Google's Schmidt says Apple and Android struggle is the 'defining fight in the industry today'

123578

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 155
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    sr2012 wrote: »
    Still Schmidt should have been sued to oblivion for obvious conflict of interest. Board Of D-rectums Fail.

    I'm puzzled why he wasn't forced off sooner. I can't think of anything, even saving face doesn't fit very well, because billions of dollars at possible risk trump saving face, as far as I'm concerned.
  • Reply 82 of 155
    jeffdm wrote: »
    I'm puzzled why he wasn't forced off sooner. I can't think of anything, even saving face doesn't fit very well, because billions of dollars at possible risk trump saving face, as far as I'm concerned.

    Apple lost nothing.
  • Reply 83 of 155
    I'm sure Bill Gates was jealous of Warren Buffet (or vice versa, forget who was richer)
  • Reply 84 of 155
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Apple lost nothing.

    That doesn't mean there wasn't a risk. Schmidt having to recuse himself for portions of a meeting because of conflicts of interest had to disruptive.
  • Reply 85 of 155
    Question for you conspiracy theorists:

    Was it wrong in any way for Google, seeing the future of mobile ushered in by the iPhone, to shift the focus of the UI/UX quickly (and work out kinks later) to not be left behind?
  • Reply 86 of 155
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 22,910member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post





    I'm puzzled why he wasn't forced off sooner. I can't think of anything, even saving face doesn't fit very well, because billions of dollars at possible risk trump saving face, as far as I'm concerned.


    A couple of things come to mind. Steve Jobs may have felt he had more influence over Google than he actually did, thinking that keeping them "in the fold" might slow any plans they had for Android. And too, how better to keep up with Google's mobile planning than to have management on board with them? It's also obvious to me that Apple needed Google's products and cooperation for the iPhone to be the product that Mr. Jobs envisioned at the time.

  • Reply 87 of 155
    jeffdm wrote: »
    That doesn't mean there wasn't a risk. Schmidt having to recuse himself for portions of a meeting because of conflicts of interest had to disruptive.

    True but being that Google bought Android in 2005 and Schmidt joined the board in 2006 any disruption is no fault of Schmidt's.

    Not one bad word from the actual Apple superiors even Steve Jobs has come out damning Schmidt. The only people who feel ill of the man are the fanboys.
  • Reply 88 of 155

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post



    Question for you conspiracy theorists:

    Was it wrong in any way for Google, seeing the future of mobile ushered in by the iPhone, to shift the focus of the UI/UX quickly (and work out kinks later) to not be left behind?


    No.


     


    Was it wrong to not give credit where credit is due, to shameless copy (or "let" the OEMs do it) UI animations, UI functionality, etc.? yes.


     


    At this point, Android =/= Google, Android is much more Samsung than Google. Only Samsung makes money from it.. How many more months can other OEMs handle and support this loosing business?

  • Reply 89 of 155
    gatorguy wrote: »
    A couple of things come to mind. Steve Jobs may have felt he had more influence over Google than he actually did, thinking that keeping them "in the fold" might slow any plans they had for Android. And too, how better to keep up with Google's mobile planning than to have management on board with them? It's also obvious to me that Apple needed Google's products and cooperation for the iPhone to be the product that Mr. Jobs envisioned at the time.

    Steve wouldn't gamble like that. He'd have straight up said or asked them to slow down or not compete or whatever. He wasn't a chess player. He was a cannon.
  • Reply 90 of 155
    No.

    Was it wrong to not give credit where credit is due, to shameless copy (or "let" the OEMs do it) UI animations, UI functionality, etc.? yes.

    At this point, Android =/= Google, Android is much more Samsung than Google. Only Samsung makes money from it.. How many more months can other OEMs handle and support this loosing business?

    No. Android still belongs to Google. Samsung just makes most money off of it. Not sure what your point was.

    Google had warned Samsung. Samsung didn't listen and we know how that panned out.

    Also Apple isn't suing just Samsung like slavish copying. Apple is suing anyone for anything. HTC sure as hell isn't anything near an Apple clone. Motorola neither. Didn't matter.
  • Reply 91 of 155
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 22,910member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post





    Steve wouldn't gamble like that. He'd have straight up said or asked them to slow down or not compete or whatever. He wasn't a chess player. He was a cannon.


    That's just what he eventually did. He was apparently willing to live with Google's Android development as long as they drew the line at multi-touch. When Palm introduced the feature and Apple chose for whatever reason not to go after them for it, Brin and Company decided they needed to do the same if they were to compete. That's the part that really set Mr. Jobs off.  IMO Google was doing what they felt was best for their business, just as Apple was. There's no friends in business.

  • Reply 92 of 155
    gatorguy wrote: »
    That's just what he eventually did. He was apparently willing to live with Google's Android development as long as they drew the line at multi-touch. When Palm introduced the feature and Apple chose for whatever reason not to go after them for it, Brin and Company decided they needed to do the same if they were to compete. That's the part that really set Mr. Jobs off.  IMO Google was doing what they felt was best for their business, just as Apple was. There's no friends in business.

    And apparently it's a crime.
  • Reply 93 of 155



     


    Tallest Skil's post has to be among the top 3 funniest posts I've ever seen here, and I can't even think of any others right now.


