That's designed to make it look like Apple took an offensive position first. Apple feels that with Google releasing Android, that was taking the primary offensive position because it would be like Apple doing the equivalent of Bing, knowing full well how close the two companies were:
Google even comically said they didn't see Android as competition to the iPhone.
FWIW Daniel Eran Dilger said the exact same thing more than once. Yet again in late 2009 he said even in hindsight he was 100% correct that Google's Android was not meant to compete with Apple. According to him and a lot of others Microsoft was the target. From the tone of your post I think you believe that too, that no challenge to Apple was ever intended. It was all about Google's future as it related to Microsoft.
In any event tho yours was a well-reasoned and generally balanced response Marvin, exactly the type of post you're known for. IMHO there's a reason you've remained a moderator and the clues are in posts like this one.
With that said, the writer of the Gizmodo article you chose to quote at the beginning of your post is overly influenced by his hate of Google. His claim that "Google has by far the worst intellectual property infringement record of any major American corporation and ... so many companies and people are suing Google around the world for intellectual property infringement."
If being sued for infringement was proof of infringement then Apple might have the "worst intellectual property infringement record" of all. That author neglected to mention how many times Google has been found guilty of IP theft: No more times than Apple has been found to AFAIK.
There's better balanced articles to quote than the Gizmodo one.
EDIT: corrected the post to 2009 instead of 2010. My apologies
FWIW Daniel Eran Dilger said the exact same thing more than once. Yet again in 2010 he said even in hindsight he was 100% correct that Google's Android was not meant to compete with Apple. According to him and a lot of others Microsoft was the target. From the tone of your post I think you believe that too, that no challenge to Apple was ever intended. It was all about Google's future as it related to Microsoft.
I think Microsoft was the original target but they must have had an idea that it would have affected Apple by releasing an OS in direct competition to them. Their rhetoric has changed over the years too and they've attacked Apple more and more with negative marketing about how they are closed and controlling. They are out to protect their core revenue streams no matter what:
If Apple continues to generate similar levels of profit going forward, iOS can happily co-exist with Android but I think it would help for Google to put out a more positive message about Apple. They know as well as anyone who set the trends for Android but they never really made it clear to their fans that Apple led the way. In the past, Steve had to tell the audience after booing Microsoft that for Apple to win, Microsoft didn't have to lose. Google can make it clear to their audience that their target isn't Apple and they aren't set out to destroy the iPhone as Steve indicated. They have no reason to because they make a lot of revenue from iOS.
I think Microsoft was the original target but they must have had an idea that it would have affected Apple by releasing an OS in direct competition to them..
Then your addition of "comically" doesn't make any sense seeing as you, Schmidt and DED all agreed that Google wasn't after Apple in the first place. No biggie and I do endorse the bulk of your previous post in any event. As for this one I don't recall anything remotely anti-Apple coming from Google other than a single comment by Vic Gundotra that he was quickly muzzled for by Brin. Has there been other anti-Apple rhetoric from Google that I missed? I've seen some from Apple against Google but for the most part Google doesn't snipe back do they?
Then your addition of "comically" doesn't make any sense seeing as you, Schmidt and DED all agreed that Google wasn't after Apple in the first place. No biggie and I do endorse the bulk of your previous post in any event. As for this one I don't recall anything remotely anti-Apple coming from Google other than a single comment by Vic Gundotra that he was quickly muzzled for by Brin. Has there been other anti-Apple rhetoric from Google that I missed? I've seen some from Apple against Google but for the most part Google doesn't snipe back do they?
Oh what horseshit, even for you. Google has collectively acted like an arrogant prick about how it would destroy Apple starting before even the G1 in 2008, the Droid 2.0 launch in 2009, the Honeycomb 3.0 "iPad-killer" & Google TV "will take over" in 2011, Google Wallet NFC in 2012, and right up to the fraudulent core count of last year's Nexus 7 (16!) and this year's Nexus 7 (X8!), pure misrepresentation of garbage app counts against the App Store, on and on.
Of course you don't remember any of this, you were too busy copying and pasting Google propaganda online.
