"Also keep in mind the V8 Javascript engine was developed by Google. No doubt one of the reasons JavaScript (and languages that compile to JS) are so popular today. "
V8 JavaScript - hmmm. Developed by Google . Intristn. Wonder why they did that ? Browser security anyone ?
If you think Adam`s story is impossible,, last week my aunt's step son basically made the small fortune of $7111 workin a fifteen hour week in their apartment and there roomate's mother`s neighbour has been doing this for nine months and easily made more than $7111 part-time On there laptop. use the instructions at this site, Great70 d o tcom
Wow, that may be the most clueless, perspective-lacking and downright dishonest thing I've heard come out of Google since Eric Schmidt walked out of Apple Board meetings with his notes on how to make a phone.
We need more innovation... but we only hire exclusively from universities of aristocracy... even though almost %100 of innovation in the modern world came from vanguard peasants... like Steve Jobs.
Why oh why can't we find more innovation in failed institutions?
Page's comments fall flat on Google's real successes. Yes, they had a better search algorithm than Yahoo & the others & they've kept ahead of pace with their competition in that respect. Though I can't say their search results are always dead on or that accurate in every instance. Google should give greater priority to that extent. That would be Page's Steve Jobs moment when he introduced the Apple Computer or the Macintosh or the iPhone. Every other commercial success is just playing catchup or creating an incremental improvement over the competition. Some people consistently find fault in others where they themselves stumble. Page was really describing Google & why it's really been a 1 trick pony
If you knew anything about Android at all you should know exactly what I'm talking about. You claim Wired targeted their interview for consumers (which is why they left out talking about Google's contributions to the internet and servers). I'm targeting my comment towards programmers/developers. If you don't know anything about software engineering, then there's no point in me going any further. I'm not here to educate you before I can even have a discussion with you.
Fortunately, there are a lot of experienced programmers on this forum.
Please tell us what IPC mechanism that Google "stole" from Apple. Has Apple sued them over a patent? (And no, obviously accidental infringement doesn't count. That's not stealing, which is the word you used.)
Of course Larry would say this. That way Google can steal the next big thing and not have to pay anything for it. As for doing "crazy" things, Google good at that but Apple has their head screwed on a whole lot better coming up with things that help consumers do things better.
Hey Larry, if you didn't want to do something that's basically the same thing, then why did Google come out with Android? IDIOT.
I hope Google finds out that those glasses they are working on are useless and won't be that successful. I personally wear prescription glasses and would have to buy more expensive Google glasses to use and I am NOT going to do that. There are enough distractions in life and to have a pair of glasses that further distracts someone by having information popping up in front of them is just distracting and they may find out that it's rather dangerous to wear these glasses. They might have people walking around bumping into people and things because the glasses are TOO distracting. Sorry, but I think these Google glasses might turn out to be a dud.
Hey Larry, if you didn't want to do something that's basically the same thing, then why did Google come out with Android? IDIOT.
Google was interested in Android well before Apple leaked they were developing a smartphone. IMO Google didn't buy the fledgling Android because of the iPhone.
FWIW Android development started in 2003, with Google purchasing them in July of 2005. Apple had no smartphone research going on in 2003 and didn't commit to developing an actual "iPhone" product until sometime in 2006 according to a history. Android certainly wasn't conceived because of anything Apple had in the works as far as I can see.
It might even be that one of the reasons Steve Jobs wanted Google on their team was to stay up-to-date on Android development. It's even possible Steve Jobs finally gave a greenlight to the iPhone project after previewing the early Android OS. Who knows? Not likely anyone here.
Fortunately, there are a lot of experienced programmers on this forum.
Please tell us what IPC mechanism that Google "stole" from Apple. Has Apple sued them over a patent? (And no, obviously accidental infringement doesn't count. That's not stealing, which is the word you used.)
Thanks ahead of time for the details.
Oh look who's back! Tell you what, when you go back and answer questions I posted in previous threads then I'll spend the time to explain it to you. Otherwise you're a troll not worth spending the time on.
