Google Facing Difficulties Getting iTunes Competitor Off The Ground

[Wacker293]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8F190)

Looks to me that Google are thinking if Amazon arent breaking there backs to get record labels on board,then why the hell should we!! There just planting a seed in this article saying "talks are breaking down" to get us ready for music lockers rather than an iTunes competetor.

 

[SockRolid]

You want open?

wow the iOS/Apple closed ecosystem must really be the WORSE THANG EVAR if google is trying to trying to do it.

Dumpster fires are open. Weedpatches are open. Cesspools are open.

Pick one and jump in.

 

[rosalindavenue]

already exists - Amazon Cloud/Music Player

Yep. I had an android phone for a year and a half before the Verizon iPhone came out and routinely bought tracks from Amazon; moved them over to itunes, etc. Android users are SOL for movies and TV shows, but Amazon fully covers music. I don't see why Google is bothering to negotiate.

 

[maclaptop]

Let us not compare Apples to turds.

Well we know where your head is at.

 

[ghostlyorb]

I feel like Apple will be in the lead for quite sometime!

 

[gorgeousninja]

iPhone did nothing new. It just took some popular features and combined them. It was more of a game changer due to it being made by apple.

People talk about a so-called 'reality distortion field' about Steve Jobs and yet everyday we get people blatantly ignoring truth because it doesn't fit with their own personal world view.

Yes, there were Palms, and Blackberries, Nokia's, Sony-Ericssons, and Panasonics etc before the iPhone but when we all saw the iPhone everyone instantly knew that was the future; touch-screen, icon based, intuitive, with an emphasis on both design and usability.

You might not like the fact that Apple revolutionized the phone market but history says otherwise.

 

[ssk2]

I don't know why Google is bothering. The Amazon cloud system *should be*/is great and competition enough for iTunes - both in terms of pricing (certainly) and usability (more debatable).

The fact that Android doesn't need an iTunes-esque system to compete with Apple means that they should probably give it up now.

Note: For the fanboys out there, please don't get too excited by this. Amazon's cloud is going to present new and interesting challenges for Apple, I don't think Google's failure to negotiate with the jumped up music industry is necessarily a bad thing, all things considered!

 

[Digitalclips]

As much as I like google as a company, as with everything they start I'm sure they will never finish this. I've come to believe google is incapable of releasing a complete, polished project. But maybe I'm just bitter since I own a 40" google tv that is virtually incapable of doing anything worth doing on a tv.

Google seem to be perpetually in 'beta' on everything. That works fine with Search, Maps, YouTube and Earth but on many products I have backed off as you never know if you put time and effort in to using / deploying them if they will be updated or even be there a year from now. Don't ever expect any support either!

The thought of investing in any hardware reliant on anything from Google would scare the pants off me.

I think Eric's tenure at Google was a disaster. Prior to him Google were innovative and lead in anything they took on. Now they are in a copy cat - catch up mode with Apple and seem to have lost their way. I hope the return of the original leaders will put Google back on track as an innovator. This industry needs more than one company that can do that.

 

[mabaker]

Aw, I almost feel sorry for Google not trying to compete with Apple with their own ideas but blatantly copying them. Pathetic.

 

[Lennholm]

I dislike it when people keep saying that line over and over. Does competition really make products better? Where's the truth in that? If it's truly the case, why do we still see half-baked consumer products for the end user?

If anything, I feel that there seldom really is a better product for us because of competition. A competing product with better specs does not necessarily result in a better product. And frankly, judging by the gadget industry, Apple's been releasing consumer-satisfied products left and right despite better (in specs) products being released by their competitors.

Okay. So did competition [from other manufacturers] make Apple release a better product? No. Because from how the Internet reacts, every other manufacturer outspecs Apple and Apple "overcharges for something you can get with much more for much less"

But Apple does release products to get with the times, however, I feel that Apple products don't need high-end specs to provide consumer satisfaction.

