What the hell are you smoking? Jobs statements were from before Android had established any real presence. Has Android helped push Apple to adopt new features? Probably. Did it help push Apple to adopt any of the features you listed? No. Let's review:
1) Mulitasking. Jobs was very clear that they would not implement multutasking until they could do it in a way that would not kill battery life. They did this with their TSR implementation. This was not brought about because of Android. iOS is unix and fully multitasking. The limitation of single userspace apps completely intentional as was the TSR implementation. Nothing to do with Android.
2) Notifications. Given the JB community had almost identical notifications to what iOS 5 has and that they predate Android notifications, the best you can say is that both Apple and Android copied the iPhone JB community.
3) Cloud service. This is where you totally come off as a troll. Even if we ignore that Apple has had various evolutions of cloud services for over 10 years and if we ignore that Jobs has been promoting exactly the implementation that we now see since his days at NeXT, we would also have to ignore that Apple has been planning the data center in North Carolina for cloud service since at the very latest Spring 2009. That is when the state agreed to give Apple tax breaks for building the data center. Do you think Apple just bought the land, planned a data center and had no idea what they were going to do with it? No, they had been planning it prior to the land acquisition, which puts it into 2008, when Android was still almost considered a beta (not beta but no one was using it).
In short, you may have a point that competition helped drive Apple. But please try to use facts that make sense or even just facts. The one fact that is totally undeniable is that if not for Apple and the iPhone, you would still be using BB/WinMo looking shit, buying apps from your carrier, paying you left nut for a few MB of data, calling in for your VM, using a dedicated keyboard (well there are still some holdouts there), using a stylus and crowing about your great 1.5" screen. The fact is that Apple, and Apple alone has completely changed what we think of as smartphones. Other competitors might have pushed Apple to include some features, but the concept as a whole was radically new when Apple brought out the iPhone.
Remember, when you are using your Android and hating on Apple and Jobs, you are using an iPhone clone. Nothing more, nothing less.
I agree with 1 and 3, but disagree with your 2nd point and your last sentence. The JB community was inspired by Android for their pull down notifications. Before Android, they used notifications that were far more similar to the old Windows phones. Think about it: How silly does it sound that Apple (let alone Android) were inspired by hackers that Apple themselves do not want?
edit: on top of the fact that in the blackberry-esqe pre versions of Android those notifications were already being used. If you think any iPhone (even jail broken ones) had those pull down notifications before Android you're simply trying to ignore facts.
And as to your statement, "when you're using Android...you're using an iPhone clone," that's entirely incorrect. Clone implies that it tried to replicate iOS. Your statement tells me you've never used an Android phone and therefore have no place to talk about them. The OSes are VERY different, and the newer Android 4.0 only reestablishes this. You have a case that Samsung is trying to replicate the iPhone. You have no ground to stand on when you say that Android as an OS does though.
There is a difference between standing on the shoulders of past greats and ripping off a product.
Please, enlighten us to how Android is completely ripping of the iPhone.
And if I hear the words "touch screen," "rectangle/looks like an iPhone" or "apps," then Apple did the same when Steve Jobs presented the first Apple computer. He didn't reinvent the computer on his first try (although thank god he eventually did ), he merely tried to improve on current technology...Not even counting the fact that his computer looked the same as other mini computers from the same time period.
Again sounds like you should never allow a competitor on you board in the first place. Looks like trying to gang up on RIM and MSFT simply backfired.
The original plan was to use big services company like Google to build the initial App ecosystem. It backfired when Google stole their plans. I don't think it would have happened if Google didn't already have a phone in development. I'm sure they looked at their secret knowledge of the iPhone and said there is no way our soon to be released phone will make it when this is released. So they copied it. Originally they copied the Blackberry. Since it was never released, I'm not sure how closely they copied it.
I don't know how, at this point, there can be any argument about whether Google, with Android, ripped off Apple's IP. They've admitted as much in court by requesting that they be allowed a free pass on their infringement. This shouldn't be surprising to anyone, their entire business model has for years been based on ripping off and "giving away for free" other's IP.
