Exactly. And when Apple introduced the iPhone, most of the Apple haters are saying: a smartphone won't work without a keyboard or stylus.
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
Exactly. And when Apple introduced the iPhone, most of the Apple haters are saying: a smartphone won't work without a keyboard or stylus.
Loved is correct. Past tense.
The Google of yesteryear, the "good" Google, circa 2002, is dead. What we left with is a massive parasite, consuming personal data and violating the privacy of users every chance it gets.
It's only a matter of time before more users get clued into the Google scam.
Speak for yourself. I know Google's business model and for me, I don't see it as a scam. Don't mistake your opinion for a fact. I find their offerings just fine, understand the underpinings and how they make their money and I'm fine with it. Gmail, Search, Google Docs, Maps, they are all hugely useful to me.
Dont like wearing kool aide glasses ill look like a hipster!! I have tried android and it's iOS with widgets!! And laggy at that....
My whole point was that they copied Blackberry and then iOS and you agreed that they copy and then changed certain things with every fruity upgrade so therefore I am correct an you fail.
The end thank you for playing
I guess it doesn't. But remember, Android started development in 2003, while the iPhone started in 2005.
Their business model is fine.
The problem is the ad market is maturing, and they don't want to be a mature company, so they are doing all those new things.
If you look at the new things they do, it violets IP including copyright (Google books), movie and TV copyrights (Youtube), encoder parents (WebM), and smart phone parents (Android), and consumer privacy.
It is OK if you feel that you don't mind them taking your personal data. The problem is that they ignore people's privacy settings and track people without consent.
Does that sound like the "Do no evil" company?
Very simple question. If a no-name company does what Google does (track your online behavior, mess-scan books without authors' permission, show movies without licensing, build software without licensing proper patents), would you still be OK with it?
Well, morality should not depend on whether it is done by Google or some small company or individual. If it is immoral for your next door neighbor to track your online behavior, then it is immoral for google to do it. Anything defending those behaviors are simply hypocrite .
that right. i am in fact using a nokia lumia 800 which uses microsoft's windows phone 7.
it works great and a total different look and feel from apple.
and the phone itself feel solid just like iphone.
try holding a samsung phone, i always feel that it will just fall apart anytime.
Absolutely! Apple's corporate philosophy is as squeaky clean as it comes in the corporate world.
Mark
Helps to read the whole story, Google is actively trying to sort things out and most of Google Books is authorised :
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704461304576216923562033348.html
Youtube removes any copyright material when it is reported by the copyright holders. It's a portal that many in the movie, music and TV industry actively use. Like other video sharing sites though, it's hard to police (Vimeo and others have the same issues) but Google tries their best.
There have been no patent lawsuits levied against WebM. Only veiled threats by the MPEG-LA due to the threat to H.264. In fact, the MPEG-LA is getting investigated over the threats by the US D.O.J :
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703752404576178833590548792.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5
Aside from Microsoft's threats, which aren't about Smartphone patents and have never been court tested (and we know what they are claiming thanks to B&N) and Oracle's botched affair of the whole Java lawsuit, Android has been relatively lawsuit free.
And of course, Apple is also guilty of quite a few patent infringements themselves (Visual Voice Mail says hi!) and trademark infringements ( iPhone says hi!) so are you saying Apple is also "evil" ?
Of course not, IP lawsuits and IP infringement are just the name of the game in this modern day and age. Its settled in court, it's a matter of money more than morals.
The Street View and Safari debacles have been since fixed, and frankly, the Street View story was so blown out of proportions it was ridiculous. Don't broadcast your SSID and encrypt your wireless network traffic if you don't want it to be public. Otherwise, you're broadcasting yourself to the world, don't be surprised when someone "listens in".
They have my full consent.
Again, all your big rant, I am aware of all of these situations. I choose to still use their services, in full knowledge of what they do, how they track me, etc... I protect my information when it is required and don't care that they use it to target ads to me when it isn't.
----------
That's why they've had to settle disputes for trademark/patent infringement with others in the past uh ? Because they never lifted anything off of anyone ?
Klausner disagrees, so does Cisco, Nokia, Creative Labs, Kodak and other entities who've had to sue to get Apple to pay up for use of their IP and technologies.
Apple is no different than the rest of the players in the industry. They sometimes ride the line hoping it's going to be cheaper to litigate than license. When it's obvious they're going to lose, they settle and enter into agreements. They are really no different than Microsoft or Google or Oracle or HP or IBM or anyone else in this lawsuit happy business we call technology.
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.
----------
?
Thanks for the info! Learned something!
Dont like wearing kool aide glasses ill look like a hipster!! I have tried android and it's iOS with widgets!! And laggy at that....
