The thing is that if Apple did lock it down and force users into using Apple only apps there would be anti competitive cases flying left right and centre.
Google would be first in line.
Can you change your phone app, your SMS/iMessage app, app store app, calendar app, email app, music app, etc...? One is forced to use those apps, right or wrong?
Those apps, Id suggest are the large part of the success of iOS. But we're arguing semantics.
Apple could close it further but they don't. I read with some amazement that story last week where to crack the top 10 in the App Store, if youre a dev, that you need to get 47000 Dlds a day. The App Stores not a closed system - that's open for business.
I really really really hate this. I don't understand why google would sacrifice user experience in favor of forcing user to use their own apps, it's like they want users living inside their own world.
Exactly - it shows how much Google really needs iOS users.
They want to try and create a sub-system operating on iOS.
Good luck with that ... fail
Sure you do, Apple doesn't allow replacement of native apps, they're just skinned to look different.
But by using iOS you're intentionally going into Apple's world. Google is trying to create their own world inside Apple's world.
I downloaded the new Chrome and registered on AI as "Test Chrome" from a gmail account -- so I could try it without exposing my system and accounts to Google "ASS" (Ads, Spying, Spam).
My first impression. reading the article, was that Google was trying to establish a system within a system -- where the user would use Chrome to go back and forth among various Google alternative apps -- rather than use the built-in Apple apps...
I only use Google Maps, Earth, Chrome and Gmail -- and these only for evaluation (no Location Services, proprietary info, personal data, etc.). I rarely use Google for searching.
Anyway, with my limited use of Google apps, I attempted to determine how successful this new Chrome was at creating a "Google System" within the iOS System...
To my mind, they were not very successful -- you can link to another Google app, but you can't round trip back to the prior app. For example, in Chrome, do a Search (Google Search) for maps -- it shows Google Maps as the top hit... If you click that link, it goes to the native "Google Maps" app if installed, rather than the web app... But, that's it -- you don't have a direct path back to Chrome -- it's just another suspended app/task. The "linked" app is apparently unaware that it was called by Chrome and makes no attempt to seamlessly roundtrip.
Note: You can round trip from Google Maps to Google Earth and back -- but it's clunky.
As I said, I don't have all the Google apps, so mine is an incomplete test... But, with Chrome and New Google Maps being released within hours of each other -- I suspected that they would be the most integrated.
Incidentally, this linking and round tripping capability has present in iOS since 5.0 (maybe 4.0) -- so it is not new groung.
So, typical Google implementation -- half a job done marginally well!
Those apps, Id suggest are the large part of the success of iOS.
But we're arguing semantics.
Apple could close it further but they don't.
I read with some amazement that story last week where to crack the top 10 in the App Store, if youre a dev, that you need to get 47000 Dlds a day.
The App Stores not a closed system - that's open for business.
Of course I didn't mean all apps but the basic function ones, but even the app store is strictly Apple. An Android user could get their apps from Amazon and cut Google out completely. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but it's kind of silly for a iOS user to say "I don't wanna be forced to use apps" when in reality they are.
I really really really hate this. I don't understand why google would sacrifice user experience in favor of forcing user to use their own apps, it's like they want users living inside their own world. Anyway this is the reason I stopped using google maps and settled for apple maps.
Wow, I totally thought you were being sarcastic. Maybe you were, but it seems to be missed by people here.
For those that don't get the sarcasm, Chrome isn't forcing anything. In the Chrome settings, you can choose what links do...whether they open in the browser, or open in apps that you may have installed, YouTube, Google Maps, Google Drive, or Google+. To be clear, in Safari, you don't have this option. In Safari, a YouTube URL opens a YouTube page in Safari. As a user, you can't change this (without jailbreaking). Again, in Chrome, this is optional.
The irony here is doubled, as Apple not only doesn't allow default app selection in Safari, but it doesn't allow default apps in iOS. So in as much as any "forcing" is going on, it's Apple that has iOS locked down in terms of default apps while Google has taken the opposite approach not only in Android, but for their apps on iOS.
Furthermore, the silliness here continues, because we're talking about URLs to Google's services. Either way, tapping on one of those linsk takes you within Google's services. Google is given you the option of continuing to use Chrome or one of their other apps only when you're already going to a Google service.
Heck even in terms of selecting which services you use, Google is allowing choice. For example, like Apple's Safari, Google's Chrome allows you select your search engine, and provides the same list of competitive search engines to choose from.
