At least you can admit you were wrong on half of what you said. Now for the admission of the other half-
True or false:
Google wants iOS users to be Android users
True or false:
Google wants people to purchase through Google Play vs iTunes
True or false:
Google wants to be in your living room instead of Apple
True or false:
Google bought a streaming music service a month after Apple bought a streaming music service
Do I need to continue? You're clueless.
1. I doubt Google particularly cared unless Apple chose to lock them out. Fear of Microsoft doing so is what drove the Android program in the first place. Google does their best to be platform agnostic.
2. The question makes no sense. Android users would never be given the option of buying apps via iTunes. :???:
3. Google wants to be in your living room. How they get there is less important than making it so. Remember from point 1: Google is platform agnostic for the most part. I think they'd happily work with Apple on Apple TV if they were asked.
4. Yes Google bought a streaming music service. But Google already had a streaming on-demand music service and has for quite awhile, Google All-Access, which the purchase is hopefully going to improve. Apple does not have one (iRadio is no on-demand streamer and nothing like All-Access) but should when the Beats deal closes.
Tossing in the "clueless" insult looks a little silly now doesn't it? It didn't add anything and comes off as more juvenile than adult. I don't mind having a discussion but would decline to join in if we're having a name-calling contest, and no doubt a contest you would win.
The article is about a specific Google product losing out to a competing Apple product.
Other Google products have nothing to do with this.
It would be like complaining that a Safari user has Google as their default search.
And it is tough to call this a Google product losing out to a 'competing' Apple product. It is Apple choosing to use its own product. The more accurate question would be why hasn't Apple used its own services for the last two years.
Google Maps was gimped on iOS intentionally. As the platform owner, Apple will have to provide an alternative that fits its own vision. Whether Google agrees or not is not so relevant.
You are 100% correct . Google had no real say in the matter. it was always Apple's decision IMO.
Google Maps was gimped on iOS intentionally. As the platform owner, Apple will have to provide an alternative that fits its own vision. Whether Google agrees or not is not so relevant.
Except that it wasn't Google Maps. It was a maps app made by Apple using Google's data.
Love how AppleInsider keeps peddling this ridiculous, tired lie. The product wans't disastrous- it was the media's reaction to it, who were desperate to hang Apple by any thread that they could find, helped by all the anti-Apple shills- and sites like yours truly, who just went along with it. The cover photo for Apple "disastrous" maps was a broken 3D view for a location that was identical in Google maps and STILL hasn't been fixed in Google maps years later. Just think about that for a second, that should give you enough insight as to the honesty of the whole manufactured "disaster". Apple maps wasn't perfect at launch, nor is it now, nor is any mapping service on the planet (I still see a TON of mistakes with Google maps). But the reaction was laughable in its lack of objectivity, and AppleInsider cowardly follows the dishonest narrative that was set by those with an anti-Apple agenda, as if it was a fact.
Apple Maps was a disaster and it used outdated map information at launch, even in major metropolitan areas. It lacked public transit information, making it useless for many users. In case you forgot, Apple admitted Maps was a failure at launch and recommended many other map products in the app store as a solution. Forstall was fired because of it. Wake up to reality because it was a fact.
Now that Apple will switch to using their Maps for Find my iPhone, now no one will be able to locate their phone. Love that AppleInsider uses Google Chrome as their browser of choice when writing about an anti-Google article. Hilarious!
Apple's upcoming Spotlight rebirth is a huge salvo toward Google. It is the front end for the eventual launch of their own search engine
It is essential for them do to this, as its the backbone for so many other technologies. And all the extra capacity they have been building out in the new data centers is not just for streaming media and iCloud storage. Its likely to run silent and internal for years, like the five years of secret OS X Intel development during the PPC years.
When the CEO of one of the world's richest companies is forced to issue a public, written apology and suggest alternatives to his own product, it's a disaster. Warranted or not, it's still a disaster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Thats my point. The apology was the best PR move in his opinion, it does not mean that the criticism that led to it was honest, balanced, objective, or justified. It was utterly out of control, and media was exploiting the "disastrous" maps to to push their "see, Apple is doomed without Steve Jobs" narrative as much as humanly possible. Yes, the situation was a disaster because of people's dishonesty, not because the product itself was a disaster. The Letter is irrelevant. That was Cook's way of dealing with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf
The media's reaction to it was undoubtedly stoked by mismanaged expectations. Apple's biggest mistake was boasting their product as "The Most Powerful" mapping solution when they should have labeled it a beta, especially since the media had an established incumbent for comparison. The higher you raise expectations, the more critically you will be judged.
