Mr. Schmidt, are you able to differentiate Chrome installations by users that directly downloaded your Chrome package and those installations that were sneakily included in other programs and defaulted to download outside of the user's direct knowledge?
I've removed Chrome on so many PC's that users had no idea what is was for, and how it got on their machines. I consider Chrome more crapware than software simply because of how devious it gets put on people's computers.
Shame on Google, andth vendors that included package in their software as a default download.
I prefer safari, but i'm using chrome right know. Why? I like to try a few browsers, a few products once in a while.
Chrome is great and since i do not want a stand alone flash on my mac, i use chrome. Chromes has great security so i feel more secure when browsing and watching ads, videos, etc.
Safari 6.0 for mac is the best browser experience any computer can give, but chrome is great and i use windows (once in a while) too.
We should get this straight.. Google is a great company that makes very nice products that i enjoy to use. Thanks to Google people can buy great phones (compared to 2005) for 300dollars contract free, search better, have a free and decent email account, great free maps, wich is awesome. Obviously the iphone is the best, but don't you see the valor of google? shmidt and others like him are just little pricks.. google is much more than that.
I was just wondering because somehow I don't seem to have ever heard about anything like this. But I guess that's because I don't hate chrome.
I do get a lot of suggestions to install "Ask! toolbar". Must be one great toolbar since every software seems to wan't to suggest it to me.
Not to long ago... Adobe reader, adobe flash, utorrent, daemon tools.. Nowadays i don't know for sure, but i'm certain about those programs at least a few years ago.
Err, maybe because Schmidt did nothing wrong? Makes me laugh whenever this is brought up. Please, show me some solid evidence that Schmidt did anything underhand whilst on the Apple board. And by evidence I don't mean hearsay and the thoughts of paranoid posters on this forum.
People seriously need to stop posting this piece of FUD.
Google were working on Blackberry style phone with physical keyboards and a stylus, prior to 2007, the year the iPhone was released. Fact. The Android OS was written with no multitouch UI. Fact. Nine months after the iPhone was released, Google announced their iPhone like multitouch phones. Fact. The reason for the touch lag was because the multitouch UI was hastily written over the top of the original Android OS, not written into it. (A total rewrite would have put them a further year behind). Fact. These things are all fact. The fact google were heading down the blackberry path with their phones before the iPhone was developed, then did a 180° and followed exactly what Apple did while Schmidt was on the Apple board, is clear as the nose on your face. Why do your type deny it? Steve Jobs wouldn't claim iOS was stolen by a friend if he didn't actually know it to be true. Steve Jobs wouldn't have declared thermonuclear war on google just on hearsay.
The only FUD being practiced is from those denying that it happen.
Later in the interview, Schmidt commented on the ongoing "patent wars," many of which involve technology from Apple and Google, and said they were "death." Patent litigation has reached a point where smaller companies can no longer protect their inventions.
?I think this is ultimately bad, bad for innovation," Schmidt said, adding, "It eliminates choices.?
This comment makes you look like a piece of shit. Please realize that there is no way to lump such a large group of people into categories like "freeloaders" or "wealthy" based off of a single consumer decision. I hope you don't actually believe what you wrote, but you probably do.
Hit a nerve, huh? The problem for you is -- you and your ilk can call me all the names you want when confronted with facts -- but abundant data on demographics bear out my claim that Android users are, as I said, "less well off, freeloading, more techy/nerdy, and generally low-enders.
Just get used to the fact. (Incidentally, there's nothing wrong with being any of those).
Informal glancing through up and coming apps suggests that new popular apps, such as Pinterest, are developed for Apple iOS first. Why? Here are three possibilities. First, Apple has fewer form factors (3 iPhones, 3 iPads) compared to thousands of Android devices. OpenSignal calculatedthat there are 3,997 distinct devices running Android on almost 600 brands. That means, iOS developers have fewer sets of hardware and middleware issues to address than do Android developers. Second, Apple’s app approval process requires developers to guarantee a certain quality, and that provides credibility. Third, the Apple user demographic is more affluent, an earlier adopter and more loyal than other brands. Combine fewer device challenges with the lure of a higher probability of making money, and Apple is attracting the developers."
