I've found the historical accuracy to be phenomenal, it's that aspect I find so enjoyable in his specials. There are so many that rewrite history, especially where Bill Gates and Apple are concerned. Or believe urban legends such as 'Gates saving Apple' when Steve came back. DED always gets it right.
Yep, a Jag XJS, a SAAB Turbo and the Jeep GC Limited are the best three vehicles I have ever owned and all for very different reasons. My wife is the one with the latest and fancy cars these days as she is a realtor so i do get to drive Mercs, Lexus, Audi, BMW etc. (she changed every two years or so) but they have never enticed me away from my Jeep ... If we go out together and I can choose either hers or mine, it's always the Jeep. I must be getting old! LOL
It's not the historical information, that I find to be very close to accurate if not spot on. It's the crazy spin that's usually associated with them that usually gets me. I know it's just for clicks though, so I'm not blinded. It reminds me of those Ancient Alien shows. They show some amazing, very real, unexplained item which is a fact. Then they go waaaaaay off on an extreme tangent to show how Aliens made/built them.
Never owned any of those other vehicles you mentioned. TrailHawk and Camaro. Both are amazing in build quality to me. Both suit a purpose.
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/181441/editorial-google-microsoft-claiming-apples-crown-albeit-from-1994#post_2566622" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Silver Shadow</strong> <a href="/t/181441/editorial-google-microsoft-claiming-apples-crown-albeit-from-1994#post_2566622"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/><br />
When I saw the iPad introduction, which was the first Apple intro I've seen, it blew me away and I thought it was going to replace or take over the business industry. Then I started touring businesses and noticed a lot of NEW computers being delivered even just this year. The employees were ecstatic to have a lap top. They were Lenovo "Tonka" style laptops that came complete with a docking station and external monitor. I asked the Director of Business why they were not using Apple laptops which had an obvious better build quality and I was told that the business had a 10 year deal with Lenovo to support all of the business functions required of the computer.<br />
<br />
MS is going to be around for a long time to come.</div></div><p> </p>
Your attitude is exactly why MS will fade away into non relevence glorying in the past. Indeed the more people like you who spread the word that the Desktop is not dead the more it will hasten its slow slide into a niche market. It won't go away it will just become a back office system and people in 10 years will smile nostagically at them. Most tasks can be done on a tablet, we don't need a PC or laptop to do most things. That's what it will become, get used to it.
Its people like you who make statements like Balmer - "$500, fully subsidized, with a plan! That is the most expensive phone in the world and it doesn't appeal to business customers because it doesn't have a keyboard, which makes it not a very good email machine."
I didn't say they would either be profitable or at the forefront of any new tech (we could be surprised). I said they will be around for a very long time. You can hold me to that. I would say at the very minimum ten more years. That's a good portion of my life, so I'll call that a very long time if you don't mind. I have been around long enough to see a lot of large companies die out. Some go relatively quick. Some linger on the edges for a very long time.
As someone who has bought into the Apple ecosystem fully, trust me, I wouldn't mind if it were tomorrow. The looks I get from people who know I only use Apple products when a computer conversation has been brought up is enough for me to hope. Most times I need to sit silent because they gang up on you. It's the oddest thing I've ever encountered for a product. When I buy a new washing machine, grill, vehicle, or anything else for that matter everyone wants to hear my opinion on it or check it out. This whole Apple thing is odd to say the least. Articles like this that go so far I to conjecture probably don't help.
I tried showing an article from this site (not DED, a factual article) to someone a while back. They took one look and yelled "It's an Apple site and they're advertising everything Google!". I gave up.
There isn't much to look up, if you have been in an Apple Store which has more than just a Genius Bar: http://www.apple.com/retail/learn/. Apple seems to already have several options in place for educating current and potential customers.
Your experience must be different than mine. In my observations people generally do not go out of their way to lean anything at all unless it's their "hobby". If it's their "hobby" they usually know almost as much as professionals, if not more, in that specific field. The new Tips app may help, but I doubt it.