My whole point was that they copied Blackberry and then iOS and you agreed that they copy and then changed certain things with every fruity upgrade so therefore I am correct an you fail.
The end thank you for playing
Actually I think you are thinking about Samsung vs iOS and not Android vs iOS.
When I was referring to copying..............
Ya know what? You just don't get it. Not gonna bother.... You win. You are right.....enjoy the limited parameters.
I found it rather funny actually. A very nice depiction of conversations on Macrumors with some more "unicorns ARE real!" individuals.
Not to mention the fact that they've lied to us on some serious issues already with the whole WiFi snooping, the tax evasion issue, and the exploiting of Safari.
Google is not a decent company nor to they have anything to do with technology.
Great point. The more I learn about design (one of my favorite DVDs is Genius of Design and I've read Donald Norman's books) the more I want to never struggle with a bad design again. I feel Steve Jobs' pain.
----------
Fact check:
Apple paid Xerox. M$ did not.
I found it rather funny actually. A very nice depiction of conversations on Macrumors with some more "unicorns ARE real!" individuals.
Nah. Now this is witty.
This is even funnier
Google stabbing the one successful Android phone in the back must be making Steve Jobs smile, right now - wherever he is.
Tim, you did the right thing, pursuing this one. Windows stole Mac and created a monster. This should never happen again.
Now, please make me a 5" iPhone - I need more real estate on my phone, these days. Please We all gave Apple a pass, last year.
I don't want to buy a Samsung, but you're leaving me no choice.
Tim, you did the right thing, pursuing this one. Windows stole Mac and created a monster. This should never happen again.
Now, please make me a 5" iPhone - I need more real estate on my phone, these days. Please We all gave Apple a pass, last year.
I don't want to buy a Samsung, but you're leaving me no choice.
And this is a point that is really being missed.
Google in a very public way took a massive dump on Samsung's face. With Samsung being Android's largest hardware partner, there is sure to be many red faced Korean executives right now.
How this affects their relationship in the future will be interesting.
Fun fact: Apple gave Xerox stock options for the rights to GUI concepts under certain conditions. Conditions which Apple later broke.
I have no idea why some people feel the need to white knight a multibillion dollar corporation. Every company has a long trail of dirty dealings behind them. Up to and including Apple.
----------
Comeon. They made a car that drives itself! How is that not technology?
Google's primary business concern and motivations are in advertising revenue. For that reason, their moral compass is 'off' from day one, their purpose not pure.
It does get them to create outstanding and free services that most enjoy and use but it's a byproduct or must do to generate ad revenues. They don't want growth to slow or mature and they're pushing the limits to make sure it doesn't, at our expense. Because their ultimate goal is to sell ad's first, and provide stellar services second they are a company to be wary of especially as they mature.
In fact, the proof is already out there. They've proven they're going to be as 'evil' as they can get away with.
Personally I'd sooner pay for an excellent service rather than have it free with a bunch of ad's in my face and shady business practices.
Maybe it's possible Google will peak sooner rather that later, they're facing more competition now as well.
If they were taking my credit card information and selling it to black marketeers, I might agree with you. The reality of the situation is far more benign.
As I've said before, it's less "Google knows...." and more "Google knows...I like pizza recipes and 70's horror flicks based upon my search queries". It's no more sinister than the Nielson ratings, expanded to the entire internet.
Admittedly, they've done some flaky stuff in the past. The recent Safari debacle being one of them, and wasn't exactly what I'd call their smoothest move ever. But they haven't done anything that's made me ultra paranoid about them just yet.
This I can agree with 100%. I don't have a moral issue against them, besides the fact I find them annoying more often than not.
Ah, if only Digital had had a time machine (or brilliant executives with the power to convince the rest) and realized that AltaVista could be bigger than the rest of the corporation.
I found it rather funny actually. A very nice depiction of conversations on Macrumors with some more "unicorns ARE real!" individuals.
Super LOL !!!
Reality vs. RDF.
(Wish I could have afforded it at the time. Imagine, a tablet I would've actually bought!)
Feh, they didn't even give it three months before they pulled the plug on the whole thing. I know they were going through some leadership issues at the time, but really, was someone in the upper levels so against it they just threw their $1.2 billion investment away? Sense it does not make.
I honestly think webOS could be absolutely huge if they just put their resources behind it, it deserves way more than what it has gotten.
As much as I hate to say it webOS is dead. If Palm had marketed it correctly, and launched with Verizon first instead of Sprint it would have taken off. They came at a time when everyone that wasn't Apple desperately needed a competing product. It could have, and should have beat out Android as it had more polish to it, and to some degree still does, but you can't rewrite history. I would have loved to see webOS on a 4.3" inch capacitive display phone, but that will never happen.