Google Claims a 'Hostile, Organized Campaign Against Android'

[BaldiMac]

The one about analyzing free form text by a fairly generic and obvious architecture. Also, Lotus had already implemented something very similar some years before.

The other patent is difficult to understand but it seems to be describing some sort of demuxer. Pretty much any mediaplayer, software or hardware, seems to be "in breach" of this patent.

Those are the only two patents that weren't thrown out by ITC, AFAIK.

Here is a list with links to the patents. Which two are you talking about? How are they overly broad and obvious at the time they were applied for.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/02/apple-vs-htc-a-patent-breakdown/

How do you know what data Apple collects?

I read their privacy policy. (Well, skimmed it. ). But seriously, is it not obvious that Google collects and sells more data about you and your online behavior than Apple?

Do you think iCloud will be analyzed by Apple in order to get more interesting data on you? I do.

And there you are shifting goalposts. Collecting data and selling it are two very different things. Of course Apple is going to collect data on their own services.

 

[macsmurf]

Here is a list with links to the patents. Which two are you talking about? How are they overly broad and obvious at the time they were applied for.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/02/apple-vs-htc-a-patent-breakdown/

I'm talking about patent 5,946,647 and 6,343,263. See https://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/15/itc-rules-for-apple-in-htc-patent-case/

I read their privacy policy. (Well, skimmed it. ). But seriously, is it not obvious that Google collects and sells more data about you and your online behavior than Apple?

And there you are shifting goalposts. Collecting data and selling it are two very different things. Of course Apple is going to collect data on their own services.

I think we misundertood each other. AFAIK, Google are not selling info as such. They collect info in order to target ads and they sell their ability to target ads to companies. They don't sell your information directly. Neither does Apple, afaik. Both companies will give you statistics on the people who clicked your advertisement, though.

 

[BaldiMac]

I'm talking about patent 5,946,647 and 6,343,263. See https://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/15/itc-rules-for-apple-in-htc-patent-case/

Okay. How are they overly broad? What evidence do you have that they were obvious in the early 90s?

I think we misundertood each other. AFAIK, Google are not selling info as such. They collect info in order to target ads and they sell their ability to target ads to companies. They don't sell your information directly. Neither does Apple, afaik. Both companies will give you statistics on the people who clicked your advertisement, though.

I understand that. I think that you think that I am trying to make a larger point than I am. Apple's iAd business is a drop in the bucket compared to Google's advertising business. That's it.

 

[techwhiz]

Patent Group (Apple, etc.) vs. Google

The patents are now bogus after they lost the bid???
They had teamed up with Intel and were willing to pay $4 Billion.
Hmmm.... Kind of hard to believe that the patents were bogus at $4 Billion?

You can be rest assured, Intel and Google would have used those patents as a club to beat Microsoft, Apple, etc. How is this any different?

With the bidding so high, a single company didn't want to or couldn't afford an outlay like that.

Put on your grown up underwear Google and "Man Up".
I's a fight, quit whining and get in there.......

 

[aohus]

What was the point of this question? Apple offers several free products. The obvious are Safari, Webkit, iTunes, Bonjour, and Quicktime. And then there is all the soon to be iCloud services.

My point is that they don't offer much to the user that would be considered free, and is productivity driven.

iTunes is bloatware tied to their app store. Its free, but not really, as it is a curated app store that requires a credit card number to purchase most of the products on there. iTunes is only for iDevices too, as you cannot sync non iDevices to iTunes. Very limited in scope.

Quicktime. Ah, proprietary codec software that barely works beyond Safari. Quicktime will be old news as HTML5 takes hold.

Safari may be free, but it is not even close to comparison to Firefox/Chrome in terms of performance, plugins. Face it, Safari is the IE of Macs.

Although I will say, thanks Apple for the WebKit. All browser companies including Chrome team should thank them for the WebKit.

iCloud offers limited storage in comparison to Google. But not really an issue.

Free Google Apps
Google Gmail (the first true mega email storage platform. all others required payments of $10+ / n megabytes
Google Maps (every Apple user should be thanking Google for the maps app on every iOS device)
Google Earth
Google Docs (free word processing/spreadsheets on the cloud. Apple not even there yet)
Google Navigation (Apple doesn't have native Navigation application. Bummer)
Google Sites (free webpage creation)
Google Translate (free translation service)

^^ all that for free, in return, they place miniscule ads on the product you're using. yeah, i totally prefer Google's business model over Apple's, where their goal is for you to buy as much of their hardware as possible year over year.

