Technically apple didn't make the first iphone by themselves, most of the "phone" stuff was made by companies that already made phones.
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 Co-Founder Accuses Jobs of 'Rewriting History' of iPhone and Android
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Technically apple didn't make the first iphone by themselves, most of the "phone" stuff was made by companies that already made phones.
I've got family members and friends with Android phones. And after all the hype from Google and their fans I must say I was expecting much more out of the Droid Eris and Moto Droid. I thought the HTC Sense UI gave a bit more polish than Motorola's Droid, but both fell far short of the feel of the iPhone. Android does do some things better, but that's like saying the Oakland Raiders have the best punter in the league. Sure it may be something to brag about, but all people care about is the number of Superbowls you've won.
But I am guessing that every user is not the same as you or I regarding their preference in UI. Some clearly prefer the Android experience. Personally, I wonder how much of that is personal opinion or mass anti-Apple opinion due to sour grapes because iPhone never came to other carriers. Either way, the Android phones should come up with an innovation or two that Apple will steal and enhance in turn. The one-up-manship should be good for us. I must say I am impressed that Apple made a quality camera with a backlit sensor in the iPhone-4 rather than just focusing on megapixels. The masses look at the number of megapixels, but the iPhone-4 just takes better pictures. That is the mark of the attention to detail that I like about Apple.
Not to say that Apple doesn't miss some things, but I still think the team they field is going to win more Superbowls. And thus draw more fans and have the greatest number of haters.
Wait, which company are you referring to here ? Because it's surely not Apple, since they did neither of these.
Google is not listening...
Having a product and not bring it to market does not make you the world's leader. Or even, acknowledged as one. Google had ample amount of time and resources to bring a device to market before the iPhone. "Why" you ask, " didn't they do it?" Here the answer:
Marketing research. At the time, they listened to the "so called" experts that told them there "wasn't a market for that stuff", it would be "astronomically expensive", "the ordinary person couldn't afford that luxury" and it would be deemed as a "business only" product and "not many businesses wouldn't adopt it". They fell into the same rut as did 90% of the cellphone makers at the time. Google inherited the very same attitude as the others: gradually release little improvements, and features of cellphones to the masses a bit at a time. Almost releasing 4 or 5 models a year, just to entice the consumer enough to keep them 'wanting', for however little crap it was. So Google just kept on "developing" their OS, not interested in the actual phone product -- until Apple secretly revealed "they are working on something". Then they got interested -- so much so -- they were willing use Apple as a test market -- see if this stuff really flies. Once the iPhone took off, and not failed once, it was time for Google to play catch up.
Now they want credit for being a pioneer.
Having a product and not bring it to market does not make you the world's leader. Or even, acknowledged as one. Google had ample amount of time and resources to bring a device to market before the iPhone. "Why" you ask, " didn't they do it?" Here the answer:
Marketing research. At the time, they listened to the "so called" experts that told them there "wasn't a market for that stuff", it would be "astronomically expensive", "the ordinary person couldn't afford that luxury" and it would be deemed as a "business only" product and "not many businesses wouldn't adopt it". They fell into the same rut as did 90% of the cellphone makers at the time. Google inherited the very same attitude as the others: gradually release little improvements, and features of cellphones to the masses a bit at a time. Almost releasing 4 or 5 models a year, just to entice the consumer enough to keep them 'wanting', for however little crap it was. So Google just kept on "developing" their OS, not interested in the actual phone product -- until Apple secretly revealed "they are working on something". Then they got interested -- so much so -- they were willing use Apple as a test market -- see if this stuff really flies. Once the iPhone took off, and not failed once, it was time for Google to play catch up.
Now they want credit for being a pioneer.
Where do you guys keep coming up with this stuff ? Larry Page simply said it's disingenious of Jobs to claim Android was the result of Apple's sour grapes towards Google because Jobs knew of Android before Eric Schmidt was on Apple's board.
That is all he said. He didn't claim anything else. And he's right.
Where did Jobs ever claim that "Android was the result of Apple's sour grapes towards Google?"
The only thing I remember Jobs saying about it was "We did not enter the search business, Jobs said. They entered the phone business."
Uh uh, and yet he knew about it since 2005. Since before all the deals to put Google apps on iPhone. Since before Eric was on the board.
