In breaking news today, Alphabet mgmt for sub-section Google apologised profusely and deeply to Apple's late Steve Jobs for the bullshit it spewed about Flash for the past seven years.
Fandroids immediately took to their Windows PCs to rail against the unfairness of life, and to reassert the pseudo-communist 'open' superiority of the world's second most malware-friendly operating system. Many also questioned Apple for allowing Flash on Macs.
Meanwhile at AI, the dullest and least insightful article on the topic ever was posted, totally failing to provide either historical context or amusing witticisms. iSheep of the site were suitably unresponsive about such a 'last decade' topic.
In reality, most Android fans own Macbooks (a few own Linux machines) and despise Microsoft far more than they do Apple. They view Apple's disdain for Google and Android to be strange and regrettable and would have much preferred Google and Apple join forces against Microsoft - who used to be a real threat to Google's core search/ads business, and the need to defend themselves against Microsoft was what motivated Google to acquire/release Chrome, Android and ChromeOS in the first place, to prevent Microsoft from locking Google out of Internet Explorer and Windows - instead of embarking on the strange, years-long, mutually counterproductive and doomed to fail (as there was always going to be a midrange or low end market, and if Google and Android didn't fill it, Microsoft and Windows Mobile would have) war against Google and Android, and joining Microsoft in the process.
Had Apple joined forces with Google in the beginning, both would have succeeded, both would have been better for it and Microsoft would be severely weakened as a result. Instead, Apple implicitly joined their old foe Microsoft in what turned out to be a losing strategy, with both hoping that Google's failure would result in Microsoft supplanting Google in the low and midrange device market, and with Microsoft's apps and services replacing Google's. Claiming that it wasn't a tag-team is untenable, as both Ballmer-era Microsoft and Apple engaged in the tactic of trying to pressure and frighten Android manufacturers into abandoning Android using infringement lawsuits. Both Apple and Microsoft knew that the result of this would be for those manufacturers to be forced to adopt Windows for their phones and tablets, as no other viable option was available. Apple - for some reason - was willing to countenance (and in an indirect but very real way encourage) Microsoft and Windows as a frenemy in the mobile space but not Android and Google, even though Apple claims that BOTH infringed on their IP. (The difference: Apple actually sued Microsoft where they never did get around to suing Google.)
Result: instead of joining together and severely weakening Microsoft, Microsoft was able to retrench and successfully reinvent themselves as a multi-platform cloud software and services company who will increasingly compete with Apple down the line. And their attempts to crush Android was such a massive failure that Tim Cook went from trying to scare users away from Android over security and privacy issues in 2015 and 2016 to developing apps for Android like everybody else with a serious cloud software and services model - Apple's new direction - is going to. (Apple Music on Android was merely the first. iCloud for Android will follow, so will Maps and other more apps and services.)
But Apple's cloud and services direction (and VR too) means that they now have 2 big competitors in that space: Microsoft and Google, both of whom have far more experience and talent in those areas than Apple does. Had Apple chosen to openly partner with Google instead of secretly partnering with Microsoft in an attempt to kill Android off, Microsoft would be severely diminished and Apple would have a strategic partner instead of 2 strong, well funded, technically capable competitors. (As it is, IBM is Apple's strategic partner on services and ... good luck with that.) So like Nokia, Apple cast their lot with Microsoft instead of Google and lost. The fact that they didn't lose nearly as much as Nokia did doesn't change that.
That's the real story, whether Apple fans like it or not. Apple decided that they preferred that Microsoft get the low-end and midrange smartphone and tablet market instead of Google. Why? Maybe because iTunes was already on Windows; maybe because Microsoft Office was available on OS X ... who knows. We just know this: Apple chose the company with a bad CEO, an outdated product and business model and on the downswing (Microsoft) over a company with much better leadership with modern tech and a forward-looking business model. And you see the result: both Microsoft and Apple are now making apps for Android. Apple even open-sourced Swift in order to help facilitate cross-platform development of Android and iOS apps!
So please stop pretending otherwise. It was Apple - not Google or "fandroids" who started this war, and it was Apple who lost it. Case in point: remember how the success of Apple Pay was going to drive people to Android? Well, now Android Pay and Apple Pay have the same usage rates despite the Android smartwatches not supporting NFC, and only a tiny percentage of Android phones supporting NFC or fingerprint sensors (and despite Android Pay launching only a few months ago and being supported by only a fraction of the banks and credit unions that support Apple Pay):
http://www.luxurydaily.com/android-pay-apple-pay-reach-parity-as-mobile-pay-adoption-grows-report/
Guys, seriously. The war is over. Apple lost because they chose to team up with Microsoft against Google instead of Google against Microsoft. Time to admit it and move on.
You might want to consider paragraphs, among other formatting tips, to make your point(s) more readable.
As for the content, I have no agreement with any of your points or point of view, and find much of it factually inaccurate, but I'll let someone else with more free time on their hands dissect and comment on your post.
