Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I think this is humorously retarded of Google.

However, this will be the best thing that happened to consumers, Android, and iPhone OS.

Without stiff competition, there isn't a need to out do.

The ball is in Apple's court.

Google has seen itself replacing Microsoft for the past five years. They now have most of their pieces on the board and Apple has become the competitor.

My guess is that Apple will launch a search engine that will try to blow Google out of the water. That "billion dollar data center" on North Carolina is not just going to be for email and MobileMe services.

My guess is that it will be called "iSearch" and may be the big announcement at WWDC instead of the next generation iPhone.
 
It is quite funny people thinking Android is more "open" than the iPhone. This blog by Jeff LaMarche pretty much sums up the reality of android and the illusion of being open.

Here's the reality of the Android situation now: if you buy an Android phone, it will most likely be locked down by your carrier, possibly also with some features disabled. Or, to use Tim Bray's term, the reality is that most Android phones that get bought are a "curated experience".

In some places, some carriers will sell unlocked phones, but for a great many people, if you want an open Android phone, you will be required to buy one from a carrier and jailbreak it, which is likely a violation of your subscriber agreement. If you don't jailbreak it, you may not get future Android updates. If you buy an Android phone and don't jailbreak it, you might spend the entire life of your phone using the Android version that shipped on it. Your vendor could even charge you a ridiculous monthly fee for the upgrade, something that at least Verizon has considered doing. Even if your carrier does provide updates for free and regularly, there will be a delay as the vendor and provider add all their customizations and restrictions on top of the official Android release.

For the vast majority of people who will buy Android phones, "open" is an illusion because now that Google has abandoned their direct sales model, Android firmly puts the final decision making power for the overall experience of the phone back into the hands of the traditional carrier/vendor relationship that ruled the space before the iPhone came out. Apple, unlike other phone vendors, is capable of going toe-to-toe with the carriers and is willing to do so to fight for a better user experience. That's why we don't have AT&T branding all over our iPhones. That's why we don't have the mandatory 15-second spiel before voicemail that Verizon users have to suffer through. Apple is at least an equal partner with the carriers who sell their phones. Most of the other phone vendors, to put it bluntly, are the carriers' bitches.

Does Android have some nice features that the iPhone doesn't? Absolutely. Is Android improving? No doubt about it and on a regular basis to boot. But, by putting the real power back in the hand of the carriers and their vendor partners, the user experience is never going to be as important in the decision making process as it is for the iPhone. Even if the Android team manages to make the overall experience better than the iPhone (which I consider unlikely, but possible), the carriers will almost certainly screw it up with their ham-handed customizations and restrictions.

If you're going to have a curated experience, isn't it better to at least have one where the curator is making their decisions primarily around the quality of your experience?

Unless Google resumes direct sales or puts licensing limitations on the carriers to prevent them from locking down Android phones, "open" will be just another empty marketing slogan.
 
Apple already has a good searching tool, Spotlight. Imagine Apple indexing the entire web instead of just your hard drive. Guess Apple could call it SearchLight :) but iSearch sounds cool too :p
 
Open... the definition

Whatever "open" means to some, it CAN mean a leveled playing field of medocrity to us all. That's the way Google and Microsoft play it. If people won't learn the difference, why make it better than they obviously need it to be. Apple, on the other hand, does things to make the computing experience better, teaching me what it can be like, making it work.

I realize that gaming - Facebook - Twitter and the uses of that ilk are important to the industry, those of us who need computers to be productive, however, shudder at the idea of an entity like Google taking over much. They've been first at a couple of things, things that are done just as well on other fronts, BTW. But, by and large, mediocre output across the board.

I would always opt for a system I can buy into that works every day for me. I don't think about the OS, or, sometimes, the price. Reliability, ease of use, those are the things I need. I'm signing off Google because of attitude and track record. Gotta go to work...
 
Apple already has a good searching tool, Spotlight. Imagine Apple indexing the entire web instead of just your hard drive. Guess Apple could call it SearchLight :) but iSearch sounds cool too :p

...all search engines already index the web :D

Seriously, this is great news. It will spur innovation. I just wish Apple also give some attention to innovating in their computer line and upgrading OSX. I just can't get excited about the latest iFad.
 
This crap gets annoying after a while, why do all these companies go after "APPLE"? Why is the news always about some company making an Apple Product Killer? Why isn't Google going after HP or DELL or Sony or Microsoft's ideas? You never hear Apple announcing that they are creating a Google Killer or an HP killer or a DELL killer, Apple just makes a great product, and for a company that gets laughed at for having such small market share with their products, just about every company seems to be going after what Apple's doing. Hmph. :rolleyes:
 
Just this last week I decided to un-Google my online life. The creepy, sinister, and downright cheesy nature of Google just gave me the heeby-jeebies once too often.

Chrome browser is fast and warm, but Apple isn't mining my data when I use Safari.

Picasa was easy to navigate, but iPhoto is prettier.

Google Documents was convenient, but so incredibly ugly and impossible to format or convert properly.