And as of now they've left their cohorts holding the bag. For anyone that doesn't believe it, ask the Android hardware manufactures how they feel about having to pay Microsoft for every Android device they sell while all Google seems to be willing to do is whine on their behalf about extortion. Suddenly Android doesn't seem as free (as in beer) anymore.
Please, enlighten us to how Android is completely ripping of the iPhone.
And if I hear the words "touch screen," "rectangle/looks like an iPhone" or "apps," then Apple did the same when Steve Jobs presented the first Apple computer. He didn't reinvent the computer on his first try (although thank god he eventually did ), he merely tried to improve on current technology...Not even counting the fact that his computer looked the same as other mini computers from the same time period.
The first Android release was an iPhone clone, but they shouldn't have had knowledge of the iPhone when it was in development. They have probably diverged in some ways since then, but they are still often copying instead of innovating. There certainly is some grey area, but they should not have had the head start on their copy machine. It isn't the fact that other touch screen phones exist, it is that the whole idea of Android was stolen directly from Apple when it wasn't public knowledge. Innovators are allowed to have a head start. That is the core problem. If you notice, Apple hasn't made any remarks about the late comers like WebOS or Windows Phone 7. If Android didn't have the head start, they would be technologically at the same level as their non-Apple competitors.
Having said this, it may not have been Schmitt's fault entirely. I don't see him doing this deliberately. Google probably had a head start on creating Apps for the iPhone. The product managers in charge of those apps may have shifted Android development at that time. That still doesn't make it right.
IF Jobs is right and Apple continues to fight off Android based on innovation, other smartphone will likely lose on the long run. Jobs has always push the envelope to innovate based on the concept of simple daily usage for its products lead by good functional design. For Apple to stay on the same path without Jobs is the question I have. Let's hope the management team he built will practice what he preached.
"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong," Jobs reportedly said. "I'm going to destroy Android..."
Such a pity that he didn't do it earlier. Then history would have gone in a different direction, and Nokia wouldn't have sold herself to Microsoft.
Speaking of Nokia ( I know, I know!), SockRolid posted a timeline of mobile device evolution above, which I think is very incomplete without the NIT 770 from 2005.
The first Android release was an iPhone clone, but they shouldn't have had knowledge of the iPhone when it was in development. They have probably diverged in some ways since then, but they are still often copying instead of innovating. There certainly is some grey area, but they should not have had the head start on their copy machine. It isn't the fact that other touch screen phones exist, it is that the whole idea of Android was stolen directly from Apple when it wasn't public knowledge. Innovators are allowed to have a head start. That is the core problem. If you notice, Apple hasn't made any remarks about the late comers like WebOS or Windows Phone 7. If Android didn't have the head start, they would be technologically at the same level as their non-Apple competitors.
Having said this, it may not have been Schmitt's fault entirely. I don't see him doing this deliberately. Google probably had a head start on creating Apps for the iPhone. The product managers in charge of those apps may have shifted Android development at that time. That still doesn't make it right.
That makes a little more sense. I incorrectly assumed you were one of the mindless "Android is still copying off of iOS!" trolls that occasionally frequent this place. And for that I apologize .
Any how, I'm not entirely too sure that they used that knowledge of the iPhone to create a product. However, I don't think the world will ever know. I doubt any developer is going to step forward and say "After developing apps for the iPhone, we scrapped our entire product and started over." So to me, this point is moot when people debate this. Android definitely could have copied iOS (and clearly was inspired by it), but I don't think we'll ever know for sure.