As much of an Apple fan as I am, and only use Safari on my iPhone, it's only fair to look at this one thing and admit that what Google did here was a good thing and a feature that many iOS users may appreciate if they use Chrome, as well as desiring similar functionality in Safari as well as iOS itself.
Of course I didn't mean all apps but the basic function ones, but even the app store is strictly Apple. An Android user could get their apps from Amazon and cut Google out completely. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but it's kind of silly for a iOS user to say "I don't wanna be forced to use apps" when in reality they are.
Yea - I agree to a point. But at what level do they give up the integrity and security that they're trying to deliver ? They have to close some areas to be able to do that.
To open it all the way and you're no better than the other wannabes
Apple have done a great job with iOS giving users the assurance of both.
Yea - I agree to a point. But at what level do they give up the integrity and security that they're trying to deliver ? They have to close some areas to be able to do that.
To open it all the way and you're no better than the other wannabes
Apple have done a great job with iOS giving users the assurance of both.
I'm not criticizing Apple's closed system, nor am I saying that they should change it. It works well for them and for the millions upon millions of users. I wholeheartedly agree that they've done a splendid job.
But by using iOS you're intentionally going into Apple's world. Google is trying to create their own world inside Apple's world.
That's a pretty circular argument. By using iOS you're going into Apple's world so its okay for them to trap you in it....
By the same logic, if you CHOOSE intentionally to install chrome on your iPhone you're intentionally going into Google's world so its okay for them to trap you in it, right?....
Except Google doesn't trap you. They allow you to choose. You can still use chrome and keep your Apple defaults.
What aggravated me to no end on my iPhone was the lame browser. Apple 'allowed' me to install a different one... The only problem is any link I clicked would automatically open their sucky browser. So Apples strategy of getting me to use their sucky browser was to aggravate the crap out of me. Apple makes great hardware but a lot of their native apps are second rate compared to what is out there. Being forced to use those instead of the ones I actually prefer was one of my drivers for leaving Apple.
Google's chrome does NOT force you to use Google's other services- it merely gives you the option to use them if you so prefer. If they had done that while I still had an iPhone I would have appreciated that.
One issue I have is the fact that Apple does not allow third-party renderers. Chome for iOS is basically just using UIWebView without JIT compilation. Third-party browsers are forced to use a gimped Apple-provided renderer.
There is not much reason for me to use Chrome under iOS given it is just a neutered Safari browser, performance-wise.
One issue I have is the fact that Apple does not allow third-party renderers. Chome for iOS is basically just using UIWebView without JIT compilation. Third-party browsers are forced to use a gimped Apple-provided renderer.
There is not much reason for me to use Chrome under iOS given it is just a neutered Safari browser, performance-wise.
You can fix the JIT issue with the Nitrous jailbreak tweak. Personally, I still use Safari, but there are a variety of features that make using Chrome a different experience from Safari.
Don't get the hatred towards iOS Chrome and all things Google. Chrome in iOS is great to me, I use it a lot more than Safari mobile. Will probably use Safari a lot more in iOS7, but till then Chrome is my preferred mobile browser. The current Safari being limited to eight tabs is extremely sad and weak and Chrome is easier to move between tabs. Only thing in Safari I still use is the 'Reader' but that's seldom. Hopefully iOS7 Safari is much improved and makes me want to switch back.
It's not hatred - but it is a severe and deep seated mistrust, on many levels.
Please remember this, Google has no business apart from advertising. Despite all their user enhancements that may provide you with a richer experience - their business is selling advertising. No point in dishing up a restaurant ad in Seattle to me here in NZ so they need to collect data to target their ads to me in a meaningful way. uhh, I don't give flying fig about their efforts to log me using my ip, browsing history and habits and then onsold so that they can make more money - to sell more ads. Wait, hang on - No I actually do care ! I am now a contributor to their enterprise - not willing but something to be used for their betterment. This is not open, as they dress it up. It's the reverse, it's closed. And what gets my goat, they expect you to accept it.
What do they give you in return ? A really good search engine and some useful apps like Earth and maps, but that's it for me. Others will add some stuff that they can't live without no doubt.
If you don't buy into anything Ive just said then you obviously trust them. I don't period as always imnsho
It's not hatred - but it is a severe and deep seated mistrust, on many levels.
Please remember this, Google has no business apart from advertising.
Despite all their user enhancements that may provide you with a richer experience - their business is selling advertising.