For the record, of the three parties that you mention, and you need to throw Facebook and Amazon into that mix, none has yet "lost" against the others as they all have strengths and weaknesses; there is no defined "finish line".
In breaking news today, Alphabet mgmt for sub-section Google apologised profusely and deeply to Apple's late Steve Jobs for the bullshit it spewed about Flash for the past seven years.
Fandroids immediately took to their Windows PCs to rail against the unfairness of life, and to reassert the pseudo-communist 'open' superiority of the world's second most malware-friendly operating system. Many also questioned Apple for allowing Flash on Macs.
Meanwhile at AI, the dullest and least insightful article on the topic ever was posted, totally failing to provide either historical context or amusing witticisms. iSheep of the site were suitably unresponsive about such a 'last decade' topic.
For years fandroids have been telling us it's a special feature that Apple's hardware/software is too weak to handle!!!!!!!!1
I work at Google.
Wow. Just wow. I had heard about the Reality Distortion Field, but I never really believed it until now. Do you guys ever read the rest of the Internet, or do you just stay on this site and jerk each other off?
1) Google hates Flash and has been working to destroy it for at least as long as Apple has, if not longer. Google doesn't own the entire eco-system, like Apple does, and can't make such just universal edicts as Apple can, or as quickly.
2) The reason Jobs cut Flash was not because Flash is ugly and has security holes. Jobs cut Flash because Adobe, which got it's start from Apple, was only focusing on the Windows version of Flash and the other versions of Flash were crap.
3) This is not the first action Google has taken against Flash. The iSheep are acting like Google just woke up this morning and suddenly saw the light. Google has been hacking away at Flash for as long as Apple has. Flash makes it much harder to index the contents of the Internet and Google has forever been pushing HTML5 over Flash. Google is just not willing to suddenly take the decision making away from its users. Apple is. And there are pros and cons to both approaches.
4) Google publicly bought the Android company and set out to get into the mobile phone business long before Apple announced the iPhone and long before Eric Schmidt was on the Apple board. Apple knew that Google was working on a phone long before Google knew that Apple was working on one. The first Android phone was announced shortly after the first iPhone. Saying that Android copied Apple because it was released a few months later is as ridiculous as saying that Apple copied the LG Prada because it was released the year before.
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone. The brilliant thing that Jobs did was line up all the parts manufacturers and make the phone that people had been asking for, rather than taking the safe route like the moron MBAs at mobile hardware companies. I bought the first iPhone and I loved it. Not because, "OMG I never imagined a phone could be like this!" but because, "Finally someone manufactured the phone we have all been asking for!"
5) No one ever said that Apple hardware/software was too weak to handle Flash. The Flash player for OX S and IOS just sucks because it was poorly written by Adobe. More than half of the engineers at Google use Apple product and love them.
6) The only people who like Flash are the people who write apps in it.
Wow. I mean wow. You people really need to get out to the rest of the Internet more often and learn something.
I will address two point, I do not believe #1, you are no better than the apple fan boys being from google and drinking its tea. Here is the reason I believe this, Google immediately add flash to Android and tried using it as the reason IOS was not good for consumers and Apple was bad for not including it. It was not until Google was loosing money on Ads from YouTube videos and such they began transcoding to support the Iphone.
The second point and this has been well documented, Steve made a hug issue of it becuase it made Mac operate slow this was in fact true, to the point where I had ad blocking software which would not allow flash based ads from loading, not to say PC were not also slowed down by flash they too were, but most PC could not even tell which thing was causing their issue. I would agree the security isssue was red herring, since mac were not the target of those exploits. Keep in mind that Adobe ignore this fact until Steve made a big stink about it, that is why we had hundreds of updates for flash since Steve made this publically known.
I will make one more point, Steve issue with google was not the fact they had android, since it was well known Google bought them, it was the fact that Google rewrote android to match what the iOS was at the time once they saw what the Iphone was. This is also a well documented fact. If google came out with Andriod as it was originally designed he would have not gone thermonuclear.
Unlike most of the people here include you, I used all these operating systems ever day, I was on android from day one until I could finally move away last year. I also worked in these industies for years and have seen what was going on from both sides.
I agree with your statement here
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone. The brilliant thing that Jobs did was line up all the parts manufacturers and make the phone that people had been asking for, rather than taking the safe route like the moron MBAs at mobile hardware companies.
This is true, there was nothing really new in the iphone other than the fact Steve pulled it all together and made it all work. Everyone thinks this is simple, but it is not. This is why steve was upset with Google about Android, they just copied what he did with no efforts of their own. Yeah Steve had barrow other peoples idea, what he took overs ideas and made them better and made them work. There is a fine line between copying and creating something better.
For years fandroids have been telling us it's a special feature that Apple's hardware/software is too weak to handle!!!!!!!!1
I work at Google.
Wow. Just wow. I had heard about the Reality Distortion Field, but I never really believed it until now. Do you guys ever read the rest of the Internet, or do you just stay on this site and jerk each other off?