Also, I think Apple's detest of Android more than WebOS and WP7 draws more from the fact that Android is hands down their greatest competitor. You could combine BB, WebOS, and MP7 and still not be able to match iOS in the smartphone market. Similar to the SEC and the Big Ten in college football. You see those two dog on each other all the time. This is because over the past couple of years they've been fighting for the national spotlight. You rarely see them talk about the Big East because in football they are considered much weaker. But that's just my outlook on it
But give Google some credit. To say they'd still be with BB and WebOS in terms of technology is silly . As an Engineer, Google jobs are coveted like gold. If you do anything with computers (software, programming, etc), Google even giving you an interview is something people may put on their resume . They have some of the best minds in the world working for them right now, and they truly are pushing technology as we speak (along with Apple )
Please, enlighten us to how Android is completely ripping of the iPhone.
And if I hear the words "touch screen," "rectangle/looks like an iPhone" or "apps," then Apple did the same when Steve Jobs presented the first Apple computer. He didn't reinvent the computer on his first try (although thank god he eventually did ), he merely tried to improve on current technology...Not even counting the fact that his computer looked the same as other mini computers from the same time period.
The Mac was the first mainstream, commercial implementation of a GUI system. Xerox was mainly doing it for research and their only commercial venture was some obscenely expensive system that was never intended for consumers nor mainstream. Apple implemented the GUI in a way that had never been seen before and was also unique in using the GUI to make computers easier to use. Windows was a clone of MacOS.
For iPhones, again, what they brought to smartphones was unique at the time. They didn't invent captive touch, but no one else was pushing them into the mainstread. They didn't invent keyboardless phones, but they made the mainstream and implemented them in a manner that was well thought out and integrated. Touchscreens prior to the iPhone generally meant a stylus and almost always still meant a physical keyboard. The notion of apps (even if at first only first party apps) was new. The concept of no carrier sludge and branding was new. The concept of a fully featured browser was new to the mainstream. The idea of everything on the device being an app, right down to the phone itself, was completely new. Perhaps not all of these were new in and of themselves. But the integration of everything that made an iPhone an iPhone was unique. Android was an unapologetic clone of iOS. Android was originally meant to be a BB/WinMo clone in every conceivable way. The success of the iPhone totally changed the plan and path for Android.
If you can't see how completely influenced Android is by the iPhone, it really isn't worth debating it with you. There is no point in debating with someone either delusional or unwilling to admit reality.
The Mac was the first mainstream, commercial implementation of a GUI system. Xerox was mainly doing it for research and their only commercial venture was some obscenely expensive system that was never intended for consumers nor mainstream. Apple implemented the GUI in a way that had never been seen before and was also unique in using the GUI to make computers easier to use. Windows was a clone of MacOS.
For iPhones, again, what they brought to smartphones was unique at the time. They didn't invent captive touch, but no one else was pushing them into the mainstread. They didn't invent keyboardless phones, but they made the mainstream and implemented them in a manner that was well thought out and integrated. Touchscreens prior to the iPhone generally meant a stylus and almost always still meant a physical keyboard. The notion of apps (even if at first only first party apps) was new. The concept of no carrier sludge and branding was new. The concept of a fully featured browser was new to the mainstream. The idea of everything on the device being an app, right down to the phone itself, was completely new. Perhaps not all of these were new in and of themselves. But the integration of everything that made an iPhone an iPhone was unique. Android was an unapologetic clone of iOS. Android was originally meant to be a BB/WinMo clone in every conceivable way. The success of the iPhone totally changed the plan and path for Android.
If you can't see how completely influenced Android is by the iPhone, it really isn't worth debating it with you. There is no point in debating with someone either delusional or unwilling to admit reality.
I never once said that Apple didn't influence Android. In fact, it influenced it a lot. But since you get so riled up over someone simply disagreeing with you I have no reason to discuss this with you. You're clearly one of those people who have some predetermined speech about Android the moment someone brings it up. Especially since you apparently know more than everyone. I've not once heard of confirmation that Android changed its product design post iPhone. Do I think it did? Hell yes I do. Am I certain it did? No. And neither should you. You see a picture of a very old prototype and make hundreds of conclusions about it. That's not someone I'd like to discuss things with. I'd much rather continue my discussion esummers, sorry.
