Chrome OS may push Google CEO off of Apple's board

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 78
    iphone1982iphone1982 Posts: 109member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Techslacker View Post


    It sure seems as though we might be seeing history repeat itself. Back in the day we saw MS get in bed with Apple, learned their plans, and exploited that. Now we see Google possibly doing the same...first in the mobile phone space and now this. Things could get very interesting.



    That was the point I was trying to make with Mr H (ole).



    Google IMO has been working on both a Mobile and a Computer OS for years.



    They may take Google OS out of beta by 2012 but my guess is it will still kitck ass.

    It can multi task after all.
  • Reply 42 of 78
    str1f3str1f3 Posts: 573member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    You think Apple isn't considering the future? And let me just say that no company on the face of the Earth plans for 15-20 years down the road, especially the IT Industries.



    Where did I say that Apple isn't considering the future? You are insane if you don't think companies don't look 15 years ahead. Maybe not IT companies but Google is not your average tech company. They can afford to wait that long because they are that dominant. Google is competing against Microsoft. Do you believe that Google's plan to crush Windows can be done within 5 years? 10 years? No this will take a long time to accomplish.
  • Reply 43 of 78
    oc4theooc4theo Posts: 294member
    I personally believe the guy need to pack up and leave. He does not need the money. He should have been gone since Google phone surfaced. A director need to be present in every meeting all the time. This guy is already absent on Apple's future growth strategy. So what does he do to deserve any compensation? And what secrets of Apple business is he diverging to Google kingdom.



    Google never has a plan for a phone until iPhone debut. When did he start excusing himself from iPhone meetings; before or after iPhone has been created? It is more than conflict of interest. How about stealing business secrets? He has to go, today!
  • Reply 44 of 78
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,833member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post


    That was the point I was trying to make with Mr H (ole).



    Ah. The good old ad-hom. You will note that I never called you (or anyone else, for that matter) a name. I await your apology.



    I'd also be interested in hearing an explanation as to what's so wrong with going with the information published by Google about the Chrome "OS".



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post


    They may take Google OS out of beta by 2012 but my guess is it will still kitck ass. It can multi task after all.



    Which one are you talking about? Android? Android seems much more interesting to me. I just really don't see the point of the Chrome "OS" as stated by Google.
  • Reply 45 of 78
    iphone1982iphone1982 Posts: 109member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Ah. The good old ad-hom. You will note that I never called you (or anyone else, for that matter) a name. I await your apology.



    I'd also be interested in hearing an explanation as to what's so wrong with going with the information published by Google about the Chrome "OS".







    Which one are you talking about? Android? Android seems much more interesting to me. I just really don't see the point of the Chrome "OS" as stated by Google.



    is ole now considered a slam?



    My 'GUESS' as it's as good as yours is that they are one in the same and modular as the cloud services for their Web Apps (Office Suite) are.



    We'll never know until we either see the source code or a real PR is released.
  • Reply 46 of 78
    str1f3str1f3 Posts: 573member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    But, why would you want to? I'd much rather have an app that's optimized for my OS and hardware that I can use if I choose to disconnect than a generic web app. And I'm not sure how many of us would really like a future where there's only one OS and type of hardware, especially if it's not the one we wanted. Of course, I've never been very impressed by gmail either, so, obviously, I'm just not that into web apps, netbooks, or the cloud.



    (Well, OK, the cloud is useful for storing data, although I would never trust it to google, but this whole web app mania is a mystery to me. Well, so is netbook mania, besides the cost factor.)



    Where is everyone getting that I'm talking about one OS? This is benefitial to Apple as well.

    There will always be a dominant OS. It is better that it be Google who thrives on open source. Apple will never have dominant marjetshare because they cater to the high end. It has always been beneficial to Apple that the web remain as open as possible because Microsoft has always tried to use their weight to create proprietary web standards.



    As for hardware that is optimized for your OS, it won't be necessary. Sometime in the future you will be able to handle these things server side so you don't need the most powerful computer. There may be a situation in the future where you can only use a video editing app through a supercomputer because no consumer computer is powerful enough. A good example of this is Onlive. You can play any of the latest PC games no matter how powerful your computer is and on any OS. All of it is handled on the servers. It may or may not be realized this year for Onlive, but there is no question this will be coming someday.



