And the same can be said bout the iBooks store. It wouldn't have existed had it not been for the Amazon Kindle.
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 Set to Roll Out eBook Sales as Early as Next Month
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And the same can be said bout the iBooks store. It wouldn't have existed had it not been for the Amazon Kindle.
The difference is that Apple doesn't have it's foot jammed up every possible place they can put it like Google.
Both doing what they are doing currently right now?
Apple have got / had their hands also in a lot of things- digital cameras, PDAs, printers, ipod speakers, socks(!), advertising ( what would Apple do without Google!), digital media distribution, mobile devices / os
See above. Don't you just love double standards :-\
I would agree, with this, but I think the thinking is, since people are going to make the devices anyway, to do all the other things they do, you might as well have that one device doing as much as possible, and eliminate the now wasteful chunk of the more limited specialized industry of physical book production.
Except, for twenty million people to read books on paper takes only the energy for them to hold it in front of them. For twenty million people to each spend twenty hours reading an electronic book, that's a lot of coal and oil we're burning to do so...
Apple really needs to put some effort into a decent portable solar power source for its products.
+1. I think they trying to get into everything which usually isn't a receipe for disaster
I don't understand how Google could have even been one of Apples closest friends at one point....how does a company go from being best friends with someone, to then purposely trying to be a thorn in that friends ass and following two steps behind every single step they take? Google has no shame. They literally want to control every single industry they can get their foot in. Don't be evil my ass.
Half of the things you listed is from the 1980's when Steve Jobs didn't even work at the company and they were losing their footing. The other half is laughable and shouldn't even be mentioned to even compare to the amount of **** Google has gotten into.
Nice try though. Keep up your pro-Adobe and pro-Google attitude because you're terrible at coming up with anything useful to add to the conversation.
Here comes all the PC fanboys... Apple sucks, why do they patent everything. There going to sue google... BLAH BLAH BLAH!
Google create your own ****! The only thing google is good at is google.com
Mail sucks
Docs Sucks
Android ill
Chrome OS WTF?
Youtube... Wait nope they bought youtube...
Come on google! You make 7 trillion dollars a day, all you can come up with is some cheesy google logo everyday!!!
Google create your own ****! The only thing google is good at is google.com
Mail sucks
Docs Sucks
Android ill
Chrome OS WTF?
Youtube... Wait nope they bought youtube...
Come on google! You make 7 trillion dollars a day, all you can come up with is some cheesy google logo everyday!!!
So, what does that matter if it was in the 1980/90s's.. I don't care if SJ was there or not ; Apple still had their foot in a lot of things. So, people crying about Google getting into other markets, should look at Apple as well. Google have the money to try things, so why not?
I'm not Pro Adobe - did you pull that out of your arse?
Adobe make some good products, Photoshop Elements is pretty good, there are other products I don't like. Same as Google. Too many people can't think for themselves and take whatever SJ says as Gospel. I'll keep an open mind.
Guess you never had a good friend turn on you and want to make your entire life miserable. But then again just take a look at politics. Friends on minute, back stabbing the next. It is all where the mighty $$$$$ lies. and since Google and Apple split ways when Google started getting into the hardware / OS business (and Apple started getting into online services) - each now sees each other as a threat. thus what happens when you start looking and saying "hmmm - why am I partnering with them when I can do it myself and make all the $$$$$$$"
Book production technology has been perfected (and of course not really perfected, but vastly improved). A typical book (i.e. not a glossy full-color coffee table book) looks the same as it did 100 years ago. Not a lot of progress on the end product.
A lot of people preferred horses to the first automobiles.
Without a doubt. But it doesn't take a prophet to see that ink on paper is doomed to extinction.
"Two years?" Said who? And why?
How does my broken iPad poison people in 'third world' countries? Are we exporting our landfill content to Africa now? Why wasn't I informed?
Can, can, and can, but usually aren't, don't, and aren't.
True. I'm still waiting for the savings from non-physical-media distribution to be passed along to me as the consumer. I'll probably be waiting a loooong time.
"Propaganda?" They are "dead tree" media.
Oh, the irony.
What product has Apple ever dreamed up from scratch? Especially in the Steve Jobs II era? An all-in-one computer? An mp3 player? A smartphone? A subscription email/web storage service?
If you're saying all Google does is copy others, where's that put Apple?