Sorry Slurpy, you're outflanked by virtue of living in a world where only technical merit matters. Maps wasn't a bad beta+/0.9-ish program, but it was rolled out promising to be much more - something it obviously still wasn't (and is only now approaching), and that gave every anti-Apple interest in the world an opening to pummel the company. And that was a major gaffe....
...I.e., in the rough and tumble of high stakes commerce, when you KNOW the media and your competitors are out gunning for you... ....when you know they'll wildly and loudly and continually exaggerate every misstep... ....and when you know Apple will be attacked for things that aren't even missteps, whatever they do....
....then you've gotta realize you always have to bring your A game to every rollout or suffer PR damage to your rep that lingers...
...as whenever Maps is in the news, every major media outlet STILL harps on the rollout problems. Can't remember the attribution, but the quote rings true in a wide variety of situations:
"You never get a second chance to make a first impression."
And that's just how stuff often works in the real economic/tech biz world.
Ask Betamax (which was def superior tech to VHS but still lost). Ask WordPerfect, whose fatal error was sticking with DOS development and being late to the Windows party. And the list of better products with just one or two slips at the wrong time sinking their ships goes on...
...Apple's just fortunate Maps wasn't that strategic at that point and that they're so successful they've been able to stick with the product through an awkward not-all-that-much-loved-by-many adolescence, since THEY see it as strategic in their competition with Google.
Apple is making fast progress with their mapping efforts. Well done. It's not an easy thing to do.
I'm going to start calling these "sheep clothing" posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Why is there a need for a war? Google's business model doesn't really overlap Apple's and vice-versa. It's not as tho Google is taking away Apple device sales as they sell everything they can produce quarter after quarter and lead the world in profitability (ignoring oil). Outside of controlling the entire computer market and sucking up every last dollar of profit what more could Apple wish for? Apple and Google could peacefully co-exist, and in fact actually assist each other, if they choose. The "war" was of Steve Jobs making IMHO and hopefully Tim Cook has a different mindset.
You forgot the sarcasm tags with most of those comments. Without them your post is woefully hypocritical. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain you (or at least some other prominent google employees) have tried to justify android in the past saying that google "had" to create it because it was "inevitable" that Apple would eventually encroach on google's business and thus google was forced to preemptively compete in the cellphone market.. then I suppose laptops, then TV (six tries?), then tablets, then curated music... Now you, and other googlers, try to rewrite history saying google is/was actually against microsoft, or that google isn't really trying to compete (it is, and it's failing miserably, with motorolla being a perfect example, and Nest soon to follow). These are all excuses to mask googles immature and undeserved sense of hubris, which seems to be the only consistent variable behind google's habit of fecklessly attempting to compete with nearly all consumer tech companies (lately trying to copy amazon). It's pathetic.
I note that VW's latest Golf in the USA has a lightening port but no USB. That suggests that most of its customers, not surprisingly, are iPhone owners. It also suggests that their lack of CarPlay doesn't translate into a seemingly suicidal anti-Apple stance.
Google declared war against the wrong company. They thought a 'device' company couldn't compete with online services, and therefore would be ultimately defeated. Google continues to pay the price for biting off more than it could hope to chew.
Great comment.
Hubris is google's fatal flaw. I (and many others) initially thought google's "don't be evil" statement was genuine. However, in retrospect, it was merely grandiosity, as evidenced by googles subsequent stream of unethical practices, their constant desire to push boundaries (like a petulant teenager), and what seems to be an "end justifies the means" attitude towards all of their misdeeds. No amount of balloons, robot couriers, or contact lens pipe dreams are going to change google's rotten, and creepy, core.
