PDA

View Full Version : Google vs. iPhone: Is Steve Jobs Reliving Past Mistakes?


MacBytes
Sep 24, 2008, 04:44 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Google vs. iPhone: Is Steve Jobs Reliving Past Mistakes? (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20080924174442)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Kilamite
Sep 24, 2008, 04:53 PM
Nothing really new - just what we had been debating here for a while, since the first app got rejected.

I can't comment on my views on the G1 phone without having actually tried it - but it looks not very pleasing, and it doesn't run OS X (obviously) so I'm still full on in getting an iPhone once my T-Mobile contract runs out.

I think it will be very interesting to see how much of a boom there is with developing for the G1 and how having an open system will affect security and so on. And also, if the G1's App Store becomes successful, what Apple will do to keep ahead in the market.

ArtOfWarfare
Sep 24, 2008, 05:18 PM
I think some people are blowing Apple's rejections a bit out of proportion.

... of course as a developer I also fear being rejected... it would be very nice if Apple clarified the rules.

IJ Reilly
Sep 24, 2008, 05:20 PM
Yeah, this guy is good at "pattern recognition" alright. He's good at recognizing the pattern of errors made by other journalists and repeating them uncritically. For one:

The key to the PC's success and Apple's downfall was that the open-standards-based IBM-compatible PC created a platform for third-party hardware and softwaremakers to ply their stuff.

Oh really? In what way was the IBM-PC based on "open standards?" In what way did Apple discourage hardware or softwaremakers [sic] from creating "stuff" for the Mac platform? The other inconvenient historical fact this guy either forgot or doesn't know is that the IBM-PC followed the Apple II but preceded the Mac. So what is he actually talking about here? We don't know, because apparently he doesn't either.

For another:

The iPhone is more open than Apple's computers.

What does this mean? Nothing, as far as I can determine.

And finally,

And unlike Apple, which listens only to Jobs, these manufacturers will be listening to the market.

Right, Apple doesn't listen to market. Like, obviously.

ArtursBoy
Sep 24, 2008, 05:50 PM
Personally I see valid points to both sides of the argument ( Open source Android platform VS closed source Apple OS platform ). For developers is the limitations Apple imposes on them vs the freedom Android gives them. But for consumers, at least from my point of view, is the filtering by Apple of programs that are good enough to be approved vs those who are not. Now this may not always be the case, such as those example of someone developing an application that competes with something Apple is already offering.

As a consumer and not a developer, I feel as thought Apple is "trying" to act in my behalf by imposing some type of quality control in the applications it allows developers to offer for the iPhone. Has anyone noticed how much an application gets criticized for its lack of functionality or stability?? Imagine if nothing was controlled. Also, the fact that an application needs to be "approved" by Apple may push a developer to write something worthy of being approved, that plus the potential sales revenue from selling the application I think is a good incentive for developers to come out with good products.

If you think about it, the lack of control of the applications offered for the Android platform has a huge appeal to those wanting to write malicious codes for the phone. I mean what's gonna stop someone from writing spyware or viruses for the Android platform ? Are we going to start needing to use Antispyware and Antivirus programs on our Android phones? While Apple's restrictions in its approval process may not ultimately be able to guarantee 100 percent protection from malicious code, I believe it most certainly will reduce the chances of that happening dramatically.

SandynJosh
Sep 24, 2008, 05:51 PM
Quote:
And unlike Apple, which listens only to Jobs, these (Android) manufacturers will be listening to the market.
-------------------------------------------------
I think Apple did an excellent job of listening to what the market wanted and the G3 is the result. Of course, there are things that can be improved and added, but the extent that they bumped up the feature set so much on the second pass is, in itself, remarkable.

Now, if AT&T can only bring their phone system up to par and get their pricing more in line, then the casual phone user would be more tempted to use the iPhone. As it stands now, Apple/AT&T is satisfying the enterprise market so well that the Blackberry is running to catch up and the Android is not even positioned to be in that race.

Furthermore, I see Apple as trying to lead the market, not follow it, so there may be some killer features to come that will keep Android and the others off balance for a while to come. These may well be features that the market doesn't yet know it wants.

Apple said they intend to have a slimmer profit margin this coming year. That sounds a lot like planning on buying some market share as well. Between aggressive prices and quickly moving the stakes, Apple will be making the competition move faster than they can just to stay slightly sub-par.

severe
Sep 24, 2008, 06:29 PM
Google vs. iPhone: Is Steve Jobs Reliving Past Mistakes?

No.

ianogden
Sep 24, 2008, 06:31 PM
I think this article explains the situation very well. Microsoft made shrewd business deals with IBM and managed to get its software on lots of computers, be they good or be they bad. There was no quality control.

It seems to me that Apple is so passionate about their products that they wouldn't want to see their stunning Mac OSX on a beige shoebox in a crummy house somewhere. I think that shows an integrity in their brand and in their products and it shows a lot of faith that they have in their designs and their implementation.