Gmail was fine, but for the first time this week I started using Apple's MailApp (after using Hotmail for ten years and Gmail for the last few), and suddenly I have no idea how I've put up with web mail for so long.

Google is choking the internet with ugly blighted ads, but Apple's iAd plan of going with quality over quantity gets my vote.

There are people on this thread calling for Apple to "go head-to-head" with Google, but that's not where it's at. It's better to have 10% market share (either in hardware, software, or advertising) and have huge profits than it is to be a blight on the world like Google is becoming, and Microsoft has been, despite their own profits.

I'll give Microsoft credit for one thing, though. They've always been about dominating markets for the purpose of making money. I don't like that approach, but I can respect it. Google's aim is to own every single last piece of your life so they can make money. I do not respect that. It's gross and anti-human.

Somehow Google has made me see Microsoft as a corporation with integrity. Never in my wildest dreams did I see that coming. Nice job, Google. Thanks. You accomplished something, anyway.

Apple should just keep on doing what it's been doing: creating a walled garden of useful, aesthetically-pleasing hardware and software products for people who recognize quality and will pay a premium for it.

I've been paying that premium since my first Macintosh Plus, and I'll keep paying it because I'll go with quality and integrity over crap and duplicity every time.

+100
 
Ahhhh. I'll stay in my walled-garden.

Complaining about "lack of openness" and app store scrutiny of submissions is like living in a neighborhood that is scrutinizing why they need a check-cashing store in the neighborhood. Why not just be a legitimate bank because, guess what, if your neighborhood has check cashing stores at every other corner, it's probably got a nice crime rate to go with it. No thanks!

Neighborhood metaphors, ftw. :p
 
If you truly question the impact of competition.....compare this year's iPhone update to last years.

If there was no significant competition the newest iPhone would be 'fluff the pillows' update with trivial features like a compass touted as innovation.

Instead the bar has been raised by products like the Evo to push functionality with each new iPhone release.

Too many people up here want to grab their pom poms for Apple like it's personal to them. Frankly, as a consumer I want as much competition, innovation and choice as possible.
 
Not fond of either companies politics, but at least I can get android on the verizon network.
I think both companies are mentally ill-it is probably what drives their innovations, while I have only owned Apples since 1987-I will buy android on the next contract with verizon if iPhone is not there. If either company wants to make products to fit my lifestyle, then it needs to fit, AT&T doesn't fit. Google has tons of money so does Apple and Microsoft. If money was the sole driver of success the US school system would pump out more brilliant graduates.
The battle is good for everyone-will if you believe in capitalism and competition.
 
The LAST place I want to download music to is my phone.

Animosity? It's simply business competition.

Google cannot succeed when its customers realize how much of their privacy will be given up to Google.

I actually think most people either don't know about their information being given away, or aren't concerned. Websites like Facebook can still become massively popular with even lighter ammounts of privacy than Google.
 
I really don't care who makes the best phone; I just want the f-ckung monthly service charges to GO DOWN and NOT INCREASE...EVER.

I really don't know about you guys, but I'm starting to scratch my head thinking why the hell does owning a cell phone costs $1400/year?????

/rant

Thank you! I just cannot justify spending that kind of money on a smart phone, and I don't see that I ever will. I'll have to make do with an iPod Touch, because I'm just not going to pay $1,400 a year for a little toy, no matter how cool and fun it is.
 
So the choice is clear.

Google creates and markets products at low or no cost in order to harvest my personal information and put ads in front of me.

Apple creates and markets products to sell,with no or minimal data harvesting involved.

I'm with Apple.Any insignificant quibbles about horrible"walled gardens"pale in comparison to the thick file Google would like to keep on me.
 
Do ya think this would have happened IF the iPhone was NOT ALL LOCKED UP WITH AT$T???

I think NOT

You really don't understand, do you? Contracts are enforceable. It doesn't matter what YOU think the market should be, serious companies must obey their contracts. Apple would never have been able to sell the iPhone if it weren't for the exclusivity contract, that was ATT's benefit side of the deal. And yes, both companies have to get something in a contract, or they would never sign it. If it was not locked up with ATT for a period of time, it would not exist at all, probably neither would its touchscreen competitors, not yet.

Grow up.
 
The more competition the better it is for consumers. I can't believe people are arguing against this. The amount of personal attachment to Apple being displayed in this thread is sickening.
 
I actually think most people either don't know about their information being given away, or aren't concerned. Websites like Facebook can still become massively popular with even lighter ammounts of privacy than Google.

That's basically it.

I haven't given a dime to Google over the years, except for their cut of the applications I purchased on Android. For free I've enjoyed the best webmail service on the internet, complete with contact and calendar syncing. I've enjoyed a great photo syncing website, document storage area with lots of space for free, blog hosting, and access to some books. Oh, I've also enjoyed amazing navigation for free both on and off my phone. Google can be your cloud, and is 1000x more capable than MobileME without the $100 per year fee. I frankly don't even notice the ads anymore on Google, and I couldn't care less that my keywords are giving advertisers aggregate information about how their ads appear.

