Apple May Give Up "Thermonuclear War" With Android

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
582
0
18,930
[citation][nom]jaber2[/nom]The end is near, thank you apple for brining us the home pc and smart phones, from now on we will take care of it, you can go back and making great software.[/citation]
Since when was Apple that brought the home pcs and smartphones to the market?
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
582
0
18,930
[citation][nom]dangi[/nom]Then I suppose Bill Gates must sue Apple for their iPad, that's clearly a rip-off of the TabletPC that Microsoft created and presentend on 2002All being said, all this suing is being paid by us, the customers, so better stop that law war and drop prices a bit[/citation]
Tablet computers already existed before Microsoft introduced the Tablet PC.
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
582
0
18,930
[citation][nom]tofu2go[/nom]TabletPCs and the iPad are a very different product. TabletPCs are just that... PCs. Where Gates failed was not realizing that the form factor needed a different interface and perhaps a more lightweight overall design. What distinguishes the iPad is the interface, touch-based and a complementary OS. The iPad is oriented towards media consumption rather than content creation. TabletPCs are PCs in that they're intended for general purpose use.If Apple ripped anyone off, it was Star Trek.[/citation]
The concept of tablet computers is something that predates Star Trek. Also Apple was not the first to introduce a tablet with a OS designed for touch input.
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
582
0
18,930
[citation][nom]testerguy[/nom]They were all awful, none of them had full HTML browsers, the touch screens were completely awful, multi touch was non existent, they just weren't targeting the same markets, and aren't at all comparable.[/citation]
So Windows Mobile didn't had a full HTML browser? Nor did tons of Nokia smartphones? But it's true that multi-touch phones didn't existed at that time and it was a huge selling point for the iPhone.
[citation][nom]testerguy[/nom]Just like the fact that the wheel existed in Egyptian times doesn't mean they invented the car.[/citation]
Please stop smoking crack.
[citation][nom]testerguy[/nom]It doesn't count because it was so ridiculously poor a device that it wasn't comparable, on just about every level.[/citation]
Compared to today's phones they are poor but keep in mind that they were released ten years before the iPhone.
 

tmshdw

Distinguished
Aug 29, 2011
113
0
18,630
[citation][nom]hoof_hearted[/nom].....I just think the reality of it is that Jobs was bitter toward Android, because Bill Gate porked him in the arse the same way years ago.[/citation]

Yea, has nothing to do with Android copying both Apple's smart phone and tablet.
 
G

Guest

Guest
So that Steve Jobs legacy isn't it? He may be herald as "great" but he's no better than salesman, and a sleezy one at that, and the comment on Android copying iOS is just showing how egotistic he is, he copied Xerox Palo Alto Research as his own Mac, and sued anyone with different GUI but a GUI nonetheless, but sometimes there are only one or two ways of doing things in a greater advancement sense, just because he popularized something he did not have ownership in that, this is just abusing patents to advance commercial aim.
 
G

Guest

Guest
If the iPhone is so great and Google just ripped it off, then why the hell are Android phones so damn successful? Maybe Apple should consider why so many people prefer a ripoff product to their own, and then fix that problem instead. Give people a reason to stay with you and not move to a competitor. It's not like Android phones are any cheaper than Apple phones.

Also gotta love the irony of Apple whining about patent theft, considering their history in the computer OS market. Besides, we all had the idea of the iphone before apple did, apple just had the balls to produce it. It's a damn touchscreen utilizing desktop icons, this is nothing groundbreaking, and they simply want to horde it all to themselves and dictate how the rest of the world will operate.
 

scuba dave

Distinguished
Jun 1, 2009
253
0
18,930
Willard, your example is kind of invalid man. As is referenced in your excerpt by the (Exs) they physically had examples, etc, in front of them. Without physically being there, your excerpt is rather useless. Context clues can be absolutely everything here. Do you have a valid video source? I can wait.