No, you're planning on reporting him for essentially reminding AI that Apple has used a lot of the competition's features to improve their own. The fact that Apple started the mobile OS as we know it is irrelevant. Android improved on a lot of things Apple started and Apple adopted them. The fact that you choose to ignore this does not make it incorrect or FUD. While not all of these can be directly proved to be inspired by Android, the fact that Apple only added backgrounds (customization options), multi tasking, wireless syncing, Notification Center, and Widgets only after Android became popular leads seemingly everyone but you that Apple is not shy about borrowing good ideas as well.
Uh, the fact that Apple started the mobile OS as we know it is not irrelevant. It's a matter of scale. Apple may have copied the notification center from Android, but Android copied inertial scrolling, swiping, pinching, copy and paste, the way various UI components work, etc. Apple created the entire "language" of multitouch UIs. Copying one feature - the way you access the notification center - is not even remotely on the same scale. The other so-called copied features such as backgrounds, the task switched and wireless syncing are ridiculous accusations, since they're all features of the OS on which iOS is based. I'm pretty sure Apple is allowed to copy themselves.
Part of Andy Rubin's carrer was spent at Apple, for three years as a manufacturing engineer in the mobile unit. In '92 Apple spun off that team as General Magic which took the original work from Apple and developed the Magic Cap operating system (written in C, IIRC) and interface for hand-held mobile devices. Rubin ran that operation until it folded in '95. The resulting history involves Rubin joining Artemis Research which became WebTV which was bought out by Microsoft, Rubin leaving to co-found Danger, another company eventually bought by Microsoft, again Rubin left, starting Android in '99, with the foundational work at General Magic to build on as they leveraged Linux for starting up Android Inc. At least one other former Apple engineer is working on Android at Google, including Andy Hertzfeld currently working on Google+
So Google has derived quite a bit of Apple's efforts from former staff, let alone Eric peeking over Steve's shoulder and jotting notes for Mountain View.
One other thing that seems to be consistently glossed over here is the fact that, just because something doesn't hit the interface immediately doesn't mean it isn't in the lab, on the bench or in circulation internally. The Apple execs routinely have devices that are a rev ahead as they "real-world" test the upcoming improvements. Apple like many other innovative companies is anywhere from 1 to 3 or 4 years out in front of what they are delivering to the market. Now that doesn't mean that they don't watch competitors and don't have competing devices in house to check out, but it does mean that where a company like Apple is driving a deeper level of innovation, they have usually anticipated the development path of a feature or device and are already there or further on if needed.
Comments
What the hell are you smoking? Jobs statements were from before Android had established any real presence. Has Android helped push Apple to adopt new features? Probably. Did it help push Apple to adopt any of the features you listed? No. Let's review:
1) Mulitasking. Jobs was very clear that they would not implement multutasking until they could do it in a way that would not kill battery life. They did this with their TSR implementation. This was not brought about because of Android. iOS is unix and fully multitasking. The limitation of single userspace apps completely intentional as was the TSR implementation. Nothing to do with Android.
2) Notifications. Given the JB community had almost identical notifications to what iOS 5 has and that they predate Android notifications, the best you can say is that both Apple and Android copied the iPhone JB community.
3) Cloud service. This is where you totally come off as a troll. Even if we ignore that Apple has had various evolutions of cloud services for over 10 years and if we ignore that Jobs has been promoting exactly the implementation that we now see since his days at NeXT, we would also have to ignore that Apple has been planning the data center in North Carolina for cloud service since at the very latest Spring 2009. That is when the state agreed to give Apple tax breaks for building the data center. Do you think Apple just bought the land, planned a data center and had no idea what they were going to do with it? No, they had been planning it prior to the land acquisition, which puts it into 2008, when Android was still almost considered a beta (not beta but no one was using it).
