New book reveals Apple's Steve Jobs was targeted for role of Google CEO

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
A new book released this week exposing the inner secrets of Google reveals that the company's founders wanted Steve Jobs to be their CEO, but settled for being his protégés.



Steven Levy's just-released tell-all on Google, entitled "In The Plex: How Google Thinks, Works and Shapes Our Lives," offers an inside look at the search giant. It also details how Apple and Google, companies that once shared a close relationship, became fierce rivals.



According to the Daily Mail, when Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page were on the hunt for a new CEO, their top choice was Apple's Jobs. When Jobs declined, Google instead found Eric Schmidt, who would become a member of Apple's board of directors.



"He (Jobs) turned down their offer, but because he saw the potential of Google he agreed to mentor Mr. Page and Mr. Brin, even sharing advisers," the report said.



Of course, the relationship between the two companies quickly went south after Google unveiled the Android mobile operating system. Jobs felt that he was betrayed by Google, and that Android simply copied the success of the iPhone.



Jobs allegedly first saw features in Android like pinch-to-zoom while visiting Google's Mountain View, Calif., corporate headquarters. The meeting reportedly made Jobs "furious."







Jobs also reportedly disparaged Google at a company meeting, dismissing Google's "don't be evil" mantra with an expletive, and saying that "Google wants to kill the iPhone."



The new book also reveals that Jobs "somehow managed to keep the development of the iPad hidden" from Schmidt when he served on Apple's board. Jobs reportedly believed that the "best ideas from the iPhone had been stolen."



Google is headed in a new direction now, as Page has officially replaced Schmidt as chief executive of Google. And Page's co-founder Brin will also take a more active role in strategic projects including product development. Schmidt will remain Google's executive chairman.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 88
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,359member
    So plan B was to try to take Apple away from Steve Jobs in the form of IP via their stooge board member.
  • Reply 2 of 88
    This is not news, is it? I saw this in the Bloomberg game changers many months ago.
  • Reply 3 of 88
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 4 of 88
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,721member
    Steve would've been a terrible fit. Can you imagine him overseeing the 'Plex ecosystem where "engineer-designed" UIs and a "good enough" mindset are the norm?
  • Reply 5 of 88
    swiftswift Posts: 436member
    Imagine, Google trying to recruit the evil Jobs. To them, it must be like discovering that France put out feelers to Hitler in 1933. Of course, Google is now using the things Jobs advised them on against him.



    And they call Apple fans mindless. Google is an advertising agency using "free as in beer" to control the world, while make billions in profits and denying profits to anyone who dares challenge them.
  • Reply 6 of 88
    sprockketssprockkets Posts: 796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by caelitus View Post


    This is not news, is it? I saw this in the Bloomberg game changers many months ago.



    The book is obviously new with it being released this week. The content in it quoted isn't.



    Steve Jobs was angry when someone copied pinch to zoom? What a hypocrite. Why don't you talk to the person at UL who came up with the magsafe connector which your company then patented? Then we'll see who has a right to be angry.
  • Reply 7 of 88
    frugalityfrugality Posts: 410member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post


    Steve Jobs was angry when someone copied pinch to zoom? What a hypocrite.



    EXACTLY.



    Apple didn't invent the mouse. Some guy named Douglas Engelbart did. And what did every computer maker out there copy, and include with its desktops? A mouse.



    If a new user interface is intuitive, it will be copied. It's great that Apple has been so innovative. But to think that they can prevent everyone from using ANYTHING they came up with -- like pinch-to-zoom, or an App store -- is ridiculous.
  • Reply 8 of 88
    habermashabermas Posts: 37member
    .....
  • Reply 9 of 88
    pk22901pk22901 Posts: 139member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by frugality View Post


    EXACTLY.



    Apple didn't invent the mouse. Some guy named Douglas Engelbart did.



    Unlike Google's rip off of Sun's Java and Apple's multitouch, Steve Jobs actually licensed Xerox's inventions AND improved upon them.



    (BTW, Microsoft never paid Xerox for their UI and it stole Apple's QuickTime multimedia engine.)
  • Reply 10 of 88
    sprockketssprockkets Posts: 796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pk22901 View Post


    Unlike Google's rip off of Sun's Java and Apple's multitouch, Steve Jobs actually licensed Xerox's inventions AND improved upon them.



    (BTW, Microsoft never paid Xerox for their UI and it stole Apple's QuickTime multimedia engine.)



    Of course apple didn't invent multi-touch either. The copying of Java on Google's part does not appear in their favor.
  • Reply 11 of 88
    bugsnwbugsnw Posts: 717member
    Steven Levy wrote a great book about the Mac's early days. The differences between what SJ saw at Xerox and what they came up with was night and day.



    Many people think they stole or copied all those GUI innovations. But they improved on them so much that they can properly be credited with inventing many of the GUI conventions we enjoy today.



    I agree with the poster above who used the word hypocrite. I'm not supportive of patenting ideas so crucial and general that one company controlling them sets the whole industry back.



    I prefer the honing and sharpening affects of raw, unrestrained competition.
  • Reply 12 of 88
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bugsnw View Post


    Steven Levy wrote a great book about the Mac's early days. The differences between what SJ saw at Xerox and what they came up with was night and day.