For all of Google's massive string of failures in virtually every market outside of ads, the company displays some remarkably juvenile arrogance every time it introduces anything, and has been flinging excrement at Apple every opportunity it gets.
Gothcha. So you've gone from "Google is suing Apple/Microsoft" to "really they aren't but they could stop MM's old existing lawsuits". You and I might actually agree then. Google didn't stop MM from using an older Android version on the MotoX either but they probably could (should) have. Aggressive micro-management of a Google subsidiary could take care of that.
Either that or you lay the blame for all of Motorola and Motorola Mobility actions and licensing efforts over the past several years at the feet of Google who's owned them since... last May, about a year .Fair enough. Doesn't make it factual but your opinion is certainly yours.
To paraphrase Apple's pledge to not assert SEP's, I'm sure Google could tell Motorola management to stand down and drop the Apple/MS lawsuits if Apple and Microsoft would do the same.
Kinda good Google's around now to keep new patent infringement claims from Motorola in check. Not much danger of anything really new, and certainly not initiated by Google, wouldn't you agree?
You don't get to represent what I've said in the past, "Gaterguy."
Also, I do not agree with any of the contorted bullshit logic you seem to think makes sense.
Google owns 100% of MM. Its inability to install the latest version of Android on a new MM-branded phone is no evidence that Google lacks the ability to stop or change MM's flagrant patent abuse performed in the interests of Google's platform, which has occured in parallel with Google feeding patents to HTC and others to use in attacking Apple in ineffectual attempts to "defend" Android from its own, purposeful and flagrant IP infringement.
Any time you try to put words in my mouth you better cite an actual quote in context, because your ability to twist what other people say is as legendary as it is shamefully dishonest.
You don't get to represent what I've said in the past because you are a *******, "Gaterguy."
Any time you try to put words in my mouth you better cite an actual quote in context, because your ability to twist what other people say is as legendary as it is shamefully dishonest.
As you wish sir, and in your own unedited words. You're welcome to explain how I'm misrepresenting it.
If you’ve read this far, you’ve may have decided that I hate Android and Google and am running down the platform to make the iPhone look better than it is, and that all the facts that I present are therefore meaningless because of my personal opinion. If so, you’d be wrong on all counts.
I think Google is a fantastic company on many levels, ranging from its commitment to supporting open, interoperable software development to its core business model that effectively churns out free (well, ad-supported) services that almost always work well and are quite reliable. I use Google’s services every day. I earn some money from Google AdSense from the properties that publish my articles. While I think the tech media sometimes gives Google a free pass in some areas where it deserves scrutiny, Google’s track record in playing fair, in supporting the environment, in treating its employees well, in not immediately selling out in human rights issues to gain access to China, and many other areas is much better than most of its peers.
As for Android, while I see lots of obvious problems that I think the media is ignoring or glossing over in their simplistic desire to write up a compelling underdog piece, I have never described Google’s smartphone plans as being a competitor or threat to the iPhone. My first article on the subject presented that the rumored “gPhone” was not going to be a hardware competitor to the iPhone at all, but rather a software platform that would target Windows Mobile. I was completely right."
Even the legendary DED should not have the OK to break forum rules and personally attack the character of other forum members. If you have a legitimate counter-point to make you don't need to fall back on schoolyard tactics. Whatever the case may be sir, I won't be baited into replying in kind.
EDIT: Truncated Corrections quoted post since his original comment has since been edited. (Kudos to moderator)
"Let me (Daniel Eran Dilger) say what I really think
If you’ve read this far, you’ve may have decided that I hate Android and Google and am running down the platform to make the iPhone look better than it is, and that all the facts that I present are therefore meaningless because of my personal opinion. If so, you’d be wrong on all counts.
I think Google is a fantastic company on many levels, ranging from its commitment to supporting open, interoperable software development to its core business model that effectively churns out free (well, ad-supported) services that almost always work well and are quite reliable. I use Google’s services every day. I earn some money from Google AdSense from the properties that publish my articles. While I think the tech media sometimes gives Google a free pass in some areas where it deserves scrutiny, Google’s track record in playing fair, in supporting the environment, in treating its employees well, in not immediately selling out in human rights issues to gain access to China, and many other areas is much better than most of its peers.