Hence why Larry Page is saying Steve is revising history. Google didn't just "enter the phone business" in 2008. They had already been publicly working on it.
I'm not sure what your point is here buddy, where did jobs ever make the claim you said he did?
Exactly. Apple (and Google) rode in on the back of years of hard work done by other companies with network standards and infrastructure, plus development of mobile device voice/data communication, high res displays and mobile GPUs.
This waiting was smart, but gets no extra bravery credit for hanging back while other companies had to struggle with 176x220 black and white displays with simple cursor keys on devices with limited memory and slow cpus.
(Actually Apple jumped in a wee bit too early, since now they have to support legacy 320x480 apps, something I'm sure they'd love to quickly leave behind.)
You're the one that quoted him.
My point is that this is what Larry Page is talking about. Not anything other that people are making up here.
Errrrrrr ...... the iPad is not a "touch-based tablet" ? Seriously?
Or are you trying to draw a distinction between the final set of features the iPad has and what this R&D progenitor had ? That internal project was the progenitor of many of the elements for both iPhone and iPad.
What Jobs said was quite clear. Apple was working on a table. Then they decided to do a phone. It is pretty clear which one of those predates the other. The gestation period for the two is different, but that denotes the end points not the beginnings.
If you are working from the assumption that all good comes from 1 Infinite Loop - it's easy to miss how late Apple really was to the smartphone party.
My 2006-era smartphone is still very usable - and, since it's on Verizon, often more usable than an Iphone 4 (or 3G or 2G or 1G) here (San Francisco & the Peninsula).
The best phone in the world on a crappy network is a crappy phone. (Yes, technically the problem is AT&T, but as long as Steve Jobs and Randy Stephenson are sleeping in the same bed (wanna bet on who's the top?) there's no practical difference. If Apple cared about the problem, you'd have a Verizon Iphone in weeks.)
+1
And what they'd shown the world--and Apple--bore no resemblance to what Apple was developing in secrecy. Then, when Apple unveiled the iPhone, ta-daaa, here's an Android phone miraculously just like it!
My wife always says that you can't trust a man whose wife can't trust him. Eric Schmidt is a worm.
A pre-iPhone Android phone:
You claimed that Jobs said "....google entering phone business".
Frankly, Jobs didn't not say this until recently. It really isn't the "phone" business unless specifically talking about the Nexus One. It is really the platform business. Just like iOS , Android is aimed at small, primarily hand held computer folks can be aligned into buying.
When iPhone apps were going to be web apps both Andriod/iOS were more aligned with each other than than different. The tension gets significantly greater between the two when it starts to become platform specific binaries as being the primary focus. At that point iOS apps start to compete with Google apps and they do overlap much more. Google has been moving along web apps for as least as long as this supposed "phone" rivalry.
Uh, so Apple knew Google was working on a phone, hired their CEO to sit on their board of directors while knowing this fact and somehow, it's Google's fault ?
Can I use Kool-aid today or will that result in leekholer blowing a gasket again ?
Google shouldn't compare when they started to when Apple launched. Obviously, Apple started development years ahead of their own launch also. And leaks, as well as typical cooperate espionage was taking place early in the game before Apple made a public announcement. Getting themselves in position to compete with Apple would easily have happened ahead of Apple's announcements, so of course Google purchased Android back then. And if they can't admit that Apple's entry into the market was the most important influence on their own entry and development of Android, they have zero credibility.
I have a p910. I loved the phone, downloaded apps, etc. It looks more like a blackberry with the keyboard popped out. No comparison. Nothing like android today and iPhone.
Ummm, so you don't even own an iPhone, yet can make comparisons to how well it does or doesn't work? Give me a break. I'm an airline pilot, and stay in all the major US metros with great regularity. I don't have any problems. That has been with every iPhone model, including the 4. A great phone on an occasionally crappy network is only occasionally crappy. Your crappy phone, even on your utopian-like, perfect network, is always crappy. And the day Verizon gets the iPhone, their network will also be slammed by people who actually enjoy using their phone and consuming a lot of data.
It just cracks me up how so many people can rate a network they don't even use. Have any reviews for any movies you've never seen also?
Wait, you dig into the guy for not owning an iPhone and criticizing it, and then you go ahead and criticize his phone without even knowing what it is ?
Do you realise how hypocritical you just sounded ?