No point in dishing up a restaurant ad in Seattle to me here in NZ so they need to collect data to target their ads to me in a meaningful way.
uhh, I don't give flying fig about their efforts to log me using my ip, browsing history and habits and then onsold so that they can make more money - to sell more ads.
Wait, hang on - No I actually do care !
I am now a contributor to their enterprise
And what gets my goat, they expect you to accept it.
What do they give you in return ?
A really good search engine and some useful apps like Earth and maps, but that's it for me.
Others will add some stuff that they can't live without no doubt.
If you don't buy into anything Ive just said then you obviously trust them.
I don't period
as always imnsho
Wow. . . An ad on a webpage really bothers you. Does it bother you just as much that Apple is also tracking you, gathering info on what you view, what music you listen to, what apps you use, what you do for a living and what your income is, who your other family members are and where you're located at any given moment? Building as accurate a profile of you as they can to also "sell you to advertisers" and use for other marketing efforts, tho so far on a much smaller scale than Google.
In actual fact what Google does is what every other company does. They give you something of value. They expect to paid paid for it in some way. For radio stations to exist someone has to pay. For newspapers to exist someone has to pay. TV, HBO, AppleInsider and millions of other services offer some value in return for payment in some form so they can continue to offer a service. And yes they all do whatever they can (or should) to better understand where their payment comes from and what drives it higher. In almost all cases whether it's selling cars, milk or ads it means the better they understand what you want the more revenue they can get. Apple isn't offering iRadio for free (they could). Either accept advertising served up just for you and your interests or pay them straight up cash for the service. They'll still gather data for your profile but the ads won't appear.
Perhaps when Google starts selling hardware too as Apple does then you won't be so afraid of them since not all their income will then be coming from advertising.:\
But by using iOS you're intentionally going into Apple's world. Google is trying to create their own world inside Apple's world.
Exactly. I've now at last dropped everything Google on the Mac thanks to duckduckgo.com for search, however Apple need to allow the iPad and iPhone to set that as a default option. DDG manage to get round that limitation on the Mac with an extension but I've not found a way to do that in iOS.
It's not hatred - but it is a severe and deep seated mistrust, on many levels.
Please remember this, Google has no business apart from advertising.
Despite all their user enhancements that may provide you with a richer experience - their business is selling advertising.
No point in dishing up a restaurant ad in Seattle to me here in NZ so they need to collect data to target their ads to me in a meaningful way.
uhh, I don't give flying fig about their efforts to log me using my ip, browsing history and habits and then onsold so that they can make more money - to sell more ads.
Wait, hang on - No I actually do care !
I am now a contributor to their enterprise - not willing but something to be used for their betterment.
The implication here is that selling advertising makes a company less trustworthy compared to selling hardware, because much of what you say here applies to Apple as well. This may be an popular opinion of this forum, but it seems that although Google collects a lot of personal data, they have more incentive than most other companies to keep your data safe. If a business manages to obtain Google's datasets, it would be less willing to pay Google to target ads for them. The success of an ad company depends on keeping your personal info a company secret, because only then would businesses keep paying the ad company to act as a middleman. Leaking your personal preferences would directly undercut Google's business.
Comments
But that world for the most part is a facade, one is still in a world very much controlled by Apple (and I'm not suggesting it's a bad thing).
Can you change your phone app, your SMS/iMessage app, app store app, calendar app, email app, music app, etc...? One is forced to use those apps, right or wrong?
Those apps, Id suggest are the large part of the success of iOS.
But we're arguing semantics.
Apple could close it further but they don't.
I read with some amazement that story last week where to crack the top 10 in the App Store, if youre a dev, that you need to get 47000 Dlds a day.
The App Stores not a closed system - that's open for business.
I downloaded the new Chrome and registered on AI as "Test Chrome" from a gmail account -- so I could try it without exposing my system and accounts to Google "ASS" (Ads, Spying, Spam).
My first impression. reading the article, was that Google was trying to establish a system within a system -- where the user would use Chrome to go back and forth among various Google alternative apps -- rather than use the built-in Apple apps...
I only use Google Maps, Earth, Chrome and Gmail -- and these only for evaluation (no Location Services, proprietary info, personal data, etc.). I rarely use Google for searching.
Anyway, with my limited use of Google apps, I attempted to determine how successful this new Chrome was at creating a "Google System" within the iOS System...
