Brain melt...
Google stole ... what from Linux ?
And Linux stole... what from Unix ?
Are you sure you even understand this stuff ?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
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"
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Brain melt...
Google stole ... what from Linux ?
And Linux stole... what from Unix ?
Are you sure you even understand this stuff ?
It did ? Funny, this is Android today :
Doesn't look like anything's changed to me really. Are you perchance mistaking Android for something it's not ? Android is a piece of software that is adaptable and can run off many different hardware configurations, be it slider phones, flip phones, "slab" phones (a la iPhone and LG Prada and P900/P800 from SE that date from 2003) or these good old trusty "Blackberry" phones.
Android is not a copy of iPhone. Nor is it a copy of iOS really. If we compare on a purely software basis, Android uses completely different paradigms than iOS in both UI (heavy widget use in the default UI to customize the home screens by the user) and core functionality (reliance on a VM to run compiled bytecode instead of machine code being executed natively, which makes it more portable accross CPU architectures if someone wanted to make a phone out of something other than ARM).
Both projects have their own merits. Android had/has multi-tasking, copy/paste, better notifications and widgets that iOS lacked/still lacks. iOS had the snazzy HW accelerated UI which Android still lacks.
To claim one is better and that the other is a copy and should be destroyed is just closed mindedness. There's plenty of room in the industry for both.
I'm up to page 4 in this thread and already my head is hurting from all the crap I'm reading from people who obviously have such a heavy and tainted bias and again, take the words of Steve Jobs and carry the torch off to some imaginary war.
Well put. My sentiments, exactly.
Brain melt...
Google stole ... what from Linux ?
And Linux stole... what from Unix ?
Are you sure you even understand this stuff ?
iOS's grandpa is NextStep.
NextStep is: "...a Unix-like operating system based on the Mach kernel, plus source code from BSD".
So Peace, any comments?
Anything but correct. Mobile devices (both phones and handhelds) made remote API-calls several years before the launch of the iPhone.
But things are not quite that simple. While processing speed makes a difference GPU-speed is probably more important when it comes to those high-end games. Also, my guess (as a developer) would be that Androids "true multi-tasking" unlike Apple's "let the app's request the services it needs" would mean that any app in Android would hog at least some resources until it was actively turned off. In iOS it's the other way round, no app multi-tasks by default...
iOS's grandpa is NextStep.
NextStep is: "...a Unix-like operating system based on the Mach kernel, plus source code from BSD".
So Peace, any comments?
Stop stealing my air bro.
Yes and Linus Torvalds licenses the Linux kernel under the GPLv2, which Google adheres to in their use and distribution of Android, which is an OS that uses Linux as a kernel (just like iOS uses Darwin as a kernel).
If we knew as much about Linus as you do, we wouldn't know much apparently. Maybe you'd like to enlighten us to this knowledge you hold because right now, it's not looking good. You seem to have quite a distorted view of the history of both Unix and Linux and open source in general.
I think it's this word "Open" that made Steve Jobs and his shareholders shudder, and the knock on effect from cult members is merely an echo.
You, sir, have won one Internet. Unfortunately, few will take note of your post, and most who do will -1 it since it doesn't honor Apple.
You have my support, at least.
Actually, that's not quite true. Well, yes it is, you can't steal Linux because Linus would be dumb to not have back ups. You can infringe on the copyright though. Basically, distribute a binary version of Linux and do accompany it with a written offer for the source code and strip away the GPL license from your documentation.
Since you'd be in breach of the GPL, you wouldn't have any rights to distribute the work and thus would be in infringment. But yeah, that's quite a nuance and not applicable in the case of Android.
Unix derived a lot of open standards, that is true. Things like POSIX are a great example of that. Unix itself however wasn't open nor is it today. If you want to use SysV code in your own derivative, you still need a valid license, of which the SCO group was responsible for as an agent to Novell (which is the owner of the original "Unix copyrights", ie, SysV and the Bell labs stuff - now part of Attachmate Corporation).