Edit: not every store is close or even convenient for everyone. In my case it's over an hour drive to an overly crowded mall in the center of a city where I have to pay to park yet still try to find a parking spot, which may take over 15 minutes. Walk down numerous hallways with "barkers". If I bring my G.F. We end up with new perfume, another iPhone case, or something I didn't want.
Then there's getting back out. I am perfectly capable of defending myself (more than capable actually), but walking back out of that situation with an Apple bullseye in my hand has made me feel very uncomfortable EVERY SINGLE TIME. I could share some interactions that I have been through but you probably would not believe them. Why are all of the sores located in the "inner-city"? Population, yea I know.
Brilliant. Satya Nadella will go nowhere because he lacks vision of the whole picture. Google is a maniacal photocopy machine. They brag to have the most brilliant minds money can buy but they are unable to create anything new. Every product they launch is bought from someone or an idea from an outsider: adsense, adwords, streetview, google wave, buzz, everything. Not a single thing created by google people, what is surprising.
Brilliant. Satya Nadella will go nowhere because he lacks vision of the whole picture. Google is a maniacal photocopy machine. They brag to have the most brilliant minds money can buy but they are unable to create anything new. Every product they launch is bought from someone or an idea from an outsider: adsense, adwords, streetview, google wave, buzz, everything. Not a single thing created by google people, what is surprising.
And in two years the patent that Google's business model is built upon is up, open and available to everyone.
I love patents! The idea is out there and 20 years later everyone gains from it.
I'm surprised I haven't seen a D.E.D. article focused on this.
And in two years the patent that Google's business model is built upon is up, open and available to everyone.
I love patents! The idea is out there and 20 years later everyone gains from it.
I'm surprised I haven't seen a D.E.D. article focused on this.
Page Rank isn't Google's patent, its Stanford University's.
Its already available to anyone, Google's exclusive rights expired in 2011. Sure, you currently need to pay for it, but anyone can use it.
It may have been a major part of Google's business model when they started, but it plays a very small part in Google's search algorithms today.
DED is pretty good at manufacturing hit pieces on the flimsiest of evidence, but I think even he might struggle to convince anyone that Google is doomed because this patent is expiring in 2017.
Page Rank isn't Google's patent, its Stanford University's.
Its already available to anyone, Google's exclusive rights expired in 2011. Sure, you currently need to pay for it, but anyone can use it.
It may have been a major part of Google's business model when they started, but it plays a very small part in Google's search algorithms today.
DED is pretty good at manufacturing hit pieces on the flimsiest of evidence, but I think even he might struggle to convince anyone that Google is doomed because this patent is expiring in 2017.
Nah, this is certainly a case of wait and see. It will be interesting. Not being able to Google a Google issue isn't unheard of.
It's nothing short of a cowardly character assassination to sit in the comments passing out accusations of copious "inaccuracies" without stating what any of these are, then represent a conversation where you stuff words into the authors mouth--without any specifics whatsoever--and complain how difficult this process is as the reason why you can't say anything other than what a terrible person in general the author is, because looking up the facts is so time consuming. Because you have so much else on your plate as you sit in AI comments for hours stabbing the author in the back while contributing very little at all.
Really hard to respect you. Especially when the "riddled errors" you like to complain about are simply your opinion as a Microsoft WiMo fan.
It's not "cowardly character assination". It is just what it is. You're writing articles from your point of view and it's very far flung from reality, with a couple doses of history installed. Call a cat a cat.
Wow, this article makes so much sense. That is, if you ignore reality.
"Google is riding high, with a peak stock valuation and an army of devoted fans ready to explain why none of the problems the company is facing (including its clumsy transition to mobile) are actually problems. Companies that make money never stop making money, right?"
But wait you said they are making less money. And there are people who can say they are just fine, cause they are still making billions.
"Then there's Microsoft, which has been losing its fans like a data center after a catastrophic power system failure. Ten years ago, Microsoft was 'the Google,' making money so fast and furiously that nobody could imagine its fortunes ever changing. I remember arguing this possibility with the Internet, and being told (even by Apple fans) that I shouldn't say such things if I wanted to retain any credibility. Because change never happens, right?"