In short, you may have a point that competition helped drive Apple. But please try to use facts that make sense or even just facts. The one fact that is totally undeniable is that if not for Apple and the iPhone, you would still be using BB/WinMo looking shit, buying apps from your carrier, paying you left nut for a few MB of data, calling in for your VM, using a dedicated keyboard (well there are still some holdouts there), using a stylus and crowing about your great 1.5" screen. The fact is that Apple, and Apple alone has completely changed what we think of as smartphones. Other competitors might have pushed Apple to include some features, but the concept as a whole was radically new when Apple brought out the iPhone.
Remember, when you are using your Android and hating on Apple and Jobs, you are using an iPhone clone. Nothing more, nothing less.
I agree with 1 and 3, but disagree with your 2nd point and your last sentence. The JB community was inspired by Android for their pull down notifications. Before Android, they used notifications that were far more similar to the old Windows phones. Think about it: How silly does it sound that Apple (let alone Android) were inspired by hackers that Apple themselves do not want?
edit: on top of the fact that in the blackberry-esqe pre versions of Android those notifications were already being used. If you think any iPhone (even jail broken ones) had those pull down notifications before Android you're simply trying to ignore facts.
And as to your statement, "when you're using Android...you're using an iPhone clone," that's entirely incorrect. Clone implies that it tried to replicate iOS. Your statement tells me you've never used an Android phone and therefore have no place to talk about them. The OSes are VERY different, and the newer Android 4.0 only reestablishes this. You have a case that Samsung is trying to replicate the iPhone. You have no ground to stand on when you say that Android as an OS does though.
There is a difference between standing on the shoulders of past greats and ripping off a product.
Please, enlighten us to how Android is completely ripping of the iPhone.
And if I hear the words "touch screen," "rectangle/looks like an iPhone" or "apps," then Apple did the same when Steve Jobs presented the first Apple computer. He didn't reinvent the computer on his first try (although thank god he eventually did
Again sounds like you should never allow a competitor on you board in the first place. Looks like trying to gang up on RIM and MSFT simply backfired.
The original plan was to use big services company like Google to build the initial App ecosystem. It backfired when Google stole their plans. I don't think it would have happened if Google didn't already have a phone in development. I'm sure they looked at their secret knowledge of the iPhone and said there is no way our soon to be released phone will make it when this is released. So they copied it. Originally they copied the Blackberry. Since it was never released, I'm not sure how closely they copied it.
I don't know how, at this point, there can be any argument about whether Google, with Android, ripped off Apple's IP. They've admitted as much in court by requesting that they be allowed a free pass on their infringement. This shouldn't be surprising to anyone, their entire business model has for years been based on ripping off and "giving away for free" other's IP.
And as of now they've left their cohorts holding the bag. For anyone that doesn't believe it, ask the Android hardware manufactures how they feel about having to pay Microsoft for every Android device they sell while all Google seems to be willing to do is whine on their behalf about extortion. Suddenly Android doesn't seem as free (as in beer) anymore.
"Good artists copy great artists steal"
-Steve Jobs
Correction, It's a quote;
"Good artists copy great artists steal"
- Pablo Picasso
Please, enlighten us to how Android is completely ripping of the iPhone.
And if I hear the words "touch screen," "rectangle/looks like an iPhone" or "apps," then Apple did the same when Steve Jobs presented the first Apple computer. He didn't reinvent the computer on his first try (although thank god he eventually did
The first Android release was an iPhone clone, but they shouldn't have had knowledge of the iPhone when it was in development. They have probably diverged in some ways since then, but they are still often copying instead of innovating. There certainly is some grey area, but they should not have had the head start on their copy machine. It isn't the fact that other touch screen phones exist, it is that the whole idea of Android was stolen directly from Apple when it wasn't public knowledge. Innovators are allowed to have a head start. That is the core problem. If you notice, Apple hasn't made any remarks about the late comers like WebOS or Windows Phone 7. If Android didn't have the head start, they would be technologically at the same level as their non-Apple competitors.
Having said this, it may not have been Schmitt's fault entirely. I don't see him doing this deliberately. Google probably had a head start on creating Apps for the iPhone. The product managers in charge of those apps may have shifted Android development at that time. That still doesn't make it right.