1) Google hates Flash and has been working to destroy it for at least as long as Apple has, if not longer. Google doesn't own the entire eco-system, like Apple does, and can't make such just universal edicts as Apple can, or as quickly.
2) The reason Jobs cut Flash was not because Flash is ugly and has security holes. Jobs cut Flash because Adobe, which got it's start from Apple, was only focusing on the Windows version of Flash and the other versions of Flash were crap.
3) This is not the first action Google has taken against Flash. The iSheep are acting like Google just woke up this morning and suddenly saw the light. Google has been hacking away at Flash for as long as Apple has. Flash makes it much harder to index the contents of the Internet and Google has forever been pushing HTML5 over Flash. Google is just not willing to suddenly take the decision making away from its users. Apple is. And there are pros and cons to both approaches.
4) Google publicly bought the Android company and set out to get into the mobile phone business long before Apple announced the iPhone and long before Eric Schmidt was on the Apple board. Apple knew that Google was working on a phone long before Google knew that Apple was working on one. The first Android phone was announced shortly after the first iPhone. Saying that Android copied Apple because it was released a few months later is as ridiculous as saying that Apple copied the LG Prada because it was released the year before.
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone. The brilliant thing that Jobs did was line up all the parts manufacturers and make the phone that people had been asking for, rather than taking the safe route like the moron MBAs at mobile hardware companies. I bought the first iPhone and I loved it. Not because, "OMG I never imagined a phone could be like this!" but because, "Finally someone manufactured the phone we have all been asking for!"
5) No one ever said that Apple hardware/software was too weak to handle Flash. The Flash player for OX S and IOS just sucks because it was poorly written by Adobe. More than half of the engineers at Google use Apple product and love them.
6) The only people who like Flash are the people who write apps in it.
Wow. I mean wow. You people really need to get out to the rest of the Internet more often and learn something.
Well actually...
1) Google loved Flash because it was good for ads.
2) Jobs cut Flash because it wasn’t designed for touch/multitouch and it would be silly to rely on the Flash feature set to define what Apple’s next-gen device could do. Also the hardware inside iPhone was designed to hardware decode h.264 video. Flash video would chew up battery, which aside from security affected Macs too, laptops especially.
3) Google has kept flash in action as long as possible in their ad landscape alongside your ‘hacking away at Flash’ which brings to mind their attempt to rule the video codec universe with the patent infringing webm inside of HTML5.
4) Apple was working on their new breakthrough device long before Google acquired Android.
There were many many things in the iPhone never before done. High-res touch sensor, highly accurate accelerometer, ambient light sensor, mated to software to create multitouch, and a new GUI for very intuitive to control with inertial touch scrolling and adaptive software keyboard, auto switching wifi networks… just to name a few.
5) It was a big selling point of rival mobile devices that they could run Flash.
6) There was so much Flash out there. Government websites relied on it etc, etc. The point people used to pick up on in regards to iOS was Steve promised the full internet… but Flash wasn’t a good future technology. The writing was on the wall - not many knew that back then.
For years fandroids have been telling us it's a special feature that Apple's hardware/software is too weak to handle!!!!!!!!1
I work at Google.
Wow. Just wow. I had heard about the Reality Distortion Field, but I never really believed it until now. Do you guys ever read the rest of the Internet, or do you just stay on this site and jerk each other off?
So you work at Google and know the workings of your little corner of the company for the past little while. Have you followed the history of the industry at all over the past 10 years? I'll start the lesson...
1) Google hates Flash and has been working to destroy it for at least as long as Apple has, if not longer. Google doesn't own the entire eco-system, like Apple does, and can't make such just universal edicts as Apple can, or as quickly.
Maybe they do now, and likely there are people in the company who always have. However, you're forgetting that back when the iPhone was first introduced in 2007 and Jobs declared that it would never run Flash, shortly thereafter phone manufacturers using Android were touting Flash compatibility as a competitive advantage over the iPhone. So clearly there were people at Google helping to make this happen simply to try and "one-up" Apple. And, in doing so, they helped Flash stay alive for longer. This is the reason why people here are revelling in this news.
2) The reason Jobs cut Flash was not because Flash is ugly and has security holes. Jobs cut Flash because Adobe, which got it's start from Apple, was only focusing on the Windows version of Flash and the other versions of Flash were crap.
While true (Flash was better maintained on Windows at the time), that's not the reason. The reason is because the very foundation of Flash was built around the desktop PC architecture. The whole interaction paradigm used for Flash doesn't work well on a mobile device. And it assumes you have large amounts of memory, storage space, CPU power, and are plugged in to an electrical outlet (i.e. it wasn't optimized at all for the constraints of mobile devices at the time). All of that, combined with the security holes, made it clear that Flash had to go.