1. You claimed to be an expert on multitouch with "decades" of experience. I called you on it since I started developing with touch screens in 1985. You never replied and left the thread. Several people including myself were wondering where you went.
2. You claimed to work for a Fortune 20 company and worked on the deployment of "thousands" of Android tablets, yet never bothered to explain why or what specific software was being developed for them that made Android the better choice. Again, you left the thread.
You are the typical troll. Say something and disappear. So when you clean up the loose ends then maybe I'll spend some time explaining it to you.
Google was interested in Android well before Apple leaked they were developing a smartphone.
Yes, Google was no doubt investing in Android because of worry over Microsoft and their interest in mobile search. Google's number one priority is to keep their search services up front.
That's why Android looked so much like Windows Mobile at first, with both touch and touchless target devices. (No, the first Android dev devices did NOT look like Blackberrys. That's a common mistake that reporters new to smartphones make. In fact, one was a variation of a known WinMo model.)
As for both Google and Apple getting serious about smartphones in 2005, I think it was also a case of the tech time being ripe for smartphones to get even more popular than they were. (By 2006, there were over 100 million smartphone users in the world.)
In an interview with Wired, Google CEO and cofounder Larry Page offered his take on the state of technology, saying that companies like Apple and Facebook should dedicate more resources on innovation rather than competion.
I notice he doesn't mention Samsung, Microsoft or even Google. I guess we know which companies they are waiting for to move the industry forward.
When asked about a specific case involving the late Steve Jobs' comment of "going thermonuclear war" on Google's Android mobile operating system, Page quipped, "How well is that working?"
"How exciting is it to come to work if the best you can do is trounce some other company that does roughly the same thing?"
Well Larry, how does it feel to push Android that does roughly the same thing as iOS or Google+ that tries to do roughly the same thing as Facebook?
Speaking on the topic of Google X, the internet search giant's experimental products lab, Page said breakthroughs and non-incremental changes are key and questions why tech giants like Apple don't use their vast resources toward these goals.
How does he know they aren't? Nobody knew about Project Purple. There's a whole rainbow to get through:
I can Sing a Rainbow
Red and yellow and pink and green, purple and orange and blue
Projects Orange and Blue are probably underway right now.
"You may say that Apple only does a very, very small number of things, and that's working pretty well for them. But I find that unsatisfying,"
They do a small number of things well. That last word is quite important. You can do lots of things but if they aren't very good then I'd say that's less satisfying. Maybe some people would be happier with a thousand bronze medals than a handful of gold ones though.
Regarding new products, <em>Wired</em> asked if Google's latest social networking endeavor, Google+, was a result of competition with Facebook, but Page dismissed the idea.
Rightly so, Google+ is no competition to Facebook at all.
"Facebook is also doing a really bad job on their products. For us to succeed, is it necessary for some other company to fail? No. We're actually doing something different."
And yet curiously Google doesn't have many unique products. Nor are they succeeding with all of them. I wonder what these successful, different products are he's talking about.
Am I the only one in the freaking world who appreciates all of the things each of these large tech companies make? I love my iphone and MacBook, I live within my google world with email, calendars, contacts, mapping, etc. I communicate with a ton of my friends on Facebook, I use MS Office because I find it better for my uses than anything else, I find my Samsung tv absolutely stunning, my PS3 is awesome, as is my Apple TV for completely different reasons. I have Amazon Prime and a Kindle and couldnt imagine living without either anymore. Why am I being told all the time that I can't appreciate all these companies?
Best post in this thread. I also enjoy devices from various vendors, I don't care who buids the device that fits me the most. I don't want a 'thermonuclear' something against anyone. Just keep producing awesome devices. And whoever makes the one I like the most, I'm going to buy it. Doesn't matter if it's Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Sony, Google or whatever. The are lot of different people with different needs and it's good that there is competition because that means that one can choose.
"Page gave the examples of YouTube, Chrome, and Android, saying, "If you%u2019re not doing some things that are crazy, then you%u2019re doing the wrong things."
Google didn't create YouTube. They bought it. Their own version didn't get traction.