...
"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong," Jobs reportedly said. "I'm going to destroy Android..."
Such a pity that he didn't do it earlier. Then history would have gone in a different direction, and Nokia wouldn't have sold herself to Microsoft.
Speaking of Nokia (
The first Android release was an iPhone clone, but they shouldn't have had knowledge of the iPhone when it was in development. They have probably diverged in some ways since then, but they are still often copying instead of innovating. There certainly is some grey area, but they should not have had the head start on their copy machine. It isn't the fact that other touch screen phones exist, it is that the whole idea of Android was stolen directly from Apple when it wasn't public knowledge. Innovators are allowed to have a head start. That is the core problem. If you notice, Apple hasn't made any remarks about the late comers like WebOS or Windows Phone 7. If Android didn't have the head start, they would be technologically at the same level as their non-Apple competitors.
Having said this, it may not have been Schmitt's fault entirely. I don't see him doing this deliberately. Google probably had a head start on creating Apps for the iPhone. The product managers in charge of those apps may have shifted Android development at that time. That still doesn't make it right.
That makes a little more sense. I incorrectly assumed you were one of the mindless "Android is still copying off of iOS!" trolls that occasionally frequent this place. And for that I apologize
Any how, I'm not entirely too sure that they used that knowledge of the iPhone to create a product. However, I don't think the world will ever know. I doubt any developer is going to step forward and say "After developing apps for the iPhone, we scrapped our entire product and started over." So to me, this point is moot when people debate this. Android definitely could have copied iOS (and clearly was inspired by it), but I don't think we'll ever know for sure.
Also, I think Apple's detest of Android more than WebOS and WP7 draws more from the fact that Android is hands down their greatest competitor. You could combine BB, WebOS, and MP7 and still not be able to match iOS in the smartphone market. Similar to the SEC and the Big Ten in college football. You see those two dog on each other all the time. This is because over the past couple of years they've been fighting for the national spotlight. You rarely see them talk about the Big East because in football they are considered much weaker. But that's just my outlook on it
But give Google some credit. To say they'd still be with BB and WebOS in terms of technology is silly
Please, enlighten us to how Android is completely ripping of the iPhone.
And if I hear the words "touch screen," "rectangle/looks like an iPhone" or "apps," then Apple did the same when Steve Jobs presented the first Apple computer. He didn't reinvent the computer on his first try (although thank god he eventually did
The Mac was the first mainstream, commercial implementation of a GUI system. Xerox was mainly doing it for research and their only commercial venture was some obscenely expensive system that was never intended for consumers nor mainstream. Apple implemented the GUI in a way that had never been seen before and was also unique in using the GUI to make computers easier to use. Windows was a clone of MacOS.
For iPhones, again, what they brought to smartphones was unique at the time. They didn't invent captive touch, but no one else was pushing them into the mainstread. They didn't invent keyboardless phones, but they made the mainstream and implemented them in a manner that was well thought out and integrated. Touchscreens prior to the iPhone generally meant a stylus and almost always still meant a physical keyboard. The notion of apps (even if at first only first party apps) was new. The concept of no carrier sludge and branding was new. The concept of a fully featured browser was new to the mainstream. The idea of everything on the device being an app, right down to the phone itself, was completely new. Perhaps not all of these were new in and of themselves. But the integration of everything that made an iPhone an iPhone was unique. Android was an unapologetic clone of iOS. Android was originally meant to be a BB/WinMo clone in every conceivable way. The success of the iPhone totally changed the plan and path for Android.
If you can't see how completely influenced Android is by the iPhone, it really isn't worth debating it with you. There is no point in debating with someone either delusional or unwilling to admit reality.
And just because he's not always right doesn't make what he said untrue. See what I did there?
This is a perferct response.
While I may disagree with that post as well, what was there that would be grounds for banning?
The material therein is completely wrong and exists only to be inflammatory. We can't possibly know if what he said is right. No one can know that.