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/181269/apple-maps-launch-on-the-web-in-new-find-my-iphone-beta-displacing-google#post_2561029" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false">Quote:<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Gatorguy</strong> <a href="/t/181269/apple-maps-launch-on-the-web-in-new-find-my-iphone-beta-displacing-google#post_2561029"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /><br />Apple is making fast progress with their mapping efforts. Well done. It's not an easy thing to do.</div></div><p> </p><p>I'm going to start calling these "sheep clothing" posts.</p><p> </p><div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/181269/apple-maps-launch-on-the-web-in-new-find-my-iphone-beta-displacing-google#post_2561041" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false">Quote:<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Gatorguy</strong> <a href="/t/181269/apple-maps-launch-on-the-web-in-new-find-my-iphone-beta-displacing-google#post_2561041"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /><br /><br />Why is there a need for a war? Google's business model doesn't really overlap Apple's and vice-versa. It's not as tho Google is taking away Apple device sales as they sell everything they can produce quarter after quarter and lead the world in profitability (ignoring oil). Outside of controlling the entire computer market and sucking up every last dollar of profit what more could Apple wish for? Apple and Google could peacefully co-exist, and in fact actually assist each other, if they choose. The "war" was of Steve Jobs making IMHO and hopefully Tim Cook has a different mindset.</div></div><p> </p><p>You forgot the sarcasm tags with most of those comments. Without them your post is woefully hypocritical. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain you (or at least some other prominent google employees) have tried to justify android in the past saying that google "had" to create it because it was "inevitable" that Apple would eventually encroach on google's business and thus google was forced to preemptively compete in the cellphone market.. then I suppose laptops, then TV (six tries?), then tablets, then curated music... Now you, and other googlers, try to rewrite history saying google is/was actually against microsoft, or that google isn't really trying to compete (it is, and it's failing miserably, with motorolla being a perfect example, and Nest soon to follow). These are all excuses to mask googles immature and undeserved sense of hubris, which seems to be the only consistent variable behind google's habit of fecklessly attempting to compete with nearly all consumer tech companies (lately trying to copy amazon). It's pathetic.</p>
so in other words Google should have stayed in search.
No other company is allowed to compete with Apple in anything and must immediately concede the ground Apple sells in?
Competition is good, without it you'd get stagnant monopolies.
I want Google, Apple, Samsung, Amazon et Al to be competing legally hard against each other to bring the best to the market to benefit us the consumer. Without that competition we as the consumer will suffer regardless of which side of the fence we sit on our personal preferences.
so in other words Google should have stayed in search.
No other company is allowed to compete with Apple in anything and must immediately concede the ground Apple sells in?
Competition is good, without it you'd get stagnant monopolies.
I want Google, Apple, Samsung, Amazon et Al to be competing legally hard against each other to bring the best to the market to benefit us the consumer. Without that competition we as the consumer will suffer regardless of which side of the fence we sit on our personal preferences.
Uhh no thanks with Samsung. As if they could run a business legally. Laughable. Let's replace them with HTC, LG, Microsoft/Nokia, etc- and I'll agree with your statement. If Samsung would go out of business- the tech world would be better for it. Their behavior is inexcusable- and when others see them benefit from their despicable tactics, it sets a terrible precedent.
As a side point- Patchy never said that google should stick to search and not compete with Apple. He was just pointing out the idiocy and hypocrisy of Gatorguys post- who said google had no thoughts of Apple when developing Android, just Microsoft- which is comical and like Patchy said, pathetic. You're relatively new here, you'll learn about Gatorguy soon enough- I mean, he calls iTunes Radio "iRadio" for Petes sake.
I (and many others) initially thought google's "don't be evil" statement was genuine.
Supposedly it was never their statement, but someone else wrote that. They DID however agreed to this 'mantra', while knowing exactly they do things the wrong way. WiFi password sniffing, publishing copyright protected literature and such. Now before someone makes a claim they never were indicted convicted for that, it doesn't mean they weren't doing things by the book, so to speak.
I anyone feels like puking but for some reason can't the following might help:
Code of Conduct
Preface
“Don’t be evil.” Googlers generally apply those words to how we serve our users. But “Don’t be evil” is much more than that. Yes, it’s about providing our users unbiased access to information, focusing on their needs and giving them the best products and services that we can. But it’s also about doing the right thing more generally – following the law, acting honorably and treating each other with respect.
The Google Code of Conduct is one of the ways we put “Don’t be evil” into practice. It’s built around the recognition that everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards of ethical business conduct. We set the bar that high for practical as well as aspirational reasons: Our commitment to the highest standards helps us hire great people, build great products, and attract loyal users. Trust and mutual respect among employees and users are the foundation of our success, and they are something we need to earn every day.
