has an agreement with Google for ads but uses Bing for search.
Personally I only care about 'open' in terms of the end user. I do wish all all document formats were 'open' ie platform independent and software independent. The last one with caveats, of course. I don't expect Word to open PS files. Thank god email and texting are 'open'.
Any content buckets and communication protocols should be open formats.
Text, Numbers (finance) Audio, Video, Social, Emotional and Celestial.
Apple [mostly] breaks out its iDevice sales in quarterly reports. These are new, unique, iDevices sold.
According to Steve, the other handset/device OEMs do not [all] report unique device sales.
Numbers are meant to be manipulated by both sides.
There is a huge iphone/ipad grey market economy around the world and nobody knows how many are actually sold to end-users (and not sitting on some shelf in a grey-market store somewhere in China).
You raise some good points. Regardless of intent however, it's clear that the public at large took his comments as a commentary, if not attack, on 'open', so I think other wording indicating that Google's approach to 'open' with Android isn't necessarily effective compared to the iOS model would have been a better way to go.
I doubt that the "public at large" even knew about Apple's earnings call (or iOS or Android) -- many, may not know who Steve Jobs is.
We, inside the tech bubble, parse every syllable of every arcane pronouncement ever made by an individual if it will further our point.
The real world has better things to do.
.
I think Yahoo has an agreement with Google for ads but uses Bing for search.
Yes, I believe you are right.