Ditto, Can't imagine why Apple has not sued Schmit (aka S_h_it) for breach of contract. There has got to be terms in the Board of Directors agreements which prohibit the theft of company secrets. Schmit clearly passed on information to Google management, in effect stealing.
There are. Hence the absolute unlikelihood that such a breach ever occurred. Hence why Apple never mentioned it or even Steve Jobs. Hence why the only people who think such s thing happened are mindless fanboys.
The only think I can think of is sponsored location pins. I don't know if Google monetizes traffic patterns, but it might be data mined to help choose a site for a new store.
This comment makes you look like a piece of shit. Please realize that there is no way to lump such a large group of people into categories like "freeloaders" or "wealthy" based off of a single consumer decision. I hope you don't actually believe what you wrote, but you probably do.
I have to agree, although not with the "shit" part.
Dichotomously polarizing people into two extreme categories, while conceptually convenient, fails to accurately describe reality. In fact, these kind of statements distort the truth, and historically and philosophically, contribute to the wide scope of problems which characterize the human condition.
If you really think about, Android phones do work perfectly well for the majority of people who only use their phone for the most essential smartphone tasks - phone, text, email, social, and web.
For many, finer details really don't matter because these people are not really detailed oriented, whether it be from an aesthetic point of view or the functional perspective.
Most people do not examine their lives in any real detail at all, swept along by the dominating trends of the moment. Hence, trending.
This happened to Apple too - iPhone and iOS was trending, and Apple swept many non-typical Apple users up.
But trends, by definition don't last past their perceived novelty stage. So those who "trend" leave on for the next big trend, whether or not its really "better" or "worse."
I know this can sound elitist because being detailed oriented is highly valued in many professions and aspects of society. But sometimes it can be harmful, such as when its obsessive compulsive or gets in the way of any practical benefit.
Likewise, sometimes its beneficial to not be detailed oriented, such as when one can see the bigger picture and doesn't sweat the small details.
However, I don't see that happening here due to the aping of Apple design, and the pathetic riding off of Apple's innovation wave. Here, Apple is both seeing the bigger picture AND sweating the small details. This is what makes Apple different, why Sony failed, and why the Apple faithful - those who can appreciate the attention to detail AND see the bigger picture, continue to support Apple.
Bottom Feeders operate by underpricing the innovator, and this is what is happening. So, they come out with something novel, overwhelm the trendsters with features after feature while ignoring the important details.
Apple has to protect against this kind of practice by offering something like the iPad mini, keeping older iPhones on the market, and continually innovating in lots of areas. Look at Passbook - how come large and small business alike are embracing Apple's model while eschewing NFC and Google Wallet?
And when Apple is ready, they will release something few some coming, or at least coming so soon.
Ditto, Can't imagine why Apple has not sued Schmit (aka S_h_it) for breach of contract. There has got to be terms in the Board of Directors agreements which prohibit the theft of company secrets. Schmit clearly passed on information to Google management, in effect stealing.
I doubt that happened though. There is some irresponsibility in allowing him on the board, knowing Google bought Android a year before, but I don't think there is necessarily any wrongdoing like you claim. It's possible, but I don't think the timeline fits an accusation of Schmidt passing information to Google. If Google had their touch screen phone ready less than six months after Apple's, that would be one thing, but it took about a year and a half produce a half-assed phone, which is perfectly plausible to do without the help of secret information.
I agree. Although I feel it's actually malware as its installed without the users authorization and calls home to google. Does this not meet the definition of malware? If it does then why are they not investigated and brought to justice?
Because the US is run ~by~ the corporations ~for~ the corporations. Microsoft? Pfft. Google is going to put them to shame.
I doubt that happened though. There is some irresponsibility in allowing him on the board, knowing Google bought Android a year before, but I don't think there is necessarily any wrongdoing like you claim. It's possible, but I don't think the timeline fits an accusation of Schmidt passing information to Google. If Google had their touch screen phone ready less than six months after Apple's, that would be one thing, but it took about a year and a half produce a half-assed phone, which is perfectly plausible to do without the help of secret information.