 

[macsmurf]

Okay. How are they overly broad? What evidence do you have that they were obvious in the early 90s?

Read the thread.

I understand that. I think that you think that I am trying to make a larger point than I am. Apple's iAd business is a drop in the bucket compared to Google's advertising business. That's it.

OK.

 

[bwillwall]

Sigh...

We can only dream

 

[aohus]

<edit>

wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_Treo

 

[Noodlefarmer]

Blah blah blah

The bottom line is that Apple's iPhone, iPad as well as the iPod sell more than anyone else's like product. You can spin the "why" any way you want, but that's a fact. Are they the best? Subjective, but most people seem to think they are. Google does a great job at their core business. But trying to market products that are pretty much a direct ripoff of the Apple ones is going to get them in hot water. They have the money to defend themselves and it may never come to resolution, but having the Mole on Apple's board doesn't make their case stronger. Spending money on R&D and developing new, ground-breaking products might have been a better route. There are smart people outside of Apple. Just tweaking Apple products is pretty weak, though.

 

[aohus]

Google does a great job at their core business. But trying to market products that are pretty much a direct ripoff of the Apple ones is going to get them in hot water. They have the money to defend themselves and it may never come to resolution, but having the Mole on Apple's board doesn't make their case stronger. Spending money on R&D and developing new, ground-breaking products might have been a better route. There are smart people outside of Apple. Just tweaking Apple products is pretty weak, though.

hilarious. you're implying that Google is merely 'tweaking' Apple's existing products?

the amount of over generalizations, weak armchair analysis, and ignorance is mind boggling on these forums.

just an FYI, Android OS is leaps and bounds different from iOS. In fact, it is iOS5 that copied Android OS/Palm OS this time around. Except this time, Android enthusiasts aren't going all insecure when Android OS was initially gaining steam.

and if you're gonna knock on a phone's form factor being similar to the iPhone, thats NOT google's problem. Take it up to the myriad of hardware makers (Motorola, HTC, Samsung, LG).

Google doesn't make hardware. I don't understand how Apple fanboys still don't get that.

 

[ranReloaded]

My point is that they don't offer much to the user that would be considered free, and is productivity driven.

iTunes is bloatware tied to their app store. Its free, but not really, as it is a curated app store that requires a credit card number to purchase most of the products on there.

...none of which will hijack your mobile phone.

iTunes is only for iDevices too, as you cannot sync non iDevices to iTunes. Very limited in scope.

Sure, they should support the Zune too! That's a deal breaker there!

Quicktime. Ah, proprietary codec software that barely works beyond Safari. Quicktime will be old news as HTML5 takes hold.

...And how many browsers support WebM?

Safari may be free, but it is not even close to comparison to Firefox/Chrome in terms of performance, plugins.

Safari runs circles around FF on my Mac. FF is freaking slow. Chrome is constantly trying to starts connections through obscure ports I never heard of... says LittleSnitch.

Face it, Safari is the IE of Macs.

The only OS with an "IE" is Windows. Nothing comes closer to cancer than IE.
Safari is a good browser with very little bugs and very decent support of web standards.
Safari is Application Software, whereas IE is a Computer Virus™.

Stay classy, please...

Free Google Apps
Google Gmail (the first true mega email storage platform. all others required payments of $10+ / n megabytes
Google Maps (every Apple user should be thanking Google for the maps app on every iOS device)
Google Earth
Google Docs (free word processing/spreadsheets on the cloud. Apple not even there yet)
Google Navigation (Apple doesn't have native Navigation application. Bummer)
Google Sites (free webpage creation)
Google Translate (free translation service)

^^ all that for free, in return, they place miniscule ads on the product you're using. yeah, i totally prefer Google's business model over Apple's, where their goal is for you to buy as much of their hardware as possible year over year.

^^ all that just in exchange for your soul. No, thanks; I'd rather stay The Costumer than becoming The Product. At least I'm not forced to upgrade my hardware every year.

 

[ranReloaded]

[...]just an FYI, Android OS is leaps and bounds different from iOS.[...]

Android does not support hardware acceleration of the GUI. Guess why? Because when they had to make the early, big decisions, Android was supposed to be a clone of BlackBerry/WinPhone 6. Then Eric decided to make it more 'iPhone-like', after the fact. To this day android phones' animations are clunky.