Seeing them gain major shares in the cloud computing arena and in Office 365, nope, they have all their business customers still there. Making more money than ever.
"I didn't predict that Microsoft would completely fail at mobile and be forced to watch Apple beat it in the enterprise."
You right, you didn't. You just wrote about it every time you could on your dumb blog.
"Apple had all sorts of technologies planned that it had been working on for years (including Copland and Taligent), in addition to having a crack team of scientists focused on inventing new stuff in its Advanced Technology Group, just like Google's jetpack, robot and self driving car labs today."
And?
"In 2006, Microsoft had also been making tons of money right up until Windows Vista sputtered into the market, bookended by PlaysForSure and Windows Mobile rolling over like overfed goldfish. Like the Old Apple, Microsoft similarly had lots of people and partnered vendors working on novel concepts and ideas, just not a lot of focused oversight."
Who is still making more money than ever, again.
"While Microsoft is clearly facing troubles, a lot of analysts are still making excuses for Google, suggesting that its attempt to copy the "commodity licensing" business model of Microsoft, albeit without collecting any licensing revenue, it still a genius move because (just you wait and see)."
Yeah, it is working great. Nevermind the fact that MS never gave away the OS until a few months ago, but go on.
"Never mind that advertising on mobile is not working out like advertising on the desktop PC browser. Google's ad profitability is dropping with each quarter, something that analysts like to excuse because "mobile ads work differently." But a larger problem is that while the PC desktop is plateauing, Google's control over the Android mobile platform is itself slipping."
Yeah, so they can't get as much money on mobile ads. The sky is falling. Not.
"While analysts are extremely concerned about Apple's share of mobile growth, and in particular its growth in China, they are only making excuses about Google's mobile performance and completely ignoring the fact that China has built its own version of Google services."
So what if they have - Google isn't going to run a bull shit run search engine just for communist china. Apple can take it all they want.
"It's only newsworthy when a Chinese company makes an off brand iPhone (that gains marketshare largely at the expense of Samsung, not Apple). When China makes off brand Google internet services that completely shut down Google's ability to make significant inroads into the vast Chinese market, well, Google didn't need China anyways!For 2013, Apple collected $171 billion (mostly from mobile) versus Google's $55.5 billion (mostly not from mobile)."
Poor google! Oh wait, they didn't get shut down, they left. More bull shit to follow!
"Instead, analysts like to talk about copies of Google's work forked by Amazon and Chinese manufacturers as if they benefit "Android," as if Android is a religion rather than a commercial enterprise, and Google is its supernatural deity rather than a more mundane sort of creator that actually has to pay for its ongoing development."
Who? More bullshit.
If Google cared about it, they'd not release the source. They don't care.
"Imagine if Apple 1994 had been valued based on the widespread proliferation of some form the "Mac desktop," even though the company wasn't making any licensing revenue from Microsoft Windows. Perhaps Apple stock wouldn't have tanked.
Or imagine if Apple today were accounted "market share" based on the ubiquitous use of WebKit, which Apple makes no licensing revenue from, rather than the sale of Apple's actual products, from which it makes more money than Google. For 2013, Apple collected $171 billion (mostly from mobile) versus Google's $55.5 billion (mostly not from mobile). Android is winning?"
Imagine some bull shit strawman for me to make it look like I'm making a point.
"Today's Apple provides a model of tech competency, with product and user interface designs that define fashion and inspire copying; with rapid, focused software development that even companies like Volkswagen want to emulate; with retail store operations that everyone from Microsoft to Samsung copy as closely as possible and with software app markets that Amazon, Google and Microsoft have all worked to duplicate."
Sure. What's ios7 trying to copy again? Hmm...
"Sound familiar? That's exactly the same kinds of problems Google is experiencing in its partnership with Samsung today, which represents the majority of Android sales and virtually all of its profits.Today, both Google and Microsoft are facing a new sort of commodity: their OSs. Both companies are now offering their software for free to any tablet makers who will use it."
