"YouTube, Chrome, and Android" Dear Larry, As I recall, you bought two out of three of those innovations. So much for internal innovation. And I beg to differ, I think there is shockingly little that has been accomplished in human history without the benefit of competition. However, this patent back and forth stuff IS nonsense. I say lets give up the lawsuits and put Eric Schmidt in jail for violating his trust to Apple shareholders when he was a member of the Apple board. He will find much in common with his new friends in the pen and we will all get to go on with our lives.
"You may say that Apple only does a very, very small number of things, and that?s working pretty well for them. But I find that unsatisfying," he said, adding that the "crazy things" investors worry about spending money on are ultimately the most substantial. Page gave the examples of YouTube, Chrome, and Android, saying, "If you?re not doing some things that are crazy, then you?re doing the wrong things."
So his examples of Google innovating are something that they bought, something that nobody wants and something that they bought and stuffed full of stolen IP. Yeah, great examples!
Google Maps is amazing, so is google earth, gmail is still the best around, google now makes siri looks like childs play, and android is getting better day by day, chrome OS is the closest thing we have gotten to one laptop per child dream. Google is an AMAZING company with AMAZING talent. Google doesnt have to suck for apple to be great. I respect both companies for different reasons.
Google is making products, no doubt (albeit all centered around their core advertising business), but what we're talking about - what Page is talking about - is original innovation.
Google Maps - An outstanding mapping product, arguably one of the best, but based on a project Google obtained in 2004 when it purchased the company that created it. No original innovation there, just that "incremental improvement" over the years.
Google Earth - Originally called "EarthViewer 3D" when it was created by another company, which again, Goggle bought. So, no original innovation there.
Gmail - A shiny web interface for standard email services, neither of which is was an original Google invention - not even by a long shot.
"google now makes siri looks like childs play" - Not sure what you're referring to, but if you're just talking about search results - about a decade of data-mining the internet, scraping <other> companies websites and sticking that information in a database isn't "innovative", not to mention that the relevancy of the results is questionable in a number of cases, thanks to the weighting results based on advertising considerations.
Android - A linux-based operating system (not a Google innovation) heavily leveraging Java for functionality (also not a Google innovation). Does it have some nice UI features, perhaps, but what are the novel innovations Android has actually brought to the table?
Chrome OS - another linux derivative which is essentially intended to only support a single application - a web browser. Low-cost, sure, innovative, nope.
He's right! Google was the first ones "crazy" enough to come up with search engines, Internet maps, mobile OS and an over business model wrapped around collect people information for advertising and marketing!!
"Page gave the examples of YouTube, Chrome, and Android, saying, "If you?re not doing some things that are crazy, then you're doing the wrong things."
YouTube, purchased by Google then updated with iterative improvements. Android purchased by Google, add several splashes of iOS flavour, now updated with iterative improvements. Chrome is the closest thing to "innovative" out of that lot, albeit from open-source roots, and it's still just a means for Google to gather information to sell to advertisers. Nexus phones and tablets, nothing innovative or game changing there - Amazon heads the pack when it comes to loss-leading.
Where is your major new disruption, Google? The world has been waiting since 1999.
Oh for those who says google doesnt innovate, ha. The web/cloud as we know it today is built off of Google's innovations in servers and server management. icould, facebook, wouldn't exist without the ground breaking work google has done on the server side.
Chrome is the closest thing to "innovative" out of that lot, albeit from open-source roots, and it's still just a means for Google to gather information to sell to advertisers.
Aren't those open-source roots in Chrome webkit which is in-house developed by Apple and then released so that Google can do an iterative improvement?
Google is making products, no doubt (albeit all centered around their core advertising business), but what we're talking about - what Page is talking about - is original innovation.
Google Maps - An outstanding mapping product, arguably one of the best, but based on a project Google obtained in 2004 when it purchased the company that created it. No original innovation there, just that "incremental improvement" over the years.
Google Earth - Originally called "EarthViewer 3D" when it was created by another company, which again, Goggle bought. So, no original innovation there.