Making the wrong decisions on the drawing board, changing course numerous times, patching the un-planned, and have badly allocated hardware resources go to waste and pay the price in performance. Sounds just like Flash.

 

[macUser2007]

The bottom line is that Apple's iPhone, iPad as well as the iPod sell more than anyone else's like product. You can spin the "why" any way you want, but that's a fact. Are they the best? Subjective, but most people seem to think they are. Google does a great job at their core business. But trying to market products that are pretty much a direct ripoff of the Apple ones is going to get them in hot water. They have the money to defend themselves and it may never come to resolution, but having the Mole on Apple's board doesn't make their case stronger. Spending money on R&D and developing new, ground-breaking products might have been a better route. There are smart people outside of Apple. Just tweaking Apple products is pretty weak, though.

Some here live in an alternative universe.

Apple is great at integrating and amazing at design, but hardly a great innovator of late.

Keep in mind that Android OS came into existence about the same time as iOS, and they both borrowed from (gasp!) Windows Mobile, which borrowed from Palm before that, and so on.

The fact is that Apple is currently a patent troll and uses its riches to squash competition in ways that would give Microsoft of yore a blush.

 

[KnightWRX]

Android does not support hardware acceleration of the GUI. Guess why? Because when they had to make the early, big decisions, Android was supposed to be a clone of BlackBerry/WinPhone 6. Then Eric decided to make it more 'iPhone-like', after the fact. To this day android phones' animations are clunky.

Can you be even farther from the mark than this ? At least get it right :

http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=6914

This is something we've investigated a couple of years ago already and that we revisit
regularly. Of course we thought of using the GPU, but there are non-trivial issues on
many Android devices (a G1-class device for instance supports only one OpenGL
context at a time, which would prevent you from using any OpenGL based app like
games or augmented reality apps.) In our past experiments we even found many
cases in which using the GPU was slower than normal rendering.

New devices might allow us to overcome the past limitations that made GPU support
a not-so-good solution.

The "choppiness" and "lagginess" you are mentioning are more often related to heavy
garbage collection than drawing performance.

Gee, I don't see a "we're making a clone here so we can't!" issue, I see a problem with different older GPUs and their software implementation being better as being the cause.

The fact is : even if Android were a "clone", that isn't even near valid a reason to not enable hardware acceleration of the UI.

BTW, vendors that ship their own UI stacks can and have used hw acceleration for them. TouchWiz does at least.

 

[aohus]

...none of which will hijack your mobile phone.

Do you realize that your iPhone is a computer too? Its a PC. Its a mobile personal computing device. Yes, the iPhone gets viruses on it as well. Yes, my iTunes account was hacked as well. Is the walled garden that we call the iTunes app store totally secure? Absolutely not. I have a non jailbroken iPad2 that was compromised. It took Apple 3 weeks to pay attention to my calls/emails to get it corrected as they disabled my entire account.

I'm never 100% secure on any personal computing device. The mere notion that you seem 100% confident in Apple's security is naive at best. Seriously, just read the posts linked below. Btw, these are coming straight from this site itself.

http://9to5mac.com/2011/01/06/hacked-itunes-account-for-sale-across-china/
http://9to5mac.com/2011/03/15/another-scam-app-hits-itunes-kennys-group/
https://discussions.apple.com/message/12964375#12964375

Sure, they should support the Zune too! That's a deal breaker there!

Theres plenty of folks that do not own iDevices. You're implying that its either iDevices or nothing. Failed argument. I was originally stating that iTunes doesn't really account as it is proprietary software that is tied to ONE particular company. Its also a bloatware fest. Whats even funnier is that Apple bundles Quicktime with iTunes. Again, users don't have a choice.

Safari runs circles around FF on my Mac. FF is freaking slow. Chrome is constantly trying to starts connections through obscure ports I never heard of... says LittleSnitch.

You're either lying, or you can't face the truth. Multiple benchmarks and real world testing clearly demonstrates that Safari is behind in performance. Theres not even that much plugin support neither. Stay ignorant though.

^^ all that just in exchange for your soul. No, thanks; I'd rather stay The Costumer than becoming The Product. At least I'm not forced to upgrade my hardware every year.

Soul? Yet you do the same exact thing when you logged into Facebook this morning. As stated in my previous thread comments, thats a weak argument. If you seriously, seriously believe that Apple is not tracking you in anyway, or getting analytical data on their customers, then wow.