Yes, too bad they kissed and made up. Kinda hurts your sensationalism when we consider, facts.
"Issues of which version of Android (or Tizen or maybe Chrome OS) is used and promoted, who gets to choose the UI and who benefits from it, whose apps and services get credited and actually installed have resulted in Samsung shipping mobile devices with multiple web browsers and multiple book, app and media stores while Google ships Samsung-built phones that don't even get Android updates over the buyer's two year contract. It's a mess."
Oh yes, let's refer to an article in 2011 that some dumbshit blogger made! Or we can actually look at today's Samsung SG3, a two year old handset, who just got updated to 4.4.2! Along with all of Moto's models from the past 2 years and even HTC!
"As a result, one of the leading enterprise cloud and services companies picked Apple as its mobile platform partner, not Microsoft and not Google. That's a profound reversal of fortune."
So what? Apple partnering with IBM says more about the sad state of IBM than MS or Google.
"Microsoft had enough competency left to have recognized (following the failure of PlaysForSure, Windows Mobile/Windows Phone, and Windows RT at the feet of iPod, iPhone and iPad) that it needed to stop what it was doing and instead begin copying Apple's finished product business model."
Wait, you aren't actually going to say they needed to copy apple to survive instead of doing what they really do best, own the enterprise?
"Google has similarly tried in vain to copy Apple's vertical business, spending billions to acquire Motorola while accomplishing nothing but bleeding additional billions in hardware losses, then turning around to pay additional billions for Nest. Google hasn't even been moderately successful at rebranding its partners' products as Nexus devices, which were aimed at 'fixing" the user interface and bloatware bundling mistakes that Android licensees were making."
More bull shit. They actually made money on the Motorola sale, and even turned a profit this past quarter with them. And they kept the patents for project Ara. Selling out of the Nexus 4 for months isn't a failure either.
"Google's Nexus strategy has worked out about as well as Apple's 1994 Mac cloning program: let us do all the design and support work but earn no money for it while eroding any ability to sell our own hardware at a profit. Genius!"
The nexus program is to actually develop android with hardware. Whatever.
"In parallel, to cover up Android's software development failures Google keeps inventing new versions of Android that "finally solve" its laggy performance and security flaws, over and over again.
Google says Android L's ART will "finally solve" lag, but that's also what it said of 2012's Android 4.1 Project Butter, which "finally solved" lag issues that Android fans had earlier announced were "finally solved" by Android 4.0's hardware accelerated UI "just like iPhone" back in 2011. Before that, everyone was loath to even admit Android lag existed.In parallel, to cover up Android's software development failures Google keeps inventing new versions of Android that "finally solve" its laggy performance and security flaws, over and over again."
Here's the prime bull shit for today! Daniel always thought Android "lagged" because it didn't have hardware accelerated gui elements. Turns out, like always, he was wrong. Then he praised apple for having such a system.
Oops, turned out, that was never the source of the lag, even though project butter did make things run smoother. But you didn't know that Daniel, did you? Because the reality is, you know jack shit about anything.
Tip Daniel, if "lag" is the only thing you have to complain about android, comparing it to Apple's still born OSes is again, bull shit. We know you hate Google because you know, they ran over you while on a motorcycle or they killed your cat or some other bull shit. The reality is, they are going nowhere. You might as well get used to MS and Google being around.
"The problem for Google's Android today is that, like Microsoft, it can't just acquire Jobs' modern operating system because Apple already did. And its own Copland-esque attempts to fix Android are too little, too late."
And they don't have to! Hell, apple even wanted to use Linux for the iphone before OSX won out!
"They're also increasingly focused on low end mobile devices, not profitable hardware. Google should ask the Old Apple about how well that strategy worked out for 1992-1997 low end Mac Performas."
How about it isn't about fucking profit when you want those who can't afford fucking $1000 iphones to have smartphones!
