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
The idea of destroying competition.
Microsoft and Intel were passionate about destroying competititon, too.
Look were that got them.
Same thing will happen to Apple, unless they change.
Don't see that happening.
Freedom and competition are good things and can't be stopped.
They are vital to progress.
http://m.cnet.com/Article.rbml?nid=20013546&cid=null&bcid=&bid=-265
A bit old but I also remember reading ( though can't find it at the mo) that one of the google guys admitting lifting some base Java code and that they didn't even take off the intro text about who it belongs to and who can use it etc.
Have a look around it's all out there on the internetz, honest.
Update Got it! http://www.dailytech.com/Update+Google+And+Java+Source+Code+in+Android/article20726.htm
Last edited:
That is the most stupid logic I've seen today! Let me break it down for you. Android was first copying the blackberry os. Then Slimy Schmit saw the iPhone at apple and took it back to google. Google scrapped its plans on seeing the iPhone and built Android on basis of iOS. Thats Copying.
As far as the point regarding motorola, yes they were pioneers in mobile technology and hence get paid for their patents in the field as they are now standards. Google doesn't pay for the technology they used from iOS hence its called stealing. Apple and others are paying for the standards set by motorola and apple innovated a new way to use mobile phones. Google did none of the above. Hence your logic is invalid.
"Apple acquired Fingerworks and its multi-touch technology in 2005. Mainstream exposure to multi-touch technology occurred in 2007 when the iPhone gained popularity, with Apple stating they 'invented multi touch' as part of the iPhone announcement, however both the function and the term predate the announcement or patent requests, except for such area of application as capacitive mobile screens, which did not exist before Fingerworks/Apple's technology (Apple filed patents for in 2005-2007 and was awarded with in 2009-2010). Publication and demonstration using the term Multi-touch by Jefferson Y. Han in 2005 predates these, but Apple did give multi-touch wider exposure through its association with their new product and were the first to introduce multi-touch on a mobile device.
So yes, any multitouch phone of today (which is almost all of the top models) are riding on the risk Apple took.
I don't get it. If Android is crap then Google obviously didn't copy Apple properly. If Android is crap then iOS will wipe the floor with it, yet Apple still feel the need to sue.
Either it's crap or it's unfair competition because it's a copy. You can't have both (unless you think iOS is crap).
Either it's crap or it's unfair competition because it's a copy. You can't have both (unless you think iOS is crap).
Jobs pretty much challenged him to do it.
"Jobs had attempted to persuade Google not to develop a mobile operating system to rival Apple's own by promising the company it would have access to the iPhone and prime real estate on the device"
From an Apple/competition/consumer perspective, I think Jobs' desire to destroy Android benefits everyone and pushes Apple to be better, and thus improve what's available in the marketplace. Actually succeeding I think would hurt everyone. With the competitive pressure removed, Apple has less motivation to innovate (and yes, even Apple probably would become complacent if it didn't have Android to deal with) and consumers would have less choice. You want the CEO who has that burning desire to be the best. It's all about the journey, not the end, because actually achieving that end of destroying Android only benefits Apple's profits, not the innovative engine of the company or the consumer. After all, Google has clearly been extremely innovative as well, even if it copied some things from iOS. Apple's designers/engineers aren't the only highly motivated people in the technology game.
I don't know why would anyone be challenged by that exact statement if the wording is correct. That's like, be in business with us and make your money from that instead of competing us.
You realize that Google makes their money from advertising? If Android did not exist and iOS had the 80% marketshare of all smartphone OS's, people who advertise on Android would be doing more of their advertising through iOS, i.e. through google services in iOS. But obviously it's better to have full control over the OS because you can get more user data and that helps Google's customers a lot more, which are advertisement firms.
Like, the whole idea af the smartphone. Being on Apple's Board, Google knew about Apple's plan for the iPhone since it's inception. Then despite nondisclosure agreements, started copying and producing product based Apple's ideas.
Comparing Siri to a mere voice recognition system is absurd. Siri is true AI.
Again, Apple isn't saying "don't compete with us". They are saying "compete with us using your own ideas".
Which actually is ten times better than people innovating "off" each other.
Yeah, because Google was the first to do online syncing. /sarcasm
AppStore released July 10, 2008
Marketplace announced couple days before August 28, 2008
I think... I THINK... July comes before August.
If you want to go further, a kind of Android 3rd party store was talked about in May, but the AppStore was announced in March.
Again, March before May.
Last edited:
I understand this is an apple forum, and I love my apple products, but you people are insane if you truely believe that android is junk. I have owned both iphones and android phones, and while the simplicity of the iphone is tempting, I will be going with android for my next phone.
Android isn't buggy, or slow, or ugly. It doesn't play music anywhere near as good as an iphone. It doesn't sync with my mac as well as the iphone. It does allow me to have flexability and control over how the phone looks and acts, without jailbraking or rooting.