3) This is not the first action Google has taken against Flash. The iSheep are acting like Google just woke up this morning and suddenly saw the light. Google has been hacking away at Flash for as long as Apple has. Flash makes it much harder to index the contents of the Internet and Google has forever been pushing HTML5 over Flash. Google is just not willing to suddenly take the decision making away from its users. Apple is. And there are pros and cons to both approaches.
The problem is that they only took such a stance after the original strategy of making Flash a distinguishing feature of Android devices as compared to iPhones didn't pan out. If they were truly trying to do what's best for customers, they would have taken that stance to begin with. It's great they've been taking it for the past few years, but it's that initial decision which has left a bitter taste in the mouth of those who really understood why Flash needed to be left behind in the move to mobile devices.
4) Google publicly bought the Android company and set out to get into the mobile phone business long before Apple announced the iPhone and long before Eric Schmidt was on the Apple board. Apple knew that Google was working on a phone long before Google knew that Apple was working on one. The first Android phone was announced shortly after the first iPhone. Saying that Android copied Apple because it was released a few months later is as ridiculous as saying that Apple copied the LG Prada because it was released the year before.
It's a sorted and complex history which is complicated by the fact that Andy Rubin (founder of Android) tends to have a pretty cavalier attitude when it comes to using other people's technology:
That and the fact that the look and feel of Android prior to the iPhone's release (much more akin to Blackberry's UI) was quite a bit different than that afterwards. Rubin had all of the core OS technology pieces in place from his work with Danger and Android. And given the quick turnaround he did with the Android developer environment/SDK by incorporating the Dalvik VM to get around having to license Java, he's shown that he can move fast on things. So putting a new UI around the core OS in a short span of time isn't beyond the realm of possibility. Especially given that Rubin is very much an insider in the industry and surely would have heard rumours/details well before the iPhone was released.
Wow. I mean wow. You people really need to get out to the rest of the Internet more often and learn something.
And you really need to understand that, while there are a fair number of investors/fans here who simply follow Apple, there are also a number of people here who have worked in and followed the tech industry for a long time. But continue to believe that because you work for a tech company and have read a few articles on the internet, you know better than everyone around you.
I haven't seen a Flash display ad in a long time. Every once in awhile I see Flash used for video but for the most part it is already gone due primarily to its incompatibility with mobile devices. This is a total non-story in my opinion.
Do you guys ever read the rest of the Internet, or do you just stay on this site and jerk each other off?
So is this the official position of the Alphabet Corporation and its subsidiaries regarding its attitude toward potential products customers?
1) Google hates Flash and has been working to destroy it for at least as long as Apple has, if not longer.
No, not longer. No, hasn’t been.
Google doesn't own the entire eco-system, like Apple does, and can't make such just universal edicts as Apple can, or as quickly.
Maybe they should have thought about that, huh?
2) The reason Jobs cut Flash was not because Flash is ugly and has security holes. Jobs cut Flash because Adobe, which got it's start from Apple, was only focusing on the Windows version of Flash and the other versions of Flash were crap.
You’re sure? Particularly when this says otherwise?
Google has been hacking away at Flash for as long as Apple has.
Sure thing¡
Flash makes it much harder to index the contents of the Internet
Ah, so THAT’S why. No fucking wonder. I almost support Flash now. In fact, I almost support an ENTIRELY Flash Internet.
Google is just not willing to suddenly take the decision making away from its users.
Sensible chuckle.gif
4) Google publicly bought the Android company and set out to get into the mobile phone business long before Apple announced the iPhone
YEAH, AND YOUR SACK OF SHIT WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A BLACKBERRY CLONE UNTIL YOU DECIDED TO CLONE APPLE’S WORK.
…LG Prada…
Holy fuck, you need to phone home and get the updated trolling points from your handlers. They abandoned that canard YEARS ago.
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone.
Except, you know, everything.
Wow. I mean wow.
Are you going to spout off something about it being “THE CURRENT YEAR”, too? Mindless drones, all of you. Learn what objective truth is.
Wow. Just wow. I had heard about the Reality Distortion Field, but I never really believed it until now. Do you guys ever read the rest of the Internet, or do you just stay on this site and jerk each other off?
1) Google hates Flash and has been working to destroy it for at least as long as Apple has, if not longer. Google doesn't own the entire eco-system, like Apple does, and can't make such just universal edicts as Apple can, or as quickly.
2) The reason Jobs cut Flash was not because Flash is ugly and has security holes. Jobs cut Flash because Adobe, which got it's start from Apple, was only focusing on the Windows version of Flash and the other versions of Flash were crap.
3) This is not the first action Google has taken against Flash. The iSheep are acting like Google just woke up this morning and suddenly saw the light. Google has been hacking away at Flash for as long as Apple has. Flash makes it much harder to index the contents of the Internet and Google has forever been pushing HTML5 over Flash. Google is just not willing to suddenly take the decision making away from its users. Apple is. And there are pros and cons to both approaches.
