Apple blew chance at getting Kinect technology

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by maflynn, Nov 5, 2010.

  1. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #1
    Cult of Mac is reporting that apple almost got Kinect instead of Microsoft but their obsessive secrecy ultimately cost them the deal

     
  2. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #2
    So what. Apple says no to a lot of things and walks away from a lot of things.

    If recent news is anything to go by, they know *exactly* what they're doing, have a clear roadmap for the future, and are about to dominate consumer tech for the next decade.
     
  3. maflynn thread starter Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #3
    Did you even read the article?

    Apple didn't walk away, in fact they were very interested and thought it was a natural fit. They're obsessive embrace with secrecy and trying to Prime sense to "sign a stack of crippling legal agreements and NDAs"

    Apple blew it, they didn't walk away and much to your chagrin Microsoft snagged them. Its like bungie, the game developer. They approached apple but were rebuffed and Microsoft picked them up.

    Just admit your almighty apple is not perfect.
     
  4. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #4
    Ok. And?

    BFD that Apple didn't get Kinect. Apple today rules mobile gaming. Especially in the tablet/slate sector. And mobile gaming is the future. Mind-boggling growth.

    Gameloft, for instance, is making an absolute killing, thanks to Apple:

    http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/iphone-ipad-help-drive-gamelofts-sales-up-15-for-q3/

    I'd say that isn't a bad trade-off.
     
  5. whooleytoo macrumors 603

    whooleytoo

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Location:
    Cork, Ireland.
    #5
    I'd be interested to know what exactly was the gist of the NDAs. Given that it's Apple looking at another company's technology, and not their own - I can only guess the agreements were to force PrimeSense to not talk about the technology for a certain period, in case Apple did buy them and wanted to build a new (secret!) feature around them. In fact, Apple would probably want PrimeSense to stay quiet for quite a while, as Apple reviewed the technology and considered the purchase.

    Not surprising they walked away. The last thing a small company needs is to keep quiet and stop tooting their own horn! ;)
     
  6. maflynn thread starter Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #6
    Agreed, why handcuff themselves when as they put it, this technology sells itself. Apple's paranoia and arrogance has cost them, the admob loss is probably the most painful
     
  7. Doc750 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    #7
    The xbox kinetic looks really cool. I'm thinking of picking one up.
     
  8. roadbloc, Nov 5, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2010

    roadbloc macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    I can allready hear *LTD*'s post..... "apple doesn't need kinetic technology...."

    Edit: oh, look, he's already posted. My mistake.
     
  9. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #9
    Very likely they already have their own answer for it, whatever it may be. Patented, of course.
     
  10. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #10
    And like the Nokia law suit they held chances are those patents will be invalid.

    Apple own NDA is going to be its undoing.
     
  11. *LTD*, Nov 5, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2010

    *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #11
    So far it's resulted in a $20 billion quarter, about 3-4 years' worth of consecutive record quarters, record sales of nearly everything they make, rocketed them way past MS in market cap, and has put them in the position of the industry innovator - especially in mobile tech, where there is no shortage of developers partaking of Apple's success. All within the span of a few years. And now iPhones and iPads are finding their way into the enterprise. Mac development is about to explode with the merging of iOS and OS X and the extension of the App Store to the Mac. Apple just showed us the future of "notebooks" with the Air, etc.

    Better go bang on Apple's doors and tell them they've got it all wrong. ROFL
     
  12. roadbloc, Nov 5, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2010

    roadbloc macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    Just like you're always ramming home how much Microsoft failed with the tablet?

    All companies make mistakes. Even Apple. I'm not saying they will be kicking themselves over it, just like m$ won't be kicking themselves over not getting in the tablet market quick enough. But it's still something apple could have used.
     
  13. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #13
    LOL they most certainly are! Read my sig. Straight from Uncle Fester's mouth. Same goes for mobile. They've been embarrassed over this more times than anyone could care to count. Read the press about Microsoft's lousy efforts in both areas. Mobile is where the industry is heading - iPad, iPad, iPad. That's the name of the game. Even with gaming, it's all going mobile.

    As for Kinect, it's got nothing to do with Apple. It's interesting tech, but it's an add-on for a gaming console. No question it's cool. No question it has nothing to do with areas MS needs to be player in if they are to remain relevant. Of course, they can just go all Xbox and cede the rest of the consumer market to someone who knows what they're doing, like Apple.
     
  14. Melrose Suspended

    Melrose

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    #14
    er, I think they kind of are. They tried to pry the market open, and couldn't - costing a lot of money that didn't ROI.
     
