So, about Apple following their lead. The Patent that that this feature is a Part of was originally granted in 2020 and has authors that left apple in long ago as 2018. Long before Google introduced the feature. Apple’s solutions tend to be far more elegant and thought out than Google’s. That means it’s far more likely Google latched on to a leak and rushed to beat Apple to market with it.
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.
Google Claims Apple Follows Its Lead in Smartphone Innovation: 'We Take It As a Compliment'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There’s also the burning question - just how well does Google’s own implementation of crash detection work as well? So far, we have quite a few YouTube videos stress-testing said feature, plus at least one news report of it working as intended. Can’t say I have heard likewise for Google.
lol google's entire device business is based on following Apple. If not for Apple, their phone would look like what they originally copied: Blackberry.
For me, it's about not being able to do reactions, and how group chats don't seem to work correctly.
No it’s not toxic. It’s just one thing in a long list of things or fads that over the last 5 decades have some harmless fixation. Examples include pet rock and tomagochi.
This is literally how patents work with every single company. Things are patented long in advance of being released, and often are never released.
They tend to be dramatic in their presentation, which does not end well for them at all.
Regardless, the new Pixel 7 Pro looks pretty good.
Edit: https://www.xda-developers.com/google-not-always-first-feature-editorial/
I liked this article.
Regardless, the new Pixel 7 Pro looks pretty good.
Edit: https://www.xda-developers.com/google-not-always-first-feature-editorial/
I liked this article.
Apple knows Siri is garbage but won't let us program a button for Google Assistant, but we have cool emoji's.
Never heard of it. I did look for Apple patent filings on Crash Detection and it predates Google’s release in fact two of the authors had already left Apple a year before Google supposedly announced their version.
It's rare that I agree with Google on anything but Apple should adopt RCS. I'm not going to convince someone who I just met to switch to iPhone just for iMessage, neither is anyone else who uses iPhone, and texting over old school SMS is horrendous compared to newer standards. A company like Apple should take pride in giving users on its platforms a better experience which this would do, not the faux corporate pride of refusing to adopt an open standard just because a competitor was heavily involved in its development. Haven't forgotten how long it took Safari to support VP9...
Not at all. When you have rushed features that are too complex to use, they don’t matter and don’t catch on. It’s why when Google and Samsung rush to market with things Apple is already rumored to be working on Apple still doesn’t bite. When technology catches up to their vision of the features they release them. Within days Google and others will be promising to copy it and two years or more later they do or they pray customers forget.
With only 36 months of OS support. I wouldn’t expect any hardware support.
This is just Google being Google. I like some of the products and the Pixel phone isn’t too bad, but the problem is they have the attention span of a squirrel. They will release some new hardware or software, then drop it like a hot potato leaving their users out in the cold. Google Stadia anyone?
At least when I buy an Apple product, I know I’m going to get support for it.
I agree except for Telegram on the iPhone 14 PM
Attachments
Let us know how it goes. I think if I was going to buy an android phone, the Pixel would be the one. I’m not too sure about that watch but it might be good.
There are things Apple doesn’t always mention in their reasoning for not support things Google is involved in. Most Google supporters have no idea how invasive their tech is or that desktop versions install a server on your hard drive that continues to communicate with Google even when the browser is closed. Chrome is designed for one purpose, to extract as much data as they can by offering free stuff. They are also the new Microsoft of the 90s.
Chrome is the most vulnerable browser on the market, but like Explorer the IT guys at way to many companies are making their web portals dependent on this data pit to function. So, often users have no choice but to be compromised to access the web.
Google’s version on open is not what you think it is. For instance, Android is supposed to be open, but they frown on branches and break compatibility.
It’s the difference in actually developing a product as a focused solution to a problem you’ve recognized and cramming a bunch of half cocked features into a device with the spaghetti method.
if google adds a feature and no one notices, does it exist?