[citation][nom]lolapple[/nom]If the iPhone is so great and Google just ripped it off, then why the hell are Android phones so damn successful? Maybe Apple should consider why so many people prefer a ripoff product to their own, and then fix that problem instead. Give people a reason to stay with you and not move to a competitor. It's not like Android phones are any cheaper than Apple phones..[/citation]

Your joking right? I can go to walmart, and get a cheapo android based prepaid for sub 80 bucks. Android phones are THE baston of cheap phones. Yes, there are some rather tempting high end ones, but the majority? Cheap garbage. The free nature of the OS helps manufacturers save money designing their own OS, and yet they base their pricing scheme on Apple, and they are still losing.

And yes, before you can say,"But Android sells more per day than Apple!".. I know that. Still, invalid. They sell more through the "lower end" of the market. How many of the high end Androids are "flying" off the shelves? They aren't(average) and it's not going to change any time soon.

Android is nothing more than a gimmick for the modern couch potato, or extreme techie, so that they can rally behind their perceived awesomeness, so blinded by the term "open source", that they can't tell that the execution of Android is hardly open, that practically everything they bash Apple for, they do on Android(but under a different name/term), and with all the money the manufacturers "saved"...they still end up with a phone that, to this date, still hasn't de-throned the iphone on the most important scale of all. Individual phone vs Individual phone. They haven't, and they probably never will (based on their tract record). With such an abysmal marketplace(appstore), extremely slow updates(i don't care what the reason.. S.L.O.W. is the answer.), quickly outdated and very quickly un-supported, Lower App Quality(third party reference I know, but it is part of the "android" experience), Lower app support, Sub-par device performance(1 gigahertz or 1 terahertz.. I don't care. Performance/experience > Specs.)....etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

I could go on and on. Android, in essense, is a fantastic idea. In execution, it's pathetic(for now. Hopefully that can/will change), and makes it's most devote fans just as sheepish as "isheep" that they insult so... haha... Religiously. Pot..Kettle. Or in this case.. iSheep..Droidfag.

Pick your flavor... but you're all still nuts.
 
G

Guest

Guest
If Tim Cook do that, the probability of Ipad or Iphone sales reduced will be increases...

put it simply, more competitors less buyers less profit...

It's a disadvantage for Apple, yet it's a advantage for us....
(they will fight each other, try to make the best pad/tab or what so ever at the cheapest price to attract customers)

- TC < SC for Apple yet TC > SC for People
- Hope Apple will still be Innovative to fight for future challanges
 

ericburnby

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2010
363
0
18,930
Nothing is really different under Cook. Apple has never gone "thermonuclear" on Android. All they have done is file suits to get companies to remove features to differentiate their products. None of the cases Apple has filed (including when Jobs was CEO) would have any serious impact on Android. The absolute worse thing is Galaxy Tabs were blocked from selling for a short period of time. Hardly anything Samsung should be worried about.

Jobs might have gone on a rant to Isaacson when talking in private, but Apple's official corporate policy was nowhere near what's described in his biography. It sure makes for good headlines and flame wars, though.

As to negotiating with Samsung, has everyone forgot Jobs himself contacted Samsung before the lawsuits were filed to try and come to a resolution? This article implies that their recent communications to come to a settlement are a change in Apple policy. They're not. Apple only filed lawsuits after negotiations failed.

Besides, Apple doesn't need to destroy Android - they're doing a great job of that themselves. As a developer I gave up writing for Android and stick with iOS now. Fragmentation is a huge problem with Android and all the blind fans who claim it isn't are ignoring a serious problem. ICS is still on less than 5% of devices. Jelly Bean is expected this fall. None of the manufacturers/carriers get updates out in any sort of timely fashion making it impossible to determine how much of the market may be able to run your latest & greatest App that takes advantage of the newest features of ICS/Jelly Bean.