To my mind, they were not very successful -- you can link to another Google app, but you can't round trip back to the prior app. For example, in Chrome, do a Search (Google Search) for maps -- it shows Google Maps as the top hit... If you click that link, it goes to the native "Google Maps" app if installed, rather than the web app... But, that's it -- you don't have a direct path back to Chrome -- it's just another suspended app/task. The "linked" app is apparently unaware that it was called by Chrome and makes no attempt to seamlessly roundtrip.
Note: You can round trip from Google Maps to Google Earth and back -- but it's clunky.
As I said, I don't have all the Google apps, so mine is an incomplete test... But, with Chrome and New Google Maps being released within hours of each other -- I suspected that they would be the most integrated.
Incidentally, this linking and round tripping capability has present in iOS since 5.0 (maybe 4.0) -- so it is not new groung.
So, typical Google implementation -- half a job done marginally well!
Of course I didn't mean all apps but the basic function ones, but even the app store is strictly Apple. An Android user could get their apps from Amazon and cut Google out completely. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but it's kind of silly for a iOS user to say "I don't wanna be forced to use apps" when in reality they are.
Any sign of the Bandwidth Management ummm, tool (for the want of a better word) ?
Remarkable that they can even call it that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by n0cud06
I really really really hate this. I don't understand why google would sacrifice user experience in favor of forcing user to use their own apps, it's like they want users living inside their own world. Anyway this is the reason I stopped using google maps and settled for apple maps.
Wow, I totally thought you were being sarcastic. Maybe you were, but it seems to be missed by people here.
For those that don't get the sarcasm, Chrome isn't forcing anything. In the Chrome settings, you can choose what links do...whether they open in the browser, or open in apps that you may have installed, YouTube, Google Maps, Google Drive, or Google+. To be clear, in Safari, you don't have this option. In Safari, a YouTube URL opens a YouTube page in Safari. As a user, you can't change this (without jailbreaking). Again, in Chrome, this is optional.
The irony here is doubled, as Apple not only doesn't allow default app selection in Safari, but it doesn't allow default apps in iOS. So in as much as any "forcing" is going on, it's Apple that has iOS locked down in terms of default apps while Google has taken the opposite approach not only in Android, but for their apps on iOS.
Furthermore, the silliness here continues, because we're talking about URLs to Google's services. Either way, tapping on one of those linsk takes you within Google's services. Google is given you the option of continuing to use Chrome or one of their other apps only when you're already going to a Google service.
Heck even in terms of selecting which services you use, Google is allowing choice. For example, like Apple's Safari, Google's Chrome allows you select your search engine, and provides the same list of competitive search engines to choose from.
As much of an Apple fan as I am, and only use Safari on my iPhone, it's only fair to look at this one thing and admit that what Google did here was a good thing and a feature that many iOS users may appreciate if they use Chrome, as well as desiring similar functionality in Safari as well as iOS itself.
Sounds more like he crashed the test
Yea - I agree to a point. But at what level do they give up the integrity and security that they're trying to deliver ? They have to close some areas to be able to do that.
To open it all the way and you're no better than the other wannabes
Apple have done a great job with iOS giving users the assurance of both.
I'm not criticizing Apple's closed system, nor am I saying that they should change it. It works well for them and for the millions upon millions of users. I wholeheartedly agree that they've done a splendid job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
But by using iOS you're intentionally going into Apple's world. Google is trying to create their own world inside Apple's world.
That's a pretty circular argument. By using iOS you're going into Apple's world so its okay for them to trap you in it....
By the same logic, if you CHOOSE intentionally to install chrome on your iPhone you're intentionally going into Google's world so its okay for them to trap you in it, right?....
Except Google doesn't trap you. They allow you to choose. You can still use chrome and keep your Apple defaults.
What aggravated me to no end on my iPhone was the lame browser. Apple 'allowed' me to install a different one... The only problem is any link I clicked would automatically open their sucky browser. So Apples strategy of getting me to use their sucky browser was to aggravate the crap out of me. Apple makes great hardware but a lot of their native apps are second rate compared to what is out there. Being forced to use those instead of the ones I actually prefer was one of my drivers for leaving Apple.
Google's chrome does NOT force you to use Google's other services- it merely gives you the option to use them if you so prefer. If they had done that while I still had an iPhone I would have appreciated that.
One issue I have is the fact that Apple does not allow third-party renderers. Chome for iOS is basically just using UIWebView without JIT compilation. Third-party browsers are forced to use a gimped Apple-provided renderer.
