Apple's choice not to sue Google directly 'extremely curious,' says Schmidt

24567

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 136


    From a litigation POV,  it makes more sense to go after the hardware makers directly.  Google didn't make a single device at the time the lawsuits started. 


     


    In courts Google would prevail because they could showed that they make no money directly from Android. 


     


    Sooner or later Apple will sue if Google's Nexus devices start to hit the double digit marketshare mark.  I'm not sure how long that would take but given that Samsung continues to dominate, it's not worth suing Google yet.

  • Reply 22 of 136

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hmm View Post


    Are you referring to pre-Google Andy Rubin with Danger/Android?



     


    Probably referring to Andy Rubin when he worked at Apple. Not only did he work at Apple, but he worked as a junior engineer under two senior engineers who developed a key patent Apple claims Android infringes. These two senior engineers are the ones whose names appear on the patent. Even worse, Andy Rubin worked under them at the EXACT SAME TIME this patent was being developed. Rubin didn't work there before the patent was developed or after it was finalized - he worked there while the patent was being developed.


     


    Do you think this is a coincidence?

  • Reply 23 of 136
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post


     


    Probably referring to Andy Rubin when he worked at Apple. Not only did he work at Apple, but he worked as a junior engineer under two senior engineers who developed a key patent Apple claims Android infringes. These two senior engineers are the ones whose names appear on the patent. Even worse, Andy Rubin worked under them at the EXACT SAME TIME this patent was being developed. Rubin didn't work there before the patent was developed or after it was finalized - he worked there while the patent was being developed.


     


    Do you think this is a coincidence?





    I wasn't aware he worked at Apple. I just looked it up Which patent are you referring to there? I was just reading this bio piece. Wiki suggests he was at Apple from 1989-1992, but the discussions on here usually revolve around a much later period. Most of the time when the name comes up on here, it's in reference to a later time period. Also if we're talking about something from the late 80s or early 90s, it should have recently expired.

  • Reply 24 of 136
    jingers wrote: »
    When I switched to OSX from Windows I used to come here for information and intelligent discourse, then I started coming for laughs because some of your comments were just hilarious and now I rarely come because a lot of the comments are just downright pathetic!

    I laugh at you for thinking that any intelligent discourse will happen at any tech website. They all have bias, how much is another question. Only read and respond to those that you view intelligent enough to correspond with
  • Reply 25 of 136
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,330member


    I like how Schmidt purposefully pretends to be stupid and obtuse, which is pretty insulting to his audience. 


     


    "They threw YouTube off the home screen [of iOS devices]. I'm not quite sure why they did that."


     


    Really, Schmidt? You really have no idea? You can't think of just a few reasons why they made that decision? Did you expect Apple to indefinitely invest their resources and development into an app that is a Google owned service, essentially marketing that service? Especially when the development of that app is much better handled by Google itself? 


     


    No doubt he would have done the exact same thing in Apple's position, as anything else would be absolutely irrational, but he pretends to have "no idea" why it happened. Treat your audience with a bit more respect Eric, you're not stupid, and neither are they. 

  • Reply 26 of 136
    "But think of the Andy Rubins!" LOL. Like Schmidt doesn't want to suck them into Google's gravity well.
  • Reply 27 of 136
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jingers View Post


    When I switched to OSX from Windows I used to come here for information and intelligent discourse, then I started coming for laughs



     


    Laughs.


     


    Yes.


     


    Many of us would have got them from this statement.

  • Reply 28 of 136

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post


    I like how Schmidt purposefully pretends to be stupid and obtuse, which is pretty insulting to his audience. 


     



     


    I agree with you.  And Schmidt saying it's "curious" is really lame.  He needs to provide details as to why he thinks it's curious, or else keep his mouth shut and say nothing at all.  

  • Reply 29 of 136


    First of all let me say that all of you that state that Google does not make any money from Android are wrong! Emphatically wrong!


     


    Google makes gobs of $$$$$$$$ from Android. Why do you think they bought it and continue to spend $$$$$$$$ supporting it?


     


    Every Android device comes with a Google search box. Every time an Android user makes a search Google gets paid. Is is as simple as that. Google uses Android to make money from search. The more Android devices, the more searches, and hence the more $$$$$$$$$$. Hello!


     


    Apple could get money from the search proceeds. How much did Google get from search pre-Android, and how much do they make post-Android. The difference is what Apple could go after. Not hard to understand.