As for Android, while I see lots of obvious problems that I think the media is ignoring or glossing over in their simplistic desire to write up a compelling underdog piece, I have never described Google’s smartphone plans as being a competitor or threat to the iPhone. My first article on the subject presented that the rumored “gPhone” was not going to be a hardware competitor to the iPhone at all, but rather a software platform that would target Windows Mobile. I was completely right."
Even the legendary DED should not have the OK to break forum rules and personally attack the character of other forum members. If you have a legitimate counter-point to make you don't need to fall back on schoolyard tactics. Whatever the case may be sir, I won't be baited into replying in kind.
EDIT: Truncated Corrections quoted post since his original comment has since been edited. (Kudos to moderator)
If you weren't lying you wouldn't need to use big letters to attempt to make a point.
In 2009 when the article you cited was written, Google hadn't yet had the opportunity to increasingly misrepresent Android and Apple for the 4 years as I outlined.
Do you not understand that? 2009. It's now 2013.
The "gPhone" article was from 2007. At the time, Android Enthusiasts were writing opinions that Google would come out with a gPhone to sell against the iPhone. They were wrong, for every reason I correctly outlined in that article. And note: since 2007 Google hasn't produced a phone of its own, although it has put its Nexus brand on partner phones from HTC, Samsung and so on. Every one of those has failed.
The Moto X is not branded by Google, and Google takes great pains to suggest that its wholly owned subsideraty is an equal partner among other Android licensees (which is bullshit). But it doesn't change the fact that in 2007, Google was working "a software platform that would target Windows Mobile" and not "a hardware competitor to the iPhone at all," unless you think that Google is so incompetent that it took 6 years to bring its in-development hardware to fruition.
If you want to do some fact checking, why not review the 7,452 posts you've made at AppleInsider and see if you can find one that is not pure fact-twisting garbage, let alone an accurate portrayal of what is happening in the mobile industry, and proven to be correct more than five years later as the post above you try to attack me with.
Oh what horseshit, even for you. Google has collectively acted like an arrogant prick about how it would destroy Apple starting before even the G1 in 2008, the Droid 2.0 launch in 2009, the Honeycomb 3.0 "iPad-killer" & Google TV "will take over" in 2011, Google Wallet NFC in 2012, and right up to the fraudulent core count of last year's Nexus 7 (16!) and this year's Nexus 7 (X8!), pure misrepresentation of garbage app counts against the App Store, on and on.
Of course you don't remember any of this, you were too busy copying and pasting Google propaganda online.
For all of Google's massive string of failures in virtually every market outside of ads, the company displays some remarkably juvenile arrogance every time it introduces anything, and has been flinging excrement at Apple every opportunity it gets.
None of the examples you quoted has anything to do with Google saying it would destroy Apple. How does introducing shitty products say anything Apple specific? So Google saying that Google TV is going to get a lot of OEMs is "destroying Apple?" Yeah, Google Wallet NFC was a failure, and doubly fouled up because of stupid carrier interference, but again, what does Google shipping a Wallet/Payment system have to do with attacking Apple? Apple doesn't even have a wallet commerce solution yet, and Google Wallet came out of Google Checkout and if anything, was targeted more at PayPal/Square/Amazon. Google as a company is based on giving engineers freedom to create projects and launch them, and so not a day goes by that Google isn't launching something new. Many of these will fail, just like the majority of small businesses or startups will fail. It is a different view of innovation, bottom up, not top down. We need both.
I'm still waiting for actual examples of "flinging excrement at Apple every opportunity it gets." I want to see actual links to quotes from Google, press releases they put out, ads, or even interviews where they bash Apple or fling excrement. And I'll start by giving you Vic Gundotra's I/O keynote. If you can't produce the needed citations, I think you should retract.
Google as a company is simply not interested in "destroying Apple". That's the kind of talk that came out of Microsoft, and there is zero evidence this is how Google thinks. We do have as evidence on the other side Job's "thermonuclear war" comment, as well as Steve Ballmer's comments on destroying Linux and Android. There is not a single shred of evidence quoted anywhere from Google likewise.
gatorguy joined in 2011. Kinda hard for him to show posts that have been proven correct 5 years later
quote:
If you want to do some fact checking, why not review the 7,452 posts you've made at AppleInsider and see if you can find one that is not pure fact-twisting garbage, let alone an accurate portrayal of what is happening in the mobile industry, and proven to be correct more than five years later as the post above you try to attack me with.
