Google Co-Founder Accuses Jobs of 'Rewriting History' of iPhone and Android

[dogie678]

absolutely agree.

Android as we now think of it existed in NAME ONLY—it was a mobile OS, yes, but for a NON-touch-based blackberry-like phone with a small screen. You know.... the kind of device everyone assumed was where the future lay, until Apple showed a different future. (Yes, I know they had the Newton AGES ago, but putting it all together into something that really worked WELL for people began with the iPhone.)

Where Google copied Apple—and Jobs is right—is in making an iPhone-style touch OS for touch-centric hardware.

Copying the iPhone transformed the Android project. Just Google for the pre-iPhone Android prototype photos. Look at the hardware AND the OS from back then. Then look at Android AFTER the iPhone came along.

I’m glad people are copying Apple and bringing competition—this will make my iPhone better! But Jobs isn’t the one re-writing history.


EDIT - Here is Android (mimicking RIM, not Apple) before the iPhone:

 

[*LTD*]

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.)

Nope, not a crappy phone. It's a network issue. Networks abound. There's a world outside the US, and frankly, we're quite happy with our iPhones.

http://thenextweb.com/apple/2010/06/23/80-of-iphone-sales-international-this-year/

Reception is pristine and reliable with Rogers here in Canada. If the US gets a raw deal, oh well.

 

[AidenShaw]

Ummm, so you don't even own an iPhone, yet can make comparisons to how well it does or doesn't work?

Yes, because I have a life, and I have friends with Iphones. I see a lot of A-B comparisons where AT&T sucks, and Verizon is fine.

At a restaurant in downtown SF (theatre district) - four of us, two Iphones, two Verizon smartphones. Want to check the theatre times - Iphones, no signal (voice or data). Verizon - 4 bars 3 G.

MBA keynote at Moscone. Iphones - useless. Had a bunch of people around my Verizon WinMo phone "listening" to the keynote play by play that they couldn't get on their Apples.

Thanksgiving at a friend's house near Sutro tower. Verizon Droids and my husband and my WinMo Samsungs fine. Apples no bars.

When your friends with Apple phones ask you to look something up on the web using your Verizon WinMo phone - you know that something is wrong in Apple-land. When it happens time-and-time again - you wonder why they haven't tossed their Apple-phones into San Francisco Bay. (Not really, since you'd expect them to properly dispose of Iphones in the toxic waste pickups.)

The Iphones have a nicer UI - if they can get a usable signal, which isn't that often in my obviously subjective experience.

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 ?

That's OK - most Iphone users don't realize how bad AT&T really is.

 

[KnightWRX]

Reception is pristine and reliable with Rogers here in Canada.

How I like proving you wrong each time :

And yet you keep coming back with this weird fantasy...

 

[rjohnstone]

That's OK - most Iphone users don't realize how bad AT&T really is.

Most non-iPhone users know AT&T is no better or worse than the other guys.
iPhone users suffer more due to the poor antennae design in the iPhone.

I've been saying this since I got my 1st gen iPhone back in 2007.
My Nokia N75 has always had better reception then any of my iPhones.

 

[frankly]

The Google executives need to talk to each other...

I'm really surprised that no one has pointed this out yet. This is so ridiculous for Brin to even be mentioning this for one simple reason. His Vice President of Engineering, Vic Gundotra said the EXACT OPPOSITE just a couple of months ago when explaining why Google made Android.

If we did not act, we faced a draconian future. Where one man, one company, one carrier was the future.

These guys need to either get on the same page or just shut up.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

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.

Apple prototypes go back to the same time they were first working on the iPod.

 

[deconstruct60]

I'm really surprised that no one has pointed this out yet. This is so ridiculous for Brin to even be mentioning this for one simple reason. His Vice President of Engineering, Vic Gundotra said the EXACT OPPOSITE just a couple of months ago when explaining why Google made Android. .

1. Pre-iPhone that was RIM also. Or if Windows mobile swept the market it would be Microsoft. Apple, Microsoft, or RIM dominating the market in monopoistic ways is whacked.

2. Frankly, one side talking smack usually results in the other side talking smack. As someone who isn't slinging FUD everything day Brin is in better position to call it as it is.

Can't remember where saw it (perhaps daringfireball site ) but at the technical level Apple and Google folks wonder what the drama is whereas the upper management folks are busy slinging FUD at each other. Sounds about normal for two large companies.

 

[FX120]

Apple prototypes go back to the same time they were first working on the iPod.