As far as the Android goes, I can't see the advantages in it. Maybe the physical keyboard will be better than the iPhone's touch keyboard, which I have been frustrated with at times, but none-the-less, I'd rather have Mac OSX on my phone, that a Google branded operating system. Maybe I'm biased.

In terms of Apple application handling, I agree with the quality control arguments. Apple is monitoring the software that is available because they want the best for their customers. This tells me a lot about them as a business. Android seems to be a device for developers rather than consumers, and that hints a trouble to me. I love the iPhone OS, its sleek and minimalist, maybe a bit slow at times, but it works! I wouldn't want to find a virus on my iPhone one day and end up with a pretty glass brick.

In any case, I don't see a major product release in the iPhone, I merely see an iPhone competitor that will soon be prone to bugs, overload, plus the G1 isn't a very nice device to looks at, or use. Multi-touch isn't there, and from the video I watched, the presenter couldn't really use it and the demo app was a blue dot!

I like google, but I think it should stick to Maps and internet search...

donga
Sep 24, 2008, 06:43 PM
Google vs. iPhone: Is Steve Jobs Reliving Past Mistakes?

i hope not. apple did mess up big time with its handling of developers and their apps though

IJ Reilly
Sep 24, 2008, 07:06 PM
A problem (among many) with this article and some of the comments is that the word "open" is thrown around with any definition of its meaning, let alone its implications.

For instance, the fact that Android is "open source" means nothing in the context of whether Google licenses it to multiple hardware makers. The big difference isn't "openness" at all -- it's the variety of hardware configurations where we're likely to see it implemented. A good or bad thing? That's a matter of opinion, but "open" by any definition has nothing to do with it.

MacNut
Sep 24, 2008, 07:22 PM
If the providers that will sell Android can keep the prices below AT&T I think they can make a dent. Don't forget that a lot of the networks will have Android based phones, not just T Mobile.

LtRammstein
Sep 25, 2008, 12:16 AM
I've been an Apple fanboi all my life, and I see the Android as a Google failure, not a potential Apple failure.

For one, developers can make whatever they want on it! I bet you anything that Google has "protected" their code and the person's personal data, but that doesn't mean it's so well protected that no one's information is going to go on to the Internet. Besides, Slashdot reported a few months back that Google was basing their OS off some old APIs that has really major security flaws in it. I bet they patched it well, but see how Google employee trends (leaving the company for another) go, I don't think they got everything.

Two, from the videos I've seen, you can make an "addon" to any application on the phone. Cool idea... Not really. If I made an application for Android and I wanted to make money on it, I would lock it down hard! I would not allow any addons unless it was specifically, asked, then just charge a small fee for it when it's done. Apple has a done a great job to make sure the developer's code is theirs, and to make all updates free. On Android, I see it turning into "who can take T-Mobile customers to the cleaners first?" I'm a part-time developer, and I support Open Source, so my stuff would be open to that.

Finally, the functionality of the phone is far worse! No multi-touch screen, it's glitchy at best (usually because of hardware), PHYSICAL QWERTY KEYBOARD, no graphics capabilities of the iPhone! I like the touch screen of the iPhone and it's keyboard. I have a PC friend who can't get it through their mind that it's easier to type on there than any other damn phone. When I mean graphics of the phone, I mean the smooth motion of objects.

The only plus side I see to the phone is it's 3 megapixel camera.

I give T-Mobile and Google my best, but I think they are going to struggle with the phone until the get a lot of the hardware parts upgraded. Mainly, faster processor, more RAM, bigger HD capacity (expandable to 8GB... Say good bye to battery life), screen is not as nice as iPhone's.

LeviG
Sep 25, 2008, 06:44 AM
Personally I'm not a big fan of the iPhone, I think its underspecified for the money and missing a few features I would want etc but thats besides the point. The app store in some ways is better than the google approach in that its regulated and you shouldn't get any dodgy apps, the problem is with the current clarity of the regulations regarding apps which needs to be sorted out sharpish, once thats done it should be good, even itunes has improved on windows since v8 so its going in the right direction as an infrastructure :)

Now android in my view has more potential than the iPhone in that its open and can be used as we want to, it does have some issues in that you could get spyware etc but it also allows us to install anything we want to.
I think the app store is a less polished affair being that its only on the phone and theres also no desktop sync app, its all done online (not sure I want google having all my info like that).

As to the devices, the g1 is ugly as sin but I don't think much of the iPhone either. Neither have a stylus by the looks of it and this makes it pretty useless for drawing quick maps (something which is handy on symbian and wm5/6).