Still Schmidt should have been sued to oblivion for obvious conflict of interest. Board Of D-rectums Fail.
I doubt that happened though. There is some irresponsibility in allowing him on the board, knowing Google bought Android a year before, but I don't think there is necessarily any wrongdoing like you claim. It's possible, but I don't think the timeline fits an accusation of Schmidt passing information to Google. If Google had their touch screen phone ready less than six months after Apple's, that would be one thing, but it took about a year and a half produce a half-assed phone, which is perfectly plausible to do without the help of secret information.
Still Schmidt should have been sued to oblivion for obvious conflict of interest. Board Of D-rectums Fail.
Sued for what? Android was already Google's by the time he was ASKED to be on the board. It is on record that he wasn't allowed to be in any meetings relating to the iPhone. Android 1.0 and then iPhoneOS were very different in that Android was obviously a quickly hacked together touch interface on top of already existing code.
What's more likely? Google's Schmidt so coy and clever that he not only managed to steal from Apple after tricking them to ask him on their board and somehow kept them from ever mentioning it for years OR Google recognizing the future when the iPhone was released modified their focus understandably?
He sum it up at the end, he is jealous that Apple is making more money at the end of the day. They my have a larger installed base, so the wall street types like that and rewarding his stock price, but they are failing to make money on the larger installed base, so they are in the race to the bottom. Why, because Apple is getting all the people who are willing to spend more. I kind of compare Google to Dell and MS in the 90's. they have a commanding lead, but they market group of people who will turn on you in a second, no brand loyalty, its all about the price, the second someone comes out with a lower cost product your customers are gone.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
Mr. Schmidt, are you able to differentiate Chrome installations by users that directly downloaded your Chrome package and those installations that were sneakily included in other programs and defaulted to download outside of the user's direct knowledge?
I've removed Chrome on so many PC's that users had no idea what is was for, and how it got on their machines. I consider Chrome more crapware than software simply because of how devious it gets put on people's computers.
Shame on Google, andth vendors that included package in their software as a default download.
I prefer safari, but i'm using chrome right know. Why? I like to try a few browsers, a few products once in a while.
Chrome is great and since i do not want a stand alone flash on my mac, i use chrome. Chromes has great security so i feel more secure when browsing and watching ads, videos, etc.
Safari 6.0 for mac is the best browser experience any computer can give, but chrome is great and i use windows (once in a while) too.
We should get this straight.. Google is a great company that makes very nice products that i enjoy to use. Thanks to Google people can buy great phones (compared to 2005) for 300dollars contract free, search better, have a free and decent email account, great free maps, wich is awesome. Obviously the iphone is the best, but don't you see the valor of google? shmidt and others like him are just little pricks.. google is much more than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kermitos
I was just wondering because somehow I don't seem to have ever heard about anything like this. But I guess that's because I don't hate chrome.
I do get a lot of suggestions to install "Ask! toolbar". Must be one great toolbar since every software seems to wan't to suggest it to me.
Not to long ago... Adobe reader, adobe flash, utorrent, daemon tools.. Nowadays i don't know for sure, but i'm certain about those programs at least a few years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid
Err, maybe because Schmidt did nothing wrong? Makes me laugh whenever this is brought up. Please, show me some solid evidence that Schmidt did anything underhand whilst on the Apple board. And by evidence I don't mean hearsay and the thoughts of paranoid posters on this forum.
People seriously need to stop posting this piece of FUD.
Google were working on Blackberry style phone with physical keyboards and a stylus, prior to 2007, the year the iPhone was released. Fact. The Android OS was written with no multitouch UI. Fact. Nine months after the iPhone was released, Google announced their iPhone like multitouch phones. Fact. The reason for the touch lag was because the multitouch UI was hastily written over the top of the original Android OS, not written into it. (A total rewrite would have put them a further year behind). Fact. These things are all fact. The fact google were heading down the blackberry path with their phones before the iPhone was developed, then did a 180° and followed exactly what Apple did while Schmidt was on the Apple board, is clear as the nose on your face. Why do your type deny it? Steve Jobs wouldn't claim iOS was stolen by a friend if he didn't actually know it to be true. Steve Jobs wouldn't have declared thermonuclear war on google just on hearsay.