Market share? Sure, Android has greater share but so many of those devices are cheap feature phones that nobody cares about (especially developers, who don't want to write for phones with 1/4 VGA screens and processors barely fast enough to run the core OS let alone any kind of App).
 

jusi0412

Honorable
Mar 30, 2012
8
0
10,510
Microsoft controls the OS and not the hardware and Apple controls both OS and hardware. Xerox is really to credit here.
g.gif
 

stoogie

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2010
65
0
18,580
And this is why Steve jobs was an idiot, Samsung did not rip apple off because Apple didnt create their products or ideas first, and Apple was the one who ripped everyone else off. He lies to himself to make himself feel better. Im glad hes dead.
 

kanaida

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2010
21
0
18,560
[citation][nom]dino34z12[/nom]If Tim Cook do that, the probability of Ipad or Iphone sales reduced will be increases...put it simply, more competitors less buyers less profit...It's a disadvantage for Apple, yet it's a advantage for us.... (they will fight each other, try to make the best pad/tab or what so ever at the cheapest price to attract customers)- TC < SC for Apple yet TC > SC for People- Hope Apple will still be Innovative to fight for future challanges[/citation]
[citation][nom]scuba dave[/nom]Willard, your example is kind of invalid man. As is referenced in your excerpt by the (Exs) they physically had examples, etc, in front of them. Without physically being there, your excerpt is rather useless. Context clues can be absolutely everything here. Do you have a valid video source? I can wait.Your joking right? I can go to walmart, and get a cheapo android based prepaid for sub 80 bucks. Android phones are THE baston of cheap phones. Yes, there are some rather tempting high end ones, but the majority? Cheap garbage. The free nature of the OS helps manufacturers save money designing their own OS, and yet they base their pricing scheme on Apple, and they are still losing. And yes, before you can say,"But Android sells more per day than Apple!".. I know that. Still, invalid. They sell more through the "lower end" of the market. How many of the high end Androids are "flying" off the shelves? They aren't(average) and it's not going to change any time soon.Android is nothing more than a gimmick for the modern couch potato, or extreme techie, so that they can rally behind their perceived awesomeness, so blinded by the term "open source", that they can't tell that the execution of Android is hardly open, that practically everything they bash Apple for, they do on Android(but under a different name/term), and with all the money the manufacturers "saved"...they still end up with a phone that, to this date, still hasn't de-throned the iphone on the most important scale of all. Individual phone vs Individual phone. They haven't, and they probably never will (based on their tract record). With such an abysmal marketplace(appstore), extremely slow updates(i don't care what the reason.. S.L.O.W. is the answer.), quickly outdated and very quickly un-supported, Lower App Quality(third party reference I know, but it is part of the "android" experience), Lower app support, Sub-par device performance(1 gigahertz or 1 terahertz.. I don't care. Performance/experience > Specs.)....etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.I could go on and on. Android, in essense, is a fantastic idea. In execution, it's pathetic(for now. Hopefully that can/will change), and makes it's most devote fans just as sheepish as "isheep" that they insult so... haha... Religiously. Pot..Kettle. Or in this case.. iSheep..Droidfag. Pick your flavor... but you're all still nuts.[/citation]