Be the blind paying customer whose a rabid fanboy of a publicly traded company whose sole purpose is to please their shareholders, Quarter after Quarter.

Its just not smart to be blindly following a company that just wants to extract money from you at any given moment.

Be a tech enthusiast, not a blind company follower. Its not in your interest. Trust me.

 

[BaldiMac]

My point is that they don't offer much to the user that would be considered free, and is productivity driven.

iTunes is bloatware tied to their app store. Its free, but not really, as it is a curated app store that requires a credit card number to purchase most of the products on there. iTunes is only for iDevices too, as you cannot sync non iDevices to iTunes. Very limited in scope.

Quicktime. Ah, proprietary codec software that barely works beyond Safari. Quicktime will be old news as HTML5 takes hold.

Safari may be free, but it is not even close to comparison to Firefox/Chrome in terms of performance, plugins. Face it, Safari is the IE of Macs.

Although I will say, thanks Apple for the WebKit. All browser companies including Chrome team should thank them for the WebKit.

iCloud offers limited storage in comparison to Google. But not really an issue.

Free Google Apps
Google Gmail (the first true mega email storage platform. all others required payments of $10+ / n megabytes
Google Maps (every Apple user should be thanking Google for the maps app on every iOS device)
Google Earth
Google Docs (free word processing/spreadsheets on the cloud. Apple not even there yet)
Google Navigation (Apple doesn't have native Navigation application. Bummer)
Google Sites (free webpage creation)
Google Translate (free translation service)

^^ all that for free, in return, they place miniscule ads on the product you're using. yeah, i totally prefer Google's business model over Apple's, where their goal is for you to buy as much of their hardware as possible year over year.

So your point was that Apple doesn't offer many free productivity products? Cool point. So what? (And then you choose to complain and present misinformation about the products that counter your claim.)

I prefer to pay for some things rather than be targeted by advertising. What's wrong with that?

Read the thread.

I'm not going to read a 500 post thread because you don't want to bother to defend your claim.

 

[ranReloaded]

Do you realize that your iPhone is a computer too? Its a PC. Its a mobile personal computing device. Yes, the iPhone gets viruses on it as well. Yes, my iTunes account was hacked as well. Is the walled garden that we call the iTunes app store totally secure? Absolutely not. I have a non jailbroken iPad2 that was compromised. It took Apple 3 weeks to pay attention to my calls/emails to get it corrected as they disabled my entire account.

I'm never 100% secure on any personal computing device. The mere notion that you seem 100% confident in Apple's security is naive at best.

Nobody said such thing. Every software has vulnerabilities. But the 'curated' AppStore approach is much better in my opinion. You may visit a website that exploits a vulnerability in Safari, or you may install some nefarious app from Cydia. But it's very unlikely that malicious software will make it through the Apple Review. Just by claiming that "No platform is 100% secure" does not invalidate the fact that the curated iTunes AppStore is 100 times safer than anything else.

Theres plenty of folks that do not own iDevices. You're implying that its either iDevices or nothing. Failed argument.

Wrong. I'm just saying Apple is a hardware manufacturer, not the FSF, and they have no duty to support other manufacturer's devices.

I was originally stating that iTunes doesn't really account as it is proprietary software that is tied to ONE particular company.

So is Google's search algorithm.

Its also a bloatware fest.

So is Microsoft Office. Your point?

Whats even funnier is that Apple bundles Quicktime with iTunes. Again, users don't have a choice.

...aaaand Microsoft sticks Silverlight down your throat at the first opportunity!

You're either lying, or you can't face the truth. Multiple benchmarks and real world testing clearly demonstrates that Safari is behind in performance. Theres not even that much plugin support neither. Stay ignorant though.

Image
Image
Image

I'm just telling you what I've seen on my one iMac. I'm not saying it's the Ultimate Truth.

And benchmarks aren't 100% Real World Scenario, in many cases.

Soul? Yet you do the same exact thing when you logged into Facebook this morning. As stated in my previous thread comments, thats a weak argument. If you seriously, seriously believe that Apple is not tracking you in anyway, or getting analytical data on their customers, then wow.

What I'm saying is I can imagine what Apple will do with my info. And most likely it's only them involved.

Be the blind paying customer whose a rabid fanboy of a publicly traded company whose sole purpose is to please their shareholders, Quarter after Quarter.

Its just not smart to be blindly following a company that just wants to extract money from you at any given moment.

