If Apple wants to design a thermostat, it doesn't need Nest to do that. If Google wants to design anything that isn't software, it needs to buy a company.
What the hell are you talking about. When Rubinstein wanted someone to help him [engineer] the iPod, he hired Fadell.
You don't even know what you wrote, do you. How can I respond to you when you don't even understand your own thoughts.
Here, I'll give you some help:
Rogifan: "... if he was all that why would Steve have let him go in the first place?"
or: ..." if Steve was all that why would Apple have let him go in the first place?"
I do know what I wrote. Steve Jobs 1.0 was nothing like Steve Jobs 2.0. and John Scully is nothing like Steve Jobs 2.0. Perhaps you can explain why Apple would need Tony Fadell? Apple's biggest weakness is online/cloud, not hardware design.
I think it is true that Apple has a perception problem but I don't think there's anything they can do about it other than continue to release great products and let those products do the talking. Apple is never going to give the Verge's of the world scoops on future stuff they're working on. It's not their MO.
If one doesn't put any stock in perception then I guess everything is just fine as it is for Apple. But I think image IS important. I was not attacking Apple or calling for them to release junk. But it has been a while since they diversified from desktop/laptop computers into mobile/handhelds. The world doesn't stand still. I want them to succeed, but I don't think phones/tablets are enough for it to continue being the leader they should be. Google seems committed to fostering new ideas both from within and without–they may be throwing a lot of stuff to see what will stick, but the odds are something will. Apple may be doing the same thing secretly for all I know, but I was just expressing my discomfort that I'm not seeing any evidence of it. Don't get me wrong, I think Google is a dispicable thief, and I don't want them to get away with it.
This level of mind-numbing stupidity makes me want to go lie down.
The truth hurts doesn't it, Apple don't share anything outside their walled garden, everything is proprietary from cables to chargers to icloud to iMessage to facetime etc. etc.
I do know what I wrote. Steve Jobs 1.0 was nothing like Steve Jobs 2.0. and John Scully is nothing like Steve Jobs 2.0. Perhaps you can explain why Apple would need Tony Fadell? Apple's biggest weakness is online/cloud, not hardware design.
If one doesn't put any stock in perception then I guess everything is just fine as it is for Apple. But I think image IS important. I was not attacking Apple or calling for them to release junk. But it has been a while since they diversified from desktop/laptop computers into mobile/handhelds. The world doesn't stand still. I want them to succeed, but I don't think phones/tablets are enough for it to continue being the leader they should be. Google seems committed to fostering new ideas both from within and without–they may be throwing a lot of stuff to see what will stick, but the odds are something will. Apple may be doing the same thing secretly for all I know, but I was just expressing my discomfort that I'm not seeing any evidence of it. Don't get me wrong, I think Google is a dispicable thief, and I don't want them to get away with it.
Honestly, is there a "Troll Waiting Area" that has jerks like you coming out of an assembly area? Apple will publish their quarterly reports, once again throw pie in your face and of those of your ilk, and then you'll simply either:
a) Spin the story (i.e. "lie") to make it sound like remotely had a (false) clue you knew what you were talking about
b) Scurry to the back of the room and pretend to look interested in a potted plant so no one calls you on your rubbish
c) b And c and sit patiently by your basement door in the hopes mommy brings down your dinner early.
If one doesn't put any stock in perception then I guess everything is just fine as it is for Apple. But I think image IS important. I was not attacking Apple or calling for them to release junk. But it has been a while since they diversified from desktop/laptop computers into mobile/handhelds. The world doesn't stand still. I want them to succeed, but I don't think phones/tablets are enough for it to continue being the leader they should be. Google seems committed to fostering new ideas both from within and without–they may be throwing a lot of stuff to see what will stick, but the odds are something will. Apple may be doing the same thing secretly for all I know, but I was just expressing my discomfort that I'm not seeing any evidence of it. Don't get me wrong, I think Google is a dispicable thief, and I don't want them to get away with it.
Google throws money at tons of stuff with little long term commitment for most things. Apple just executes. Perhaps Google believes that so far it is really just a one trick poney. Search will eventually change. Apple is already using Siri to hurt Google search
Honestly, is there a "Troll Waiting Area" that has jerks like you coming out of an assembly area? Apple will publish their quarterly reports, once again throw pie in your face and of those of your ilk, and then you'll simply either:
a) Spin the story (i.e. "lie") to make it sound like remotely had a (false) clue you knew what you were talking about
b) Scurry to the back of the room and pretend to look interested in a potted plant so no one calls you on your rubbish
c) b And c and sit patiently by your basement door in the hopes mommy brings down your dinner early.