Besides, the iOS today looks the same as the iOS from the iPhone 1 but with upgrades. Did competition spur Apple into doing the upgrades? I doubt it. They seem to have their own idea of where to direct their OS. Honeycomb on the other hand looks and functions very differently from Froyo. That [design decision] instead seems to be driven by competition.

It's hard to know what features Apple wouldn't have included in the latest gen of a product if it hadn't been for competition. Maybe iPad 2 wouldn't have had the improved GPU if it had zero competing products.
One thing I'm certain of, iOS would still not have had personal hot spot if it hadn't been for the competition from Android.

 

[JAT]

When Apple releases their new HD TV the networks will have complete control on pricing with Apple getting it's cut. Apple will provide a complete hardware delivery system for them that operates seamlessly with a click, and has a magical (could not resist) effect on the end user.

No needing to try all this crap streaming through Amazon and such BS. Could even give Netflix a run.

Tivo already did this, over a decade ago. And look at the mess that has existed for them. First with DirecTV, and now Comcast. Uh, and now with DirecTV again.

 

[Lennholm]

People talk about a so-called 'reality distortion field' about Steve Jobs and yet everyday we get people blatantly ignoring truth because it doesn't fit with their own personal world view.

Yes, there were Palms, and Blackberries, Nokia's, Sony-Ericssons, and Panasonics etc before the iPhone but when we all saw the iPhone everyone instantly knew that was the future; touch-screen, icon based, intuitive, with an emphasis on both design and usability.

You might not like the fact that Apple revolutionized the phone market but history says otherwise.

No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.

 

[dethmaShine]

No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.

Where can I find the definition of a smart phone?

 

[qtx43]

... "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. ...

I find this whole "Apple invented the smartphone" argument amusing. But your sentence there, in all its self-contradictory glory, gets to the heart of the matter. The word 'smartphone' preexisted the iPhone (by your own admission). So no matter what new features it had, and however much it revolutionized the market, the iPhone was not the first smartphone. Come up with a new word, maybe GeniusPhone. Apple likes the word 'genius'.

 

[tigress666]

No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.

I have to agree.

The biggest reason the iphone is so great to me is the fact that I could add in other programs and add functionality. I could personalize it with the programs I put on to do what I wanted to do. In fact that was something I snubbed about the iphone when it came out (in comparison to the ipaq I had that I could get other programs for it). And the one snub I don't think I was wrong about (I snubbed it for other reasons but after having one decided either it was a good idea or it wasn't something that really mattered).

If I had to only use the apps Apple gave me... I'm sorry, it wouldn't be that great of a phone. In fact I'm still wondering why anyone would buy the first one that you were stuck only with the basic stuff Apple put on, I really don't know how they convinced people to get interested in the idea. The thing that makes the iphone so great to me is it's ability to be so multi-functional in the ways *I* want it to be. Which is what being able to buy different programs gives it.

I heard somewhere that Apple was forced to let people buy other software (or something like that)? If true, Apple should be thanking that ruling.

 

[dethmaShine]

already exists - Amazon Cloud/Music Player

What's go good about it?

It's like dropbox but free for 5GB.

 

[gorgeousninja]

No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.

No, that is exactly my point, people were not thinking along those lines at all. You can name any phone from the last ten years if you want, and you might as well include Alexander Graham-Bell, and Star Trek. When the iPhone debuted everyone got interested, but just saying that it was 'only because it was Apple' is being extremely disingenuous.
There were also many 'experts' saying that Apple were going to fall flat on it's face trying to take on the 'big boys' of Nokia and Motorola et al.
This is the same roundabout argument that has gone on since Apple started, 'Oh, it wasn't them it was Xerox, Riva, Sony, MS etc etc. Why is it so hard for some to give credit where it is due, and instead try to rubbish everything. It just seems so petty.