You're (any many other people) are still missing the point:

Jobs was accusing Google of entering into the phone business in a response to the iPhone and knowingly going head to head with Apple. This is not correct as Google had been working on a phone back in 2005. It doesn't matter what the configuration of the device was, or how it looked, or how crappy it was, just that Google was actively perusing the development of a mobile OS at that time. It doesn't matter when Apple started working on the iPhone, it could have been 1982 but the important fact is that the project wasn't public until 2007. While Google obviously had some advance insider details on the project, I doubt they knew fully about it prior to the purchase of Android, Inc. Contrary to Jobs' statement, Google didn't go out and start developing Android as soon as they got a taste of the iPhone.

 

[frankly]

1. Pre-iPhone that was RIM also. Or if Windows mobile swept the market it would be Microsoft. Apple, Microsoft, or RIM dominating the market in monopoistic ways is whacked.

2. Frankly, one side talking smack usually results in the other side talking smack. As someone who isn't slinging FUD everything day Brin is in better position to call it as it is.

Can't remember where saw it (perhaps daringfireball site ) but at the technical level Apple and Google folks wonder what the drama is whereas the upper management folks are busy slinging FUD at each other. Sounds about normal for two large companies.

What are you talking about? I can't make heads or tails of your response. Did you realize that in my post I was not saying that Brin and Jobs were saying the opposite of one another. But that Google's public stance on this issue has been two different positions that are directly opposite of one another. One says that Google had to do Android in order to avoid Apple running the entire show and the other says no we were doing Android long before Apple even did the iPhone.

They can't both be right.

You're (any many other people) are still missing the point:

...

Contrary to Jobs' statement, Google didn't go out and start developing Android as soon as they got a taste of the iPhone.

You're right. But Google DID go out and start developing an iPhone look-alike version of Android as soon as they got a taste of the iPhone.

 

[DMann]

Ummm, so you don't even own an iPhone, yet can make comparisons to how well it does or doesn't work?

Which amount to vicarious, non-experiences based solely on sporadic incidence, hearsay, and non-related issues. (Moscone 2010)

Sadly, some will do anything to rummage up and spew out negativity toward Apple, and AT&T.

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.

Same here - I live in Manhattan, travel to the west coast often during the year, and have had very few problems with 3G service overall, with the exception of regions throughout PA and Ohio, where Edge kicks in reliably. The iPhone 4, so far, has been as robust and reliable with calls, data, and data+calls, if not more than the 3G and 3GS.

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.

Having used various WinMo Samsung phones, I agree.

...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.

This will likely be the case, when it happens.

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?

Well said.

It would be fairly easy to post anecdotes and stories of Verizon's sluggishness, spotty coverage, dead spots where AT&T's signal is strong, etc. Having previously been a Verizon Wireless customer, these accounts wouldn't be 'once removed.'

But that would be lame.

 

[Max(IT)]

How to turn a simple well known fact to all into a 2000 page thread on MR.

Arn is laughing all the way to the bank.

Everyone knows LG was first to market with a full touch screen phone. Everyone knows Symbian and J2ME came years before the iPhone SDK. Everyone knows about Opera Mini and Opera Mobile being here before Safari Mobile. Everyone knows Google purchased Android in 2005, way before iPhone or Eric Schmidt at Apple.

Do we need yet another argument about iPhone changing anything besides the way you hold your phone ?

And everyone knows that Android suddenly switched to an Iphone-wannabe in 2007, well after iphone succesfull launch, but you are going to ignore it ...

 

[capn7]

Who cares?

 

[macsmurf]

And everyone knows that Android suddenly switched to an Iphone-wannabe in 2007, well after iphone succesfull launch, but you are going to ignore it ...

Android is an operating system, not a phone. It works on a number of different form factors.

You guys are simply making up the facts as you go along. I guess they fit the narrative better. I'm actually surprised the iPhone 4 antenna issues haven't been blamed on Google yet.

 

[Mister Snitch]

Well of course, Larry. Because we all know that iPhone development didn't start until it was announced....

Indeed. Talk about 'rewriting history'!

the important fact is that the project wasn't public until 2007. While Google obviously had some advance insider details on the project....

As soon as you made the statement, you knew you had to qualify it. What was "public" not only is not an "important fact" - it didn't matter at all. Google was on the board. They didn't just have "some advance knowledge", as you laughably claim. They knew exactly what Apple was planning, along with the rest of the board.

Epic fail.

 

[MorphingDragon]

How I like proving you wrong each time :

And yet you keep coming back with this weird fantasy...

That doesn't prove anything, I could stand a couple kilometres away from Vodafone's nearest tower than bash how bad it is then say everybody should move to 2degrees.

I would define reliable reception as having reception, at least 1 bar in 99% of the country.

 

[Carniphage]

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.)

That's an interesting interpretation; The real cellphone companies did all the hard stuff, and all Apple did was add a spot of eye candy on top of these heroic efforts.