Did it occur to you the rest of the world doesn't subsidize the iphone and selling a cheap crap 8GB model in India isn't doing them any favors either?
Comments
It's not the historical information, that I find to be very close to accurate if not spot on. It's the crazy spin that's usually associated with them that usually gets me. I know it's just for clicks though, so I'm not blinded. It reminds me of those Ancient Alien shows. They show some amazing, very real, unexplained item which is a fact. Then they go waaaaaay off on an extreme tangent to show how Aliens made/built them.
Never owned any of those other vehicles you mentioned. TrailHawk and Camaro. Both are amazing in build quality to me. Both suit a purpose.
I didn't say they would either be profitable or at the forefront of any new tech (we could be surprised). I said they will be around for a very long time. You can hold me to that. I would say at the very minimum ten more years. That's a good portion of my life, so I'll call that a very long time if you don't mind. I have been around long enough to see a lot of large companies die out. Some go relatively quick. Some linger on the edges for a very long time.
As someone who has bought into the Apple ecosystem fully, trust me, I wouldn't mind if it were tomorrow. The looks I get from people who know I only use Apple products when a computer conversation has been brought up is enough for me to hope. Most times I need to sit silent because they gang up on you. It's the oddest thing I've ever encountered for a product. When I buy a new washing machine, grill, vehicle, or anything else for that matter everyone wants to hear my opinion on it or check it out. This whole Apple thing is odd to say the least. Articles like this that go so far I to conjecture probably don't help.
I tried showing an article from this site (not DED, a factual article) to someone a while back. They took one look and yelled "It's an Apple site and they're advertising everything Google!". I gave up.
Your experience must be different than mine. In my observations people generally do not go out of their way to lean anything at all unless it's their "hobby". If it's their "hobby" they usually know almost as much as professionals, if not more, in that specific field. The new Tips app may help, but I doubt it.
Edit: not every store is close or even convenient for everyone. In my case it's over an hour drive to an overly crowded mall in the center of a city where I have to pay to park yet still try to find a parking spot, which may take over 15 minutes. Walk down numerous hallways with "barkers". If I bring my G.F. We end up with new perfume, another iPhone case, or something I didn't want.
Then there's getting back out. I am perfectly capable of defending myself (more than capable actually), but walking back out of that situation with an Apple bullseye in my hand has made me feel very uncomfortable EVERY SINGLE TIME. I could share some interactions that I have been through but you probably would not believe them. Why are all of the sores located in the "inner-city"? Population, yea I know.
The Apple store isn't the answer for everything.
And in two years the patent that Google's business model is built upon is up, open and available to everyone.
I love patents! The idea is out there and 20 years later everyone gains from it.
I'm surprised I haven't seen a D.E.D. article focused on this.
And in two years the patent that Google's business model is built upon is up, open and available to everyone.
I love patents! The idea is out there and 20 years later everyone gains from it.
I'm surprised I haven't seen a D.E.D. article focused on this.
DED is pretty good at manufacturing hit pieces on the flimsiest of evidence, but I think even he might struggle to convince anyone that Google is doomed because this patent is expiring in 2017.
Nah, this is certainly a case of wait and see. It will be interesting. Not being able to Google a Google issue isn't unheard of.
It's not "cowardly character assination". It is just what it is. You're writing articles from your point of view and it's very far flung from reality, with a couple doses of history installed. Call a cat a cat.
Wow, this article makes so much sense. That is, if you ignore reality.
"Google is riding high, with a peak stock valuation and an army of devoted fans ready to explain why none of the problems the company is facing (including its clumsy transition to mobile) are actually problems. Companies that make money never stop making money, right?"
But wait you said they are making less money. And there are people who can say they are just fine, cause they are still making billions.
"Then there's Microsoft, which has been losing its fans like a data center after a catastrophic power system failure. Ten years ago, Microsoft was 'the Google,' making money so fast and furiously that nobody could imagine its fortunes ever changing. I remember arguing this possibility with the Internet, and being told (even by Apple fans) that I shouldn't say such things if I wanted to retain any credibility. Because change never happens, right?"