    Many people think they stole or copied all those GUI innovations. But they improved on them so much that they can properly be credited with inventing many of the GUI conventions we enjoy today.



    You're forgetting the most important fact:



    Apple PAID Xerox for the right to use what Xerox had created. How do you steal something that you've already paid for?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bugsnw View Post


    I agree with the poster above who used the word hypocrite. I'm not supportive of patenting ideas so crucial and general that one company controlling them sets the whole industry back.



    I prefer the honing and sharpening affects of raw, unrestrained competition.



    Yeah, people who couldn't ever create anything always say that.



    Raw, unrestrained competition would have resulted in Microsoft completely displacing everyone else. There would be no Mac OS X, no Linux, no Android, no PalmOS, no Blackberry, no Symbian.
  • Reply 13 of 88
    bugsnwbugsnw Posts: 717member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Yeah, people who couldn't ever create anything always say that.



    Raw, unrestrained competition would have resulted in Microsoft completely displacing everyone else. There would be no Mac OS X, no Linux, no Android, no PalmOS, no Blackberry, no Symbian.



    The govt. certainly didn't get in the way of MS's tablet creation efforts. And raw, unrestrained competition has resulted in tons of innovation in this area.



    As long as the govt. stays out, this will continue.
  • Reply 14 of 88
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post


    Of course apple didn't invent multi-touch either. The copying of Java on Google's part does not appear in their favor.



    Why do the professional Apple-bashers continue to put words in our mouths, claiming we think "Apple invented ___."? It doesn't matter if Apple invented ___ or not; if there were no shipping products using ___, or no products people wanted to buy in any numbers using ___, and Apple comes along and "invents" a product that sells in the millions using ___, then Apple should get some credit for bringing ___ to the marketplace. That's all anybody has ever said. There are a lot of things you can fill in the ___ with.
  • Reply 15 of 88
    dominoxmldominoxml Posts: 110member
    I think this discussion is already a bit off because it's not so much about the fact that Google copied technology, but more about how they did it.



    The main point is that Steve and the other Apple managers gave Google employees insights in new technology in trust within the scope of a partnership (friendship) in order to create a revolutionary combination of OS and services.



    It turned out that the partner wasn't trustworthy, but used the knowledge to develop a competing product behind the scenes.



    Some might call this a clever business strategy - I'd call it willful deception.

    With such partners there's no need for enemies.
  • Reply 16 of 88
    joshongjoshong Posts: 51member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    Does it count as "news" if it's more than half a year old?



    AppleInsider outscooped by Gizmodo (and pretty much most of the rest of the world) once again:

    http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/10/go...ceo-of-google/

    http://www.google.com/search?q=googl...s+october+2010



    http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...first_ceo.html
  • Reply 17 of 88
    ajbdtc826ajbdtc826 Posts: 190member
    Step back from the trees and the forest will show u that the Apple vs Google saga is nothing more than friends helping eachother avoid antitrust situations. There is no hatred between the 2 as if google never came out with android, Apple would've been the next Microsoft. They both need eachother
  • Reply 18 of 88
    sprockketssprockkets Posts: 796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


    Why do the professional Apple-bashers continue to put words in our mouths, claiming we think "Apple invented ___."? It doesn't matter if Apple invented ___ or not; if there were no shipping products using ___, or no products people wanted to buy in any numbers using ___, and Apple comes along and "invents" a product that sells in the millions using ___, then Apple should get some credit for bringing ___ to the marketplace. That's all anybody has ever said. There are a lot of things you can fill in the ___ with.



    See post #11, and if apple didn't invent it, I guess they shouldn't have patented it or get angry when someone else copies them eh?



    Of course, the patent on multi-touch isn't the actual technology, but just the gestures implemented in software.
  • Reply 19 of 88
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


    Why do the professional Apple-bashers continue to put words in our mouths, claiming we think "Apple invented ___."? It doesn't matter if Apple invented ___ or not; if there were no shipping products using ___, or no products people wanted to buy in any numbers using ___, and Apple comes along and "invents" a product that sells in the millions using ___, then Apple should get some credit for bringing ___ to the marketplace. That's all anybody has ever said. There are a lot of things you can fill in the ___ with.



    "Professional Apple-bashers"



    They're just trying to divert attention from the fact that Google had taken these ideas from Apple, whether Apple sourced them or not, because Google had early access to the iPhone. Nothing Google says is going to convince me that pinch-to-zoom, and all of the other touch-screen UI elements, was some kind of coincidence between iOS, Android, webOS, and now WP7. Everyone didn't just think it up at the same time.
  • Reply 20 of 88
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post


    See post #11, and if apple didn't invent it, I guess they shouldn't have patented it or get angry when someone else copies them eh?



    Of course, the patent on multi-touch isn't the actual technology, but just the gestures implemented in software.



    This whole patent situation has gotten out of hand, that's true enough. "The picture in your patent only shows someone using their index finger. If it's possible for anybody to use their middle finger on your device you're violating our any-finger-swipe patent." This is all pretty silly, but if Apple doesn't play the same game they're going to get nailed to the wall.
Sign In or Register to comment.