    As for Google, I'd never trust them for anything except search. There are too many privacy issues with them.
  • Reply 47 of 78
    foo2foo2 Posts: 1,077member
    Just because Chrome OS doesn't overlap with Mac OS X doesn't mean the two won't be competitively seeking some of the same consumer dollars. Just because Android is open source doesn't mean the iPhone doesn't compete with it for marketshare.



    With Android and now Chrome OS, it really begs the question: "WTF has Schmidt been doing on Apple's board all this time?" Schmidt shouldn't have been waiting to be removed from the board, he should have removed himself long ago. But now he's stuck there, no doubt feigning ignorance and having to deny to the SEC any reason to leave the board for fear of prosecution and all the while looking more and more like a greedy, conniving schmuck. IMHO it's time for Jobs to kick Schmidt's tusch onto the hard asphalt of Infinite Loop.
  • Reply 48 of 78
    ivladivlad Posts: 742member
    Apple knew about this for years. They will continue their friendship. They have one goal, to kill Micro$oft monopoly. Together they can make amazing products. Android OS and iPhone OS are pretty competitive yet Apple and Google continue to work together.
  • Reply 49 of 78
    nite41nite41 Posts: 41member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post


    I agree, but like i said, IMO Apple is only really successful at Hardware and UI; Software is the ends to the means. I say let a more ambitious software guru take over that division so there is a single umbrella and to different genius companies at the helm. Of course there will be egos, but S.J. has always been into Hardware over Software. Seamless integration on every device, anywhere in the world is Google. That way google could potentially get their wish of an OS that spans multiple devices and anywhere you want it, and they don't have to deal with competition.



    Just my wacky crack-pot fantasy, i know. The future of business (i've heard on several NPR interviews) will probably be involving market collaboration and integration, meaning lots of companies will be merging to gain an advantage on market share. Could be a very interesting future. OK, i'll get my head out of my butt.



    discuss...



    You said that Apple is only really successful at Hardware and UI. Do you mean that the Mac OS X is not a succeessful OS? And isn't UI a part of an OS?



    Google is not a Software Guru, not yet. We will see how the Chrome OS performs. May be then it could be considered as a Software Guru. But for now, no way!



    Now let me comment on you fantsay drive..

    It sounds really good. But not realistic. Even if Apple and Google do decide to merge (which itself is a far call), the regulators (EU, SEC etc) will not let it succeed. Because when Apple and Google team up in full force, a worthy challenger would be hard to find. So, your idea, no matter how good it sounds, most probably won't bear seed. But good imagination though
  • Reply 50 of 78
    mactelmactel Posts: 1,275member
    Tim Cook would be his obvious replacement. I have no doubt he'll be replaced by the end of the year.



    Apple will enter the netbook market as it will be an obvious extension of the iPhone OS (a.k.a. OSX) with multi-touch built-in. Netbook are mainly for web browsing, chat, and email via mobile provider networks and Apple cannot ignore that for very much longer.



    The Chrome OS will only be a threat to Linux and XP (later Windows 7) on the netbooks and will be a better compliment to the devices if the Chrome browser is any indicator of the OS. I adore the Chrome browser.



    Google's productivity suite will only come more to the forefront especially for mobile workers with their Netbook OS.
  • Reply 51 of 78
    One more company that will copy Apple like microsoft did.
  • Reply 52 of 78
    talksense101talksense101 Posts: 1,738member
    They should release Chrome for Moblin instead of polishing Chrome + Nacl into yet another Netbook OS.







    This has nothing to do with Eric being on Apple's board. The market segments are vastly different.
  • Reply 53 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post


    Arrogant doesn't even come close to the words for your posting.



    YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING UNTIL GOOGLE RELEASES IT.



    READ MY SENTENCE ABOVE OVER AND OVER UNTIL YOU UNDERSTAND IT.



    someone beats their wife....
  • Reply 54 of 78
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,833member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post


    is ole now considered a slam?



    Come on. We all know what you meant.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhone1982 View Post


    My 'GUESS' as it's as good as yours is that they are one in the same and modular as the cloud services for their Web Apps (Office Suite) are.