If you weren't lying you wouldn't need to use big letters to attempt to make a point.
In 2009 when the article you cited was written, Google hadn't yet had the opportunity to increasingly misrepresent Android and Apple for the 4 years as I outlined. . .
If you want to do some fact checking, why not review the 7,452 posts you've made at AppleInsider and see if you can find one that is not pure fact-twisting garbage, let alone an accurate portrayal of what is happening in the mobile industry, and proven to be correct more than five years later as the post above you try to attack me with.
So now that you've finally admitted what many of us suspected, that you are really Daniel Eran Dilger attempting to hide your identity, why the subterfuge? Why talk about yourself in the 3rd party and claim not to be who you just confirmed you are?
I think Microsoft was the original target but they must have had an idea that it would have affected Apple by releasing an OS in direct competition to them. Their rhetoric has changed over the years too and they've attacked Apple more and more with negative marketing about how they are closed and controlling.
Then your addition of "comically" doesn't make any sense seeing as you, Schmidt and DED all agreed that Google wasn't after Apple in the first place.
Like I said, they were obviously aware that it would have been in direct competition to what Apple was doing regardless if it was their intention or not to do harm. You don't think it would be comical if Apple started Bing and came out publicly saying they don't see themselves in competition with Google?
I don't recall anything remotely anti-Apple coming from Google other than a single comment by Vic Gundotra that he was quickly muzzled for by Brin. Has there been other anti-Apple rhetoric from Google that I missed? I've seen some from Apple against Google but for the most part Google doesn't snipe back do they?
They don't go overboard with insults but they've been feeding their fans with negativity about Apple how they are closed and want to stifle innovation:
Just because you don't pay attention to it doesn't mean that Google isn't giving Apple well-deserved props.
The first link says:
"while Schmidt was adamant in his praise for Apple’s 9.7-inch iPad, he was also was quick to point out the superior experience users can have on a Nexus 10 tablet by claiming that it has “more apps, is more scalable and more secure.”"
It's like saying "I love Apple but their products are a bit stale lately" and then focusing on the first part of the sentence as praise. The whole sentence is designed as an insult.
The fans do more damage but none of the negativity is necessary. I've never heard Google say that buying an Android device or an iOS device doesn't matter - Google can profit just as much from either one. Google fans always promote Android devices over Apple under the assumption that this is better for Google when that's not necessarily the case.
The fans do more damage but none of the negativity is necessary. I've never heard Google say that buying an Android device or an iOS device doesn't matter - Google can profit just as much from either one. Google fans always promote Android devices over Apple under the assumption that this is better for Google when that's not necessarily the case.
Absolutely. IMHO, and apparently yours too, I don't imagine Google cares where the revenue is coming from as long as they aren't locked out. That was the fear Google had with Microsoft's mobile plans. They'd already seen what lengths Microsoft was willing to go to control the desktop and wanted to make sure that it wasn't a repeat in mobile. I think you agree with that.
Judge Robard gets the difference between Google and Motorola. Tho Microsoft tried to mix the two together in an attempt to convince the court that MS already had the rights to any IP Google had with regard to MPEG-LA, the court recognizes MM and Google are two separate entities,
From yesterdays' ruling on various Summary Judgement motions:
"Here, the court agrees with Motorola and grants summary judgment that Google’s failure to grant a license to Microsoft under the Google-MPEG LA agreement cannot form the basis of Microsoft’s claim that Motorola breached its RAND commitment. Despite opportunity to plead Google into this matter, Microsoft has not done so, and accordingly Google is not a party to this lawsuit. Motorola cannot reasonably be expected to answer for the actions of Google, because Motorola does not in any way control Google. [B]The court is unaware of any authority that permits Microsoft to sue Motorola for the actions of another entity, Google, and Microsoft has pointed the court to no such authority. In any event, the court concludes that it would be unfair for Motorola to be put on trial for the actions of another. Taken to its logical extreme, Microsoft’s argument would allow Microsoft to accuse Motorola of breach of contract based on actions by any other with whom Motorola has some sort of affiliation.[/B] That cannot be a just result. Accordingly, the court grants Motorola’s motion for summary judgment regarding the Google-MPEG LA license agreement and any failure on the part of Google to provide a license under that agreement."