What product has Apple ever dreamed up from scratch? Especially in the Steve Jobs II era? An all-in-one computer? An mp3 player? A smartphone? A subscription email/web storage service?
If you're saying all Google does is copy others, where's that put Apple?
Probably not as much coal and oil burned to produce those twenty million books and transport them to those forty million hands...
Your argument is missing a key part of the equation.
Riiiight. Google has been building a digital book collection for 6 years and it wasn't until the iPad came out that they realized they could make eBooks.
So If Google is just a "me-too" company what does that make Apple?
Is anything in Final Cut Studio first to market? Nope.
Aperture? Nope.
How about first with MP3 players? Nope.
Music jukebox software? Nope.
Smart phone? Nope.
Anything in iLife first to market? Nope.
First to market tablet device? Nope.
Being first is overrated. Being better than the competition is what counts and that's what Apple aims for. They aim to make a better MP3. A better smart phone. A better suite of professional applications. And as Steve Jobs likes to say, good artist copy but great artists steal. If Steve Jobs doesn't have a problem saying that Apple stands on the shoulders of others why do you (didn't he specifically name drop the Kindle during the iPad keynote)?
Lethal
So what does it matter? Last I checked this is the year 2010, not 1986. We are comparing the company practices of today. You are trying to act like the 3 or 4 things you listed that were all short lived when the company had no ground or any idea where to go is a joke. Come up with better arguments or don't bother. If Google has all the money in the world instead of spending it on gobbling up tiny companies or wasting their resources on "me too" services they should donate it or spend it on what they're good at, search.
Where did I pull that out of my ass? Why right here.
Maybe when you stop speaking gospel and defending both Google and Adobe whenever you get the chance I'll believe you.
and don't forget keeping the lights on at barnes and noble while they sit on the shelf
That's the point.
While Apple was 'smearing the bulls-eye' by producing droves of peripherals and redundant products, amidst their already convoluted product lines, they were failing miserably.
In 1997, when Steve Jobs returned and paired down Apple's offerings significantly, things turned around dramatically.
Apple had always been a computer hardware/software company.
Google, primarily a search company, has suddenly forayed into hardware, application software, OS development, Mobile OS development, web browser development, peripherals, media distribution, and likely TBA, fast food chains and department stores.
Their "me too" motivation has become blatantly obvious, while it has treaded, quite heavily, upon MS's territory.
All in all, competition, from this perspective, isn't all that bad, if not highly amusing.
At the same time you have Apple going after Google's bread and butter: the ad business. I am really hoping that in the end the fact that Apple and Google are going after each other's throats is going to benefit the consumer.
Excuse me? Make eBooks? I said sell eBooks, maybe you should learn how to read/comprehend.Riiiight. Google has been building a digital book collection for 6 years and it wasn't until the iPad came out that they realized they could make eBooks.
So If Google is just a "me-too" company what does that make Apple?
Is anything in Final Cut Studio first to market? Nope.
Aperture? Nope.
How about first with MP3 players? Nope.
Music jukebox software? Nope.
Smart phone? Nope.
Anything in iLife first to market? Nope.
First to market tablet device? Nope.
Being first is overrated. Being better than the competition is what counts and that's what Apple aims for. They aim to make a better MP3. A better smart phone. A better suite of professional applications. And as Steve Jobs likes to say, good artist copy but great artists steal. If Steve Jobs doesn't have a problem saying that Apple stands on the shoulders of others why do you (didn't he specifically name drop the Kindle during the iPad keynote)?
Lethal
Everything you listed with is in the realm of computing devices with the exception of two, one of which was being the first MP3 player that was useable and the other of which being the first store that isn't subscription based. The same can't be said about Google. At all. The pile of crap they've gotten into spans so far you couldn't even keep track of what they're doing if you tried.
I can't speak for the Kindle, but if you are buying an iPad solely to read books, you probably shouldn't be buying an iPad. With that in mind, what is more environmentally friendly?
An iPad and a collection of physical books?
Or
An iPad with e-books?
If you're an author, and you self-publish, then this can be good news.
This is potentially the only benefit.
I don't understand this. Google will not have any major publishing houses involved, as they can't give most of the revenue to websites if they do that.
I don't understand this model or what they will be selling at all.
I don't think this will be a competitor to Amazon, iBooks, B&N etc.
They will not have the same kind of library, but I am not sure what they will be "selling".