Both phones have advantages and disadvantages, but just because you love apple products, as I do, doesn't mean everything else is garbage or stolen.
Android isn't buggy, or slow, or ugly. It doesn't play music anywhere near as good as an iphone. It doesn't sync with my mac as well as the iphone. It does allow me to have flexability and control over how the phone looks and acts, without jailbraking or rooting.
Both phones have advantages and disadvantages, but just because you love apple products, as I do, doesn't mean everything else is garbage or stolen.
Well that would be a gamble. And I am sure Google saw the writing of the wall. Apple would see how much Google was making from ads and then create their own platform and then kick Google to the curb. Oh wait - didn't that sorta happen with "iAds"
Jobs wanted to entice Google to keep any possible competition at bay. A smart move. But Google, again, clearly saw the disadvantage of being reliant on Apple and took this offer as an impetus to develop their own OS so that they profit more have have independence.
Why help Apple make money and also be at their "mercy" instead of doing it on their own. Sure a gamble - but it seems to be paying off LONG TERM.
That's right I forgot how iOS had the pull down notification menu first and then Android copied it and then iOS got rid of it only to copy it back with the release of iOS5.
All companies take ideas from their competitors to better their own products. No one company is the source of all ideas and even hinting at such a thing is ludicrous.Regardless, Jobs was a little too obsessed with something that he couldn't achieve. The Galaxy S2 has sold millions and millions, Android keeps refining the OS with each subsequent release. It isn't going anywhere. Competition is good for the marketplace and good for consumers. The zealous "anti-everything not Apple" is unhealthy, both for a CEO and customers.
Not that I expect it from the wonderfully tunnel-visioned crowd that has over the last 5 years slowly destroyed the last remnants of objectivity on this once wonderful forum, but people need to stop with the "Innovaashun!" descriptor every single time they mention Apple or Steve Jobs. The company is for the most part about integration, not innovation. They gobble up companies, patents, technologies, all with their massive investment potential and army of lawyers. They then integrate technologies that others innovated. This is not a bad thing.
The problem is that if you point out that the majority of their products spring from "integration" of technologies they gobbled up, it's somehow a slight at Apple because it doesn't live up to the marketing narrative that everyone else gulps down like an obedient toddler. Apple being more of an "integrator" than "innovator" doesn't somehow diminish their accomplishments or status as a company, but for some reason it just crushes the fragile little souls of the devout zealots who have to parrot every single marketing bullet point like religious doctrine.
And stop with the CEO worship already. The guy is dead. He wasn't Einstein, he wasn't Tesla, so stop comparing him to those people who are orders of magnitude more important than he is. You want to compare him to someone? Compare him to a ruthless business executive that gets credit for inventing something he didn't invent, like Thomas Edison.
If so much of your personal self worth is so deeply vested in the marketing narrative of a company and a religious hate of anything produced by competitors.....seek help. Professional help.
By steal you mean license Xerox's technology and provide Xerox with stock that was worth millions, right?
Xerox sued Apple for copying the user interface. Xerox lost but eventually Apple settled. Apple needed to clear all legal issues before their IPO.
Ill preface my comments with: Apple didnt invent the smartphone or the general UI within. But, you cant argue that Android holds a candle to iOS. I had a 3G, then 4, then went to an HTC Inspire for a while...hoping to love it. I had to charge it constantly, UI felt unpolished, was saddled with AT&T bloatware, used more data without perceivable benefit, and the HTC touchscreen was possessed.
Sure, I could install boob shaker+ and customize my home screen to the Nth degree...but I'm back with the 4S now and it's so much better. Granted, many of the 4S criticisms are true (battery life and Siri issues). Phones like the Galaxy Nexus look fantastic, but not being able to sync to my iTunes and diminished battery life (if the Nexus follows suit with the other large Android sets): complicating my life too much.
Plus, the App store is so much better. Stay well
Well that would be a gamble. And I am sure Google saw the writing of the wall. Apple would see how much Google was making from ads and then create their own platform and then kick Google to the curb. Oh wait - didn't that sorta happen with "iAds"
Jobs wanted to entice Google to keep any possible competition at bay. A smart move. But Google, again, clearly saw the disadvantage of being reliant on Apple and took this offer as an impetus to develop their own OS so that they profit more have have independence.
Why help Apple make money and also be at their "mercy" instead of doing it on their own. Sure a gamble - but it seems to be paying off LONG TERM.
Well, we can't know what would have happened otherwise. Google destroyed a good partnership which they had with the largest tech company in the world. Surely that's gotta have its benefits as well.
Plus, the new iOS5 notification bar is taken from Android too, right down to that little ridge-y tab that you use to pull down from the top menu bar. And that's OK, I have no problem with the OS's copying each others' good features. In the end, we users win. Only code can be "stolen". Not ideas.