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 Looks to Distance Android from Apple vs. Samsung Ruling
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The average user probably does not pick a phone based on the operating system. They base it on the carrier service, then what phones they offer.
Hmmm, from 2008 to end of 2011 Google earned $500M from Android. And the ironic part is that Google earns more from iOS then from Android.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/google-earns-four-times-more-from-ios-than-android/
And to think it must be a fact because you stated it as such.
So, its a combination of hardware choice, price choice, and operating system choice.
This Choice thing must be funny
----------
Awww, only 500 million dollars? profit is still profit.
Um, Android hovers at over 50% of the smartphone marketshare?
So, its a combination of hardware choice, price choice, and operating system choice.
This Choice thing must be funny
Which is completely different than what you were claiming in the post that I responded to.
Ok, seems in 2009. I thought notifications/center was used way before then. I would not be surprised if Google & Apple already have some sort of an agreement if the patent does get approved.
Congratulations on joining the "stock price is a function of investors' expectation of future cash flows" party about 80 years behind everyone else.
Which points to the fact that profits are not soaring for Google with respect to Android. With the introduction of iOS 6 this year, the profits from iOS to Google are going to shrink. No more Google maps. Marketshare is no indication of success, profit is. The netbook manufacturers learned that the hard way.
Google's "notification center" patent that is repeatedly brought up does not appear to be infringed on by Apple's iOS implementation.
Wow, a little harsh and unrealistic isn't it. Can't you at least find it in your heart to give them major credit for a terrific search engine as well as an awesome MAPS/STREETVIEW?
Fast forward five years to eight years.
Apple iOS 60% market share
Microsoft mobile OS 20% market share and rising
Android market share 15% market share and falling
Others 5% market share
Can I please borrow that crystal ball of yours, or are you perhaps related to the AMAZING KRESKIN?
Or is this more like wishful thinking?
Five years is a long time; in the tech-world it's a very long time, never mind eight years! 
Android does not and has never looked anything like iOS. Unless you count icons. You can't be serious if you mean icons.
----------
The patent was filed for in 2009 :
Notification of Mobile Device Events
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't use their search and there's nothing special about Maps, seeing as the ability to map something has been around for years before Google came along and you can do the same thing on Bing Maps.
It may or may not. I dunno, and I don't care. All I know is that I greatly prefer it to the old notification center, and don't want it to go away just because Android did something similar first.
It's great for illustrating the two-sidedness of some people here, though. Those who consider pinch-to-zoom in Android to be "stolen", whereas a nearly identical dropdown notification center appearing in iOS nearly a year after it's debut in Android is...hey...perfectly okay.
I think that's the most annoying thing about discussing topics on here. No one is really objective. Save for a couple of people, almost everyone has an extreme bias one way or the other.
...case in point.
Nice rant. Except that I wasn't comparing Android's notification center to the iOS notification center. I compared it to the implementation described in the patent claims.
Nor have I ever said anything about pinch-to-zoom that I can remember.
I kinda used you as a jumping off point for my rant. That second paragraph wasn't directly aimed at you.
Except your source doesn't support your claim. It's from November 2007. 10 months after the iPhone was first demonstrated.
Except in the same video he shows off 2 devices, one of them being the device that everyone says Android was like before iPhone. So I'm just pointing out that both devices existed simultaneously.
If you haven't noticed any improvement on Android devices or handset designs then it is because you are looking through rose coloured kool aid glasses and just AREN'T willing to look around. I really don't have the time to do the internet research to link to you the hundreds of ways that phone makers have improved based on the ground breaking model that Apple provided. Not every handset maker COPIED Apple, but they did take their model as what to build success on.
If you took Android and iOS as baseline comparisons as to who has developed faster and better over the years, you will notice that Apple has been slow and steady much like the tortoise and Android much like the hare in leaps and bounds. Contrary to story book tales, slow and steady does NOT win the race. I wish I had the energy to do the research to bring up the differences since inception of each OS to show "improvement" comparison.
Everyone goes on about how Android seems unfinished or not as polished. Well consider that much like Apple (who designed or modified someone else's OS) that Android has had to take a different OS and build it up to not resemble iOS. Apple started 5 yrs or so before they released their iOS device. Android came to life as a viable OS AFTER and has had to do their research and development on the fly.
Ditto!
Fully agree. $3B would be the entire profit from Samsung's mobile division for last quarter, but regardless these companies can recover from that kind of set back. The biggest thing about the result of this trial is the validation of the utility patents regarding the user interface. Samsung will have to code TouchWiz around those patents now and come up with some new icons. Stock Android by-and-large has already been coded around the Apple utility patents (some exceptions, depending on your interpretation of the patents).
Actually, if you look at the history of it, Andy Rubin produced the Hip Top software with his startup, Danger Inc., from 1998 to 2002. He then took that experience with him when he founded Android Inc. in 2003, which Google bought in 2005, a good 2 years ahead of the iPhone launch.
Android didn't just "come to life" after the iPhone, Andy has a long history of doing mobile OSes and that's where Android sprang from.
And if anything, iOS also looks unfinished. I still cringe at any screenshot of iPhone OS pre version 4.0. Black background... ugh. My 2003 bought T610 from Sony Ericsson had configurable wallpapers, it took Apple until iOS 4.0 to ship them, and even then, they didn't manage to give them to iPhone 3G owners. My 486 could display a bitmapped image in the background of its 14 inch monitor running at 640x480 resolution, yet a 2008 shipped iPhone with a ARM processor and dedicated Imagine Technologies PowerVR GPU about 50 times as fast couldn't.
----------
I missed the ruling on the trademark claims relating to the icons. Can you point to it ? I still haven't found anything. It was not part of the Jury form, nor the 700 questions, there is nothing in the verdict about them. Were they treated as part of a summary judgement ?
Looking through the available Timeline, the last mention of the trademark claims (the ones about icons) seems to be document 75, Apple's amended complaint. The claims start at 69, as Apple seems to have added the iPad stuff to this complaint...
Then there doesn't seem to have anything else said about those trademark icons. Under seal ?
It's not unrealistic by any means.
Remember when search equaled Yahoo and it was trading at an all time high of $118.75...
Yeah, I do. I remember when Yahoo and Altavista and then MSN search was what we were stuck with. The search engine itself was poor, often results being based on paying customers of the search engine's controlling entity rather than actual usefulness.
Then there was the god awful trend of making "Portal pages" as the start page of any search engine where the search bar was buried under a mess of categories you could "Browse" through instead of entering search criteria.
Google showing up with an uncluttered start page, a simple search field, a logo and 2 buttons and an actual algorithm that could classify results based on their relevance and usefulness (pagerank) was quite refreshing.
They also had the 10,000 cheap PCs running the whole thing and as Larry Page demonstrated in those days, they didn't even bother to unrack those that died.
Yes, anyone who remembers when search equaled Yahoo! remembers why we all loved Google and why it is the #1 search engine today.