4) Google publicly bought the Android company and set out to get into the mobile phone business long before Apple announced the iPhone and long before Eric Schmidt was on the Apple board. Apple knew that Google was working on a phone long before Google knew that Apple was working on one. The first Android phone was announced shortly after the first iPhone. Saying that Android copied Apple because it was released a few months later is as ridiculous as saying that Apple copied the LG Prada because it was released the year before.
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone. The brilliant thing that Jobs did was line up all the parts manufacturers and make the phone that people had been asking for, rather than taking the safe route like the moron MBAs at mobile hardware companies. I bought the first iPhone and I loved it. Not because, "OMG I never imagined a phone could be like this!" but because, "Finally someone manufactured the phone we have all been asking for!"
5) No one ever said that Apple hardware/software was too weak to handle Flash. The Flash player for OX S and IOS just sucks because it was poorly written by Adobe. More than half of the engineers at Google use Apple product and love them.
6) The only people who like Flash are the people who write apps in it.
Wow. I mean wow. You people really need to get out to the rest of the Internet more often and learn something.
Wow! Hey mister Google employee (insert eyeroll), Google is working so hard to destroy Flash? So when is google themselves, going to stop using Flash in their own google content pages?
Yes, Google was trying to get rid of Flash from day one. Certainly from at least five years ago. But rather than just chop it out completely, they realized that a huge portion of the Internet used it, so they were pushing for a gradual transition to HTML 5. And it's been working. If individual hardware manufacturers were touting Flash compatibility, take it up with them.
No, I don't speak for Google. That doesn't mean I don't have an opinion.
What is it that you think Google blatantly copied from the iPhone to Android? Rounded corners and a touchscreen? That's hardware, not Android, and those things were already on the market. And array of icons? Those were already on desktops. Multi-touch gestures? Anyone who's seen Minority Report knows that Apple didn't "invent" that. Apple had the guts to put together the package that people wanted, Apple was first to market with the complete package, and Apple has been richly rewarded, having been catapulted to the position of most valuable company in the world with $200B in the bank. At best, Android copied a few things from the same places that Apple copied them, just as Apple copied some of the same things that Android copied.
I love Apple. I have an Apple laptop. Best UI there is, bar none. I owned the iPhones 1 and 3 and thought they were great. Except Android let me get stuff done faster by not dumbing down the UI, so I switched. I think Apple is an amazing innovator and industry leader. Steve Jobs was revered at Google, and his death was one of the few times when Google posted a memorial on their front page. But Apple didn't invent any of those things. They packaged them up the right way.
But rather than just chop it out completely, they realized that a huge portion of the Internet used it, so they were pushing for a gradual transition to HTML 5.
And yet Apple managed to do it without problem.
No, I don't speak for Google.
Then why does working for them mean anything?
What is it that you think Google blatantly copied from the iPhone to Android?
Cute.
I love Apple. I have…
Adorable.
But…
Saccharine.
They packaged them up the right way.
Marvin, et. al., please let this be his last post here. 1999 called. They want their “Apple only does marketing” garbage back.
For years fandroids have been telling us it's a special feature that Apple's hardware/software is too weak to handle!!!!!!!!1
I work at Google.
Wow. Just wow. I had heard about the Reality Distortion Field, but I never really believed it until now. Do you guys ever read the rest of the Internet, or do you just stay on this site and jerk each other off?
1) Google hates Flash and has been working to destroy it for at least as long as Apple has, if not longer. Google doesn't own the entire eco-system, like Apple does, and can't make such just universal edicts as Apple can, or as quickly.
2) The reason Jobs cut Flash was not because Flash is ugly and has security holes. Jobs cut Flash because Adobe, which got it's start from Apple, was only focusing on the Windows version of Flash and the other versions of Flash were crap.
3) This is not the first action Google has taken against Flash. The iSheep are acting like Google just woke up this morning and suddenly saw the light. Google has been hacking away at Flash for as long as Apple has. Flash makes it much harder to index the contents of the Internet and Google has forever been pushing HTML5 over Flash. Google is just not willing to suddenly take the decision making away from its users. Apple is. And there are pros and cons to both approaches.
4) Google publicly bought the Android company and set out to get into the mobile phone business long before Apple announced the iPhone and long before Eric Schmidt was on the Apple board. Apple knew that Google was working on a phone long before Google knew that Apple was working on one. The first Android phone was announced shortly after the first iPhone. Saying that Android copied Apple because it was released a few months later is as ridiculous as saying that Apple copied the LG Prada because it was released the year before.
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone. The brilliant thing that Jobs did was line up all the parts manufacturers and make the phone that people had been asking for, rather than taking the safe route like the moron MBAs at mobile hardware companies. I bought the first iPhone and I loved it. Not because, "OMG I never imagined a phone could be like this!" but because, "Finally someone manufactured the phone we have all been asking for!"
5) No one ever said that Apple hardware/software was too weak to handle Flash. The Flash player for OX S and IOS just sucks because it was poorly written by Adobe. More than half of the engineers at Google use Apple product and love them.