Google didn't create Chrome. Apple surprised everyone, deviated from Mozilla and chose KHTML. Chrome took Apple's WebKit engine.
Android stole Apple's concept and reused Mac UI concepts. Also built incrementally on Linux and Java. It is the pinnacle of incremental technology. That's why it's free/cheap.
I don't see the innovations they cites in his 3 examples. They are all incremental according to his words.
Comments
V8 JavaScript - hmmm. Developed by Google . Intristn. Wonder why they did that ?
Browser security anyone ?
what Janice implied I'm surprised that a mother able to profit $4363 in 1 month on the computer. have you seen this web link Great70 .c om
If you think Adam`s story is impossible,, last week my aunt's step son basically made the small fortune of $7111 workin a fifteen hour week in their apartment and there roomate's mother`s neighbour has been doing this for nine months and easily made more than $7111 part-time On there laptop. use the instructions at this site, Great70 d o tcom
We need more innovation... but we only hire exclusively from universities of aristocracy... even though almost %100 of innovation in the modern world came from vanguard peasants... like Steve Jobs.
Why oh why can't we find more innovation in failed institutions?
*eye roll*
Just two words can destroy his vain efforts at excoriating Apple on innovation and risk ..... Apple Newton.
[quote]Hölzle, Page, and a third engineer designed the rigs themselves. “It wasn’t really ‘designed,’” Hölzle says, gesturing with air quotes.[/quote]
Oh Google, you'd do anything, won't you?
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/19281/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[URL=http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ff_googleinfrastructure3_large.jpg]link[/URL]
--
[QUOTE]Chrome and chrome os. Changed browsing forever.[/quote]
Like trolls on AI, you mean?
Page's comments fall flat on Google's real successes. Yes, they had a better search algorithm than Yahoo & the others & they've kept ahead of pace with their competition in that respect. Though I can't say their search results are always dead on or that accurate in every instance. Google should give greater priority to that extent. That would be Page's Steve Jobs moment when he introduced the Apple Computer or the Macintosh or the iPhone. Every other commercial success is just playing catchup or creating an incremental improvement over the competition. Some people consistently find fault in others where they themselves stumble. Page was really describing Google & why it's really been a 1 trick pony
Cheers !
ironic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
I just told you, why are you asking me again?
If you knew anything about Android at all you should know exactly what I'm talking about. You claim Wired targeted their interview for consumers (which is why they left out talking about Google's contributions to the internet and servers). I'm targeting my comment towards programmers/developers. If you don't know anything about software engineering, then there's no point in me going any further. I'm not here to educate you before I can even have a discussion with you.
Fortunately, there are a lot of experienced programmers on this forum.
Please tell us what IPC mechanism that Google "stole" from Apple. Has Apple sued them over a patent? (And no, obviously accidental infringement doesn't count. That's not stealing, which is the word you used.)
Thanks ahead of time for the details.
ROTFLMAO.
Changed browsing forever? Care to explain how that worked? What did Chrome do that changed browsing to any significant extent?
Oh, and btw, please explain how it's a Google innovation when it's based on Webkit with a few UI tweaks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob53
Of course Larry would say this. That way Google can steal the next big thing and not have to pay anything for it. As for doing "crazy" things, Google good at that but Apple has their head screwed on a whole lot better coming up with things that help consumers do things better.
Hey Larry, if you didn't want to do something that's basically the same thing, then why did Google come out with Android? IDIOT.
I hope Google finds out that those glasses they are working on are useless and won't be that successful. I personally wear prescription glasses and would have to buy more expensive Google glasses to use and I am NOT going to do that. There are enough distractions in life and to have a pair of glasses that further distracts someone by having information popping up in front of them is just distracting and they may find out that it's rather dangerous to wear these glasses. They might have people walking around bumping into people and things because the glasses are TOO distracting. Sorry, but I think these Google glasses might turn out to be a dud.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
Hey Larry, if you didn't want to do something that's basically the same thing, then why did Google come out with Android? IDIOT.
Google was interested in Android well before Apple leaked they were developing a smartphone. IMO Google didn't buy the fledgling Android because of the iPhone.