     


    The funniest part is the pause it takes to figure out what is.  It took me 0.5 seconds to recognize Jeff G and then 1.0 seconds to get the scene.


     


    Then 0.000001 seconds to come up with the line.


     


    I don't even want to cheapen it by typing it.


     


    Well done Sir!


     


    [Too Bad it was necessary].




     

  • Reply 94 of 155

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post





    No. Android still belongs to Google. (1)Samsung just makes most money off of it. Not sure what your point was.

    Google had warned Samsung. Samsung didn't listen and we know how that panned out.

    Also Apple isn't suing just Samsung like slavish copying. Apple is suing anyone for anything. (2)HTC sure as hell isn't anything near an Apple clone. Motorola neither. Didn't matter.


    (1) Samsung is the only OEM making money from it. Samsung is the only one benefitting from it.


     


    (2) So that's why HTC is dying a slow death, selling less and less, making less and less, loosing more and more. Same with Motorola. Same with Sony.


     


    I understand that right know, Samsung is the only one really copying apple (thanks to their skin), but since all other OEMs are dying and samsung represents the success of android, they must pay for that. Also, not long ago, pretty much any OEMs used a lot of copyrighted UI features, thinking that apple wasn't strong enough to going head on against all of them. XDA roms still show a huge lack of respect for copyrighted/patented UI features. Android is based on lack of respect and crime.


     


    Google should do something about this. Custom apps should be allowed, skins? No.


     


    I would really like to play with a Nexus phone.

  • Reply 95 of 155

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by t2af View Post


    the solid evidence was in the goracle trail , showing the google made a massive UI change when Schmidt was on the board and saw the iphone. It was went from a blackberry clone to an iphone clone, there was no dual design path, just one that changed radically. This is why Jobs felt betrayed and was saying to Schmidt "you stole from us". 



     


    That's not evidence, that's just your view of things - one that many will disagree with.


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Kr00 View Post


    Google were working on Blackberry style phone with physical keyboards and a stylus, prior to 2007, the year the iPhone was released. Fact. The Android OS was written with no multitouch UI. Fact. Nine months after the iPhone was released, Google announced their iPhone like multitouch phones. Fact. The reason for the touch lag was because the multitouch UI was hastily written over the top of the original Android OS, not written into it. (A total rewrite would have put them a further year behind). Fact. These things are all fact. The fact google were heading down the blackberry path with their phones before the iPhone was developed, then did a 180° and followed exactly what Apple did while Schmidt was on the Apple board, is clear as the nose on your face. Why do your type deny it? Steve Jobs wouldn't claim iOS was stolen by a friend if he didn't actually know it to be true. Steve Jobs wouldn't have declared thermonuclear war on google just on hearsay. 


     


    The only FUD being practiced is from those denying that it happen.


     


    Do yourself a favour and read some FACTS. http://www.phonearena.com/news/Steve-Jobs-vowed-revenge-on-Eric-Schmidt-over-Android_id23152



     


    And where in any of that does it state that Schmidt abused his position while on the Apple board?  Nowhere.  I'm not disputing the fact that Android was influenced by iOS, just this crap that it was Schmidt that did it.  Nobody, ever, anywhere or at any time has provided any sort of evidence that this happened, its all just conjecture and hearsay.

  • Reply 96 of 155

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post



    I don't really see how this is a "struggle" from Apple's standpoint: these are two platforms that cater to a very different set of demographics. Android caters to the less well-off, freeloading, more techy/nerdy segment of the market while Apple goes for the opposite.

    Apple should simply let Google have its low-enders.

     




    Just because you can't afford a contractless  Galaxy S 3. Tsssk.

  • Reply 97 of 155

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by reefoid View Post


     


    That's not evidence, that's just your view of things - one that many will disagree with.


     


     


    And where in any of that does it state that Schmidt abused his position while on the Apple board?  Nowhere.  I'm not disputing the fact that Android was influenced by iOS, just this crap that it was Schmidt that did it.  Nobody, ever, anywhere or at any time has provided any sort of evidence that this happened, its all just conjecture and hearsay.





    I think Schmidt would have been convicted very, very fast, if it so were.

  • Reply 98 of 155
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 22,910member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post



    I don't really see how this is a "struggle" from Apple's standpoint: these are two platforms that cater to a very different set of demographics. Android caters to the less well-off, freeloading, more techy/nerdy segment of the market while Apple goes for the opposite.

    Apple should simply let Google have its low-enders.

    All Apple should worry about is making sure there is sufficient room for growth left both in market expansion and the replacement market (for those whom it already has as a customer). Apple currently seems to have no problems with either. Indeed it's the opposite: people cannot seem to get enough of -- and Apple cannot make enough of -- any new product.


    Excellent suggestion! 

  • Reply 99 of 155


    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post

    Apple lost nothing.


     



     


    That statement grates on me like the meatbags people who say, "People who have their movies, music, and applications pirated don't lose anything."

  • Reply 100 of 155
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member


    I love the "compare" shots that don't actually compare the SAME things. Those two map shots are clearly not at the same zoom level so the detail is expected to be different.


     


    And at least for myself I prefer the faster navigation a less cluttered screen offers.

Sign In or Register to comment.