6) The only people who like Flash are the people who write apps in it.
Wow. I mean wow. You people really need to get out to the rest of the Internet more often and learn something.
We've found an actual Googler here... watch out! He's foaming at the mouth!
So… less time than Apple. And yet Apple managed to do it without problem. Then why does working for them mean anything? Cute. Adorable. Saccharine. Marvin, et. al., please let this be his last post here. 1999 called. They want their “Apple only does marketing” garbage back.
For years fandroids have been telling us it's a special feature that Apple's hardware/software is too weak to handle!!!!!!!!1
Wow. Just wow. I had heard about the Reality Distortion Field, but I never really believed it until now. Do you guys ever read the rest of the Internet, or do you just stay on this site and jerk each other off?
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone. The brilliant thing that Jobs did was line up all the parts manufacturers and make the phone that people had been asking for, rather than taking the safe route like the moron MBAs at mobile hardware companies. I bought the first iPhone and I loved it. Not because, "OMG I never imagined a phone could be like this!" but because, "Finally someone manufactured the phone we have all been asking for!"
Pot calling the kettle black : You need to check your own revisionist history making
"There nothing in the iPhone that hasn't ben done before on some other phone>"
If you means the actual components in side the phone you may be right but come on , you know perfectly well that when the iPhone came out there was a chorus so loud saying it was:
1) Over priced 2) couldn't exist without a hardware keyboard 3) was a toy for mac fanboys
etc etc.
No other phone before it was able to: 1) do smooth scrolling 2) non sequential voicemail 3) a real desktop quality browser, with real pinch to zoom
to name a few
All the phones on the market completely failed at most of these and were unable to match it in performance and Battery life.
So please stop it with your obvious lies. Do you actually remember the default phones back then? Feature phones with tiny screen with that ridiculous outmoded Symbian OS.
For years fandroids have been telling us it's a special feature that Apple's hardware/software is too weak to handle!!!!!!!!1
I work at Google.
...
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone. The brilliant thing that Jobs did was line up all the parts manufacturers and make the phone that people had been asking for, rather than taking the safe route like the moron MBAs at mobile hardware companies. I bought the first iPhone and I loved it. Not because, "OMG I never imagined a phone could be like this!" but because, "Finally someone manufactured the phone we have all been asking for!"
....
Wow. I mean wow. You people really need to get out to the rest of the Internet more often and learn something.
I hope for Google's sake, you don't.
So, the iPhone wasn't unique because it actually was a completely unseen before configuration and so, err, unique. So "Hotel California" (the song) wasn't unique (and unheard off before) because it sounded like 5 or 10 other song styles before it (this was an actual comment at the time, but now we all know better).
Everyone - including Google - was dabbling at the time with tiny cumbersome, awkward, ugly (did I mention ugly) 'froebel' hardware keyboards with tiny - sometimes touch - screens behind deforming transparent plastic with horrendously bad software.
When Apple (I mean Steve jobs) demonstrated the iPhone everyone (yes, Google also) saw instantly - but after the fact - that that was the new direction and switched policy accordingly. Not mentioning this is lying. People who didn't see Steve Jobs demonstration dismissed a virtual keyboard on a glass touch screen as preposterous and an instant failure. Apple was being laughed of the planet because of it. It's now clear who's being laughed of the planet, but it seems no one can remember they dismissed it at the time. No one wanted the iPhone before it was demonstrated; it's like an interior decorator demonstration the new living room and the owner reacts "that's exactly how I wanted it" ... right.
The only distortion I see is in your mind, but your not even aware of that.
So… less time than Apple. And yet Apple managed to do it without problem. Then why does working for them mean anything? Cute. Adorable. Saccharine. Marvin, et. al., please let this be his last post here. 1999 called. They want their “Apple only does marketing” garbage back.
But Apple didn't invent any of those things. They packaged them up the right way.
If you break any major invention down into it's component parts, you'll find that it's built from ideas which came before it. Nothing is created in a vacuum.
The problem with this way of looking at things is that it dismisses the work done to put those component parts together into a product which is intuitive and simple to use by average people. Engineers tend to see this work as "obvious", but yet they come up with so many products that frustrate people. If it's such an obvious thing to do, then there should be far more well designed products out there.
One other thing to consider in all of this is that, even though Apple doesn't invent a lot of the technology used in their products, they do go through the proper channels to obtain or license the rights to that technology. Which is more than can be said for the approach taken by Mr. Rubin in the development of Android. Respect the work of others.
Comments
As for the content, I have no agreement with any of your points or point of view, and find much of it factually inaccurate, but I'll let someone else with more free time on their hands dissect and comment on your post.
For the record, of the three parties that you mention, and you need to throw Facebook and Amazon into that mix, none has yet "lost" against the others as they all have strengths and weaknesses; there is no defined "finish line".
okay that made me laugh
I will address two point, I do not believe #1, you are no better than the apple fan boys being from google and drinking its tea. Here is the reason I believe this, Google immediately add flash to Android and tried using it as the reason IOS was not good for consumers and Apple was bad for not including it. It was not until Google was loosing money on Ads from YouTube videos and such they began transcoding to support the Iphone.