FWIW Android development started in 2003, with Google purchasing them in July of 2005. Apple had no smartphone research going on in 2003 and didn't commit to developing an actual "iPhone" product until sometime in 2006 according to a history. Android certainly wasn't conceived because of anything Apple had in the works as far as I can see.
It might even be that one of the reasons Steve Jobs wanted Google on their team was to stay up-to-date on Android development. It's even possible Steve Jobs finally gave a greenlight to the iPhone project after previewing the early Android OS. Who knows? Not likely anyone here.
1. You claimed to be an expert on multitouch with "decades" of experience. I called you on it since I started developing with touch screens in 1985. You never replied and left the thread. Several people including myself were wondering where you went.
2. You claimed to work for a Fortune 20 company and worked on the deployment of "thousands" of Android tablets, yet never bothered to explain why or what specific software was being developed for them that made Android the better choice. Again, you left the thread.
You are the typical troll. Say something and disappear. So when you clean up the loose ends then maybe I'll spend some time explaining it to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Google was interested in Android well before Apple leaked they were developing a smartphone.
Yes, Google was no doubt investing in Android because of worry over Microsoft and their interest in mobile search. Google's number one priority is to keep their search services up front.
That's why Android looked so much like Windows Mobile at first, with both touch and touchless target devices. (No, the first Android dev devices did NOT look like Blackberrys. That's a common mistake that reporters new to smartphones make. In fact, one was a variation of a known WinMo model.)
As for both Google and Apple getting serious about smartphones in 2005, I think it was also a case of the tech time being ripe for smartphones to get even more popular than they were. (By 2006, there were over 100 million smartphone users in the world.)
I notice he doesn't mention Samsung, Microsoft or even Google. I guess we know which companies they are waiting for to move the industry forward.
Well Larry, how does it feel to push Android that does roughly the same thing as iOS or Google+ that tries to do roughly the same thing as Facebook?
How does he know they aren't? Nobody knew about Project Purple. There's a whole rainbow to get through:
I can Sing a Rainbow
Red and yellow and pink and green, purple and orange and blue
Projects Orange and Blue are probably underway right now.
They do a small number of things well. That last word is quite important. You can do lots of things but if they aren't very good then I'd say that's less satisfying. Maybe some people would be happier with a thousand bronze medals than a handful of gold ones though.
Rightly so, Google+ is no competition to Facebook at all.
And yet curiously Google doesn't have many unique products. Nor are they succeeding with all of them. I wonder what these successful, different products are he's talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01
Am I the only one in the freaking world who appreciates all of the things each of these large tech companies make? I love my iphone and MacBook, I live within my google world with email, calendars, contacts, mapping, etc. I communicate with a ton of my friends on Facebook, I use MS Office because I find it better for my uses than anything else, I find my Samsung tv absolutely stunning, my PS3 is awesome, as is my Apple TV for completely different reasons. I have Amazon Prime and a Kindle and couldnt imagine living without either anymore. Why am I being told all the time that I can't appreciate all these companies?
Best post in this thread. I also enjoy devices from various vendors, I don't care who buids the device that fits me the most. I don't want a 'thermonuclear' something against anyone. Just keep producing awesome devices. And whoever makes the one I like the most, I'm going to buy it. Doesn't matter if it's Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Sony, Google or whatever. The are lot of different people with different needs and it's good that there is competition because that means that one can choose.
Google didn't create YouTube. They bought it. Their own version didn't get traction.
Google didn't create Chrome. Apple surprised everyone, deviated from Mozilla and chose KHTML. Chrome took Apple's WebKit engine.
Android stole Apple's concept and reused Mac UI concepts. Also built incrementally on Linux and Java. It is the pinnacle of incremental technology. That's why it's free/cheap.
I don't see the innovations they cites in his 3 examples. They are all incremental according to his words.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
…Larry Page offered his take on the state of technology, saying that companies… …should dedicate more resources on innovation… rather than competion.
We're actually doing something different."
Ladies and Gentlemen, Google's Very First Innovation:
Stealing from Yahoo!.