If google or another android manufacturer can make a phone which is pretty stylish and can work with both pen and finger (which it can be due to open nature), has a decent range of installed apps and theres a desktop app created then I think that the mobile market would be seriously shaken up but at present can't see either as being as big a seller as they could have been.

rdowns
Sep 25, 2008, 06:50 AM
These seem to be the same old tired arguments trotted out when the iPod was released. Seems Apple did OK there. We've had 39 iPod killers but none could even get arrested for a misdemeanor. :D

reverie
Sep 25, 2008, 06:54 AM
The PC didn't win over the Mac because it offered a huge selection of ugly boxes and lower quality. Why would that make any sense? Customers will alway prefer beautiful and functional products. It won for 2 main reasons:

1. IBM was the dominant brand in computing
2. It was significantly cheaper.

So how could this threat Apple today? There's no brand bigger than Apple's AND the iPhone is already cheap! People have to realize that Steve Jobs did not repeat John Scully's mistake from the 80s. The Mac was really, really expensive, but the iPod is not and neither is the iPhone.

mainstreetmark
Sep 25, 2008, 07:57 AM
"The iPhone is more open than Apple's computers"

Well, clearly this guy is mis-informed as to what open means. Macs have a closed hardware-operatingsystem model. The iphone also has this. Anyone can write and distribute anything they want for the Mac, to anyone they want to.

The iPhone? Not so much...

But, for the time being, I can understand why. If Apple lets people install whatever crap they want from whomever they want, the odds are high that some crappy, battery-hogging software will make it on there, and Apple gets to pay to support it. After all, the iPhone runs on batteries all day, whereas on a Mac, a bad app simply gets tossed and you're on your way.

IJ Reilly
Sep 25, 2008, 10:32 AM
These seem to be the same old tired arguments trotted out when the iPod was released. Seems Apple did OK there. We've had 39 iPod killers but none could even get arrested for a misdemeanor. :D

Perfect! :)

The PC didn't win over the Mac because it offered a huge selection of ugly boxes and lower quality. Why would that make any sense? Customers will alway prefer beautiful and functional products. It won for 2 main reasons:

1. IBM was the dominant brand in computing
2. It was significantly cheaper.

This was also a one-time event which will never be repeated. When IBM farmed out the OS for the IBM-PC to Microsoft, they had no thoughts about allowing the hardware to be cloned. This was something others figured out how to do without violating IBM's copyrights. The result was far from deliberate on IBM's part. Still all these years later, some clueless journalists write as though it was, and compound their error by calling the PC "open" -- something it was never intended to be, by any definition.

swordfish5736
Sep 25, 2008, 02:20 PM
The app store was also a result of apple listenin to what the consumer wanted

Quote:
And unlike Apple, which listens only to Jobs, these (Android) manufacturers will be listening to the market.
-------------------------------------------------
I think Apple did an excellent job of listening to what the market wanted and the G3 is the result. Of course, there are things that can be improved and added, but the extent that they bumped up the feature set so much on the second pass is, in itself, remarkable.

Now, if AT&T can only bring their phone system up to par and get their pricing more in line, then the casual phone user would be more tempted to use the iPhone. As it stands now, Apple/AT&T is satisfying the enterprise market so well that the Blackberry is running to catch up and the Android is not even positioned to be in that race.

Furthermore, I see Apple as trying to lead the market, not follow it, so there may be some killer features to come that will keep Android and the others off balance for a while to come. These may well be features that the market doesn't yet know it wants.

Apple said they intend to have a slimmer profit margin this coming year. That sounds a lot like planning on buying some market share as well. Between aggressive prices and quickly moving the stakes, Apple will be making the competition move faster than they can just to stay slightly sub-par.

markgamber
Sep 25, 2008, 04:55 PM
But, for the time being, I can understand why. If Apple lets people install whatever crap they want from whomever they want, the odds are high that some crappy, battery-hogging software will make it on there, and Apple gets to pay to support it. After all, the iPhone runs on batteries all day, whereas on a Mac, a bad app simply gets tossed and you're on your way.

Where does this paranoia originate? First of all, is the iPhone hardware really that weak? Seriously, people on this site love to rip Windows Mobile and Blackberry but both can chug along pretty well with piles apps all running at once. Second, Windows Mobile and Blackberry have both been around for years and so have 3rd party apps for both. Whatever serious garbage is out there gets ferretted out pretty quickly and marked for what it is. And not because HTC, Microsoft or RIM run every aspect of every phone with a heavy-handed, my-way-or-the-highway attitude. Are iPhone users too stupid to figure out what's bad on their own or is this supposed to explain why the iPhone system has all the appeal of 1989's "software carousel"?

Practically, the answer is no. Steve Jobs has never made a mistake. Just ask him, he'll tell you himself.

chris200x9
Sep 25, 2008, 04:57 PM
I just thought of something. With everyone complaining apples store isn't open enough and others complaining that androids is going to be to open, why doesn't google or apple take a cue from linux and offer repositories. Google or Apples repository you know the app has been check and quality assured but you *can* install other apps if you want.

LeviG
Sep 25, 2008, 05:12 PM
I just thought of something. With everyone complaining apples store isn't open enough and others complaining that androids is going to be to open, why doesn't google or apple take a cue from linux and offer repositories. Google or Apples repository you know the app has been check and quality assured but you *can* install other apps if you want.
I would say this is likely what will happen with android in the end and perhaps also have the very rare chance of happening with apple too.

wearwholesaler
Sep 26, 2008, 12:51 AM
I love my iPhone