Be a tech enthusiast, not a blind company follower. Its not in your interest. Trust me.

You are talking to the wrong guy. Every company is in for the money.

But I've been to many places and ended up here. I'm not a "Tech Entusiast". I just want to get my stuff done without having to curse all day. I'm not saying Apple is perfect. But they have a strong tendency to get their stuff right. And I am willing to reward them for that. Other companies have earned so many "hate points" that even discovering the cure for cancer won't save them.


Of course, each has their own experiences...

 

[aohus]

Nobody said such thing. Every software has vulnerabilities. But the 'curated' AppStore approach is much better in my opinion. You may visit a website that exploits a vulnerability in Safari, or you may install some nefarious app from Cydia. But it's very unlikely that malicious software will make it through the Apple Review. Just by claiming that "No platform is 100% secure" does not invalidate the fact that the curated iTunes AppStore is 100 times safer than anything else.

its quite clear you have never used Android OS. Google actually tells you, before you install ANYTHING on your device, what the app will do on your phone. Its more of, customer be wary. Even with the curated app store, you will still get viruses, as I noted in my previous comments. Apple devices get hacked into, and this is FACT.

Wrong. I'm just saying Apple is a hardware manufacturer, not the FSF, and they have no duty to support other manufacturer's devices.

no kidding? as I said, the application may be free, but to fully utilize the software, you must purchase an iDevice. I'm merely making the argument that its not really free. Its their software, they can do whatever they wan with it. Thats not my issue. The issue was that its not entirely free, if you want to utilize most of the features on iTunes.

So is Microsoft Office. Your point?

why are you even talking about Microsoft? Oh I get it, you blindly feel that Microsoft = Google? They hate each other. In fact, Google's main competitor has ALWAYS been Microsoft.

...aaaand Microsoft sticks Silverlight down your throat at the first opportunity!

and you're talking about Microsoft again, why? So let me get this straight. Microsoft|Google = the same (because you probably assume that they are dominant on the non Mac sphere), so you somehow now equate Microsoft to Google? made no sense, whatsoever. You're trying to grab straws out of something that wasn't in the subject field we were discussing.

I'm just telling you what I've seen on my one iMac. I'm not saying it's the Ultimate Truth.

And benchmarks aren't 100% Real World Scenario, in many cases.

Real world testing shows Chrome outperforming Safari by a landslide. So far you have your own presonal little anecdote, compared to my reference-heavy links I provided. ok then.

But I've been to many places and ended up here. I'm not a "Tech Entusiast". I just want to get my stuff done without having to curse all day. I'm not saying Apple is perfect. But they have a strong tendency to get their stuff right. And I am willing to reward them for that. Other companies have earned so many "hate points" that even discovering the cure for cancer won't save them.

Oh yeah without a doubt. Apple makes their products work out of the box. And thats wonderful. Personally I see a lot of innovation happening on the Android side right now, and less from iOS. This doesn't make me hate Apple, btw.

 

[BaldiMac]

its quite clear you have never used Android OS. Google actually tells you, before you install ANYTHING on your device, what the app will do on your phone.

No, it tells you what the application will have access to, not what it will do with the stuff it has access to.

Its more of, customer be wary. Even with the curated app store, you will still get viruses, as I noted in my previous comments. Apple devices get hacked into, and this is FACT.

Can you please provide any evidence of viruses infecting an iOS device? Please keep in mind that viruses are a specific type of malware and are not the same as getting hacked.

no kidding? as I said, the application may be free, but to fully utilize the software, you must purchase an iDevice. I'm merely making the argument that its not really free. Its their software, they can do whatever they wan with it. Thats not my issue. The issue was that its not entirely free, if you want to utilize most of the features on iTunes.

And that's not true.

Real world testing shows Chrome outperforming Safari by a landslide. So far you have your own presonal little anecdote, compared to my reference-heavy links I provided. ok then.

Super. But the performance comparison he made was between Firefox and Safari.

 

[aohus]

No, it tells you what the application will have access to, not what it will do with the stuff it has access to.

Still a notification. With the app store, you get 0 notification as to what parts of the phone said app will have access to. You just get the blind trust in the App Store Gods that they approved an app thats track-free/virus-free.

Can you please provide any evidence of viruses infecting an iOS device? Please keep in mind that viruses are a specific type of malware and are not the same as getting hacked.

There was malware associated with jailbroken iPhones. Not exactly the same since it only affects those that jailbroke. Additionally, malware app has been approved by App Store. If there were none, why even have a malware app on the App Store?