    What information do you base your guess on? When Google have said, "This 'OS' is going to be the Chrome browser running on the Linux kernel, it's aimed at people who spend most of their time on the web, the primary interface will be the web browser, the development platform will be the web", why on earth would you "guess" that it's exactly the same as Android and is going to be "modular as the cloud services", whatever that means? Essentially, you are saying that Google is lying about what Chrome OS is going to be. Why would they do that?
  • Reply 55 of 78
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,833member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post


    Just because Chrome OS doesn't overlap with Mac OS X doesn't mean the two won't be competitively seeking some of the same consumer dollars. Just because Android is open source doesn't mean the iPhone doesn't compete with it for marketshare.



    With Android and now Chrome OS, it really begs the question: "WTF has Schmidt been doing on Apple's board all this time?" Schmidt shouldn't have been waiting to be removed from the board, he should have removed himself long ago.



    Surely the Apple board have some responsibility here too? I agree it would seem it's time for him to leave.
  • Reply 56 of 78
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,682member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post


    Where is everyone getting that I'm talking about one OS? This is benefitial to Apple as well.



    My point about one OS, a point I didn't make very clearly is that as long as there are multiple hardware and OS variations, apps written and compiled to specifically take advantage of their features are likely to outperform web apps, both in speed and the user experience.



    In fact, the current trend seems to be in quite the opposite direction, the current discussion being related to a case in point.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post


    As for hardware that is optimized for your OS, it won't be necessary. Sometime in the future you will be able to handle these things server side so you don't need the most powerful computer. There may be a situation in the future where you can only use a video editing app through a supercomputer because no consumer computer is powerful enough. A good example of this is Onlive. You can play any of the latest PC games no matter how powerful your computer is and on any OS. All of it is handled on the servers. It may or may not be realized this year for Onlive, but there is no question this will be coming someday.



    But, again, why would you want this sort of future?



    Yes, it would be nice to have access to all the latest whatever, but that doesn't have anything to do with web apps. That future already exists and it's called the App Store. You need something, you download it and run it on your computer, which happens to be an iPhone.



    This view of the future of computing is contrary to everything that was behind the invention of the personal computer. The point was that you could have a computer of your own that you could do whatever you wanted to with. This whole cloud computing/web app thing is an attempt to stuff the genie back in the bottle so that someone -- google in this case -- can take away that freedom for their own financial benefit. (And this is, in fact, the one downside of the iPhone: unless you jailbreak it, your freedom to do with it as you like is severely curtailed.)



    And, no, I do not see the day coming when, "you can only use a video editing app through a supercomputer because no consumer computer is powerful enough." Today's supercomputer is tomorrow's laptop, and there's no evidence that would lead me to expect that will change; unless we accept a future of web appliances and the cloud, and our personal computers become less powerful than today's iPhone. That's not a future I'd like to see: a future where someone else controls all our data and what we can do with it.



    I'd like Eric Schmidt to resign from Apple's board because his philosophy is in direct contradiction to the philosophy that Apple was founded on, and his continued presence is likely to steer Apple further and further from it's own original principles. Google tossed their founding principals out the window long ago and has been doing evil for quite some time. Well, a moot point since he's going to have to leave Apple's board anyway, and not a moment too soon.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post


    As for Google, I'd never trust them for anything except search. There are too many privacy issues with them.



    I don't even trust them for search as there are plenty of privacy issues there as well. Of course, the other reason I don't trust them for search is that it's clear, and has been for some time, that the goal of google's search algorithm is to maximize google's profits (by preferentially presenting links to sites displaying google ads) not to provide the best search results.
  • Reply 57 of 78
    Maybe this is why Apple "has no interest" in the "cheap/low-end" netbook market? The Google OS is targeted there - Apple targets desktop/laptop and iPhones - everyone stays on everyone else's board and sings kumbaya.



    In 3-5 years this could all change as markets change/converge, yes, but that's uncertain: Who would have predicted 3-5 years ago that Apple would be *the* pre-eminent contender to the throne of King of All Smartphones? I mean, outside of the apple-fans...



    Google's OS is as much proof-of-concept as it is reality. If it works then we'll see marketplace acceptance for truly bare-bones OS architecture. If it's buggy/unreliable and it flops, then, meh. Personally I see it as a significant niche player, just as gmail is a significant player for personal email, but too unreliable for corporate/enterprise use (same as with google docs, etc).
  • Reply 58 of 78
    elmsleyelmsley Posts: 120member
    Google always seems to provide "whatever you want (free if necessary), as long as you use it and look at ads".