Why not counteract my arguments rather than replying in a childish way?
If Apple wants to design a thermostat, it doesn't need Nest to do that. If Google wants to design anything that isn't software, it needs to buy a company.
OS X and iOS, the two most important software projects to come out of Apple, were directly enabled by acquisitions - NeXT in the former case and Fingerworks for the latter.
Comments
All this debate for one "unfollows". Funny
If Apple wants to design a thermostat, it doesn't need Nest to do that. If Google wants to design anything that isn't software, it needs to buy a company.
What the hell are you talking about. When Rubinstein wanted someone to help him [engineer] the iPod, he hired Fadell.
All this debate for one "unfollows". Funny
Weekends are always slow.
You don't even know what you wrote, do you. How can I respond to you when you don't even understand your own thoughts.
Here, I'll give you some help:
Rogifan: "... if he was all that why would Steve have let him go in the first place?"
or: ..." if Steve was all that why would Apple have let him go in the first place?"
I do know what I wrote. Steve Jobs 1.0 was nothing like Steve Jobs 2.0. and John Scully is nothing like Steve Jobs 2.0. Perhaps you can explain why Apple would need Tony Fadell? Apple's biggest weakness is online/cloud, not hardware design.
The truth hurts doesn't it, Apple don't share anything outside their walled garden, everything is proprietary from cables to chargers to icloud to iMessage to facetime etc. etc.
What the hell are you talking about. When Rubinstein wanted someone to help him design the iPod, he hired Fadell.
And when Steve created a SVP for iPhone hardware engineering he didn't choose Fadell. I'm curiou to know why you think Apple needs Fadell?
I do know what I wrote. Steve Jobs 1.0 was nothing like Steve Jobs 2.0. and John Scully is nothing like Steve Jobs 2.0. Perhaps you can explain why Apple would need Tony Fadell? Apple's biggest weakness is online/cloud, not hardware design.
That's not the point.
For you not to see that is pretty lame.
And when Steve created a SVP for iPhone hardware engineering he didn't choose Fadell. I'm curiou to know why you think Apple needs Fadell?
WTF are you talking about?
Nothing as inept as your post which added no value to the conversation.
If one doesn't put any stock in perception then I guess everything is just fine as it is for Apple. But I think image IS important. I was not attacking Apple or calling for them to release junk. But it has been a while since they diversified from desktop/laptop computers into mobile/handhelds. The world doesn't stand still. I want them to succeed, but I don't think phones/tablets are enough for it to continue being the leader they should be. Google seems committed to fostering new ideas both from within and without–they may be throwing a lot of stuff to see what will stick, but the odds are something will. Apple may be doing the same thing secretly for all I know, but I was just expressing my discomfort that I'm not seeing any evidence of it. Don't get me wrong, I think Google is a dispicable thief, and I don't want them to get away with it.
http://tinyurl.com/mvqqfh3
WTF are you talking about?
Why do you think Apple needs Tony Fadell right now?
Why do you think Apple needs Tony Fadell right now?
Did I say anything about Apple needing Fadell right now.
Damn, man... get with the program.
Wanted to thumbs up you, but 'I'm over my limit for rating content. Please try again later.'
Perhaps because Google Ventures was a major investor and likely would have killed such a buyout. Perhaps Apple doesn't need or want Nest.
*whine* *cry* *harp* *ohwoeesme*
Honestly, is there a "Troll Waiting Area" that has jerks like you coming out of an assembly area? Apple will publish their quarterly reports, once again throw pie in your face and of those of your ilk, and then you'll simply either:
a) Spin the story (i.e. "lie") to make it sound like remotely had a (false) clue you knew what you were talking about
b) Scurry to the back of the room and pretend to look interested in a potted plant so no one calls you on your rubbish
c) b And c and sit patiently by your basement door in the hopes mommy brings down your dinner early.
It's amazing what qualifies as "news" these days.
What's next?
"Tim Cook drives a different way to work to avoid sharing highway with Nest employees"?
Google throws money at tons of stuff with little long term commitment for most things. Apple just executes. Perhaps Google believes that so far it is really just a one trick poney. Search will eventually change. Apple is already using Siri to hurt Google search
Why not counteract my arguments rather than replying in a childish way?
If Apple wants to design a thermostat, it doesn't need Nest to do that. If Google wants to design anything that isn't software, it needs to buy a company.
OS X and iOS, the two most important software projects to come out of Apple, were directly enabled by acquisitions - NeXT in the former case and Fingerworks for the latter.