And that's not true.

Yet you have no reasoning why its not true. Good one.

Super. But the performance comparison he made was between Firefox and Safari.

And he selectively decided to opt out 'Chrome,' performance. Btw, Firefox, based on those benchmarks, are still better performing than Safari.

 

[divinox]

So Xerox shouldn't have been allowed to patent the copy machine and be the only company to sell it until the patent expired ?

No, especially not considering that the "copy machine" machine has existed for what now? Gutenberg lived in the 13th century, right?

Xerox should be able to patent one specific way of doing copies, not copying per se. Similarly, Apple should be able to patent one way of doing multi-touch, not multi-touch interaction per se. As for gestures and all that crap it first of all shouldnt be patentable, and secondly there is a ton of prior art in the area; the field of touch and gesture-based interaction dates back almost as far as computing itself (and further than the pc).

 

[shompa]

hilarious. you're implying that Google is merely 'tweaking' Apple's existing products?

the amount of over generalizations, weak armchair analysis, and ignorance is mind boggling on these forums.

just an FYI, Android OS is leaps and bounds different from iOS. In fact, it is iOS5 that copied Android OS/Palm OS this time around. Except this time, Android enthusiasts aren't going all insecure when Android OS was initially gaining steam.

and if you're gonna knock on a phone's form factor being similar to the iPhone, thats NOT google's problem. Take it up to the myriad of hardware makers (Motorola, HTC, Samsung, LG).

Google doesn't make hardware. I don't understand how Apple fanboys still don't get that.

iOS and Android share the same core: *nix.
I hope that you also know that Google did not invent Android. They bought Android.

Please explain what iOS has copied from Android.
And please use a real example. The Messenger Center is not copied by Apple. It was available on unlocked Iphones before Android. Apple hired the programmer and integrated into iOS5.

I would respect Google a lot more if they invented their own stuff instead of buying stuff and copying stuff.

Googles culture is to test the boundaries. They have already numerous times get fined for stealing software and unfair business practices.

 

[BaldiMac]

Still a notification. With the app store, you get 0 notification as to what parts of the phone said app will have access to. You just get the blind trust in the App Store Gods that they approved an app thats track-free/virus-free.

Sill, I would rather trust Apple than thousands and thousand of random developers. And the fact of the situation is there in much more malware on the Android Market than the App Store.

There was malware associated with jailbroken iPhones. Not exactly the same since it only affects those that jailbroke. Additionally, malware app has been approved by App Store. If there were none, why even have a malware app on the App Store?

So, basically, you admit that you were wrong? There are no viruses that have infected iOS devices. Your claim was about curated apps from the App Store, not jailbreak apps.

As far as your Malware app, maybe you should read the description. It's for detecting malware on remote servers. It's primary purpose is to prevent you from downloading malware that could infect your PC.

Yet you have no reasoning why its not true. Good one.

I assumed you were purposely using hyperbole and would realize your mistake. The only thing you need to pay Apple for in using iTunes is to purchase stuff from the iTunes Store (Duh!) and to use the built in sync engine. You can easily sync your iTunes library with non-Apple devices using third party software.

That would hardly be considered "most of the features on iTunes."

And he selectively decided to opt out 'Chrome,' performance. Btw, Firefox, based on those benchmarks, are still better performing than Safari.

Yes, he did. He made the claim. If he would have said that Safari is the fastest browser on the Mac, you would have a point. But he didn't.

 

[dethmaShine]

iOS and Android share the same core: *nix.
I hope that you also know that Google did not invent Android. They bought Android.

Please explain what iOS has copied from Android.
And please use a real example. The Messenger Center is not copied by Apple. It was available on unlocked Iphones before Android. Apple hired the programmer and integrated into iOS5.

I would respect Google a lot more if they invented their own stuff instead of buying stuff and copying stuff.

Googles culture is to test the boundaries. They have already numerous times get fined for stealing software and unfair business practices.

You can explain further, but for all I know, your valid comments will be down ranked by the sad android trolls on this forum.
Good luck stating facts on this forum.

 

[voonyx]

You can explain further, but for all I know, your valid comments will be down ranked by the sad android trolls on this forum.
Good luck stating facts on this forum.

Yeah I find it funny that all the ranked down posts are anti-android posts LOL. It's like android users just troll Apple boards to prove they're "OS is better!!"...