As a side point- Patchy never said that google should stick to search and not compete with Apple. He was just pointing out the idiocy and hypocrisy of Gatorguys post- who said google had no thoughts of Apple when developing Android, just Microsoft- which is comical and like Patchy said, pathetic. You're relatively new here, you'll learn about Gatorguy soon enough- I mean, he calls iTunes Radio "iRadio" for Petes sake.
I said nothing of the sort. You are either being intentionally disingenuous or misreading what was written. What I said was Android was originally intended to blunt Microsoft's mobile plans. MS was already trying to push Google off the desktop and they didn't want the same to happen in mobile. Android was Google's plan for relevancy. An Apple iPhone wasn't even in the picture when Google began investing in the project in late 2004/early 2005. It wasn't even a twinkle in Steve Jobs eye. It was months later when Jobs was eventually convinced the iPhone was viable and development given the green light as an offshoot of the iPad "Project Purple". FACT that even DED would agree with.
There's absolutely no doubt that once the iPhone was official Mr. Jobs made it an issue that Google would be unable to ignore with threats of retaliation and eventually even war. It became personal. But that does not change the fact that Android was never intended to be an attack on Apple. It's simply revisionist bull* to make the assertion it was. That Mr. Jobs tirades and threats made sure Apple could not be ignored in the years since doesn't change history. Google never threatened war nor envisioned Android as a way of hurting Apple. There was zero benefit to them to do so. You've got things confused.
As I said several posts back you should perhaps research a bit more.
Comments
1. I doubt Google particularly cared unless Apple chose to lock them out. Fear of Microsoft doing so is what drove the Android program in the first place. Google does their best to be platform agnostic.
2. The question makes no sense. Android users would never be given the option of buying apps via iTunes. :???:
3. Google wants to be in your living room. How they get there is less important than making it so. Remember from point 1: Google is platform agnostic for the most part. I think they'd happily work with Apple on Apple TV if they were asked.
4. Yes Google bought a streaming music service. But Google already had a streaming on-demand music service and has for quite awhile, Google All-Access, which the purchase is hopefully going to improve. Apple does not have one (iRadio is no on-demand streamer and nothing like All-Access) but should when the Beats deal closes.
Tossing in the "clueless" insult looks a little silly now doesn't it? It didn't add anything and comes off as more juvenile than adult. I don't mind having a discussion but would decline to join in if we're having a name-calling contest, and no doubt a contest you would win.
The article is about a specific Google product losing out to a competing Apple product.
Other Google products have nothing to do with this.
It would be like complaining that a Safari user has Google as their default search.
And it is tough to call this a Google product losing out to a 'competing' Apple product. It is Apple choosing to use its own product. The more accurate question would be why hasn't Apple used its own services for the last two years.
That's a big upgrade from clueless. Well done sir. Can't be a good, intelligent grown-up debate without a little name-calling eh?
You are 100% correct . Google had no real say in the matter. it was always Apple's decision IMO.
The operative words were business model. While they do compete on various fronts the overall business model for each company is very different.
Except that it wasn't Google Maps. It was a maps app made by Apple using Google's data.
Love how AppleInsider keeps peddling this ridiculous, tired lie. The product wans't disastrous- it was the media's reaction to it, who were desperate to hang Apple by any thread that they could find, helped by all the anti-Apple shills- and sites like yours truly, who just went along with it. The cover photo for Apple "disastrous" maps was a broken 3D view for a location that was identical in Google maps and STILL hasn't been fixed in Google maps years later. Just think about that for a second, that should give you enough insight as to the honesty of the whole manufactured "disaster". Apple maps wasn't perfect at launch, nor is it now, nor is any mapping service on the planet (I still see a TON of mistakes with Google maps). But the reaction was laughable in its lack of objectivity, and AppleInsider cowardly follows the dishonest narrative that was set by those with an anti-Apple agenda, as if it was a fact.
Apple Maps was a disaster and it used outdated map information at launch, even in major metropolitan areas. It lacked public transit information, making it useless for many users. In case you forgot, Apple admitted Maps was a failure at launch and recommended many other map products in the app store as a solution. Forstall was fired because of it. Wake up to reality because it was a fact.