Comments
FWIW Daniel Eran Dilger said the exact same thing more than once. Yet again in late 2009 he said even in hindsight he was 100% correct that Google's Android was not meant to compete with Apple. According to him and a lot of others Microsoft was the target. From the tone of your post I think you believe that too, that no challenge to Apple was ever intended. It was all about Google's future as it related to Microsoft.
In any event tho yours was a well-reasoned and generally balanced response Marvin, exactly the type of post you're known for. IMHO there's a reason you've remained a moderator and the clues are in posts like this one.
With that said, the writer of the Gizmodo article you chose to quote at the beginning of your post is overly influenced by his hate of Google. His claim that "Google has by far the worst intellectual property infringement record of any major American corporation and ... so many companies and people are suing Google around the world for intellectual property infringement."
If being sued for infringement was proof of infringement then Apple might have the "worst intellectual property infringement record" of all. That author neglected to mention how many times Google has been found guilty of IP theft: No more times than Apple has been found to AFAIK.
There's better balanced articles to quote than the Gizmodo one.
EDIT: corrected the post to 2009 instead of 2010. My apologies
raymond.woo@energizer.com
I think Microsoft was the original target but they must have had an idea that it would have affected Apple by releasing an OS in direct competition to them. Their rhetoric has changed over the years too and they've attacked Apple more and more with negative marketing about how they are closed and controlling. They are out to protect their core revenue streams no matter what:
http://www.electronista.com/articles/13/07/02/latest.salvo.of.legal.filings.from.geolocation.firm.accused.brin.of.misconduct/
They've said they're patching some things up with Apple and their relationship is improving:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/sun-valley-googles-eric-schmidt-584566
If Apple continues to generate similar levels of profit going forward, iOS can happily co-exist with Android but I think it would help for Google to put out a more positive message about Apple. They know as well as anyone who set the trends for Android but they never really made it clear to their fans that Apple led the way. In the past, Steve had to tell the audience after booing Microsoft that for Apple to win, Microsoft didn't have to lose. Google can make it clear to their audience that their target isn't Apple and they aren't set out to destroy the iPhone as Steve indicated. They have no reason to because they make a lot of revenue from iOS.
Then your addition of "comically" doesn't make any sense seeing as you, Schmidt and DED all agreed that Google wasn't after Apple in the first place. No biggie and I do endorse the bulk of your previous post in any event. As for this one I don't recall anything remotely anti-Apple coming from Google other than a single comment by Vic Gundotra that he was quickly muzzled for by Brin. Has there been other anti-Apple rhetoric from Google that I missed? I've seen some from Apple against Google but for the most part Google doesn't snipe back do they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Then your addition of "comically" doesn't make any sense seeing as you, Schmidt and DED all agreed that Google wasn't after Apple in the first place. No biggie and I do endorse the bulk of your previous post in any event. As for this one I don't recall anything remotely anti-Apple coming from Google other than a single comment by Vic Gundotra that he was quickly muzzled for by Brin. Has there been other anti-Apple rhetoric from Google that I missed? I've seen some from Apple against Google but for the most part Google doesn't snipe back do they?
Oh what horseshit, even for you. Google has collectively acted like an arrogant prick about how it would destroy Apple starting before even the G1 in 2008, the Droid 2.0 launch in 2009, the Honeycomb 3.0 "iPad-killer" & Google TV "will take over" in 2011, Google Wallet NFC in 2012, and right up to the fraudulent core count of last year's Nexus 7 (16!) and this year's Nexus 7 (X8!), pure misrepresentation of garbage app counts against the App Store, on and on.
Of course you don't remember any of this, you were too busy copying and pasting Google propaganda online.