  15. Doc750 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    #15
    Could you imagine a little kinetic motion sensor bar that plugged into apple tv, and then you could have downloaded games from an app store. Or controlled your apple tv by just moving your arm in the air, or it recognizing your voice commands.

    That would have been a perfect match. It would have taken apple tv from "hobby" to mainstream.
     
  16. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #16
    Apple will add it. They will charge $79 for the receiver and $29 for a little glove you have to wear with an Apple logo on it.
     
  17. Mike225 macrumors 6502a

    Mike225

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Location:
    SF BAY
    #17
    Apple probably would've charged $600 plus a $15 for the stand.

    Then $120 iClothes for the best experience.


    If iPad is magic, what is Kinect?
     
  18. James L macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    #18
    Please tell me you got this straight out of a press release. Even my friends who work at 1 Infinite Loop don't nutride this bad. :D
     
  19. *LTD*, Nov 6, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2010

    *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #19
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8B117)

    It's true. All of it. It's what's happening now, and what's just around the corner. You don't have to believe me. Just sit back and watch. :)

    In terms of Kinect, has it ever occurred to anyone here that Apple simply didn't want or care enough about it to make an effort to get it? There's nothing preventing Apple from negotiating with anyone if they feel it's worth it. You don't need to be a Silicon Valley insider to know that when Apple sees something they think is great, that they can develop and implement in just the right manner, they're all over it. As we know, Apple is quite conservative with their spending and they're much more apt to say no than yes to a lot of things.

    It's nonsensical to believe that the Apple of 2010, with $50 billion+ in cash can't acquire technology they're dying to get. It might be a good idea to ask Apple about it, rather than assume what this guy is saying (especially *after* MS made him wealthy) is accurate. It makes for interesting PR to say (after the fact) that the people who turned him down did so out of ignorance or blindness/lack of vision or because they "didn't believe in [me] him." If any company today has vision and forward-thinking in abundance, it's Apple.

    I'd be interested to hear Apple's reasons.
     
  20. jaw04005, Nov 6, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2010

    jaw04005 macrumors 601

    jaw04005

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    AR
    #20
    Did you? The article doesn't mention anything about Apple being very interested or thinking the technology was a natural fit. It says the PrimeSense engineers thought Apple was a natural fit for their technology. Big difference there.

    "In fact, he’d already had several meetings at Apple. It was the first place he and his engineers thought of. “It was the most natural place for the technology,” he said.

    Apple has a history of interface innovation, of course, and had recently introduced the iPhone with its paradigm-shifting multitouch UI. PrimeSense’s system went one step further: It was multitouch that you didn’t even have to touch. Apple seemed like a natural fit.

    Yet the initial meetings hadn’t gone so well. Obsessed with secrecy, Apple had already asked Beracha to sign a stack of crippling legal agreements and NDAs."

    Sounds like Apple didn't know what to do with it. After all, they don't make a game console. What were they going to use it for? --- iSight cameras?

    The most fascinating aspect of the article is the timeline. Microsoft bought PrimeSense and developed a flagship product within 2 1/2 years. Not bad on their part considering the effort they're putting behind Kinect. It's being touted as the XBOX 360 II and not just an add-on accessory like the PS3 Move.

    Most of these motion/sense technologies disappear once they're bought out by a large corporation.

    I would love a Kinect, but I'll wait until it hits $99 (with a game) and there are more titles available.
     
  21. lsvtecjohn3 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    #21
    Yeah right Apple bought Quattro for less money than Google bought AdMob for, 475 million dollars less. And Apple mobile profit is going be just as much as Google's is by the end of the year.
     
  22. maflynn thread starter Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #22
    Thy paid less and they got less. The real jewel was AdMob, they themselves admit they let the deal slip through their fingers.
     
  23. *LTD*, Nov 7, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2010

    *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #23
    Uh-huh. Ok.

    Keep trying.
     
  24. maflynn thread starter Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #24
    No need to try, AdMob was the crown jewel, plain and simple. It sad that you cannot accept the fact that apple blew it, and arrogantly assumed that AbMob would be there, when google, flush with cash swooped in.

    Even Jobs admitted that they tried to buy admob and failed.

    Keep drinking that koolaid :rolleyes:
     
  25. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #25
    Is this seriously the best you can do?

    So what. iAd is about to go global. Apple mobile profit will be right up there with Google's in only a matter of months. The whole AdMob issue no longer matters, and considering what Apple is about to achieve in mobile profits it wouldn't have mattered anyway.

    Find something that's actually significant.
     

Share This Page