Even the strongest Apple fanboy should be glad Google is around. Without Android and Palm I can almost guarantee you that multitasking, even the lame way it's going to be done in 4.x, wouldn't be a feature. Competition is a great thing as it keeps people on their toes.

Google isn't going to kill Apple, nobody can kill Apple. Hell, Apple has yet to kill anyone. All the smartphone players are still around that were there when the iPhone was released.
 
Wake up people. You need to do your part and crush Google, aka The Evil Empire. I've worked up a list of things you can say to counter the Android FUD. Start today, please. Pretty please. With sugar on top.

Why do you hate Google so much? You seem really defensive, and angry. You seem to be taking this all so personally. You need to let go of your ego. Everything is not all about you.

No Mac app awards at this year's WWDC. No update to the MacBook Air. No update to the Mac Pro. Underwhelming update of the MacBook Pro. Unlikely that there will be OS X 10.7 news at WWDC in June.

I'd love to be proven wrong but it doesn't appear that Mac and OS X are that much of a priority in Cupertino right now.

Sadly, this is the truth. Macs are taking a beating and the beating is coming from Apple. Sure they still sell well, but it seems in recent times, this is mostly due to the aura around Macs, not any actual meat on the bone. OS X is still great and I'd still buy one of the new 15" MBPs if I had the dough, but the update was late, very late (one of the reasons I don't have the cash, my money went on something other than a computer).
 
I'm all for competition. I'm not sure I like Google's tactics, but it's starting to feel like the old days, when there more than just 2 choices (Mac or Win).

Apple
Atari
Commodore (64, Amiga, etc)
IBM
Tandy

I'm sure I'm missing much, but you get the idea.
 
This crap gets annoying after a while, why do all these companies go after "APPLE"? Why is the news always about some company making an Apple Product Killer?

Because this is a Mac blog and is very partisan to Apple, so all the news posted here is tainted with some twist to make it seem like Apple is more important than they really are.

The fact is, and ChazUK pointed it out first, none of these Google moves seem to be a "Let's take on Apple" move. Android was bought in 2005 way before the iPhone was announced to the public, Admob has been around forever, so iAds is more of a response to Google than Admob being a response to Apple, h.264 is being adopted and used everyday by Google, etc.. etc..

Some people here need to take it down a notch, not everything in life is about Apple and "There must be only one!" made for a good movie, but in the markets, I'd rather have competition than a monopoly controlling every segment. Microsoft already showed us how bad it is when 1 company controls the market.

Good thing that the sentiments posted on here are mostly garbage. I'll keep on using OS X on my Macbook to browse the web using Firefox so I can read my e-mail in Gmail, while listening to music ripped from my own CDs through iTunes. Competition is good.
 
competition is about profits, not about products, and as things stand at the moment I see nothing good coming out of it for me as the end user.

Anyways as long as I can do the things I can do better with apple's machines and OS, I'm staying in apples camp...
 
competition is about profits, not about products, and as things stand at the moment I see nothing good coming out of it for me as the end user.

Shortsighted.

Profit comes from sales and sales come from offering something that people want to buy. Competition is very much about the products, making them better and more attractive to the end user, which in the end gets a lot of good out of it.

Err... h.264 isn't "made" by Apple. Quicktime is.

Depending on how you look at it, Quicktime is not a video codec either. Apple isn't in the video codec business at all. Quicktime is either a software to playback media or a container format (.mov or .mp4). Apple used to use Sorenson Video from their codec (starting with Quicktime 3) and now use H.264.

That part of the article is a big stretch. There is no link to Apple on the VP8 front.
 
I think it's just that Google is the hot new tech company now and they are feeling very full of themselves, much like Microsoft in the 90's. I think the danger for them is getting too arrogant and losing focus of making great products.

The problem is google won't finish anything.

I love the concept of google docs, but there are still major bugs, lack of polish and major missing features.

Even gmail is very unfinished. It seems like every couple of months google fiddles with gmail. New features are nice, but features seems to come, go and be rearranged.

Google also starts and stops and merges services constantly. You can never count on google to provide any service long term. Unless google has had a service aroma for a long time it is not worth investing I , since it can be randomly canceled at anytime.

Their only service that is really finished is their search and ad words business.

Android is a total mess IMHO. You are not to expect updates unless you want to hack your own ROM.

Until google focuses on something and finishes it, they will not put apple out of business.
 
And that is exactly what all the handset-makers will do, slap there own GUI on it and take control of the app-store. 'Open' will splinter the market and make it useless, Google will need to make it closed again and force the hardware and features in the same direction.
Won't be easy because providers and handset-makers don't want to be the dumb link in the chain, they want control over features and software.

Well, you can't have it both ways. When you create an open system some companies will try to take control on their own platforms. Apple took BSD (and I'll be sure to mention NextStep as well) slapped their own GUI on it and the end product is an excellent OS. How is this bad?

HTC might do the same thing. They might even start their own app store that is not compatible with the Android Market. However, that might make users stop buying their products. So maybe they won't.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.