Now that Apple will switch to using their Maps for Find my iPhone, now no one will be able to locate their phone. Love that AppleInsider uses Google Chrome as their browser of choice when writing about an anti-Google article. Hilarious!
Apple's upcoming Spotlight rebirth is a huge salvo toward Google. It is the front end for the eventual launch of their own search engine
It is essential for them do to this, as its the backbone for so many other technologies. And all the extra capacity they have been building out in the new data centers is not just for streaming media and iCloud storage. Its likely to run silent and internal for years, like the five years of secret OS X Intel development during the PPC years.
AI's headlines are almost never accurate.
It's word soup, selected for maximum click traffic.
When the CEO of one of the world's richest companies is forced to issue a public, written apology and suggest alternatives to his own product, it's a disaster. Warranted or not, it's still a disaster.
Thats my point. The apology was the best PR move in his opinion, it does not mean that the criticism that led to it was honest, balanced, objective, or justified. It was utterly out of control, and media was exploiting the "disastrous" maps to to push their "see, Apple is doomed without Steve Jobs" narrative as much as humanly possible. Yes, the situation was a disaster because of people's dishonesty, not because the product itself was a disaster. The Letter is irrelevant. That was Cook's way of dealing with it.
Quote:
The media's reaction to it was undoubtedly stoked by mismanaged expectations. Apple's biggest mistake was boasting their product as "The Most Powerful" mapping solution when they should have labeled it a beta, especially since the media had an established incumbent for comparison. The higher you raise expectations, the more critically you will be judged.
Sorry Slurpy, you're outflanked by virtue of living in a world where only technical merit matters. Maps wasn't a bad beta+/0.9-ish program, but it was rolled out promising to be much more - something it obviously still wasn't (and is only now approaching), and that gave every anti-Apple interest in the world an opening to pummel the company. And that was a major gaffe....
...I.e., in the rough and tumble of high stakes commerce, when you KNOW the media and your competitors are out gunning for you... ....when you know they'll wildly and loudly and continually exaggerate every misstep... ....and when you know Apple will be attacked for things that aren't even missteps, whatever they do....
....then you've gotta realize you always have to bring your A game to every rollout or suffer PR damage to your rep that lingers...
...as whenever Maps is in the news, every major media outlet STILL harps on the rollout problems. Can't remember the attribution, but the quote rings true in a wide variety of situations:
"You never get a second chance to make a first impression."
And that's just how stuff often works in the real economic/tech biz world.
Ask Betamax (which was def superior tech to VHS but still lost). Ask WordPerfect, whose fatal error was sticking with DOS development and being late to the Windows party. And the list of better products with just one or two slips at the wrong time sinking their ships goes on...
...Apple's just fortunate Maps wasn't that strategic at that point and that they're so successful they've been able to stick with the product through an awkward not-all-that-much-loved-by-many adolescence, since THEY see it as strategic in their competition with Google.
Apple is making fast progress with their mapping efforts. Well done. It's not an easy thing to do.
I'm going to start calling these "sheep clothing" posts.
Why is there a need for a war? Google's business model doesn't really overlap Apple's and vice-versa. It's not as tho Google is taking away Apple device sales as they sell everything they can produce quarter after quarter and lead the world in profitability (ignoring oil). Outside of controlling the entire computer market and sucking up every last dollar of profit what more could Apple wish for? Apple and Google could peacefully co-exist, and in fact actually assist each other, if they choose. The "war" was of Steve Jobs making IMHO and hopefully Tim Cook has a different mindset.
You forgot the sarcasm tags with most of those comments. Without them your post is woefully hypocritical. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain you (or at least some other prominent google employees) have tried to justify android in the past saying that google "had" to create it because it was "inevitable" that Apple would eventually encroach on google's business and thus google was forced to preemptively compete in the cellphone market.. then I suppose laptops, then TV (six tries?), then tablets, then curated music... Now you, and other googlers, try to rewrite history saying google is/was actually against microsoft, or that google isn't really trying to compete (it is, and it's failing miserably, with motorolla being a perfect example, and Nest soon to follow). These are all excuses to mask googles immature and undeserved sense of hubris, which seems to be the only consistent variable behind google's habit of fecklessly attempting to compete with nearly all consumer tech companies (lately trying to copy amazon). It's pathetic.