Gmail - A shiny web interface for standard email services, neither of which is was an original Google invention - not even by a long shot.
"google now makes siri looks like childs play" - Not sure what you're referring to, but if you're just talking about search results - about a decade of data-mining the internet, scraping <other> companies websites and sticking that information in a database isn't "innovative", not to mention that the relevancy of the results is questionable in a number of cases, thanks to the weighting results based on advertising considerations.
Android - A linux-based operating system (not a Google innovation) heavily leveraging Java for functionality (also not a Google innovation). Does it have some nice UI features, perhaps, but what are the novel innovations Android has actually brought to the table?
Chrome OS - another linux derivative which is essentially intended to only support a single application - a web browser. Low-cost, sure, innovative, nope.
Apple is different how, no one invents anything anymore. Apple didnt invent anything, they have improved, just like google has.
Android - A linux-based operating system (not a Google innovation) heavily leveraging Java for functionality (also not a Google innovation). Does it have some nice UI features, perhaps, but what are the novel innovations Android has actually brought to the table?
Chrome OS - another linux derivative which is essentially intended to only support a single application - a web browser. Low-cost, sure, innovative, nope.
On the "nice UI features" of Android, those were mostly taken from the iPhone. I dgaf if the Android cheerleaders want to argue that Android is now as good as iOS (thanks to "Project Butter" for example.) The bottom line is the basic UI on Android was lifted from Apple. And don't forget about Apple's WebKit contribution to Chrome!
As someone else said much better than I can: "Outside of Search, Google’s products — Android, Google Docs — are shit."
you have no idea what impact google has had on the servers that run the internet.
But Page didn't mention any of that. The "innovations" he highlighted weren't really Google innovations at all. They were either purchased or adapted or stolen, depending on your point of view.
On the "nice UI features" of Android, those were mostly taken from the iPhone. I dgaf if the Android cheerleaders want to argue that Android is now as good as iOS (thanks to "Project Butter" for example.) The bottom line is the basic UI on Android was lifted from Apple. And don't forget about Apple's WebKit contribution to Chrome!
As someone else said much better than I can: "Outside of Search, Google’s products — Android, Google Docs — are shit."
Yes apple invented icons lol. IOS basic ui is your basic gui of computing, its nothing special, apple didn't invent anything with the iphone. What they did, was create a fully functional mini computer with a touchscreen, that was revolutionary. Apple was not the first smartphone, not the first smartphone with a browser, not the first smartphone with apps, the list goes on. The iphone represents what apple does best, not invention but introduction of old technology that makes sense to the masses. Apple is great at consumer products. If you want to talk about invention talk about IBM, old motorola, not apple.
But Page didn't mention any of that. The "innovations" he highlighted weren't really Google innovations at all. They were either purchased or adapted or stolen, depending on your point of view.
Because it would take a lifetime to explain, and this interview is meant for the general public, so he talks about google's most consumer known products.
As I recall, you bought two out of three of those innovations. So much for internal innovation. And I beg to differ, I think there is shockingly little that has been accomplished in human history without the benefit of competition.
However, this patent back and forth stuff IS nonsense. I say lets give up the lawsuits and put Eric Schmidt in jail for violating his trust to Apple shareholders when he was a member of the Apple board. He will find much in common with his new friends in the pen and we will all get to go on with our lives.
What would be your hypothetical charges? No one outside of these boards has accused him of abusing his position at the time.
Comments
Dear Larry,
As I recall, you bought two out of three of those innovations. So much for internal innovation. And I beg to differ, I think there is shockingly little that has been accomplished in human history without the benefit of competition.
However, this patent back and forth stuff IS nonsense. I say lets give up the lawsuits and put Eric Schmidt in jail for violating his trust to Apple shareholders when he was a member of the Apple board. He will find much in common with his new friends in the pen and we will all get to go on with our lives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"You may say that Apple only does a very, very small number of things, and that?s working pretty well for them. But I find that unsatisfying," he said, adding that the "crazy things" investors worry about spending money on are ultimately the most substantial. Page gave the examples of YouTube, Chrome, and Android, saying, "If you?re not doing some things that are crazy, then you?re doing the wrong things."
