Agreed. Google's whole "do no evil" philosophy is crap. I mean, the devil never claims to be evil...
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.
Walter Isaacson Says Jobs' Rage Over Android Was Real
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agreed. Google's whole "do no evil" philosophy is crap. I mean, the devil never claims to be evil...
The Idea of a smart, but easy to use, Mobile platform, the lockscreen, Notifications, gaming on the go, among many other things.
Yeah, I don't think so ....
I don't have any problem comprehending why Jobs would have been so angry about Android's release. But the truth is, he was wrong about it being a repeat of the MacOS vs. Windows situation. If for no other reason? This time, the copy-cat released the project as open source. It wasn't a head-to-head battle between two companies selling commercial, proprietary products.
Mind you, this is the SAME open source community that allowed Mac OS X to become what it was, since Apple borrowed heavily from their work on the kernel (as well as using much of their work to build the Safari browser).
Most of the negative feelings I have about Microsoft Windows and related products have a LOT to do with the company's way of doing business and their licensing restrictions. The way Google produced and released Android, none of that is really a factor.
So ultimately? This amounts to nothing more than Jobs having a PERSONAL problem with the fact someone on his board of directors leaked info to Google about his latest project, and they proceeded to design their own similar phone OS based on the general concepts explained to them.
Cook is a little more removed from the emotional side of things, and is able to think more clearly about what makes the most BUSINESS sense for Apple. I think that means leaving Android alone, and just doing their best to make new iPhones so good, people will keep choosing them over Android anyway.
I don't have any problem comprehending why Jobs would have been so angry about Android's release. But the truth is, he was wrong about it being a repeat of the MacOS vs. Windows situation. If for no other reason? This time, the copy-cat released the project as open source. It wasn't a head-to-head battle between two companies selling commercial, proprietary products.
Mind you, this is the SAME open source community that allowed Mac OS X to become what it was, since Apple borrowed heavily from their work on the kernel (as well as using much of their work to build the Safari browser).
Most of the negative feelings I have about Microsoft Windows and related products have a LOT to do with the company's way of doing business and their licensing restrictions. The way Google produced and released Android, none of that is really a factor.
So ultimately? This amounts to nothing more than Jobs having a PERSONAL problem with the fact someone on his board of directors leaked info to Google about his latest project, and they proceeded to design their own similar phone OS based on the general concepts explained to them.
Cook is a little more removed from the emotional side of things, and is able to think more clearly about what makes the most BUSINESS sense for Apple. I think that means leaving Android alone, and just doing their best to make new iPhones so good, people will keep choosing them over Android anyway.
Jobs was passionate, and a visionary, but also a very selfish, bitter, greedy man.
Fanboys, down vote me all you want.
Fanboys, down vote me all you want.
Sorry Walt, Old Steve played you ....
... For all you're worth.
Having read the biography, one is struck but the utter lack of insight into Jobs strategic mind and his choices wrt technology paths. Steve ensured the book was filled with personal fluff rather than really peering into the mans actual business acumen. It's probably true Steve was pissed off about Android, but to raging out in this semi-pubic way (no way he assumed his rant would remain a secret) was a classic tactic.
And yet Issacson buys it all hook, line and sinker.
... For all you're worth.
Having read the biography, one is struck but the utter lack of insight into Jobs strategic mind and his choices wrt technology paths. Steve ensured the book was filled with personal fluff rather than really peering into the mans actual business acumen. It's probably true Steve was pissed off about Android, but to raging out in this semi-pubic way (no way he assumed his rant would remain a secret) was a classic tactic.
And yet Issacson buys it all hook, line and sinker.
Lol at the comments on this thread. The iOS/android struggle is actually much closer to Windows/Linux.
Linux = open source operating system that you can operate for free
Android = open source operating system that you can operate for free
Windows = proprietary closed system owned by a wealthy company that will leverage any advantage it can to squash the competition
iOS = ditto
Well, we all know what happened with Linux vs Windows.... they both occupy different spaces in the computing universe. Windows is on more desktops than Linux, but internet backbone is built off of Linux and its cousins.
The Mac/PC saga does have some parallels, but I think what really upset Jobs was that Google was already a few generations ahead of where Apple wants to be in terms of a complete computing platform+ecosystem.
It is much easier to break into a young, fledgling mobile device market than to get users to rely upon your search/email/map/video/blog/etc suite.