Seeing them gain major shares in the cloud computing arena and in Office 365, nope, they have all their business customers still there. Making more money than ever.
"I didn't predict that Microsoft would completely fail at mobile and be forced to watch Apple beat it in the enterprise."
You right, you didn't. You just wrote about it every time you could on your dumb blog.
"Apple had all sorts of technologies planned that it had been working on for years (including Copland and Taligent), in addition to having a crack team of scientists focused on inventing new stuff in its Advanced Technology Group, just like Google's jetpack, robot and self driving car labs today."
And?
"In 2006, Microsoft had also been making tons of money right up until Windows Vista sputtered into the market, bookended by PlaysForSure and Windows Mobile rolling over like overfed goldfish. Like the Old Apple, Microsoft similarly had lots of people and partnered vendors working on novel concepts and ideas, just not a lot of focused oversight."
Who is still making more money than ever, again.
"While Microsoft is clearly facing troubles, a lot of analysts are still making excuses for Google, suggesting that its attempt to copy the "commodity licensing" business model of Microsoft, albeit without collecting any licensing revenue, it still a genius move because (just you wait and see)."
Yeah, it is working great. Nevermind the fact that MS never gave away the OS until a few months ago, but go on.
"Never mind that advertising on mobile is not working out like advertising on the desktop PC browser. Google's ad profitability is dropping with each quarter, something that analysts like to excuse because "mobile ads work differently." But a larger problem is that while the PC desktop is plateauing, Google's control over the Android mobile platform is itself slipping."
Yeah, so they can't get as much money on mobile ads. The sky is falling. Not.
"While analysts are extremely concerned about Apple's share of mobile growth, and in particular its growth in China, they are only making excuses about Google's mobile performance and completely ignoring the fact that China has built its own version of Google services."
So what if they have - Google isn't going to run a bull shit run search engine just for communist china. Apple can take it all they want.
"It's only newsworthy when a Chinese company makes an off brand iPhone (that gains marketshare largely at the expense of Samsung, not Apple). When China makes off brand Google internet services that completely shut down Google's ability to make significant inroads into the vast Chinese market, well, Google didn't need China anyways!For 2013, Apple collected $171 billion (mostly from mobile) versus Google's $55.5 billion (mostly not from mobile)."
Poor google! Oh wait, they didn't get shut down, they left. More bull shit to follow!
"Instead, analysts like to talk about copies of Google's work forked by Amazon and Chinese manufacturers as if they benefit "Android," as if Android is a religion rather than a commercial enterprise, and Google is its supernatural deity rather than a more mundane sort of creator that actually has to pay for its ongoing development."
Who? More bullshit.
If Google cared about it, they'd not release the source. They don't care.
"Imagine if Apple 1994 had been valued based on the widespread proliferation of some form the "Mac desktop," even though the company wasn't making any licensing revenue from Microsoft Windows. Perhaps Apple stock wouldn't have tanked.
Or imagine if Apple today were accounted "market share" based on the ubiquitous use of WebKit, which Apple makes no licensing revenue from, rather than the sale of Apple's actual products, from which it makes more money than Google. For 2013, Apple collected $171 billion (mostly from mobile) versus Google's $55.5 billion (mostly not from mobile). Android is winning?"
Imagine some bull shit strawman for me to make it look like I'm making a point.
"Today's Apple provides a model of tech competency, with product and user interface designs that define fashion and inspire copying; with rapid, focused software development that even companies like Volkswagen want to emulate; with retail store operations that everyone from Microsoft to Samsung copy as closely as possible and with software app markets that Amazon, Google and Microsoft have all worked to duplicate."
Sure. What's ios7 trying to copy again? Hmm...
"Sound familiar? That's exactly the same kinds of problems Google is experiencing in its partnership with Samsung today, which represents the majority of Android sales and virtually all of its profits.Today, both Google and Microsoft are facing a new sort of commodity: their OSs. Both companies are now offering their software for free to any tablet makers who will use it."