    Apple's aim is to provide you something so awesome, you just want to pay them for it, (even if you don't really need it).

    M$ makes money only because it never really orphans off any technology that depended on them from ages past.



    If I'm looking to upgrade (from say XP), would I prefer..

    1. A free bloated browser (GoogleOS) that may provide offline versions of it's software, or

    2. A mature, cool, robust uncustomizable system requiring me to repurchase software-if available, or

    3. Same old system that will run my existing native apps?



    I suppose they all have their benefits, but the consumer masses would fit best with (1), the creative bunch (2), and the business masses (3). Mind you people don't always use what best fits their needs, but it would appear that Google has a good case to change the OS landscape. Whether that translates into actually taking revenue away from the others is another story. Whether adoption is as quick and easy as they may hope is really up to their execution. We'll see where we are in 5 years.
  • Reply 59 of 78
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nite41 View Post


    You said that Apple is only really successful at Hardware and UI. Do you mean that the Mac OS X is not a succeessful OS? And isn't UI a part of an OS?



    Google is not a Software Guru, not yet. We will see how the Chrome OS performs. May be then it could be considered as a Software Guru. But for now, no way!



    Now let me comment on you fantsay drive..

    It sounds really good. But not realistic. Even if Apple and Google do decide to merge (which itself is a far call), the regulators (EU, SEC etc) will not let it succeed. Because when Apple and Google team up in full force, a worthy challenger would be hard to find. So, your idea, no matter how good it sounds, most probably won't bear seed. But good imagination though



    just wanted to clarify for you my opinion. No, I don't think Mac OS X is unsuccessful. I think it's just a necessary instrument to accomplishing Steve Jobs' goal to create the simplest, cleanest, easiest to use hardware, IMO. They had no choice but to create a platform for their fantastic hardware. So no, not unsuccessful but just the means to the end-goal. I think the priority is more hardware than software. Perhaps no longer now that they are broadening out to the mobile device market. but still the software is more the supporting infrastructure to the over-all goal to creating the most innovative and simplest hardware out there to the end-user.



    and to clarify the rest of your comments, as unrealistic as my thought sounds; I did call it a "fantasy". By definition: fantasy = "a situation imagined by an individual or group, which does not correspond with reality but expresses certain desires or aims of its creator. " wikipedia...Thanks for the feedback!
  • Reply 60 of 78
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MyopiaRocks View Post


    Maybe this is why Apple "has no interest" in the "cheap/low-end" netbook market? The Google OS is targeted there - Apple targets desktop/laptop and iPhones - everyone stays on everyone else's board and sings kumbaya.



    In 3-5 years this could all change as markets change/converge, yes, but that's uncertain: Who would have predicted 3-5 years ago that Apple would be *the* pre-eminent contender to the throne of King of All Smartphones? I mean, outside of the apple-fans...



    Google's OS is as much proof-of-concept as it is reality. If it works then we'll see marketplace acceptance for truly bare-bones OS architecture. If it's buggy/unreliable and it flops, then, meh. Personally I see it as a significant niche player, just as gmail is a significant player for personal email, but too unreliable for corporate/enterprise use (same as with google docs, etc).



    Interesting thoughts...



    I never imagined Apple would be where it is today either. But, seeing the success of the iPod, the phone seemed to be a logical next step in hind-sight. It appears that Apple (in the last 10 years) has become a company that takes time to develop technologies and stews on innovative ideas until they have something that's so good, the end-user has no choice but to flock towards it. They don't test their good ideas on the end-user, like MS.



    An IT friend of mine said once that MS (and others) always has the first good innovative ideas (whether they are successful or not...usually unsuccessful because they are new and untested). For example...look at Windows Media Center and Media Player. Great idea but it's never really been successful until Apple perfected it into iTunes.



    That's one of the main reasons why I really respect Apple. They take their time to don't put something out until it's been tested and they don't waste their time on "fads".



    MS tests all the new ideas on the end-users and Apple perfects it and goes beyond. That, IMO, is an interesting perspective on the major differences between the two giants. Google, probably fits somewhere in-between.
Sign In or Register to comment.