Google declared war against the wrong company. They thought a 'device' company couldn't compete with online services, and therefore would be ultimately defeated. Google continues to pay the price for biting off more than it could hope to chew.
Great comment.
Hubris is google's fatal flaw. I (and many others) initially thought google's "don't be evil" statement was genuine. However, in retrospect, it was merely grandiosity, as evidenced by googles subsequent stream of unethical practices, their constant desire to push boundaries (like a petulant teenager), and what seems to be an "end justifies the means" attitude towards all of their misdeeds. No amount of balloons, robot couriers, or contact lens pipe dreams are going to change google's rotten, and creepy, core.
No other company is allowed to compete with Apple in anything and must immediately concede the ground Apple sells in?
Competition is good, without it you'd get stagnant monopolies.
I want Google, Apple, Samsung, Amazon et Al to be competing legally hard against each other to bring the best to the market to benefit us the consumer. Without that competition we as the consumer will suffer regardless of which side of the fence we sit on our personal preferences.
Could someone investigate whether there is some rule behind usage Apple/Google maps in Find my phone like browser based or location based?
I have little possibility to do that.
That was a shampoo commercial lol
Uhh no thanks with Samsung. As if they could run a business legally. Laughable. Let's replace them with HTC, LG, Microsoft/Nokia, etc- and I'll agree with your statement. If Samsung would go out of business- the tech world would be better for it. Their behavior is inexcusable- and when others see them benefit from their despicable tactics, it sets a terrible precedent.
As a side point- Patchy never said that google should stick to search and not compete with Apple. He was just pointing out the idiocy and hypocrisy of Gatorguys post- who said google had no thoughts of Apple when developing Android, just Microsoft- which is comical and like Patchy said, pathetic. You're relatively new here, you'll learn about Gatorguy soon enough- I mean, he calls iTunes Radio "iRadio" for Petes sake.
Supposedly it was never their statement, but someone else wrote that. They DID however agreed to this 'mantra', while knowing exactly they do things the wrong way. WiFi password sniffing, publishing copyright protected literature and such. Now before someone makes a claim they never were
indictedconvicted for that, it doesn't mean they weren't doing things by the book, so to speak.I anyone feels like puking but for some reason can't the following might help:
Code of Conduct
Preface
“Don’t be evil.” Googlers generally apply those words to how we serve our users. But “Don’t be evil” is much more than that. Yes, it’s about providing our users unbiased access to information, focusing on their needs and giving them the best products and services that we can. But it’s also about doing the right thing more generally – following the law, acting honorably and treating each other with respect.
The Google Code of Conduct is one of the ways we put “Don’t be evil” into practice. It’s built around the recognition that everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards of ethical business conduct. We set the bar that high for practical as well as aspirational reasons: Our commitment to the highest standards helps us hire great people, build great products, and attract loyal users. Trust and mutual respect among employees and users are the foundation of our success, and they are something we need to earn every day.
http://investor.google.com/corporate/code-of-conduct.html
Though this guy, employee #23 says he came up with Don't Be Evil...
I said nothing of the sort. You are either being intentionally disingenuous or misreading what was written. What I said was Android was originally intended to blunt Microsoft's mobile plans. MS was already trying to push Google off the desktop and they didn't want the same to happen in mobile. Android was Google's plan for relevancy. An Apple iPhone wasn't even in the picture when Google began investing in the project in late 2004/early 2005. It wasn't even a twinkle in Steve Jobs eye. It was months later when Jobs was eventually convinced the iPhone was viable and development given the green light as an offshoot of the iPad "Project Purple". FACT that even DED would agree with.
There's absolutely no doubt that once the iPhone was official Mr. Jobs made it an issue that Google would be unable to ignore with threats of retaliation and eventually even war. It became personal. But that does not change the fact that Android was never intended to be an attack on Apple. It's simply revisionist bull* to make the assertion it was. That Mr. Jobs tirades and threats made sure Apple could not be ignored in the years since doesn't change history. Google never threatened war nor envisioned Android as a way of hurting Apple. There was zero benefit to them to do so. You've got things confused.
As I said several posts back you should perhaps research a bit more.