Google Chairman 'Not Too Worried' About Apple Lawsuits Over Android

[0815]

There are good Android phones out there (not the cheaper ones, but the more expensive ones) ... but I wouldn't call them innovative or 'game changing' ... they are just polished versions of existing stuff (that might be protected by patents or not).

But calling Apple being not innovative and doing law suits instead - that is just a joke. At least Apple innovated many things that changes the way how people (and other companies) look at technology.

MP3 was a good, but not exciting market until Apple created the iPod
SmartPhones were ok but not exciting for everyone until the iPhone came out
Tablets were a fail until the iPad came out.

Apple did NOT create any of these markets, but they changed them through their innovations. (some might argue it created the 'iPad' market since it is not really the same as the old type of tablet and that it is a new device class)

But this whole quote just shows what a jerk Schmidt is and that is was probably a smart decision to remove him from the position as CEO (as damage control measurement)

 

[err404]

The best way to avoid IP litigation is to be the one innovating.
There is little question as to why Android is on the defense in so many of these cases. Android is an excellent conglomeration of modern ideas, but very little of it is innovative.

Apple innovates and sues while Android copies and complains that suing isn't competitive.

 

[126351]

One can only marvel at Big Eric's chutzpah.

 

[dethmaShine]

You are my new man crush..........

People call him a troll; people call him a fanoby.

But most of the times, he makes some really good comments. Although a bit biased sometimes, the guy has more brains than most of the knee-jerks freaks who pay for a 'Demi-God' status and are just here to troll.

 

[nwcs]

For starters how about the notification screen that Apple is now ripping off Android for IOS 5. How about the cloud that Apple is not ripping off them? I switched to an Android based phone after having two iPhones and it is a much better platform than the iPhone. Unfortunately, the fanboys don't take time to really get to know what they're bashing, they just bash and run off a the mouth because it's what fanboys do. Once you've seen how great Google integration is you'll never go want to go back to an iPhone.

Exactly how is a notification screen innovative? I'm not going to argue little features because they are just little features. True innovation is putting a touch screen on a phone when none existed before. In my opinion, as a 16 year software developer, the only innovations in smart phones was the first smart phone (the palm brick phone) and the iPhone. Everything else was incremental improvement and refinement.

Apple hasn't had anything innovative since the iPhone in my opinion (including the iPad which is really an evolution of the iPhone -- although it could be argued the other direction if you follow the history of product development). But by the same turn no one else has done anything innovative in smart phones since then, too. They've all been minor incremental evolutionary changes.

I've seen Android plenty. I have no desire to switch. I am also very leery of google having so much knowledge about who I am. I hesitate to give them even more intimate knowledge. They are not out for my best interests from a privacy point of view. Some day I may not have a choice but I do right now.

 

[Doctor Q]

If I never hear the words "patent litigation" again, it'll be too soon.

Oops, that didn't take long: Apple Loses Appeal in Patent Countersuit With Kodak

Has Apple actually ever won a patent suit? They seem to sue a lot without much success. The HTC suit is still ongoing and frankly the two patents in question seem weak from a technical point of view.

And now the Kodak suit.

 

[Ryth]

How many markets has Apple innovated in?

MP3 player, App store, Smart Phone and the latest is the Tablet.

How many markets has Android innovated in?

Thought so Eric. Keep copying. Samsung and HTC are going to get their collective @$$e$ handed to them in court. It's blatant straight up copyright/plagiarism.

The whole Google team is a bunch of tools.

Apple hasn't had anything innovative since the iPhone in my opinion

Yeah right...the iPad is the biggest innovation in the last 10 years easily. It's completely changed personal computing and the PC manufacturers were completely caught off guard. Something that was deemed 'a fad' has now turned into the future of computing for the next 10 years.

 

[wikus]

Is Eric T. Mole flapping his gums again?

What is it *this time*, Eric? It's not enough you ripped off Apple something serious, but you then have to point an accusatory finger at them. Apple made your market for you and for everyone else. And they're still doing it.

Apple is the one that has been doing all the "innovating" in the first place. Not little UI changes, but redefinitions of entire markets, and the creation of new ones. With stuff that at first blush baffles everyone, until Apple shows them it's "safe" to jump in.

Android would probably look like BlackBerry OS (just look at the original screenshots) if iOS hadn't been released. But Eric was taking notes at those board meetings.