For all of Google's massive string of failures in virtually every market outside of ads, the company displays some remarkably juvenile arrogance every time it introduces anything, and has been flinging excrement at Apple every opportunity it gets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Gothcha. So you've gone from "Google is suing Apple/Microsoft" to "really they aren't but they could stop MM's old existing lawsuits". You and I might actually agree then. Google didn't stop MM from using an older Android version on the MotoX either but they probably could (should) have. Aggressive micro-management of a Google subsidiary could take care of that.
Either that or you lay the blame for all of Motorola and Motorola Mobility actions and licensing efforts over the past several years at the feet of Google who's owned them since... last May, about a year .Fair enough. Doesn't make it factual but your opinion is certainly yours.
To paraphrase Apple's pledge to not assert SEP's, I'm sure Google could tell Motorola management to stand down and drop the Apple/MS lawsuits if Apple and Microsoft would do the same.
Kinda good Google's around now to keep new patent infringement claims from Motorola in check. Not much danger of anything really new, and certainly not initiated by Google, wouldn't you agree?
You don't get to represent what I've said in the past, "Gaterguy."
Also, I do not agree with any of the contorted bullshit logic you seem to think makes sense.
Google owns 100% of MM. Its inability to install the latest version of Android on a new MM-branded phone is no evidence that Google lacks the ability to stop or change MM's flagrant patent abuse performed in the interests of Google's platform, which has occured in parallel with Google feeding patents to HTC and others to use in attacking Apple in ineffectual attempts to "defend" Android from its own, purposeful and flagrant IP infringement.
Any time you try to put words in my mouth you better cite an actual quote in context, because your ability to twist what other people say is as legendary as it is shamefully dishonest.
As you wish sir, and in your own unedited words. You're welcome to explain how I'm misrepresenting it.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/10/21/gartners-presumptuous-coronation-of-android-as-the-windows-of-smartphones/
"Let me (Daniel Eran Dilger) say what I really think
If you’ve read this far, you’ve may have decided that I hate Android and Google and am running down the platform to make the iPhone look better than it is, and that all the facts that I present are therefore meaningless because of my personal opinion. If so, you’d be wrong on all counts.
I think Google is a fantastic company on many levels, ranging from its commitment to supporting open, interoperable software development to its core business model that effectively churns out free (well, ad-supported) services that almost always work well and are quite reliable. I use Google’s services every day. I earn some money from Google AdSense from the properties that publish my articles. While I think the tech media sometimes gives Google a free pass in some areas where it deserves scrutiny, Google’s track record in playing fair, in supporting the environment, in treating its employees well, in not immediately selling out in human rights issues to gain access to China, and many other areas is much better than most of its peers.
As for Android, while I see lots of obvious problems that I think the media is ignoring or glossing over in their simplistic desire to write up a compelling underdog piece, I have never described Google’s smartphone plans as being a competitor or threat to the iPhone. My first article on the subject presented that the rumored “gPhone” was not going to be a hardware competitor to the iPhone at all, but rather a software platform that would target Windows Mobile. I was completely right."
Even the legendary DED should not have the OK to break forum rules and personally attack the character of other forum members. If you have a legitimate counter-point to make you don't need to fall back on schoolyard tactics. Whatever the case may be sir, I won't be baited into replying in kind.
EDIT: Truncated Corrections quoted post since his original comment has since been edited. (Kudos to moderator)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
As you wish sir, and in your own unedited words. You're welcome to explain how I'm misrepresenting it.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/10/21/gartners-presumptuous-coronation-of-android-as-the-windows-of-smartphones/
"Let me (Daniel Eran Dilger) say what I really think
If you’ve read this far, you’ve may have decided that I hate Android and Google and am running down the platform to make the iPhone look better than it is, and that all the facts that I present are therefore meaningless because of my personal opinion. If so, you’d be wrong on all counts.
I think Google is a fantastic company on many levels, ranging from its commitment to supporting open, interoperable software development to its core business model that effectively churns out free (well, ad-supported) services that almost always work well and are quite reliable. I use Google’s services every day. I earn some money from Google AdSense from the properties that publish my articles. While I think the tech media sometimes gives Google a free pass in some areas where it deserves scrutiny, Google’s track record in playing fair, in supporting the environment, in treating its employees well, in not immediately selling out in human rights issues to gain access to China, and many other areas is much better than most of its peers.