 

[georgethomas]

i guess everyone wants a piece of the pie

wouldn't be surprised to see competitors are going after it

the law of big number suggests that a small fraction of the number can lead to a big sales. that is my opinion

 

[notabadname]

It's hard to know what features Apple wouldn't have included in the latest gen of a product if it hadn't been for competition. Maybe iPad 2 wouldn't have had the improved GPU if it had zero competing products.
One thing I'm certain of, iOS would still not have had personal hot spot if it hadn't been for the competition from Android.

This argument is flawed IMO, because, even in a vacuum of competition, Apple is going to advance the product line each year for the purpose of upgrading customers. The business model doesn't work, even in the absence of competition, to allow a product line to become static. To think that Apple wouldn't add features, make it faster, sleeker, lighter, etc is flawed. Even with no competition, there would have been an iPad 2. They are all about selling products, every year. And a lot of that consumer base is in existing customers - they've gotta keep us reinvesting in the product. And it would have to have significant improvements for people like me to trade version 1 for it.

 

[maclaptop]

Y

i don't even know why people bring up the apple ecosystem.

Its simple really.

The Apple ecosystem is very good and quite convenient. Yet it's dictatorial, heavily censored, and some truly great apps are rejected because Apple is afraid that customers will embrace these apps and wonder why Apple failed to incorporate the functionality into the native iOS.

Quite to the contrary of the view Apple Evangelists hold, Apple's iPhone is not the best smartphone on the planet. Excellent? Yes, The best? Not so much.

Oh sure they currently have massive sales volume, but so does, toxic highly fatty fast food.

The realty is the general public wants what most others have, an iPhone - they're a dime a dozen and everywhere, a fad that will eventually fade.

Stay tuned, this movies not over.

 

[matrix07]

No, when Apple revealed the iPhone most people were thinking something along the line of "Apple seriously need to reconsider leaving out 3G and the ability to install software if they want to make it in the smart phone business", a phone that doesn't let you install new software is by definiton not a smart phone. The iPhone 3G was the real deal, ofcourse the first gen was successful, simply because it was Apple, but the 3G was when it turned into a good product and soared in popularity.
And iPhone is far from the first icon based phone and I personally believe the Sony Ericsson P800 and P900 was a big inspiration for iPhone.

It still hurts you, isn't it? When it's Apple that re-invent the phone.
Goes on. Keep denying pal. Let us know how hurt you are. Pundits out there all accepted what iPhone did to the industry. Only bitter person like you can not accept that.

I find this whole "Apple invented the smartphone" argument amusing.

You are one of those idiots crawling at Engadget who saw Macworld 2007 keynote and think only one thing.. "touch screen keyboard? Yuck!!!", I guess. LOL

 

[bpaluzzi]

I just want to sync my music. **** itunes **** what ever. I love bit torrent. I refuse to pay for music or movies.

Proving, once again, you're an absolute wanker.

 

[qtx43]

It still hurts you, isn't it? When it's Apple that re-invent the phone.
Goes on. Keep denying pal. Let us know how hurt you are. Pundits out there all accepted what iPhone did to the industry. Only bitter person like you can not accept that.



You are one of those idiots crawling at Engadget who saw Macworld 2007 keynote and think only one thing.. "touch screen keyboard? Yuck!!!", I guess. LOL

Yes, I'm an idiot for using my iPad's touch screen. You're so perceptive! What are you, 12 years old?

 

[matrix07]

12 years old?

Miss by a mile pal. iPad has nothing to do with your opinion about iPhone. If you can't accept the fact that iPhone has re-invented the phone industry, a fact all the media accepted, then even a hundred iPad in your household couldn't save your ********. You know that if you're older than 15.

 

[qtx43]

Miss by a mile pal. iPad has nothing to do with your opinion about iPhone. If you can't accept the fact that iPhone has re-invented the phone industry, a fact all the media accepted, then even a hundred iPad in your household couldn't save your ********. You know that if you're older than 15.

Miss by a mile, indeed. You can't read.