There is not much reason for me to use Chrome under iOS given it is just a neutered Safari browser, performance-wise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox
One issue I have is the fact that Apple does not allow third-party renderers. Chome for iOS is basically just using UIWebView without JIT compilation. Third-party browsers are forced to use a gimped Apple-provided renderer.
There is not much reason for me to use Chrome under iOS given it is just a neutered Safari browser, performance-wise.
You can fix the JIT issue with the Nitrous jailbreak tweak. Personally, I still use Safari, but there are a variety of features that make using Chrome a different experience from Safari.
Don't get the hatred towards iOS Chrome and all things Google. Chrome in iOS is great to me, I use it a lot more than Safari mobile. Will probably use Safari a lot more in iOS7, but till then Chrome is my preferred mobile browser. The current Safari being limited to eight tabs is extremely sad and weak and Chrome is easier to move between tabs. Only thing in Safari I still use is the 'Reader' but that's seldom. Hopefully iOS7 Safari is much improved and makes me want to switch back.
Please remember this, Google has no business apart from advertising.
Despite all their user enhancements that may provide you with a richer experience - their business is selling advertising.
No point in dishing up a restaurant ad in Seattle to me here in NZ so they need to collect data to target their ads to me in a meaningful way.
uhh, I don't give flying fig about their efforts to log me using my ip, browsing history and habits and then onsold so that they can make more money - to sell more ads.
Wait, hang on - No I actually do care !
I am now a contributor to their enterprise - not willing but something to be used for their betterment.
This is not open, as they dress it up. It's the reverse, it's closed.
And what gets my goat, they expect you to accept it.
What do they give you in return ?
A really good search engine and some useful apps like Earth and maps, but that's it for me.
Others will add some stuff that they can't live without no doubt.
If you don't buy into anything Ive just said then you obviously trust them.
I don't period
as always imnsho
Wow. . . An ad on a webpage really bothers you. Does it bother you just as much that Apple is also tracking you, gathering info on what you view, what music you listen to, what apps you use, what you do for a living and what your income is, who your other family members are and where you're located at any given moment? Building as accurate a profile of you as they can to also "sell you to advertisers" and use for other marketing efforts, tho so far on a much smaller scale than Google.
In actual fact what Google does is what every other company does. They give you something of value. They expect to paid paid for it in some way. For radio stations to exist someone has to pay. For newspapers to exist someone has to pay. TV, HBO, AppleInsider and millions of other services offer some value in return for payment in some form so they can continue to offer a service. And yes they all do whatever they can (or should) to better understand where their payment comes from and what drives it higher. In almost all cases whether it's selling cars, milk or ads it means the better they understand what you want the more revenue they can get. Apple isn't offering iRadio for free (they could). Either accept advertising served up just for you and your interests or pay them straight up cash for the service. They'll still gather data for your profile but the ads won't appear.
Perhaps when Google starts selling hardware too as Apple does then you won't be so afraid of them since not all their income will then be coming from advertising.:\
Exactly. I've now at last dropped everything Google on the Mac thanks to duckduckgo.com for search, however Apple need to allow the iPad and iPhone to set that as a default option. DDG manage to get round that limitation on the Mac with an extension but I've not found a way to do that in iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobM
It's not hatred - but it is a severe and deep seated mistrust, on many levels.
Please remember this, Google has no business apart from advertising.
Despite all their user enhancements that may provide you with a richer experience - their business is selling advertising.
No point in dishing up a restaurant ad in Seattle to me here in NZ so they need to collect data to target their ads to me in a meaningful way.
uhh, I don't give flying fig about their efforts to log me using my ip, browsing history and habits and then onsold so that they can make more money - to sell more ads.
Wait, hang on - No I actually do care !
I am now a contributor to their enterprise - not willing but something to be used for their betterment.
The implication here is that selling advertising makes a company less trustworthy compared to selling hardware, because much of what you say here applies to Apple as well. This may be an popular opinion of this forum, but it seems that although Google collects a lot of personal data, they have more incentive than most other companies to keep your data safe. If a business manages to obtain Google's datasets, it would be less willing to pay Google to target ads for them. The success of an ad company depends on keeping your personal info a company secret, because only then would businesses keep paying the ad company to act as a middleman. Leaking your personal preferences would directly undercut Google's business.
Edit: Fixed, thanks RobM.