     


    The people at Google are very smart. They bought Android, pay to improve it, and support it for a reason. That reason is MONEY! Cash MONEY!


     


    Just ask the company who tried to use Android "without" the Google search box. Google went crazy and told them that they could not. It is "open source" yet they do not allow removal of the search box. That is because that is how Google gets paid from Android. Search = $$$$$$$


     


    Just think about it and you will agree.

  • Reply 30 of 136
    malomalo Posts: 19member
    Litigation is simply business strategy, designed to disrupt the product development cycle and slow down the go to market product placement.
  • Reply 31 of 136
    koopkoop Posts: 337member
    This idea that Apple is winning this patent war is crazy. Google has close to a 90% marketshare in the smartphone market and that's happened regardless of aggressive patent litigation on Apple's part over the past few years. I'm sure their lawyers having have a great Xmas feeding off Apple's large war chest but it's really all for naught. Google who sits back and watches the proxy war occur as their partners go to bat for them and nobody gains any ground. Google still makes a boat load of money on search on Apple's platform anyway. Actually I think there was a study that was shown that Apple devices are much more profitable for Google at the moment. , Unless Apple can convince their users to use Bing, Google is caught in a win, win situation.
  • Reply 32 of 136
    This guy is such a bold face liar. He knows exactly why Apple removed Google Maps and went with their own mapping solution (they wouldnt bring Google Maps turn by turn directions and other features that are available on the Android version). He knows exactly why Apple removed the YouTube app from being built into another app needed to be downloaded (the contract between the two for the app had expired). He knows exactly why Apple hasnt sued Google directly (how can you get damages from a product they make no money on, like others have said look at the Oracle trial as an example).

    He is such a snake, just like Google has become. Apple is no saint but it seems Google is taking pages out of Microsoft's old book and that only got Microsoft in trouble with governments around the world and it seems like Google is on the same path.

  • Reply 33 of 136
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mac123 View Post


    First of all let me say that all of you that state that Google does not make any money from Android are wrong! Emphatically wrong!


     


    Google makes gobs of $$$$$$$$ from Android. Why do you think they bought it and continue to spend $$$$$$$$ supporting it?


     


    Every Android device comes with a Google search box. 


     


    Just ask the company who tried to use Android "without" the Google search box. Google went crazy and told them that they could not. It is "open source" yet they do not allow removal of the search box. That is because that is how Google gets paid from Android. Search = $$$$$$$



     


    Do you realise that you just negated your own argument?


     


    According to you, Google actually makes money from Google search, NOT the Android operating system.

  • Reply 34 of 136
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by koop View Post



    This idea that Apple is winning this patent war is crazy. Google has close to a 90% marketshare in the smartphone market and that's happened regardless of aggressive patent litigation on Apple's part over the past few years.


     


    I hear your message, and agree with you, brother!


     


    I recently started up a business selling widgets.


     


    I paid my customers $20 each if they would use my widgets in their business, and they have agreed to do so.


     


    I have since lost $1,000,000,000, but I now have 90% of the widget market.


     


    I am winning!

  • Reply 35 of 136
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,789member
    Re: "Apple's choice not to sue Google directly 'extremely curious,' says Schmidt"

    Follow the money, Eric. How much money is Google making from Android? Not so much.
    How much money is Samsung making from Android? $$$ billions.
    Therefore Apple did sue and will continue to sue Samsung.

    Re: "They threw YouTube off the home screen [of iOS devices]. I'm not quite sure why they did that."

    Because you were going to spam up the YouTube experience with ads.
    Leave the spamware to the Wintel crowd, Eric.

    Oh wait. I forgot that 96% of Google's revenue comes from ads. OK, go ahead and spam up the
    whole Google experience Eric. Sucks, but hey, it's free.
  • Reply 36 of 136
    shompashompa Posts: 343member
    I don't understand Google. Its ok to pay MSFT 5-15 dollar for each Android device. But when Apple wants them to stop copying iOS/or pay some royalties = no.

    In Sweden we have legal right to know what a company store about it's users. Only Google refuses to release the data. Why? What are they hiding?

    They refuse to delete the data. I want to be able to pay Google for its great services, but that they stop to index everything. I personally hate that people who use Gmail: If I email them, Google indexes my email. I have not given Google permission to do that!. I don't use Gmail..