As for Android, while I see lots of obvious problems that I think the media is ignoring or glossing over in their simplistic desire to write up a compelling underdog piece, I have never described Google’s smartphone plans as being a competitor or threat to the iPhone. My first article on the subject presented that the rumored “gPhone” was not going to be a hardware competitor to the iPhone at all, but rather a software platform that would target Windows Mobile. I was completely right."
Even the legendary DED should not have the OK to break forum rules and personally attack the character of other forum members. If you have a legitimate counter-point to make you don't need to fall back on schoolyard tactics. Whatever the case may be sir, I won't be baited into replying in kind.
EDIT: Truncated Corrections quoted post since his original comment has since been edited. (Kudos to moderator)
If you weren't lying you wouldn't need to use big letters to attempt to make a point.
In 2009 when the article you cited was written, Google hadn't yet had the opportunity to increasingly misrepresent Android and Apple for the 4 years as I outlined.
Do you not understand that? 2009. It's now 2013.
The "gPhone" article was from 2007. At the time, Android Enthusiasts were writing opinions that Google would come out with a gPhone to sell against the iPhone. They were wrong, for every reason I correctly outlined in that article. And note: since 2007 Google hasn't produced a phone of its own, although it has put its Nexus brand on partner phones from HTC, Samsung and so on. Every one of those has failed.
The Moto X is not branded by Google, and Google takes great pains to suggest that its wholly owned subsideraty is an equal partner among other Android licensees (which is bullshit). But it doesn't change the fact that in 2007, Google was working "a software platform that would target Windows Mobile" and not "a hardware competitor to the iPhone at all," unless you think that Google is so incompetent that it took 6 years to bring its in-development hardware to fruition.
If you want to do some fact checking, why not review the 7,452 posts you've made at AppleInsider and see if you can find one that is not pure fact-twisting garbage, let alone an accurate portrayal of what is happening in the mobile industry, and proven to be correct more than five years later as the post above you try to attack me with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
Oh what horseshit, even for you. Google has collectively acted like an arrogant prick about how it would destroy Apple starting before even the G1 in 2008, the Droid 2.0 launch in 2009, the Honeycomb 3.0 "iPad-killer" & Google TV "will take over" in 2011, Google Wallet NFC in 2012, and right up to the fraudulent core count of last year's Nexus 7 (16!) and this year's Nexus 7 (X8!), pure misrepresentation of garbage app counts against the App Store, on and on.
Of course you don't remember any of this, you were too busy copying and pasting Google propaganda online.
For all of Google's massive string of failures in virtually every market outside of ads, the company displays some remarkably juvenile arrogance every time it introduces anything, and has been flinging excrement at Apple every opportunity it gets.
None of the examples you quoted has anything to do with Google saying it would destroy Apple. How does introducing shitty products say anything Apple specific? So Google saying that Google TV is going to get a lot of OEMs is "destroying Apple?" Yeah, Google Wallet NFC was a failure, and doubly fouled up because of stupid carrier interference, but again, what does Google shipping a Wallet/Payment system have to do with attacking Apple? Apple doesn't even have a wallet commerce solution yet, and Google Wallet came out of Google Checkout and if anything, was targeted more at PayPal/Square/Amazon. Google as a company is based on giving engineers freedom to create projects and launch them, and so not a day goes by that Google isn't launching something new. Many of these will fail, just like the majority of small businesses or startups will fail. It is a different view of innovation, bottom up, not top down. We need both.
I'm still waiting for actual examples of "flinging excrement at Apple every opportunity it gets." I want to see actual links to quotes from Google, press releases they put out, ads, or even interviews where they bash Apple or fling excrement. And I'll start by giving you Vic Gundotra's I/O keynote. If you can't produce the needed citations, I think you should retract.