The only FUD being practiced is from those denying that it happen.
Do yourself a favour and read some FACTS. http://www.phonearena.com/news/Steve-Jobs-vowed-revenge-on-Eric-Schmidt-over-Android_id23152
How is it monetized on Android?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Later in the interview, Schmidt commented on the ongoing "patent wars," many of which involve technology from Apple and Google, and said they were "death." Patent litigation has reached a point where smaller companies can no longer protect their inventions.
?I think this is ultimately bad, bad for innovation," Schmidt said, adding, "It eliminates choices.?
What, like Skyhook, you f**king hypocrite?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
How is it monetized on Android?
Not very well, according to Google's reported income from mobile and the new licensing scheme they were setting up when Apple pulled the plug.
Exactly so what would prevent them from making a version for iOS?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance
This comment makes you look like a piece of shit. Please realize that there is no way to lump such a large group of people into categories like "freeloaders" or "wealthy" based off of a single consumer decision. I hope you don't actually believe what you wrote, but you probably do.
Hit a nerve, huh? The problem for you is -- you and your ilk can call me all the names you want when confronted with facts -- but abundant data on demographics bear out my claim that Android users are, as I said, "less well off, freeloading, more techy/nerdy, and generally low-enders.
Just get used to the fact. (Incidentally, there's nothing wrong with being any of those).
1) See, for example, Androidauthority (iPhone users are more male, better educated, more well-off):http://www.androidauthority.com/are-iphone-users-richer-better-educated-than-android-users-105032/
2) Then again, Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/darcytravlos/2012/08/22/five-reasons-why-google-android-versus-apple-ios-market-share-numbers-dont-matter/): "More of Apple’s apps generate revenue, while most of Google apps are free: 67% of apps on Apple are paid for versus 34% on Google. And that gets developers paid. Asymco estimates that Android developers made $210M in all of 2011, compared to the $700M pocketed by Apple iOS developers in the Q4 2011. And getting paid attracts more developers to Apple. Flurry Analytics estimates that 7 of 10 develop for Apple’s iOS compared to Google’s Android. AppStoreHQ estimates there are over 43K Apple iOS developers and 10K Android developers. Why? Because iOS developers earn more. For the very same app,Flurry Analytics estimates that a developer will earn $1.00 on the Apple iOS version compared to $0.24 for the Google Android version.
Informal glancing through up and coming apps suggests that new popular apps, such as Pinterest, are developed for Apple iOS first. Why? Here are three possibilities. First, Apple has fewer form factors (3 iPhones, 3 iPads) compared to thousands of Android devices. OpenSignal calculated that there are 3,997 distinct devices running Android on almost 600 brands. That means, iOS developers have fewer sets of hardware and middleware issues to address than do Android developers. Second, Apple’s app approval process requires developers to guarantee a certain quality, and that provides credibility. Third, the Apple user demographic is more affluent, an earlier adopter and more loyal than other brands. Combine fewer device challenges with the lure of a higher probability of making money, and Apple is attracting the developers."
3) This one is the most comprehensive: http://www.impactbnd.com/iphone-vs-android-users-what-does-your-phone-say-about-you/ ;
I could on and on. (Incidentally, I have no idea where you got the word "wealthy" since I never used it!).
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Exactly so what would prevent them from making a version for iOS?
Cocoa.
it would smoke the android app in every possible way, even if you compared iphone 4 to the s3. that would send a message..
or google could write a bad iOS app, and everyone would seem them as less good engineers or hypocrites.
they were smoked by apple.
There are. Hence the absolute unlikelihood that such a breach ever occurred. Hence why Apple never mentioned it or even Steve Jobs. Hence why the only people who think such s thing happened are mindless fanboys.
The only think I can think of is sponsored location pins. I don't know if Google monetizes traffic patterns, but it might be data mined to help choose a site for a new store.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance
This comment makes you look like a piece of shit. Please realize that there is no way to lump such a large group of people into categories like "freeloaders" or "wealthy" based off of a single consumer decision. I hope you don't actually believe what you wrote, but you probably do.