However, things like Linux do not use any of the protected SysV code (didn't SCO vs IBM and SCO vs Novell teach us that ? Why yes, yes it did). BSD does have some parts of SysV code in it but... BSDi vs USL is also a great piece of information on how tainted the Unix code base now is by open source with the partial release of the settlement information. BSD were granted free use of the code they did use from the original Unix in the settlement and so everything is peachy on that front.
My only .02 on this matter is that (and not having gone through it - I can only conjecture) that Steve knew he was terminal. Had no idea how much time he would have left. It would seem to me that dealing with family, friends and running Apple would take its toll both emotionally and physically. And I sincerely wonder - with that kind of stress - if his statements and attitude were results from his illness. We all know Steve hasn't ever been one to pull punches regarding the competition - but the segment of the book here could also point to him being less that rational.
On the upside - the board would never have let him spend all of Apple's resources ($$) on "destroying" Google.
Passion is one thing - but his statements are a bit extreme even for Steve.
On the upside - the board would never have let him spend all of Apple's resources ($$) on "destroying" Google.
Passion is one thing - but his statements are a bit extreme even for Steve.
Android not only copied iOS but nicked parts of code from Oracle if I remember correctly.
As for the dweeb from Google saying Siri is useless, people don't want to speak to their phones, what a fool! If Apple gets sirious (hehe) about siri it will be the default search option for most people. A lot quicker to ask about the correct pronunciation of 'Ginsters' for instance than type it into Google search.
As for the dweeb from Google saying Siri is useless, people don't want to speak to their phones, what a fool! If Apple gets sirious (hehe) about siri it will be the default search option for most people. A lot quicker to ask about the correct pronunciation of 'Ginsters' for instance than type it into Google search.
You're seeing this through a technical perspective and totally correct. Comparing both is like comparing apples and bananas. No point. However, you only have to look at the license Google provided to developers to go and try have a slice of Apple's pie. Samsung got it wrong by trying to mimic iOSs qualities, HTC have played a steady game and most of the others have made a right old mess of it. That includes developers not really having a great basis of app's to draw inspiration from. It was more Google's personal playground when the G1 was first launched with their productivity apps.
Android is too complex IMHO to be any good at being a good mobile operating system. Things may of changed since I owned the original G1 (which was hyped up big time). However, I never knew a phone to...
- crash so much
- disconnect so many calls and refuse to send texts
- have a poorly executed app store which was littered with buggy apps
Honestly; Android could of been a much bigger player if Google had setup the principals and building blocks right from the start. I won't personally purchase an Android phone out of my own free-will again. It's littered the market with awful phones that are built for quantity.
This is why Apple got it right. Provide a quality product that continues to bring quality however you use it. Thanks to Steve, Apple are the Nokia of the 21st Century and hope Android has some ill-fate in the future.
It did ? Funny, this is Android today :
Doesn't look like anything's changed to me really. Are you perchance mistaking Android for something it's not ? Android is a piece of software that is adaptable and can run off many different hardware configurations, be it slider phones, flip phones, "slab" phones (a la iPhone and LG Prada and P900/P800 from SE that date from 2003) or these good old trusty "Blackberry" phones.
Android is not a copy of iPhone. Nor is it a copy of iOS really. If we compare on a purely software basis, Android uses completely different paradigms than iOS in both UI (heavy widget use in the default UI to customize the home screens by the user) and core functionality (reliance on a VM to run compiled bytecode instead of machine code being executed natively, which makes it more portable accross CPU architectures if someone wanted to make a phone out of something other than ARM).
Both projects have their own merits. Android had/has multi-tasking, copy/paste, better notifications and widgets that iOS lacked/still lacks. iOS had the snazzy HW accelerated UI which Android still lacks.
To claim one is better and that the other is a copy and should be destroyed is just closed mindedness. There's plenty of room in the industry for both.
I'm up to page 4 in this thread and already my head is hurting from all the crap I'm reading from people who obviously have such a heavy and tainted bias and again, take the words of Steve Jobs and carry the torch off to some imaginary war.
What I find interesting and the courts seem to agree. Keep in mind that when apple released the iPhone the tech used on all the phones you mentioned was quite different which is why no one could figure out how to use them. I am a tech guy and always had the next hot phone. Most of it was unusable. Even after Google took over android the phones they released and the code they put out was very different than the iPhone. So the concept that they were already doing this is kind of silly to me. If that was the case then it would not have taken 3 years for them to catch on.
