Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Google Looks to Distance Android from Apple vs. Samsung Ruling

samcraig said:
Yeah -both sides were guilty. Maybe you missed this gem

http://news.yahoo.com/oracle-admits-paying-bloggers-google-fails-comply-judge-224527041.html
Click to expand...

Another example of the dishonorable state of corporate affairs in this country (and around the world). And some of my friends wonder why I am so pro-regulation. Left to their own devices, the corporate and financial sector creed is "screw the other guy, anyway we can, and as fast as we can, before he screws us." Liars, cheats and thieves!

Apple is, of course, the exception! :)

Mark
 
KnightWRX said:
Again, you're thinking Google meant it as a negative. Guess what, Android is an acquisition Google made. OS X is an acquisition Apple made. Both use open source software extensively, etc..

Relax, no one was attacking Apple.

----------
Click to expand...

Didn't they "buy" OSX from NeXT?
 
LordVic said:
it's exactly what he said

> OS X is an acquisition Apple made.
Click to expand...

Yes, but if Next was Steve Jobs', and Steve Jobs, running Apple, buys NeXT... Could that really be considered "buying the technology"? It's still originally the company guy's product, no?
 
twosee said:
Yes, but if Next was Steve Jobs', and Steve Jobs, running Apple, buys NeXT... Could that really be considered "buying the technology"? It's still originally the company guy's product, no?
Click to expand...

Steve Jobs was not an employee of Apple at the time.
Steve and Apple had gone their seperate ways after the Board had forced Jobs out.

Steve jobs founded (or helped found) Next and decided to focus the companies resources on building the next generation of Desktop Operating systems.

Apple started to flounder. Poor business decisions. Failing lawsuits, and virtually bankrupting themselves, Only to be saved by the competition, Apple bought out Next, and all ti's assets including the Operating system in development and Steve Jobs.

that OS would be rebranded as OSx and sold by Apple as it's new OS.
 
LordVic said:
Steve Jobs was not an employee of Apple at the time.
Steve and Apple had gone their seperate ways after the Board had forced Jobs out.

Steve jobs founded (or helped found) Next and decided to focus the companies resources on building the next generation of Desktop Operating systems.

Apple started to flounder. Poor business decisions. Failing lawsuits, and virtually bankrupting themselves, Only to be saved by the competition, Apple bought out Next, and all ti's assets including the Operating system in development and Steve Jobs.

that OS would be rebranded as OSx and sold by Apple as it's new OS.
Click to expand...

NO, I understand all of that. But what I'm saying is that it's all Steve jobs anyway. He co-founded Apple. NeXT is his anyway. so it's not the same as if they went out and bought Windows. So basically, OSX is a Steve Jobs product anyway... technically.

Of Course apple buys technology and software. Look at their upcoming maps for example. But I was talking about OSX in particular. I guess "technically" they did buy it, but it was Jobs' all along anyway. He just "convinced" (read: conned) Apple Inc. into giving him half a billion dollars or whatever it was they paid him for it, and hiring him back.
 
Just read a great perspective on these patent wars over on Gizmodo.
The author proposes that he hopes Apple wins all the appeals. Why?

Here's a snippet:

"We hope Apple wins the patent wars." And happily, they did.

Yes, happily. Don't listen to the obtuse apologists and the blind fandroids of the me-too—this is great news for consumers and technology because it's the End of the iPhone Era.
There was never much doubt that this would be the outcome of the case. Anyone except its most fierce and partisan advocates, everyone with two eyes can see how blatant and crude these Samsung—and Google—copies are. The emails that showed Samsung's intent were the final nails in the coffin.

Microsoft knew this too. Even while the Redmond company had a strong patent agreement with Apple, it knew there was no way it could clone the iPhone and the iPad and get away with it. Neither legally nor commercially. If it really wanted to succeed, Microsoft knew it needed to do something different. Something better—which is why it created Metro and the new Windows Phone. These are the ultimate examples that prove wrong those who claim that there's no way to do things but the iPhone way and thus, Apple's winning the patent wars would kill the smartphone as we know it.

This is, of course, poppycock.

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5938193/apple-winning-the-patent-wars-is-great-for-innovation

I'm a firm believer that this will weed out the weak developers and hardware manufacturers and force them to innovate. Those who don't believe this to be true are on the lazy end of the spectrum. It takes hard work and dedication to ones craft and vision to see beyond your competitor and look into the future - and believe in that future so much, that you risk the future of your product on that future.
 
macnerd93 said:
Why would you change the recipe and do a "Microsoft" i.e giving the interface a whole new style and look. It would just make it confusing for users.

When you have the perfect recipe you very rarely change it, rather just tweak it slightly.
Click to expand...

Yes, good philosophy. Is the same one the Soviet Union used when making cars and toasters. Is good enough, why look for improvement. 10 years later, you look like dinosaur. :rolleyes:
 
twosee said:
Yes, but if Next was Steve Jobs', and Steve Jobs, running Apple, buys NeXT... Could that really be considered "buying the technology"? It's still originally the company guy's product, no?
Click to expand...