First came the iPhone. Then, out of nowhere, everything else looked like an iPhone. Everyone else introduced an App Store modelled on the REAL App Store.

Apple releases the iPad. Then every other tablet out there (the also-rans suddenly got back into the game, I wonder why) started looking like an iPad. Well, alright, they *tried* to look like an iPad. But all they really provide is comic relief in doing so.

No wonder Steve was monumentally pissed at Eric.

Apple has been getting ripped off since 2007. They are now responding because there is too much out there that violates their IP. The infringements have reached critical mass. Apple is now looking to clean up the game. This is normal.

Are you angry?

 

[0815]

The best way to avoid IP litigation is to be the one innovating.
There is little question as to why Android is on the defense in so many of these cases. Android is an excellent conglomeration of modern ideas, but very little of it is innovative.

Apple is innovating and suing. Android is copying and claiming suing isn't competitive.

That is a good point. Do we know which patents Google owns for its smart phone innovations?

 

[Starflyer]

Android before iPhone

Edit: Sorry 0815, I should have read the entire thread before posting.

 

[samcraig]

Some people should also learn the difference between evolution and revolution.

 

[BC2009]

Do you have a link? Not that I don't believe you but it sounds interesting.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/14/apple-wins-copyright-infringement-case-against-psystar-in-califo/

Psystar made Mac clones. However, this was not a patent-win for Apple -- but a license/copyright win. The license terms of Mac OS X did not permit running on non-Apple hardware. Psystar purchased Mac OS X licenses and then installed them on their clones. Apple shut them down.

Historically, Apple has not used patents so much because the biggest rival was Microsoft who also had a boatload of patents that Apple needed. The reason you see Apple doing this now is because many of the companies they are suing don't hold a boatload of patents they need. Nokia did in fact have many patents that Apple needed so Apple is paying them license fees now to use them -- also settling and cross-licensing avoided further challenge from Nokia to Apple's patents. Nokia now has license to many Apple patents and vice-versa.

Android comes from the open source community and so is patent-poor as is the company who purchased Android since Google was founded in 1998 and most of their improvements to Android are copies of iOS features and therefore cannot be patented. Google has some shoddy patent applications in the USPTO right now, but some of it is complete garbage indicative of a company looking for quantity over quality since Google is in desperate need of quantity.

Ideally, all of these big companies would be cross-licensing with each other because each would hold enough patents to mandate it. When you are blatantly copying somebody and don't have the patent portfolio to back it up, you are basically screwed. When Palm announced WebOS they did so knowing full well they had enough patents on mobile phones and such to make things difficult for Apple if they should try to sue with their own patents (like the inertial-rubber-band/snap-back touch-scrolling patent they own that they use when you reach the edge of a document you are scrolling with your finger -- palm outright copied that because they had the patent arsenal that assured Apple would not sue them).

In the end, Nokia will also sue the Android manufacturers and it is likely that Google will add licensing terms to Android that say you cannot sue another Android manufacturer over features provided by Android, so as to avoid Android manufacturers from suing each other. Microsoft and Nokia will be making money on every Android phone sold without selling them. Apple would like rather cripple the Android phones to have a better experience on iOS. Windows Phone 7 is likely safe from Apple since Microsoft has so many patents that Apple needs and since Nokia is cross-licensed with Apple as well.

 

[wikus]

Some people should also learn the difference between evolution and revolution.

This should be made a sticky thread. Too many Apple evangelicals seem to think everything Apple does is revolutionary, most of it, if not all is just evolutionary.

 

[0815]

Exactly how is a notification screen innovative? I'm not going to argue little features because they are just little features. True innovation is putting a touch screen on a phone when none existed before. In my opinion, as a 16 year software developer, the only innovations in smart phones was the first smart phone (the palm brick phone) and the iPhone. Everything else was incremental improvement and refinement.

Apple hasn't had anything innovative since the iPhone in my opinion (including the iPad which is really an evolution of the iPhone -- although it could be argued the other direction if you follow the history of product development). But by the same turn no one else has done anything innovative in smart phones since then, too. They've all been minor incremental evolutionary changes.

I've seen Android plenty. I have no desire to switch. I am also very leery of google having so much knowledge about who I am. I hesitate to give them even more intimate knowledge. They are not out for my best interests from a privacy point of view. Some day I may not have a choice but I do right now.

There were phones before that had a touch screen (don't know the reference by hard and I'm too lazy to search for it).