They are thieves of everyones ideas and believe they can take, redecorate and give away others ideas to sell their ads. And because stupid people believe that free is the best way and don't care how they get it they support Google and Android blindly while their sole purpose is to sell your identity.
I don't think that's quite true since NeXTSTEP and by association, OS X and iOS both borrowed heavily from the open source community :
http://opensource.apple.com/
Safari is basically a fork of KHTML/KJS with an Apple UI on top, OS X is built on the GNU userland with some BSD tools thrown in. The whole of developer tools Apple uses, aside from the UI, is basically opensource stuff.
Apple also adheres to a lot of open standards like LDAP, DNS, Kerberos in order to interoperate with other OSes out there.
The new Apple is basically more and more open. Though they still release the proprietary stuff here and there (Facetime, iMessage, Airplay, Air* basically) which gets annoying when you have such a nice eco-system that is open and interoperable and suddenly you're stuck with a piece which isn't.
See for yourself.
http://allthingsd.com/20110727/old-email-may-bite-google-in-java-patent-suit/
Here is an except from one of the emails in question. They do not foster innovation they kill it. The real innovators who spend billions every year to create new ideas will not do so if they feel their investment can be copied and given away with no recourse. These companies would invest much less in these efforts because there is no benefit. its better to wait until someone else spends the money then just copy what works. In that case nothing gets created.
If Sun doesnt want to work with us, we have two options: 1) Abandon our work and adopt MSFT CLR VM and C# language or 2) Do Java anyway and defend our decision, perhaps making enemies along the way.
Nope, no code was taken from Oracle. That's a point people need to understand. Google used the Java language syntax for their programming language which was implemented on top of the Dalvik VM (not the Sun JVM). They used Apache's project Harmony to get a J2SE compatible stack running on Dalvik.
Oracle is going after them for mostly patents, saying Dalvik is implemented in way that infringes on the JVM patents. They also tried to claim copyright, but that was turned down last I checked.
Don't read FOSSpatents for your information guys, the Oracle lawsuit has been severely handicapped already, with claims cut from 128 to 3, damage requests lessenned from billions to millions, and nothing being decided yet. Florian tried to claim Google took code from Oracle, but he was mistaken and proving wrong. Florian has an anti-google agenda, don't bother taking anything he says as fact, research if your best friend here.
Software and Phones go through amazing amounts of transformations before it's released. It's easy to point to Android's development as there are images all over the internet about what could have been. But let me ask you this - where are all the images of how iOS developed over time before it was released. If you can't point to those - then drawing a comparison is moot. And I am sure the iPhone itself had several designs before they settled on what the original one would look like.
Because if you want to play "this" game - you can then say that iOS's notifications are modeled after Android. Buying and integrating Siri was modeled after Android's voice control. And so on.
I'm not arguing who copied who. I am saying, as someone who has worked in the cellular industry - these kinds of posts (below) about what "could have been" are silly.
Because if you want to play "this" game - you can then say that iOS's notifications are modeled after Android. Buying and integrating Siri was modeled after Android's voice control. And so on.
I'm not arguing who copied who. I am saying, as someone who has worked in the cellular industry - these kinds of posts (below) about what "could have been" are silly.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-sour...se-in-android-what-do-you-say-now-oracle/9285
Frankly, until a court decision is reached, I don't see how anyone can claim Google did something wrong. Oracle might not like Google's use of Java, that doesn't make it illegal yet. "Do java anyway and defend our decision" sounds like the legal option was explored and Google believe that they indeed didn't infringe on Sun's work.
They just hoped Sun would go along with it, which it seems they did under the old management.
![[DL]](/data/avatars/m/410/410081.jpg?1266785706){kind=avatar}
That is the kind of passion that destroys you. It is never a good thing, live your life and let others live theirs. It is only a phone after all and there are only so many ways you can make them. Samsung sold more Android phones than Apple Iphones in the third quarter.
How did he destroy Android?
Im happy Android exists. You cant have Jedis without Sith...albeit unresponsive, buggy, and poorly conceived Sith.