If it were that simple, anyone could do it. It would be trivially easy for these real cellphone companies to regain the lead from this upstart.

And yet in three years, that has not happened. Nokia's N-Series devices - which are the ones sold in the same category as the iPhone have halved in sales (and halved again). Motorola has ..err. rolled over. Sony Ericsson has all but given up too. If Apple stood on the shoulders of giants, how come the giants still can't reach the cookie jar?

On the software side, Microsoft's response has been to dismiss, the iPhone, and finally they are going to reboot "Windows" on the phone by eradicating any sign of Windows from the device.

The only credible responses to iPhone have been from Palm and Android. The market did not reward Palm's effort. And that leaves Android.

This demonstrates that the special sauce is not old-school phone technology. The market is actually interested in software which creates a brand new platform.


C.

 

[imageWIS]

I think Google is starting to whine ... and it's sounding more and more like a rich and spoiled teenager who doesn't get to use the Bentley hardtop for their Friday night date, and instructed instead to use the less expensive Rolls convertible.

We all could do with a bit less whining and a bit more incredible hardware and software that makes our lives easier and easier.

Actually, in terms of price: Rolls > Bentley.

 

[fuwafuwa]

Android is an operating system, not a phone. It works on a number of different form factors.

You guys are simply making up the facts as you go along. I guess they fit the narrative better. I'm actually surprised the iPhone 4 antenna issues haven't been blamed on Google yet.

Hmm, OK. Android is an OS that is intended to work with hardware keyboard, but suddenly evolve into multitouch OS after having intense contact with iPhone.

 

[ChazUK]

Hmm, OK. Android is an OS that is intended to work with hardware keyboard, but suddenly evolve into multitouch OS after having intense contact with iPhone.

Erm.... iOS is a derivative of Mac OSX that evolved into a multitouch OS. If OSX can do it, why couldn't Android evolve in the same vein?

 

[MorphingDragon]

Erm.... iOS is a derivative of Mac OSX that evolved into a multitouch OS. If OSX can do it, why couldn't Android evolve in the same vein?

In terms of the base system, the only thing that iOS and OSX have in common is the Foundation Framework and the Darwin Kernel.

 

[ChazUK]

In terms of the base system, the only thing that iOS and OSX have in common is the Foundation Framework and the Darwin Kernel.

Is that not enough to make it a derivative of OSX?

 

[MorphingDragon]

Is that not enough to make it a derivative of OSX?

Technically no, what makes Mac OSX, Mac OSX is the AppKit framework. What makes iOS, iOS is UIKit. UIKit was written to be syntactically similar to AppKit, but the relation really stops there.

A derivative would be OpenGL -> OpenGL ES

 

[KnightWRX]

That doesn't prove anything, I could stand a couple kilometres away from Vodafone's nearest tower than bash how bad it is then say everybody should move to 2degrees.

In a proper covered area, it shouldn't matter how far you stand from 1 particular tower, since you'll pick up reception from the next one instead. That is what *LTD* pretends Rogers' network to be. The reality is, Rogers covers metropolitan areas and highways well, and leaves big gapping holes everywhere else.

You're in New Zealand. I don't comment on your cell coverage, please don't comment on mine.

And yet in three years, that has not happened. Nokia's N-Series devices - which are the ones sold in the same category as the iPhone have halved in sales (and halved again). Motorola has ..err. rolled over. Sony Ericsson has all but given up too. If Apple stood on the shoulders of giants, how come the giants still can't reach the cookie jar?

Is that why Apple is in distant 3rd place in market share ?

What are you talking about ? Just because you're stuck in the Apple Blogosphere doesn't mean that elsewhere all these people aren't doing stuff.

Nokia is still 1st in worldwide marketshare of "smartphones", RIM is still second. All other handset manufacturers never shipped vast amounts and always fought for the crumbs. Now Apple fights for the crumbs too.

In the entire cellphone market, Apple is a drop of water in the ocean.

And last I checked, Sony all but gave up ? They just finished transitionning from Windows Mobile to Android. They have 2 new form factor handsets coming out with Android (Xperia X10 Mini and Xperia X10 Pro) and their current flagship (Xperia X10) is a very cool phone, I see tons of em around on Rogers which is pushing them.

Some of you guys need to step out of the reality distortion field. Apple is not leading the market. Not by a longshot.

 

[FX120]

As soon as you made the statement, you knew you had to qualify it. What was "public" not only is not an "important fact" - it didn't matter at all. Google was on the board, and of course the board knew exactly what Apple was planning.

Epic fail.

Go ahead and ignore that Eric Schmidt wasn't on the board until late 2006, again well over a year after Google's purchase of Android, Inc, and likely about the time that Apple brought Google on board to help develop software applications for the iPhone.