So his examples of Google innovating are something that they bought, something that nobody wants and something that they bought and stuffed full of stolen IP. Yeah, great examples!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker
Google Maps is amazing, so is google earth, gmail is still the best around, google now makes siri looks like childs play, and android is getting better day by day, chrome OS is the closest thing we have gotten to one laptop per child dream. Google is an AMAZING company with AMAZING talent. Google doesnt have to suck for apple to be great. I respect both companies for different reasons.
Google is making products, no doubt (albeit all centered around their core advertising business), but what we're talking about - what Page is talking about - is original innovation.
Google Maps - An outstanding mapping product, arguably one of the best, but based on a project Google obtained in 2004 when it purchased the company that created it. No original innovation there, just that "incremental improvement" over the years.
Google Earth - Originally called "EarthViewer 3D" when it was created by another company, which again, Goggle bought. So, no original innovation there.
Gmail - A shiny web interface for standard email services, neither of which is was an original Google invention - not even by a long shot.
"google now makes siri looks like childs play" - Not sure what you're referring to, but if you're just talking about search results - about a decade of data-mining the internet, scraping <other> companies websites and sticking that information in a database isn't "innovative", not to mention that the relevancy of the results is questionable in a number of cases, thanks to the weighting results based on advertising considerations.
Android - A linux-based operating system (not a Google innovation) heavily leveraging Java for functionality (also not a Google innovation). Does it have some nice UI features, perhaps, but what are the novel innovations Android has actually brought to the table?
Chrome OS - another linux derivative which is essentially intended to only support a single application - a web browser. Low-cost, sure, innovative, nope.
What's the matter Larry?
Is Google running out of things to copy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Page gave the examples of YouTube, Chrome, and Android, saying, "If you?re not doing some things that are crazy, then you?re doing the wrong things."
Rebuilding Safari with a logo from Power Rangers, crazy
No wait...
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbalmer
....business model wrapped around collect people information for advertising and marketing!!
No wait...
Bingo, rbalmer!
Apple sells products, Google/Facebook sells.... "you!"
No thanks.
"Page gave the examples of YouTube, Chrome, and Android, saying, "If you?re not doing some things that are crazy, then you're doing the wrong things."
YouTube, purchased by Google then updated with iterative improvements. Android purchased by Google, add several splashes of iOS flavour, now updated with iterative improvements. Chrome is the closest thing to "innovative" out of that lot, albeit from open-source roots, and it's still just a means for Google to gather information to sell to advertisers. Nexus phones and tablets, nothing innovative or game changing there - Amazon heads the pack when it comes to loss-leading.
Where is your major new disruption, Google? The world has been waiting since 1999.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker
Oh for those who says google doesnt innovate, ha. The web/cloud as we know it today is built off of Google's innovations in servers and server management. icould, facebook, wouldn't exist without the ground breaking work google has done on the server side.
"Ground breaking work" like what?
Quote:
Chrome is the closest thing to "innovative" out of that lot, albeit from open-source roots, and it's still just a means for Google to gather information to sell to advertisers.
Aren't those open-source roots in Chrome webkit which is in-house developed by Apple and then released so that Google can do an iterative improvement?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodGrief
Google is making products, no doubt (albeit all centered around their core advertising business), but what we're talking about - what Page is talking about - is original innovation.
Google Maps - An outstanding mapping product, arguably one of the best, but based on a project Google obtained in 2004 when it purchased the company that created it. No original innovation there, just that "incremental improvement" over the years.
Google Earth - Originally called "EarthViewer 3D" when it was created by another company, which again, Goggle bought. So, no original innovation there.
Gmail - A shiny web interface for standard email services, neither of which is was an original Google invention - not even by a long shot.