I have to agree, although not with the "shit" part.
Dichotomously polarizing people into two extreme categories, while conceptually convenient, fails to accurately describe reality. In fact, these kind of statements distort the truth, and historically and philosophically, contribute to the wide scope of problems which characterize the human condition.
If you really think about, Android phones do work perfectly well for the majority of people who only use their phone for the most essential smartphone tasks - phone, text, email, social, and web.
For many, finer details really don't matter because these people are not really detailed oriented, whether it be from an aesthetic point of view or the functional perspective.
Most people do not examine their lives in any real detail at all, swept along by the dominating trends of the moment. Hence, trending.
This happened to Apple too - iPhone and iOS was trending, and Apple swept many non-typical Apple users up.
But trends, by definition don't last past their perceived novelty stage. So those who "trend" leave on for the next big trend, whether or not its really "better" or "worse."
I know this can sound elitist because being detailed oriented is highly valued in many professions and aspects of society. But sometimes it can be harmful, such as when its obsessive compulsive or gets in the way of any practical benefit.
Likewise, sometimes its beneficial to not be detailed oriented, such as when one can see the bigger picture and doesn't sweat the small details.
However, I don't see that happening here due to the aping of Apple design, and the pathetic riding off of Apple's innovation wave. Here, Apple is both seeing the bigger picture AND sweating the small details. This is what makes Apple different, why Sony failed, and why the Apple faithful - those who can appreciate the attention to detail AND see the bigger picture, continue to support Apple.
Bottom Feeders operate by underpricing the innovator, and this is what is happening. So, they come out with something novel, overwhelm the trendsters with features after feature while ignoring the important details.
Apple has to protect against this kind of practice by offering something like the iPad mini, keeping older iPhones on the market, and continually innovating in lots of areas. Look at Passbook - how come large and small business alike are embracing Apple's model while eschewing NFC and Google Wallet?
And when Apple is ready, they will release something few some coming, or at least coming so soon.
Then the process will repeat itself...
I doubt that happened though. There is some irresponsibility in allowing him on the board, knowing Google bought Android a year before, but I don't think there is necessarily any wrongdoing like you claim. It's possible, but I don't think the timeline fits an accusation of Schmidt passing information to Google. If Google had their touch screen phone ready less than six months after Apple's, that would be one thing, but it took about a year and a half produce a half-assed phone, which is perfectly plausible to do without the help of secret information.
Because the US is run ~by~ the corporations ~for~ the corporations. Microsoft? Pfft. Google is going to put them to shame.
Still Schmidt should have been sued to oblivion for obvious conflict of interest. Board Of D-rectums Fail.
Thank you. I've said verbatim
Sued for what? Android was already Google's by the time he was ASKED to be on the board. It is on record that he wasn't allowed to be in any meetings relating to the iPhone. Android 1.0 and then iPhoneOS were very different in that Android was obviously a quickly hacked together touch interface on top of already existing code.
What's more likely? Google's Schmidt so coy and clever that he not only managed to steal from Apple after tricking them to ask him on their board and somehow kept them from ever mentioning it for years OR Google recognizing the future when the iPhone was released modified their focus understandably?
Be honest with yourself.
Eff this guy. The only difference between him and a common thief is he has a fancy title.
He google, if patents are the bad, why don't you release your algorithm for search.
He sum it up at the end, he is jealous that Apple is making more money at the end of the day. They my have a larger installed base, so the wall street types like that and rewarding his stock price, but they are failing to make money on the larger installed base, so they are in the race to the bottom. Why, because Apple is getting all the people who are willing to spend more. I kind of compare Google to Dell and MS in the 90's. they have a commanding lead, but they market group of people who will turn on you in a second, no brand loyalty, its all about the price, the second someone comes out with a lower cost product your customers are gone.
Originally Posted by Pendergast
Is that a steaming pile of Schmidt?
"That is one big pile of Schmidt."
Cue Jeff Goldblum noises.