Google CEO Larry Page says rivalries with Apple & Amazon hurt users

124678

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 159
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,882member
    'The Google CEO said he feels it "would be nice" if his company got along better with rivals like Apple. . . "

    Maybe that would have been the case if your company didn't stab Apple and Steve Jobs in the back, eh? What a disingenuous comment. Not surprising though as insincerity and hypocrisy have always been Google's predominant corporate personality trait.
  • Reply 62 of 159
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bilbo63 View Post


    Google's CEO was sitting on Apple's board, being privy to Apple's plans and products while at the same time planning to compete with their "partner" by producing basically a clone of Apple's work. That is beyond a sh*tty thing to do to your "partner". Eric, should have "excused himself" from Apple's board long before, while stating that they were planning to compete "head to head" with Apple... but then again think of all of the intel he wouldn't have been able to gather if he did that.


     


    Eric Schmidt was essentially a mole on Apple's board. Google wanted to be sure that their maps, search and YouTube was on Apple's devices so they could harvest user data AND gain insight on Apple's products and plans. Had Apple known what Google was planning, their is no way in hell that Eric Schmidt would have been allowed anywhere near the Apple campus let alone sit on their board. Steve was furious because he was betrayed by a snake posing as a partner.




     


    The only people that repeat this are internet tough guys. It doesn't align with the claims from either side.


     


    Quote:


    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


    from Wired: It began back in 2002, soon after the iPod, when Jobs realized that the convergence of mobile phones and music players would force Apple to get into the mobile phone business.


     


    yes, they would show a third party an internal device before they show the Board. I don't know if you know anything about Boards, but they are involved at a high level at what the business goals are. I assume an iPhone fitted that criteria.


     


    can you imagine it without Maps? i know ,so tragic because other phones had maps at the time, what no?



     


    According to all stories at the time, Schmidt excused himself from meetings that would present a conflict of interest. If Apple doesn't claim otherwise, you really shouldn't worry about it.There is no way we're going to see detailed records of every board meeting, so it's all speculation anyway.


     


    I vaguely remember some of the early phones that tried that to incorporate mp3 libraries. I expected it to become more prevalent as soon as storage and battery life improved on these devices. Some of the really old ones like the original Treo when it was still Handspring were terrible on battery. If you tried to integrate more functions on such a device, you would have been tethered to something all the time. Remember things like car chargers? Now if you'll excuse me, I must sort out my pills for the week :P. Regarding maps many of them did have gps applications available or the ability to download maps to the device. It wasn't as refined as it is today, but simpler versions of these features go back a long way.

  • Reply 63 of 159
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bilbo63 View Post


    Regardless, if they were planning to go from a "partner" to competing "head on" with Apple in the exact same space, Eric should have resigned from Apple's board long before he did.




     


    I agree with that.  For that matter, Eric should've left the moment he realized that Steve was trying to play on Schmidt's admiration for him, in order to try to stop Android.  Remember, Eric idolized Jobs.


     


    The fact is, Schmidt didn't sneak onto the board.  Jobs, knowing that Google was already working on a phone, invited him. 


     


    For anyone who needs to see a conspiracy, the evidence overwhelmingly points to Jobs wanting to know what Google was doing, and to try to convince them to not do anything similar.


     

  • Reply 64 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

     


    I agree with that.  For that matter, Eric should've left the moment he realized that Steve was trying to play on Schmidt's admiration for him, in order to try to stop Android.  Remember, Eric idolized Jobs.


     


    The fact is, Schmidt didn't sneak onto the board.  Jobs, even knowing that Google was working on a phone, invited him. 


     


    For anyone who needs to see a conspiracy, the evidence overwhelmingly points to Jobs wanting to know what Google was doing, and to try to convince them to not do anything similar.



     


    You forgot to start with, "Once upon a time..."

  • Reply 65 of 159
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,095member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bilbo63 View Post


    Regardless, if they were planning to go from a "partner" to competing "head on" with Apple in the exact same space, Eric should have resigned from Apple's board long before he did. The fact that he hung around as long as he possibly could before resigning from the board speaks pretty loudly. He was gathering intel. Any way you slice it, the way that Google handled this is greasy and no way to treat your "partner". As I said, if Apple's CEO sat on their board all the while planning compete head on with them in search, it would be equally greasy. Come on! Google basically cloned iOS for crying out loud.



    Except that they aren't competing head-on with Apple. Google uses services to expand their advertising revenues. Apple sells hardware, with the software side being a necessary evil in some cases, at least in my view. Other than both offering an OS the two business plans don't have much in common really.

