Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

From Steve Jobs' Biography: "I'm going to destroy Android"

boonlar said:
He could have killed android if he allowed flash and made a new design instead of the iphone 4s. Not that it isn't a great phone, but it could have beat android in so many ways.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Flash would have brought over a lot of on-the-fence Android users.

rsshelas said:
It could have? I think IOS is already beating the android
Click to expand...

Android has 58% of the market. iOS only 28%. Stats are from Sept 2011.

DJAKO said:
That's the two worst ideas I've heard. Flash is horrible on battery life for mobile phones and why does Apple need to come out with a new design every year?
Click to expand...

Poor battery life can be attributed to a poor player... if Apple supported Flash, Adobe might have been inclined to invest development time to meet minimum performance requirements.
 
starvingartist8 said:
I wish that 'Something917483974' girl would post again. I am against her completely but I love reading her dying efforts to fight off 99% of the people in here lol.
Click to expand...

Oh good, because I do love your posts too, despite their utter lack of substance. I do note you couldn't actually address any of my points though, so I'll go ahead and assume you agree with them.

And if you're expecting me to be someone with a vagina, you're going to be rather mistaken.
 
I'm seeing a lot of clueless google fanboys on here who have never written code themselves as a "job" so they have no concept of what goes into writing software that works well. Writing good software is "hard work". I've been in the software industry for over 12 years.

Don't get me wrong, there are some really smart guys working at Google and some of them are my former co-workers but the management there have an interesting idea of right and wrong. They say "do no evil" but seem to have no qualms about stealing code from Sun (Java) or interface designs from Apple.

Google at its heart is an advertising company and their "free" services all hinge around mining your data in your email and search for advertising.

Apple, on the other hand is mainly concerned with selling songs, hardware and software so they offer services like iCloud for a different reason which is to promote the iOS/mac os x ecosystem.

Companies like Google and Facebook see you as the product whereas Apple sees you as a customer that they want to sell a product to.
 
vitzr said:
Very true.

As the warm & fuzzy spin many apply to his eulogies fade, it is slowly becoming more well known, just what a tyrant he was.
Click to expand...

I thought that it was always pretty much well known that he was a tyrant. And the only people who complained about it were people who worked at Cupertino. It doesn't effect the users even a little bit.
 
iBug2 said:
Multitouch products, not phones. Apple didn't invent multitouch, nor does anyone believe that they did. Apple acquired Fingerworks together with their multitouch patents, and they own them.
Click to expand...

What makes applying it to phones special enough that only Apple should be allowed to do it?
 
Snowshiro said:
And yet he's never shown a moment's remorse from stealing practically the entire concept of the Macintosh from Xerox, without which Apple wouldn't even exist any more.
Click to expand...

hey genius! yeah you. google search it and you'll find that it was paid for via shares. zombie. in the age of the internet you can't take 5 seconds and just do a check on that situation.
 
iBug2 said:
Multitouch products, not phones. Apple didn't invent multitouch, nor does anyone believe that they did. Apple acquired Fingerworks together with their multitouch patents, and they own them.
Click to expand...

They don't own that technology. Just because it's touch screen technology was on the first phone to have it doesn't mean they own the rights to the touch screen technology.... Again, it's like saying I should have a patent to peanut butter, because I made PB&J. It's ridiculous.
 
vitzr said:
Very true.

As the warm & fuzzy spin many apply to his eulogies fade, it is slowly becoming more well known, just what a tyrant he was.
Click to expand...

The rumour is - Back in the day people hated taking the elevator with Jobs. Cause you'd never know if you still had your job when you walked out of the elevator.

Jobs was amazing but a tyrant. If he was at any position at Apple that was not CEO he would have been fired years ago for not being a team player. I think Apple now free from it's dictator will be a lot nicer placer to work at. Apart from those who report to Forstall. People say he is a tyrant too.
 
Peace said:
You forgot the part about google being non-libel for anything. It's in their license agreement.

That's why apple is going after the handset makers and not google.
Click to expand...

1. What in the blazes is "non-libel" supposed to mean?

2. How does any of that have any relevance to what I just said?
 
the8thark said:
The rumour is - Back in the day people hated taking the elevator with Jobs. Cause you'd never know if you still had your job when you walked out of the elevator.