No. Steve wasn't at Apple when they bought NeXT. Steve came in the acquisition.
 
twosee said:
NO, I understand all of that. But what I'm saying is that it's all Steve jobs anyway. He co-founded Apple. NeXT is his anyway. so it's not the same as if they went out and bought Windows. So basically, OSX is a Steve Jobs product anyway... technically.
Click to expand...

That's just trying to put a spin on things. Don't even try to go there please.

At the time, Apple was considering both Steve's NeXT or Gasse's Be Inc. If the coin had drop the other way, Jean-Louis Gasse would have headed Apple's last decade and OS X would have been based on BeOS R5, we'd be written iOS software in C++ with a very very fast threading model aimed at multi-media applications.

Apple went the NeXT route instead. It's not all Steve's. Apple wasn't under Steve's control when the acquisition took place.
 
iChrist said:
Yes, good philosophy. Is the same one the Soviet Union used when making cars and toasters. Is good enough, why look for improvement. 10 years later, you look like dinosaur. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They've improved the design of iOS quite a bit since it's fist iteration. Yes, it may generally look, feel, and control the same (20 Icons on a screen), but the functionality has come a long way.

You're suggesting something along the lines of replacing a steering wheel in a car with some other for type of control just for the hell of it.
 
KnightWRX said:
That's just trying to put a spin on things. Don't even try to go there please.

At the time, Apple was considering both Steve's NeXT or Gasse's Be Inc. If the coin had drop the other way, Jean-Louis Gasse would have headed Apple's last decade and OS X would have been based on BeOS R5, we'd be written iOS software in C++ with a very very fast threading model aimed at multi-media applications.

Apple went the NeXT route instead. It's not all Steve's. Apple wasn't under Steve's control when the acquisition took place.
Click to expand...

I know Steve wasn't there when they made the Acquisition, Nor was he brought in to run the company at the time. What I was saying was that in a "Big Picture" sort of way, Steve Jobs c0-founded Apple > Steve Jobs Founded NeXT > NeXT (partially) equals OSX therefore it could be argued that OSX was Apples all along. Just saying that it's not the same as Apple purchasing the mapping companies.

So you are assuming that the decision was based on a coin-flip? Really? Half a billion dollars, possible future technology for a corporation... and it's based on a coin flip that could have gone either way? Hell, I could run Apple that way.
 
twosee said:
I know Steve wasn't there when they made the Acquisition, Nor was he brought in to run the company at the time. What I was saying was that in a "Big Picture" sort of way, Steve Jobs c0-founded Apple > Steve Jobs Founded NeXT > NeXT (partially) equals OSX therefore it could be argued that OSX was Apples all along. Just saying that it's not the same as Apple purchasing the mapping companies.

So you are assuming that the decision was based on a coin-flip? Really? Half a billion dollars, possible future technology for a corporation... and it's based on a coin flip that could have gone either way? Hell, I could run Apple that way.
Click to expand...

missed his point entirely
 
twosee said:
What I was saying was that in a "Big Picture" sort of way, Steve Jobs c0-founded Apple > Steve Jobs Founded NeXT > NeXT (partially) equals OSX therefore it could be argued that OSX was Apples all along.
Click to expand...

Only if you want to pretend reality never occurred in order to satisfy some need for Apple not to be "building on the shoulders of giants". Of course, if you'd rather live in a world with unicorns and leprechauns, be my guess, I won't bother arguing with you.

The rest of us realise that building on the shoulders of giants and acquisitions are not a negative point. They are quite the contrary, positive points that bring about true innovation and thus we salute Apple's use of the method in growing their product portofolio.
 
Wrathwitch said:
Oh please! If you think NOT giving the consumers what it wants in technology is a bad business model, don't ever go into business.

Look what happened to RIM when they didn't "Wake up". They went down.

Google and all of the other handset manufacturers recognized a winning formula and offered competitive products. Not every phone maker copies slavishly everything Apple does.

Apple offered a great product that people wanted. It made sense for other companies to follow suit. If you compare it to designing clunky model T forms for cars instead of the sleek Maserati that the people want just to appear different, you are just begging to go into the hole.

There HAS to be a first when it comes to innovative products, ie flatscreen TVs etc. Trying to change the shape of it just so it doesn't seem like you are copying is stupid. Some items require a certain form function to be practical.

So yes, Apple led the way and Google and the rest followed. There always has to be a first but assuming that others won't follow an excellent idea and try to improve on it is just plain naive and stupid.

In the long run we as consumers benefit from ground breakers and those who attempt to improve on what the ground breakers offer.
Click to expand...

If companies would have actually improved, and not copied apple, we wouldn't have had any of these lawsuits. But they didn't improve on the "concept" of the iPhone, they just copied it!! Anyone can see they copied it. That is why apple won the lawsuit. The evidence was all in paper and you have to be a apple hater or a fandroid to argue.
Look at Windows Phone 7 and you can see what improving on a concept can come up with and if you wanna use apple patents then you gotta pay up like Microsoft does!!
 
samcraig said:
missed his point entirely
Click to expand...

No, I think he's just nitpicking at my generalization and totally missed MY point.

All I am asking, is that if it generated from a Steve Jobs product... isn't it basically all "in-house" anyway? Meaning... assume Steve was never ousted in the first place, and given the liberty he had after his return... is it possible that OSX would have arrived at the same point it is now without any acquisitions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back