Google as a company is simply not interested in "destroying Apple". That's the kind of talk that came out of Microsoft, and there is zero evidence this is how Google thinks. We do have as evidence on the other side Job's "thermonuclear war" comment, as well as Steve Ballmer's comments on destroying Linux and Android. There is not a single shred of evidence quoted anywhere from Google likewise.
gatorguy joined in 2011. Kinda hard for him to show posts that have been proven correct 5 years later
quote:
If you want to do some fact checking, why not review the 7,452 posts you've made at AppleInsider and see if you can find one that is not pure fact-twisting garbage, let alone an accurate portrayal of what is happening in the mobile industry, and proven to be correct more than five years later as the post above you try to attack me with.
So now that you've finally admitted what many of us suspected, that you are really Daniel Eran Dilger attempting to hide your identity, why the subterfuge? Why talk about yourself in the 3rd party and claim not to be who you just confirmed you are?
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/140080/inside-apples-2011-steve-jobs-achievements-battles-and-crises#post_2017940
Your last sentence in this one is more than a little strange considering your own efforts to mask who you are. For that matter, and considering it was your 3rd post if I'm correct, the entire thing is a bit disconcerting IMO:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/130771/samsung-stalls-accuses-apple-of-doctoring-evidence-in-us-iphone-ipad-copying-case/40#post_1925062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
So now that you've finally admitted what many of us suspected, that you are really Daniel Eran Dilger attempting to hide your identity, why the subterfuge? Why talk about yourself in the 3rd party and claim not to be who you just confirmed you are?
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/140080/inside-apples-2011-steve-jobs-achievements-battles-and-crises#post_2017940
Just for the record
I am not Spartacus
Just because you don't pay attention to it doesn't mean that Google isn't giving Apple well-deserved props.
http://news.yahoo.com/eric-schmidt-praises-apple-innovator-urges-blackberry-step-185027754.html
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2168684/google-boss-clarifies-web-remarks-praises-apple-facebook
Like I said, they were obviously aware that it would have been in direct competition to what Apple was doing regardless if it was their intention or not to do harm. You don't think it would be comical if Apple started Bing and came out publicly saying they don't see themselves in competition with Google?
They don't go overboard with insults but they've been feeding their fans with negativity about Apple how they are closed and want to stifle innovation:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jan/18/google-larry-page-facebook-apple
http://bgr.com/2012/12/12/google-eric-schmidt-apple-war/
The first link says:
"while Schmidt was adamant in his praise for Apple’s 9.7-inch iPad, he was also was quick to point out the superior experience users can have on a Nexus 10 tablet by claiming that it has “more apps, is more scalable and more secure.”"
It's like saying "I love Apple but their products are a bit stale lately" and then focusing on the first part of the sentence as praise. The whole sentence is designed as an insult.
The fans do more damage but none of the negativity is necessary. I've never heard Google say that buying an Android device or an iOS device doesn't matter - Google can profit just as much from either one. Google fans always promote Android devices over Apple under the assumption that this is better for Google when that's not necessarily the case.
Absolutely. IMHO, and apparently yours too, I don't imagine Google cares where the revenue is coming from as long as they aren't locked out. That was the fear Google had with Microsoft's mobile plans. They'd already seen what lengths Microsoft was willing to go to control the desktop and wanted to make sure that it wasn't a repeat in mobile. I think you agree with that.
From yesterdays' ruling on various Summary Judgement motions:
"Here, the court agrees with Motorola and grants summary judgment that Google’s failure to grant a license to Microsoft under the Google-MPEG LA agreement cannot form the basis of Microsoft’s claim that Motorola breached its RAND commitment. Despite opportunity to plead Google into this matter, Microsoft has not done so, and accordingly Google is not a party to this lawsuit. Motorola cannot reasonably be expected to answer for the actions of Google, because Motorola does not in any way control Google. [B]The court is unaware of any authority that permits Microsoft to sue Motorola for the actions of another entity, Google, and Microsoft has pointed the court to no such authority. In any event, the court concludes that it would be unfair for Motorola to be put on trial for the actions of another. Taken to its logical extreme, Microsoft’s argument would allow Microsoft to accuse Motorola of breach of contract based on actions by any other with whom Motorola has some sort of affiliation.[/B] That cannot be a just result. Accordingly, the court grants Motorola’s motion for summary judgment regarding the Google-MPEG LA license agreement and any failure on the part of Google to provide a license under that agreement."