Jobs was amazing but a tyrant. If he was at any position at Apple that was not CEO he would have been fired years ago for not being a team player. I think Apple now free from it's dictator will be a lot nicer placer to work at. Apart from those who report to Forstall. People say he is a tyrant too.
Click to expand...

Thankfully

The Forstall part .
 
aristotle said:
I'm seeing a lot of clueless google fanboys on here who have never written code themselves as a "job" so they have no concept of what goes into writing software that works well. Writing good software is "hard work". I've been in the software industry for over 12 years.

Don't get me wrong, there are some really smart guys working at Google and some of them are my former co-workers but the management there have an interesting idea of right and wrong. They say "do no evil" but seem to have no qualms about stealing code from Sun (Java) or interface designs from Apple.

Google at its heart is an advertising company and their "free" services all hinge around mining your data in your email and search for advertising.

Apple, on the other hand is mainly concerned with selling songs, hardware and software so they offer services like iCloud for a different reason which is to promote the iOS/mac os x ecosystem.

Companies like Google and Facebook see you as the product whereas Apple sees you as a customer that they want to sell a product to.
Click to expand...

This is spot on. Google's customers are not Android users. Google's customers are advertisers. Google is the world's largest advertisement company.

----------
Basil90 said:
They don't own that technology. Just because it's touch screen technology was on the first phone to have it doesn't mean they own the rights to the touch screen technology.... Again, it's like saying I should have a patent to peanut butter, because I made PB&J. It's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I never said they own touch screen technology. Nor did Fingerworks. But they own the gestures.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

Relax, I like Apple too. Bad choice using the word "go" a better word would be enhance. Ideas from others helps Apple to enhance the iOS experience.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

Jerome Morrow said:
j1787 said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

Some people enjoy Pepsi, some enjoy Coke. To each their own, stop crying. Any android success is good for ALL, keeps Apple going. I don't know about you, but I sure love my new notification center with widgets...get the point?
Click to expand...

Apple makes Apple go, not competition. See the history for reference.
Click to expand...

Relax, I like Apple too. Bad choice using the word "go" a better word would be enhance. Ideas from others helps Apple to enhance the iOS experience.
 
jaecyn42 said:
1. What in the blazes is "non-libel" supposed to mean?

2. How does any of that have any relevance to what I just said?
Click to expand...

1. It means google has a license they use for android. In the terms of the license google specifies that they ( google) can't be sued or held responsible for any patent/copyright infringements that might arise out of the use of android.

2. I mentioned that because you forgot to mention how sure google is of not infringing on any patents/copyrights.

And there's a reason the galaxy tab isn't being sold in several countries. And it's not because apple paid off a bunch of judges.
 
markie said:
Show me one place Google stole from Apple. Sure, some visual concepts that make logical sense are the same - but that's a two way street. Look at iOS 5 "stealing" Androids superior notifications. You have a touchscreen, there's only so many ways to do things. Imagine if we had this nonsense when things like buttons were invented.
Click to expand...
I don't have enough detailed knowledge about Android to really comment on the "Google stole from Apple" bit. But the part of your quote that I highlighted makes very little sense to me.

There are a gazillion ways of doing things. A paradigm for touch screens already existed from the Palm/WinMob era. Microsoft have cleary demonstrated that it's possible to invent something fresh even after the release of the iPhone.

Inventing something new and equally good won't come easy though, and it will probably cost you time and money. I think that's what people seem to forget. Obviously Apple went through a lot of internal testing of different styled screen-widgets, sizes, travel distance etc. They probably spent years researching ending up with a product that just felt right from the first touch.
 
Peace said:
1. It means google has a license they use for android. In the terms of the license google specifies that they ( google) can't be sued or held responsible for any patent/copyright infringements that might arise out of the use of android.

2. I mentioned that because you forgot to mention how sure google is of not infringing on any patents/copyrights.
Click to expand...


> can't be sued or held responsible for any patent/copyright infringements that might arise out of the use of android

NON-LIABLE

Not "non-libel".

And I still fail to see how it has any relevance to my post. The fact the Google is not LIABLE for things the user does with the software has nothing to do with anything I just said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back