But Apple innovation I see in the whole package how they put the touch screen to work with the OS, how the user interacts with it, now everything 'feels' - the ease of use they put to it - that is what was innovative, creative and years ahead of everyone else (until the others copied)

 

[joneill55]

One can only marvel at Big Eric's chutzpah.

With 95% of Google revenue coming from advertising, it is apparently very "easy" not to worry about Sh#*# for ol' Eric!

 

[PBG4 Dude]

Do you have a link? Not that I don't believe you but it sounds interesting.

Look up eMachine's eOne. Total rip off off the bondi blue iMac (CRT version). Apple was able to get it pulled from the market.

 

[Zaim2]

Android before iPhone

Android after the iPhone. The first Android, HTC G1 (released October 2008)

Compared to this:

iPhone 1 (Released in 2007)

I think some of you need your eyes checked. Looks more like Symbian S60 to me.

 

[Popeye206]

Bottom line.... looks like the battle lines are drawn and everyone is going for king of the hill.

Although I'm a "fanboy" I do hope that Apple prevails in protecting their IP in relationship to the iPhone. It seems like many people forget how horrid smart phones were before the iPhone, but Apple did innovate many aspects of the smart phone and put it in a package that no one had seen before. They deserve the right to protect it and get compensation for their inventions. That's the whole purpose of patents to begin with.

 

[nwcs]

There were phones before that had a touch screen (don't know the reference by hard and I'm too lazy to search for it).

But Apple innovation I see in the whole package how they put the touch screen to work with the OS, how the user interacts with it, now everything 'feels' - the ease of use they put to it - that is what was innovative, creative and years ahead of everyone else (until the others copied)

There were touch screens before but I think no one can say that a phone like the iPhone existed before. Just like no phone was like the Qualcomm/Kyocera Palm Phone from 2000 I was playing with years ago. But between that Palm phone and the iPhone there were many variations of that theme (including BlackBerry -- I had one of the first models out there back then, too). Just as the phones now are variations of the iPhone.

Revolutions come sporadically. Everything else is just evolution/iteration.

 

[codyrodgers92]

Well this sucks for Google then...

Because HTC already lost the lawsuit, so how about Google just goes back to what they do best and that is be a name that everyone uses for a search engine.

 

[iCrizzo]

riiggghhhtttttt!!! not worried.

 

[lfc]

Image
Android after the iPhone. The first Android, HTC G1 (released October 2008)

Compared to this:

Image
iPhone 1 (Released in 2007)

I think some of you need your eyes checked. Looks more like Symbian S60 to me.

I don't get what your trying to prove?

 

[wikus]

Image
Android after the iPhone. The first Android, HTC G1 (released October 2008)

Compared to this:

Image
iPhone 1 (Released in 2007)

I think some of you need your eyes checked. Looks more like Symbian S60 to me.

iPhones home screen is one of the ugliest on the market. Straight up grid of ugly icons, nothing more. They took that and slapped it onto a giant screen, named it an iPad and called it a day.

Most uninspiring GUI of any mobile platform.

 

[macsmurf]

Look up eMachine's eOne. Total rip off off the bondi blue iMac (CRT version). Apple was able to get it pulled from the market.

Image

Not a patent suit.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/14/apple-wins-copyright-infringement-case-against-psystar-in-califo/

Psystar made Mac clones. However, this was not a patent-win for Apple -- but a license/copyright win. The license terms of Mac OS X did not permit running on non-Apple hardware. Psystar purchased Mac OS X licenses and then installed them on their clones. Apple shut them down.

As you say, not a patent suit.

...So the answer would be no?

 

[BC2009]

The funniest thing is that iOS has ripped off Android's notifications (and improved them slightly), but this is like the one area that Apple has copied Google's copying and Android fans will be pointing to it for the next decade.
....

I had to quote myself, because of this.....

For starters how about the notification screen that Apple is now ripping off Android for IOS 5. How about the cloud that Apple is not ripping off them? I switched to an Android based phone after having two iPhones and it is a much better platform than the iPhone. Unfortunately, the fanboys don't take time to really get to know what they're bashing, they just bash and run off a the mouth because it's what fanboys do. Once you've seen how great Google integration is you'll never go want to go back to an iPhone.

See there it is!!! Google fans will latch on to these things for years and years. It's like that one time a bad team wins a game, the fans talk about that forever. Meanwhile the fans of the great team cannot recount the numerous times their team has won.