"google now makes siri looks like childs play" - Not sure what you're referring to, but if you're just talking about search results - about a decade of data-mining the internet, scraping <other> companies websites and sticking that information in a database isn't "innovative", not to mention that the relevancy of the results is questionable in a number of cases, thanks to the weighting results based on advertising considerations.
Android - A linux-based operating system (not a Google innovation) heavily leveraging Java for functionality (also not a Google innovation). Does it have some nice UI features, perhaps, but what are the novel innovations Android has actually brought to the table?
Chrome OS - another linux derivative which is essentially intended to only support a single application - a web browser. Low-cost, sure, innovative, nope.
Apple is different how, no one invents anything anymore. Apple didnt invent anything, they have improved, just like google has.
Look up "google now"
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodGrief
"Ground breaking work" like what?
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/10/ff-inside-google-data-center/
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/08/google-as-xerox-parc/?rm
you have no idea what impact google has had on the servers that run the internet.
Google is, by a mile, the most prolific company in the world when it comes to buying out others. Is that what they call innovation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodGrief
Android - A linux-based operating system (not a Google innovation) heavily leveraging Java for functionality (also not a Google innovation). Does it have some nice UI features, perhaps, but what are the novel innovations Android has actually brought to the table?
Chrome OS - another linux derivative which is essentially intended to only support a single application - a web browser. Low-cost, sure, innovative, nope.
On the "nice UI features" of Android, those were mostly taken from the iPhone. I dgaf if the Android cheerleaders want to argue that Android is now as good as iOS (thanks to "Project Butter" for example.) The bottom line is the basic UI on Android was lifted from Apple. And don't forget about Apple's WebKit contribution to Chrome!
As someone else said much better than I can: "Outside of Search, Google’s products — Android, Google Docs — are shit."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
Chime in, Spam? Want to here my from my wizard friend! (I'm calling Spam a wizard, not referring to wiz69, just to be clear)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techstalker
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/10/ff-inside-google-data-center/
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/08/google-as-xerox-parc/?rm
you have no idea what impact google has had on the servers that run the internet.
But Page didn't mention any of that. The "innovations" he highlighted weren't really Google innovations at all. They were either purchased or adapted or stolen, depending on your point of view.
Originally Posted by shadash
On the "nice UI features" of Android, those were mostly taken from the iPhone. I dgaf if the Android cheerleaders want to argue that Android is now as good as iOS (thanks to "Project Butter" for example.) The bottom line is the basic UI on Android was lifted from Apple. And don't forget about Apple's WebKit contribution to Chrome!
As someone else said much better than I can: "Outside of Search, Google’s products — Android, Google Docs — are shit."
Yes apple invented icons lol. IOS basic ui is your basic gui of computing, its nothing special, apple didn't invent anything with the iphone. What they did, was create a fully functional mini computer with a touchscreen, that was revolutionary. Apple was not the first smartphone, not the first smartphone with a browser, not the first smartphone with apps, the list goes on. The iphone represents what apple does best, not invention but introduction of old technology that makes sense to the masses. Apple is great at consumer products. If you want to talk about invention talk about IBM, old motorola, not apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadash
But Page didn't mention any of that. The "innovations" he highlighted weren't really Google innovations at all. They were either purchased or adapted or stolen, depending on your point of view.
Because it would take a lifetime to explain, and this interview is meant for the general public, so he talks about google's most consumer known products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drwam
"YouTube, Chrome, and Android"
Dear Larry,
As I recall, you bought two out of three of those innovations. So much for internal innovation. And I beg to differ, I think there is shockingly little that has been accomplished in human history without the benefit of competition.
However, this patent back and forth stuff IS nonsense. I say lets give up the lawsuits and put Eric Schmidt in jail for violating his trust to Apple shareholders when he was a member of the Apple board. He will find much in common with his new friends in the pen and we will all get to go on with our lives.
What would be your hypothetical charges? No one outside of these boards has accused him of abusing his position at the time.
Originally Posted by Techstalker
…has no idea where apple got webkit from.
I didn't talk about where WebKit came from. I talked about Apple's "contribution" to WebKit, which Google then used to build Chrome.