  • Reply 66 of 159
    kdarlingkdarling Posts: 1,640member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bilbo63 View Post


    Uh yeah, but Apple wasn't competing with them in head to head in search, so what's your point?


     



     


    Some people blindly repeat Jobs' clever comment that Apple wasn't getting into search, without stopping to think about it.


     


    Google's business isn't search.   It's selling ads.  Search is just one primary way of doing that.   Apple now also sells ads.   Apple is indeed competing with Google's business.


     


    Quote:


    Also, do you seriously expect people to believe that Google had next to no advanced knowledge of what Apple was doing with the iPhone? Google was writing apps for the iPhone! Of course they did!




     


    Google didn't write the original iPhone apps.  They provided APIs and Apple wrote their own apps.


     


    Don't forget Apple's penchant for secrecy.  Even inside Apple, only a tiny few developers ever saw the iPhone hardware and software together.


     


    Cheers!

  • Reply 67 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


     


    What a bunch of self-serving BS from this sociopath. Yeah, Larry, it's a shame that everyone won't just roll over and let you control everything, a real shame.



    Mouse, as you know I have always been concerned you are a sociopath. Based on your comment I decided to do a bit of research and I am happy to report you do not fit the profile. There are 10 red flags and this is the first.


     


    #1) Sociopaths are charming. Sociopaths have high charisma and tend to attract a following just because people want to be around them. They have a "glow" about them that attracts people who typically seek guidance or direction. They often appear to be sexy or have a strong sexual attraction. Not all sexy people are sociopaths, obviously, but watch out for over-the-top sexual appetites and weird fetishes


     


    However if you find that Larry has a glow about him I can try and arrange a more intimate meeting. Good to see you posting I guess that means your mom got your computer in the basement working again.

  • Reply 68 of 159
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


     


    Wow, I'm surprised you could fit so many misrepresentations of facts into a single post. It's a nice little fairy tale you present, but...


     


    First off, you are just making this part up. It's a nice little tale you are telling, but, frankly, I don't think you are in a position to have this knowledge. I doubt very much that Jobs was fine with Android until they turned on multitouch, and your little tale contradicts what I have heard. But, at least I'm not pretending I have the inside story. Please don't make stuff up and pass it off as facts. We already have another poster here who does that and we don't need another.


     


    The "Android" Google bought in 2005 bears no resemblance to the Android we know today. The only thing they have in common is the name. So, this other OS called "Android", that Google bought in 2005, is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. I'm sure you know that, but thought that you could get away with saying it anyway. You didn't. So give up that story too.


     


    Since this part of your fiction depends on the first, we'll just dismiss it as part of the tale.


     


    This next paragraph is perhaps the most entertaining, a beautiful little "just so" story. But, the idea that Google did the heavy lifting so the iPhone could be born is beyond ludicrous. There would have been an iPhone even if Google had never existed. Google's only involvement was to steal everything they could from it. So enough of this fantasy as well.


     


    Lastly, "Everyone looks at others' stuff" != "Everyone steals others' stuff". And, yes, you were certainly attempting to promote that equivalence. You failed, miserably.


     


    If you're going to post here, try to be a little more honest, less disingenuous, than your posts to date. As I said above, we already have more than enough people coming here to spin fictitious versions of reality. We don't need any more of that.



     


    Your reply is right on target.  Note that he cleverly used the words that Google "turned on multitouch" to make it looking like Google had this feature in Android from the beginning not stealing/copying from the iPhone. 

  • Reply 69 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Yet users keep wanting more Apple gear.


     


    Know what, Larry? Users don't actually give a shit. All these company-driven declarations about what you *think* users really want, are just that: company-driven propaganda. 


     


    THE PROOF IS IN THE PRODUCT. Apple products = insane demand, lineups, and the hunger for more. WITH or WITHOUT Google Maps and Streetview. 


     


    Make Android suck a little less on tablets, and then *maybe* you can talk about what users actually want, you imbecile.  



    Quadra. good to see you, I know a thread like this pulls you from the dark. I wanted to reply to you because it appears no one else does.

  • Reply 70 of 159


    I basically agree....


     


    The main reason I do not use iCloud is that I cannot sync Notes, Contacts, Calendars with any non-apple device.  This is something that I have to do form my work.  As a result, I am forced to use Google to sync these items because it works on ALL platforms....


     


    If Apple simply allowed me to sync these three servies with non apple device in iCLoud I would probably just use iCloud instead of Google....


     


    This is what I think he is talking about....

  • Reply 71 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


     


    Wow, I'm surprised you could fit so many misrepresentations of facts into a single post. It's a nice little fairy tale you present, but...


     



    You do it all the time, I am not sure why you are shocked.