IMO, this is what Jobs meant when he said that Google was 'copying' Apple. I think he was less concerned about gestures and bounce back function on an image gallery and much more concerned about where people will spend their time and money on videos, songs, and applications.
Google recognized the endgame for what it was early on and by effectively delegating the hardware end of the business out to the best electronics manufacturers in the world, have been able to push out features and functionality at 2x the pace that Apple has.
There's nothing wrong with competition, but you must be smart about picking your battles. Microsoft eventually stopped trying to destroy Linux (for the moment) and are trying to emulate some of its best features. Their battle was buying them little except ill will.
Apple seems like they might head in that direction within a year or two (they already adopted voice dictation and notifications).
Linux = open source operating system that you can operate for free
Android = open source operating system that you can operate for free
Windows = proprietary closed system owned by a wealthy company that will leverage any advantage it can to squash the competition
iOS = ditto
Well, we all know what happened with Linux vs Windows.... they both occupy different spaces in the computing universe. Windows is on more desktops than Linux, but internet backbone is built off of Linux and its cousins.
The Mac/PC saga does have some parallels, but I think what really upset Jobs was that Google was already a few generations ahead of where Apple wants to be in terms of a complete computing platform+ecosystem.
It is much easier to break into a young, fledgling mobile device market than to get users to rely upon your search/email/map/video/blog/etc suite.
IMO, this is what Jobs meant when he said that Google was 'copying' Apple. I think he was less concerned about gestures and bounce back function on an image gallery and much more concerned about where people will spend their time and money on videos, songs, and applications.
Google recognized the endgame for what it was early on and by effectively delegating the hardware end of the business out to the best electronics manufacturers in the world, have been able to push out features and functionality at 2x the pace that Apple has.
There's nothing wrong with competition, but you must be smart about picking your battles. Microsoft eventually stopped trying to destroy Linux (for the moment) and are trying to emulate some of its best features. Their battle was buying them little except ill will.
Apple seems like they might head in that direction within a year or two (they already adopted voice dictation and notifications).
I agree, Cook is slowly showing that he doesn't view Apple the way steve did. Actions speak louder then words.
----------
if they buy them out, they should shut them down, after acquistion.
IMHO - APPLE SHOULD BUY RIM, convert the BB infrastructure to IOS, develop a backend security system like BB, and convert the millions of BB users to IOS. This would give Apple a solid entry into the business world and kick Android to the curb.
I agree, Cook is slowly showing that he doesn't view Apple the way steve did. Actions speak louder then words.
----------
if they buy them out, they should shut them down, after acquistion.
Competition is the life force of every market.
----------
"The Idea of a smart, but easy to use, " yes, only Apple had that idea.
"Gaming on the go" was invented a long, long time ago.
This isn't true with today's high end Android devices. Take a Galaxy Nexus or a RAZR series phone and their isn't any sort of lag, freeze, low fps or anything of the sort. Heck I can't think of the last time I had to force close or restart my RAZR MAXX. It's rock solid stable.
Wow!! I can't believe how people are passionate about something no one will ever know... Only Steve Jobs had known the truth... end of line...
A show to sell books... and god Isaac should be happy....
A show to sell books... and god Isaac should be happy....
I think it has a lot more to do with his ego, or his self-belief if you want to put it more kindly. This is the guy who thought he could cure himself of cancer. Apple didn't invent today's phone interface, even if they improved it. It wasn't designed out of thin air. Android was a rip-off only in Job's mind.
And also the billions to be made had something to do with it, if not for himself, then for his shareholders.
There is nothing out there to say anything like this.
Tim has not really made a move towards Google one way or another.
As a matter of fact neither did Jobs, he never attacked google head on and only by proxy.
There are many ways to skin a cat and to hit Google where it hurts without having to resort to frivolous lawsuits.
The biggest place to hurt Google is by taking away ad $ and I have a feeling that this is coming soon.
I'm 99% sure Apple is working on something special to pay back Schmitd and Google for what they have done.
BB is converting their users to iOS and Android users just fine as it is, Apple doesn't need to buy them for that to happen.
Have you ever used Android 1.6 through 2.2? I have. It's a copy of iOS, plain and simple. While Android has gone on to do a semi-decent job of differentiating themselves in 4.0, the earlier versions felt like a cheap imitation of iOS. IMO, of course.