    This is what Google knows about you and store forever:
    What you think: Your interests, desires, needs, and intentions: Google.com searches, etc.
    What you read: News, commentary, and books: Google News, Book Search, DoubleClick, etc.
    What you watch: YouTube, Google TV
    What you write/receive: Gmail and Google Docs
    Who you%u2019ve communicated with, what you talked about: Groups, Buzz, Gmail, Voice, etc.
    What you believe: Politics and religion: search, News, YouTube, Groups, Gmail, Buzz, etc.
    Everywhere you go on the Internet: DoubleClick ad-tracking, Chrome, search, etc.
    What you plan to do or where you%u2019re going: Calendar, Maps, Streetview, Android, etc.
    Where your home, work, commutes and hangouts are: Android, Maps, Street View, etc.
    You and your family%u2019s voiceprints and faceprints: Voice, Picasa, translation, etc.
    You and your family%u2019s medical history and health status: Search, Google Health, Gmail, etc.
    Your financial worth, status, and purchases: Search, Google Checkout, etc.
  • Reply 37 of 136
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    dagamer34 wrote: »
    I have yet to see any evidence of such a strategy actually benefiting Apple. The only substantial victory has come against Samsung for $1 billion, but that amount is so small compared to their revenues that it's a slap on the wrist. Patent litigation has become more of a nuisance for Apple than anything else.

    What about the $4 billion a year Google/Motorola is demanding for standards essential patents using the extortionate threat of injunctions?

    It's convenient that you and Schmidt left Apple standing up to this bullying behaviour out of your calculations.
  • Reply 38 of 136
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    shompa wrote: »
    I don't understand Google. Its ok to pay MSFT 5-15 dollar for each Android device. But when Apple wants them to stop copying iOS/or pay some royalties = no.
    In Sweden we have legal right to know what a company store about it's users. Only Google refuses to release the data. Why? What are they hiding?
    They refuse to delete the data. I want to be able to pay Google for its great services, but that they stop to index everything. I personally hate that people who use Gmail: If I email them, Google indexes my email. I have not given Google permission to do that!. I don't use Gmail..
    This is what Google knows about you and store forever:
    What you think: Your interests, desires, needs, and intentions: Google.com searches, etc.
    What you read: News, commentary, and books: Google News, Book Search, DoubleClick, etc.
    What you watch: YouTube, Google TV
    What you write/receive: Gmail and Google Docs
    Who you%u2019ve communicated with, what you talked about: Groups, Buzz, Gmail, Voice, etc.
    What you believe: Politics and religion: search, News, YouTube, Groups, Gmail, Buzz, etc.
    Everywhere you go on the Internet: DoubleClick ad-tracking, Chrome, search, etc.
    What you plan to do or where you%u2019re going: Calendar, Maps, Streetview, Android, etc.
    Where your home, work, commutes and hangouts are: Android, Maps, Street View, etc.
    You and your family%u2019s voiceprints and faceprints: Voice, Picasa, translation, etc.
    You and your family%u2019s medical history and health status: Search, Google Health, Gmail, etc.
    Your financial worth, status, and purchases: Search, Google Checkout, etc.

    @ shompa, nice list. First time I've had to contemplate the term "faceprint." In this context, it's very Brave New World-ish.
  • Reply 39 of 136
    koop wrote: »
    This idea that Apple is winning this patent war is crazy. Google has close to a 90% marketshare in the smartphone market and that's happened regardless of aggressive patent litigation on Apple's part over the past few years. I'm sure their lawyers having have a great Xmas feeding off Apple's large war chest but it's really all for naught. Google who sits back and watches the proxy war occur as their partners go to bat for them and nobody gains any ground. Google still makes a boat load of money on search on Apple's platform anyway. Actually I think there was a study that was shown that Apple devices are much more profitable for Google at the moment. , Unless Apple can convince their users to use Bing, Google is caught in a win, win situation.

    Patents are about intellectual property rights, not marketshare. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of the "innovate don't litigate" trolls.
  • Reply 40 of 136

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post


    I have yet to see any evidence of such a strategy actually benefiting Apple. The only substantial victory has come against Samsung for $1 billion, but that amount is so small compared to their revenues that it's a slap on the wrist. Patent litigation has become more of a nuisance for Apple than anything else.



     


    Congratulations !!! you couldn't be more wrong... 


     


    here's an article that explains in detail why you are wrong.:


     


     


    Soft stance on patents would cost Apple's shareholders hundreds of billions of dollars

Sign In or Register to comment.