  • Reply 72 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    If you're going to post here, try to be a little more honest, less disingenuous, than your posts to date. As I said above, we already have more than enough people coming here to spin fictitious versions of reality. We don't need any more of that.



    I would work on taking your own advice.

  • Reply 73 of 159
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,095member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post


     


    Your reply is right on target.  Note that he cleverly used the words that Google "turned on multitouch" to make it looking like Google had this feature in Android from the beginning not stealing/copying from the iPhone. 



    The code existed in Android well before it was ever activated. That's fairly common knowledge. IIRC one of the mockups being shown prior to Android's first phone (besides the Blackberry-like scroll-wheel device) was one having a touch interface.


     


    There were several different hardware combos being shown as sample builds to potential members of the Android Handset Alliance. With Apple's instant success with a touchscreen smartphone the direction for others was obviously set. Kudos to Apple.

  • Reply 74 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


    I would work on taking your own advice.



     


    Get over your man-crush skater, you aren't my type.

  • Reply 75 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post


     


    Some people blindly repeat Jobs' clever comment that Apple wasn't getting into search, without stopping to think about it.


     


    Google's business isn't search.   It's selling ads.  Search is just one primary way of doing that.   Apple now also sells ads.   Apple is indeed competing with Google's business.


     


     


    Google didn't write the original iPhone apps.  They provided APIs and Apple wrote their own apps.


     


    Don't forget Apple's penchant for secrecy.  Even inside Apple, only a tiny few developers ever saw the iPhone hardware and software together.


     


    Cheers!



    Well, I respect your opinion, and maybe things didn't happen the way that they certainly appeared to, but I will say that the way that Google handled themselves looks very sketchy at best. Especially in light of how Android "magically" turned into darn near an iOS clone. I'm sorry but I don't see Google being anything but greasy. I've set it before, that seems like a very very crappy way to be a "partner".


     


    Yes Apple now sells iAds, but wasn't that more in a knee-jerk response to Google stabbing them in the back? In any event, iAds was probably a poor decision. Which is often the case when you do something for the wrong reasons. Isn't it pretty much dead anyway?


     


    Yes, poor, poor, misunderstood Google... you're the good guy. We all believe you. /s

  • Reply 76 of 159
    "rivalries with Apple & Amazon hurt users"

    using android hurt them much more.
  • Reply 77 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post



    While I was in Engineering, I used to have so much respect for Google. I lost it since 4 to 5 years. Happily sitting in Apple's board - bast*rd Schmidt had copied all Apple's Business plan and ideas. They have completely completely totally ripped off Apple iOS, giving opportunities to Samscum like companies. I hate you Google!

    Now, you are telling Welcome and let's not hurt users. Shame on you!

    Oh, yeah! You told "Don't be evil." First stop being stupid. You morons.


    Agreed...I'm in the market for a TV...(not sure I can wait till next fall for the ATV) but I will be damned if I'm going to buy a Samsung. I don't care if a Sharp of LG is $40 more. No Samsung.


     


    .....waiting for someone to tell me now, Sharp's and LG's are made by Samsung! :(

  • Reply 78 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


    because it appears no one else does.



     


    That's because there isn't much to contest. 

  • Reply 79 of 159

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Except that they aren't competing head-on with Apple. Google uses services to expand their advertising revenues. Apple sells hardware, with the software side being a necessary evil in some cases, at least in my view. Other than both offering an OS the two business plans don't have much in common really.



    Wow. Really?  Google were well entrenched with the iPhone and probably always would be, if they didn't behave like such dicks. They could still work with other vendors on their devices to support their services. What makes them "extremely dick'ish", is they create basically an iOS clone and then give it away for FREE. That is a really sh*tty thing to do to your partner and totally unnecessary. They could have partnered with everyone and got everything that they wanted without stabbing Apple in the back.


     


    Edit: Corrected a typo. My spulling is sometimes bad. ;-)

  • Reply 80 of 159


    Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

    Some people blindly repeat Jobs' clever comment that Apple wasn't getting into search, without stopping to think about it.


     


    Some people blindly ignore both what Apple said they were doing and what Apple did (which is the same) and pretend whatever they want.


     


    Paraphrased, "You bought those guys, and everyone, you know, the rumor mill's talking about how they're for search; how Apple's getting into search…"


     


    "Well, no, not… They're not really a search company."



    "Well, what are they?"



    "They're an AI company." And Steve gives Mossberg the look, you know? That one where it's like, "This is blindingly obvious to us, and it should be to you, and I'm quite satisfied with how my four word answer will cause far more of a stir than any multi-page article on any rumor site."

Sign In or Register to comment.