Yes, too bad they kissed and made up. Kinda hurts your sensationalism when we consider, facts.
"Issues of which version of Android (or Tizen or maybe Chrome OS) is used and promoted, who gets to choose the UI and who benefits from it, whose apps and services get credited and actually installed have resulted in Samsung shipping mobile devices with multiple web browsers and multiple book, app and media stores while Google ships Samsung-built phones that don't even get Android updates over the buyer's two year contract. It's a mess."
Oh yes, let's refer to an article in 2011 that some dumbshit blogger made! Or we can actually look at today's Samsung SG3, a two year old handset, who just got updated to 4.4.2! Along with all of Moto's models from the past 2 years and even HTC!
"As a result, one of the leading enterprise cloud and services companies picked Apple as its mobile platform partner, not Microsoft and not Google. That's a profound reversal of fortune."
So what? Apple partnering with IBM says more about the sad state of IBM than MS or Google.
"Microsoft had enough competency left to have recognized (following the failure of PlaysForSure, Windows Mobile/Windows Phone, and Windows RT at the feet of iPod, iPhone and iPad) that it needed to stop what it was doing and instead begin copying Apple's finished product business model."
Wait, you aren't actually going to say they needed to copy apple to survive instead of doing what they really do best, own the enterprise?
"Google has similarly tried in vain to copy Apple's vertical business, spending billions to acquire Motorola while accomplishing nothing but bleeding additional billions in hardware losses, then turning around to pay additional billions for Nest. Google hasn't even been moderately successful at rebranding its partners' products as Nexus devices, which were aimed at 'fixing" the user interface and bloatware bundling mistakes that Android licensees were making."
More bull shit. They actually made money on the Motorola sale, and even turned a profit this past quarter with them. And they kept the patents for project Ara. Selling out of the Nexus 4 for months isn't a failure either.
"Google's Nexus strategy has worked out about as well as Apple's 1994 Mac cloning program: let us do all the design and support work but earn no money for it while eroding any ability to sell our own hardware at a profit. Genius!"
The nexus program is to actually develop android with hardware. Whatever.
"In parallel, to cover up Android's software development failures Google keeps inventing new versions of Android that "finally solve" its laggy performance and security flaws, over and over again.
Google says Android L's ART will "finally solve" lag, but that's also what it said of 2012's Android 4.1 Project Butter, which "finally solved" lag issues that Android fans had earlier announced were "finally solved" by Android 4.0's hardware accelerated UI "just like iPhone" back in 2011. Before that, everyone was loath to even admit Android lag existed.In parallel, to cover up Android's software development failures Google keeps inventing new versions of Android that "finally solve" its laggy performance and security flaws, over and over again."
Here's the prime bull shit for today! Daniel always thought Android "lagged" because it didn't have hardware accelerated gui elements. Turns out, like always, he was wrong. Then he praised apple for having such a system.
Oops, turned out, that was never the source of the lag, even though project butter did make things run smoother. But you didn't know that Daniel, did you? Because the reality is, you know jack shit about anything.
Tip Daniel, if "lag" is the only thing you have to complain about android, comparing it to Apple's still born OSes is again, bull shit. We know you hate Google because you know, they ran over you while on a motorcycle or they killed your cat or some other bull shit. The reality is, they are going nowhere. You might as well get used to MS and Google being around.
"The problem for Google's Android today is that, like Microsoft, it can't just acquire Jobs' modern operating system because Apple already did. And its own Copland-esque attempts to fix Android are too little, too late."
And they don't have to! Hell, apple even wanted to use Linux for the iphone before OSX won out!
"They're also increasingly focused on low end mobile devices, not profitable hardware. Google should ask the Old Apple about how well that strategy worked out for 1992-1997 low end Mac Performas."
How about it isn't about fucking profit when you want those who can't afford fucking $1000 iphones to have smartphones!
Did it occur to you the rest of the world doesn't subsidize the iphone and selling a cheap crap 8GB model in India isn't doing them any favors either?