The second point and this has been well documented, Steve made a hug issue of it becuase it made Mac operate slow this was in fact true, to the point where I had ad blocking software which would not allow flash based ads from loading, not to say PC were not also slowed down by flash they too were, but most PC could not even tell which thing was causing their issue. I would agree the security isssue was red herring, since mac were not the target of those exploits. Keep in mind that Adobe ignore this fact until Steve made a big stink about it, that is why we had hundreds of updates for flash since Steve made this publically known.
I will make one more point, Steve issue with google was not the fact they had android, since it was well known Google bought them, it was the fact that Google rewrote android to match what the iOS was at the time once they saw what the Iphone was. This is also a well documented fact. If google came out with Andriod as it was originally designed he would have not gone thermonuclear.
Unlike most of the people here include you, I used all these operating systems ever day, I was on android from day one until I could finally move away last year. I also worked in these industies for years and have seen what was going on from both sides.
I agree with your statement here
There's nothing in the iPhone that hadn't already been done before on some other phone. The brilliant thing that Jobs did was line up all the parts manufacturers and make the phone that people had been asking for, rather than taking the safe route like the moron MBAs at mobile hardware companies.
This is true, there was nothing really new in the iphone other than the fact Steve pulled it all together and made it all work. Everyone thinks this is simple, but it is not. This is why steve was upset with Google about Android, they just copied what he did with no efforts of their own. Yeah Steve had barrow other peoples idea, what he took overs ideas and made them better and made them work. There is a fine line between copying and creating something better.
Well actually...
1) Google loved Flash because it was good for ads.
2) Jobs cut Flash because it wasn’t designed for touch/multitouch and it would be silly to rely on the Flash feature set to define what Apple’s next-gen device could do. Also the hardware inside iPhone was designed to hardware decode h.264 video. Flash video would chew up battery, which aside from security affected Macs too, laptops especially.
3) Google has kept flash in action as long as possible in their ad landscape alongside your ‘hacking away at Flash’ which brings to mind their attempt to rule the video codec universe with the patent infringing webm inside of HTML5.
4) Apple was working on their new breakthrough device long before Google acquired Android.
There were many many things in the iPhone never before done. High-res touch sensor, highly accurate accelerometer, ambient light sensor, mated to software to create multitouch, and a new GUI for very intuitive to control with inertial touch scrolling and adaptive software keyboard, auto switching wifi networks… just to name a few.
5) It was a big selling point of rival mobile devices that they could run Flash.
6) There was so much Flash out there. Government websites relied on it etc, etc. The point people used to pick up on in regards to iOS was Steve promised the full internet… but Flash wasn’t a good future technology. The writing was on the wall - not many knew that back then.
Maybe they do now, and likely there are people in the company who always have. However, you're forgetting that back when the iPhone was first introduced in 2007 and Jobs declared that it would never run Flash, shortly thereafter phone manufacturers using Android were touting Flash compatibility as a competitive advantage over the iPhone. So clearly there were people at Google helping to make this happen simply to try and "one-up" Apple. And, in doing so, they helped Flash stay alive for longer. This is the reason why people here are revelling in this news.
While true (Flash was better maintained on Windows at the time), that's not the reason. The reason is because the very foundation of Flash was built around the desktop PC architecture. The whole interaction paradigm used for Flash doesn't work well on a mobile device. And it assumes you have large amounts of memory, storage space, CPU power, and are plugged in to an electrical outlet (i.e. it wasn't optimized at all for the constraints of mobile devices at the time). All of that, combined with the security holes, made it clear that Flash had to go.
The problem is that they only took such a stance after the original strategy of making Flash a distinguishing feature of Android devices as compared to iPhones didn't pan out. If they were truly trying to do what's best for customers, they would have taken that stance to begin with. It's great they've been taking it for the past few years, but it's that initial decision which has left a bitter taste in the mouth of those who really understood why Flash needed to be left behind in the move to mobile devices.
It's a sorted and complex history which is complicated by the fact that Andy Rubin (founder of Android) tends to have a pretty cavalier attitude when it comes to using other people's technology:
http://www.fosspatents.com/2011/11/googles-five-failed-attempts-to-give.html
That and the fact that the look and feel of Android prior to the iPhone's release (much more akin to Blackberry's UI) was quite a bit different than that afterwards. Rubin had all of the core OS technology pieces in place from his work with Danger and Android. And given the quick turnaround he did with the Android developer environment/SDK by incorporating the Dalvik VM to get around having to license Java, he's shown that he can move fast on things. So putting a new UI around the core OS in a short span of time isn't beyond the realm of possibility. Especially given that Rubin is very much an insider in the industry and surely would have heard rumours/details well before the iPhone was released.