The Mac was the first mainstream, commercial implementation of a GUI system. Xerox was mainly doing it for research and their only commercial venture was some obscenely expensive system that was never intended for consumers nor mainstream. Apple implemented the GUI in a way that had never been seen before and was also unique in using the GUI to make computers easier to use. Windows was a clone of MacOS.
For iPhones, again, what they brought to smartphones was unique at the time. They didn't invent captive touch, but no one else was pushing them into the mainstread. They didn't invent keyboardless phones, but they made the mainstream and implemented them in a manner that was well thought out and integrated. Touchscreens prior to the iPhone generally meant a stylus and almost always still meant a physical keyboard. The notion of apps (even if at first only first party apps) was new. The concept of no carrier sludge and branding was new. The concept of a fully featured browser was new to the mainstream. The idea of everything on the device being an app, right down to the phone itself, was completely new. Perhaps not all of these were new in and of themselves. But the integration of everything that made an iPhone an iPhone was unique. Android was an unapologetic clone of iOS. Android was originally meant to be a BB/WinMo clone in every conceivable way. The success of the iPhone totally changed the plan and path for Android.
If you can't see how completely influenced Android is by the iPhone, it really isn't worth debating it with you. There is no point in debating with someone either delusional or unwilling to admit reality.
I never once said that Apple didn't influence Android. In fact, it influenced it a lot. But since you get so riled up over someone simply disagreeing with you I have no reason to discuss this with you. You're clearly one of those people who have some predetermined speech about Android the moment someone brings it up. Especially since you apparently know more than everyone. I've not once heard of confirmation that Android changed its product design post iPhone. Do I think it did? Hell yes I do. Am I certain it did? No. And neither should you. You see a picture of a very old prototype and make hundreds of conclusions about it. That's not someone I'd like to discuss things with. I'd much rather continue my discussion esummers, sorry.
No, you're planning on reporting him for essentially reminding AI that Apple has used a lot of the competition's features to improve their own. The fact that Apple started the mobile OS as we know it is irrelevant. Android improved on a lot of things Apple started and Apple adopted them. The fact that you choose to ignore this does not make it incorrect or FUD. While not all of these can be directly proved to be inspired by Android, the fact that Apple only added backgrounds (customization options), multi tasking, wireless syncing, Notification Center, and Widgets only after Android became popular leads seemingly everyone but you that Apple is not shy about borrowing good ideas as well.
Uh, the fact that Apple started the mobile OS as we know it is not irrelevant. It's a matter of scale. Apple may have copied the notification center from Android, but Android copied inertial scrolling, swiping, pinching, copy and paste, the way various UI components work, etc. Apple created the entire "language" of multitouch UIs. Copying one feature - the way you access the notification center - is not even remotely on the same scale. The other so-called copied features such as backgrounds, the task switched and wireless syncing are ridiculous accusations, since they're all features of the OS on which iOS is based. I'm pretty sure Apple is allowed to copy themselves.
So Google has derived quite a bit of Apple's efforts from former staff, let alone Eric peeking over Steve's shoulder and jotting notes for Mountain View.
One other thing that seems to be consistently glossed over here is the fact that, just because something doesn't hit the interface immediately doesn't mean it isn't in the lab, on the bench or in circulation internally. The Apple execs routinely have devices that are a rev ahead as they "real-world" test the upcoming improvements. Apple like many other innovative companies is anywhere from 1 to 3 or 4 years out in front of what they are delivering to the market. Now that doesn't mean that they don't watch competitors and don't have competing devices in house to check out, but it does mean that where a company like Apple is driving a deeper level of innovation, they have usually anticipated the development path of a feature or device and are already there or further on if needed.
In all seriousness, how can it be both "completely wrong" and also something "we can't possibly know"?
Huh, you're right. With my love of higher dimensional stuff, I should've seen that.
And really, is this the first time you've seen a post here that's both completely wrong and inflammatory?
Nah, you're right. May as well just ignore them at this point.