Steve Jobs was an emotional, sometimes (some may say often) irrational person. But I don't think he was too off base with his feelings on Android.
Google's BS of "do no evil" has been BS from the start. Apple is a hardware company. They want to sell you hardware. Microsoft is a software company. They want to sell you software. Google is an information/marketing company masquerading as a "web search/web services" company. They want to know everything about you, why you search for certain things, what you like, who your friends are, what they like. All so they can sell more ads.
So tell me; who's evil? Apple/Microsoft? or Google?
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
Maybe he was angry that he was dying. Of course he would have seen Apple copied at other points in his life. Before he seemed to be more at peace with that and thought Apple could win by continuing to innovate. Perhaps it was just that he saw the landscape with Android encroaching on the iOS device he helped create and he was most upset he didn't have a chance to continue with Apple's development. Maybe he wanted to leave this life with a state of certainty about his work and Apple's success. I have to believe that were he alive today and had he not been faced with death, he would have likely still gone after Android, but knowing he had time and space to see things in motion, he wouldn't have had a type of maniacal urgency in which he said he would spend every last penny to see Android destroyed. It was probably a very real, sad moment, but maybe Android was simply a misplaced focus; although I am sure the feeling was real, perhaps it was a projection about wanting to destroy death.
Maybe Apple can't destroy Android, but they certainly can destroy Google. Just create a decent search engine and link to advertisements for free.
I hope these stupid lawsuits end. Tim Cook is doing an excellent job and I actually like the fact that he doesn't want this war to continue. Settle it already. Why is he expected to carryout Job's tantrums?
Removing all Google products from iOS would likely have a bigger impact, given the market share of iPads, iPT's, and iPhones combined. It wouldn't kill Google though.
This should come as no surprise. Steve had an emotional connection with this company that can't be replicated very easily.
It was my hope that Tim Cook would have the same kind of fire that Steve possessed.
Steve learned his lesson. Microsoft ripped Apple off, and went on to be one of the most profitable companies of all time.
Now, Steve brings Apple back from the dead, and swears to not let history repeat itself, and what does Tim Cook decide to do? Try to settle the lawsuits.
Jobs' reaction to Android wasn't an egotistical tantrum. It was warranted, genuine concern.
Not the right move by Tim Cook, in my opinion. Not the right move in Jobs' opinion.
It was my hope that Tim Cook would have the same kind of fire that Steve possessed.
Steve learned his lesson. Microsoft ripped Apple off, and went on to be one of the most profitable companies of all time.
Now, Steve brings Apple back from the dead, and swears to not let history repeat itself, and what does Tim Cook decide to do? Try to settle the lawsuits.
Jobs' reaction to Android wasn't an egotistical tantrum. It was warranted, genuine concern.
Not the right move by Tim Cook, in my opinion. Not the right move in Jobs' opinion.
I have a few problems with Issacson's timeline. It's an issue with the book and apparently one he repeats in these comments. He makes it sound as if Jobs was involved with Apple when Microsoft was "ripping off" the Mac. Steve left Apple in 1985 and did not return until 1997. The first commercially important release of Windows was in 1990, and it was made possible by the license Apple signed over to Microsoft in 1985, after Steve departed. So Steve had nothing whatsoever to do with this period at Apple or any of these events. Whatever opinions he might have expressed about it aren't really relevant.
Second, Issacson makes it sound as if Microsoft "chose" the licensing route for their OS, as if was a philosophical difference, as if they had another choice. He says this a couple of times in the book, and it raised my eyebrows each time. Microsoft never had any other business model. They were never a PC hardware manufacturer, and were wise to not become one. Their only method of making money was to "promiscuously" license DOS and Windows to the manufacturers. OTOH, Apple was a PC hardware manufacturer from day one.
I don't doubt that Android pissed Steve off royally. It's the analogy to Microsoft that doesn't seem to fit.
Second, Issacson makes it sound as if Microsoft "chose" the licensing route for their OS, as if was a philosophical difference, as if they had another choice. He says this a couple of times in the book, and it raised my eyebrows each time. Microsoft never had any other business model. They were never a PC hardware manufacturer, and were wise to not become one. Their only method of making money was to "promiscuously" license DOS and Windows to the manufacturers. OTOH, Apple was a PC hardware manufacturer from day one.
I don't doubt that Android pissed Steve off royally. It's the analogy to Microsoft that doesn't seem to fit.