And you really need to understand that, while there are a fair number of investors/fans here who simply follow Apple, there are also a number of people here who have worked in and followed the tech industry for a long time. But continue to believe that because you work for a tech company and have read a few articles on the internet, you know better than everyone around you.
Edit, actually, I forgot: cudos to Google!
So is this the official position of the Alphabet Corporation and its subsidiaries regarding its attitude toward potential products customers?
No, not longer. No, hasn’t been.
Maybe they should have thought about that, huh?
You’re sure? Particularly when this says otherwise?
Sure thing¡
Ah, so THAT’S why. No fucking wonder. I almost support Flash now. In fact, I almost support an ENTIRELY Flash Internet.
Sensible chuckle.gif
YEAH, AND YOUR SACK OF SHIT WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A BLACKBERRY CLONE UNTIL YOU DECIDED TO CLONE APPLE’S WORK.
Holy fuck, you need to phone home and get the updated trolling points from your handlers. They abandoned that canard YEARS ago.
Except, you know, everything.
Are you going to spout off something about it being “THE CURRENT YEAR”, too? Mindless drones, all of you. Learn what objective truth is.
Google is working so hard to destroy Flash?
So when is google themselves, going to stop using Flash in their own google content pages?
No, I don't speak for Google. That doesn't mean I don't have an opinion.
What is it that you think Google blatantly copied from the iPhone to Android? Rounded corners and a touchscreen? That's hardware, not Android, and those things were already on the market. And array of icons? Those were already on desktops. Multi-touch gestures? Anyone who's seen Minority Report knows that Apple didn't "invent" that. Apple had the guts to put together the package that people wanted, Apple was first to market with the complete package, and Apple has been richly rewarded, having been catapulted to the position of most valuable company in the world with $200B in the bank. At best, Android copied a few things from the same places that Apple copied them, just as Apple copied some of the same things that Android copied.
I love Apple. I have an Apple laptop. Best UI there is, bar none. I owned the iPhones 1 and 3 and thought they were great. Except Android let me get stuff done faster by not dumbing down the UI, so I switched. I think Apple is an amazing innovator and industry leader. Steve Jobs was revered at Google, and his death was one of the few times when Google posted a memorial on their front page. But Apple didn't invent any of those things. They packaged them up the right way.
And yet Apple managed to do it without problem.
Then why does working for them mean anything?
Cute.
Adorable.
Saccharine.
Marvin, et. al., please let this be his last post here. 1999 called. They want their “Apple only does marketing” garbage back.
"There nothing in the iPhone that hasn't ben done before on some other phone>"
If you means the actual components in side the phone you may be right but come on , you know perfectly well that when the iPhone came out there was a chorus so loud saying it was:
1) Over priced
2) couldn't exist without a hardware keyboard
3) was a toy for mac fanboys
etc etc.
No other phone before it was able to:
1) do smooth scrolling
2) non sequential voicemail
3) a real desktop quality browser, with real pinch to zoom
to name a few
All the phones on the market completely failed at most of these and were unable to match it in performance and Battery life.
So please stop it with your obvious lies. Do you actually remember the default phones back then? Feature phones with tiny screen with that ridiculous outmoded Symbian OS.
So, the iPhone wasn't unique because it actually was a completely unseen before configuration and so, err, unique. So "Hotel California" (the song) wasn't unique (and unheard off before) because it sounded like 5 or 10 other song styles before it (this was an actual comment at the time, but now we all know better).
Everyone - including Google - was dabbling at the time with tiny cumbersome, awkward, ugly (did I mention ugly) 'froebel' hardware keyboards with tiny - sometimes touch - screens behind deforming transparent plastic with horrendously bad software.
When Apple (I mean Steve jobs) demonstrated the iPhone everyone (yes, Google also) saw instantly - but after the fact - that that was the new direction and switched policy accordingly.
Not mentioning this is lying.
People who didn't see Steve Jobs demonstration dismissed a virtual keyboard on a glass touch screen as preposterous and an instant failure. Apple was being laughed of the planet because of it.
It's now clear who's being laughed of the planet, but it seems no one can remember they dismissed it at the time.
No one wanted the iPhone before it was demonstrated; it's like an interior decorator demonstration the new living room and the owner reacts "that's exactly how I wanted it" ... right.
The only distortion I see is in your mind, but your not even aware of that.
If you break any major invention down into it's component parts, you'll find that it's built from ideas which came before it. Nothing is created in a vacuum.
The problem with this way of looking at things is that it dismisses the work done to put those component parts together into a product which is intuitive and simple to use by average people. Engineers tend to see this work as "obvious", but yet they come up with so many products that frustrate people. If it's such an obvious thing to do, then there should be far more well designed products out there.
One other thing to consider in all of this is that, even though Apple doesn't invent a lot of the technology used in their products, they do go through the proper channels to obtain or license the rights to that technology. Which is more than can be said for the approach taken by Mr. Rubin in the development of Android. Respect the work of others.