Apple has passed it's time. There's hundreds of phones from dirt cheap to very expensive in the android world, developers are free to do whatever they want to write, users are free to modify their devices and replace their operating system as they like. Basically they've created they 'PC' of phones... for better or worse, that freedom to make something great or crappy is android's best ally. It's only a matter of time until they go down the tubes like blackberry. People will only buy the same crappy looking phone so many times with meaningless features. The worst part is how they deal with problems though, business as usual is alienating developers and brushing problems under the rug without so much as an apology to customers.
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
582
0
18,930
[citation][nom]scuba dave[/nom]Your joking right? I can go to walmart, and get a cheapo android based prepaid for sub 80 bucks. Android phones are THE baston of cheap phones. Yes, there are some rather tempting high end ones, but the majority? Cheap garbage. The free nature of the OS helps manufacturers save money designing their own OS, and yet they base their pricing scheme on Apple, and they are still losing. And yes, before you can say,"But Android sells more per day than Apple!".. I know that. Still, invalid. They sell more through the "lower end" of the market. How many of the high end Androids are "flying" off the shelves? They aren't(average) and it's not going to change any time soon.[/citation]
Yet the Android phone that sell the most is the Samsung Galaxy S2, then comes the Galaxy S, HTC EVO 4G, HTC Desire HD and the Galaxy Note. I wouldn't call them a prepaid 80 bucks phone.
[citation][nom]scuba dave[/nom]Android is nothing more than a gimmick for the modern couch potato, or extreme techie, so that they can rally behind their perceived awesomeness, so blinded by the term "open source", that they can't tell that the execution of Android is hardly open, that practically everything they bash Apple for, they do on Android(but under a different name/term), and with all the money the manufacturers "saved"...they still end up with a phone that, to this date, still hasn't de-throned the iphone on the most important scale of all. Individual phone vs Individual phone. They haven't, and they probably never will (based on their tract record).[/citation]
It's highly unlikely, if not impossible, for a single android phone to surpass the iPhone because of the wide portfolio of phones available. The market share of the iPhone would have to drop bellow 9% for that to happen.
 

ericburnby

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2010
363
0
18,930
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Yet the Android phone that sell the most is the Samsung Galaxy S2, then comes the Galaxy S, HTC EVO 4G, HTC Desire HD and the Galaxy Note. I wouldn't call them a prepaid 80 bucks phone.
It's highly unlikely, if not impossible, for a single android phone to surpass the iPhone because of the wide portfolio of phones available. The market share of the iPhone would have to drop bellow 9% for that to happen.[/citation]
You're right when you say no single Android phone can surpass the iPhone when the 5 you listed totalled together still can't match Apple's 4S.
 

ericburnby

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2010
363
0
18,930
[citation][nom]kanaida[/nom]Apple has passed it's time. There's hundreds of phones from dirt cheap to very expensive in the android world, developers are free to do whatever they want to write, users are free to modify their devices and replace their operating system as they like. Basically they've created they 'PC' of phones... for better or worse, that freedom to make something great or crappy is android's best ally. It's only a matter of time until they go down the tubes like blackberry. People will only buy the same crappy looking phone so many times with meaningless features. The worst part is how they deal with problems though, business as usual is alienating developers and brushing problems under the rug without so much as an apology to customers.[/citation]
I'll make sure to sell all my Apple shares based on your expert advice.

Why is it that the technonerds try to take the features they like in a phone and apply it to the general population? Do you know how many Android users bought their phone so they could modify it and change the OS? An extremely small number. Yet they're the ones who post online telling people how great Android is when the other 98% don't care.

Same thing with people who build gaming rigs (like myself). I like to make my own PC's but I don't rag on the masses who prefer to buy a ready-made PC at Best Buy or from Dell or HP. Not everyone is into modifying their devices.
 

testerguy

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2011
54
0
18,580
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]So Windows Mobile didn't had a full HTML browser? Nor did tons of Nokia smartphones? But it's true that multi-touch phones didn't existed at that time and it was a huge selling point for the iPhone.Please stop smoking crack.Compared to today's phones they are poor but keep in mind that they were released ten years before the iPhone.[/citation]

Which Windows Mobile, specifically, are you claiming had a full HTML browser before the iPhone came out? Please also name the Nokia device, which also had a FULL HTML browser.

Good luck with that, 'crack head'.

I'm sorry you didn't understand the wheel analogy. Still. The point is that just because touch screen phones existed, doesn't mean they existed in the same form as we understand hem to be today. Which applies to the awful older phones you try to excuse the differences of because they are old. That doesn't take anything away from what Apple achieved.
 

testerguy

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2011
54
0
18,580
[citation][nom]willard[/nom]Quality of a device is irrelevant. You don't own an idea because you pulled it off better than the people who actually came up with the idea. Do you really want to live in a world where whoever most recently improved a device is the only one allowed to produce it?No, they were decided based on claims that actually had merit. The fact is that Apple has claimed that they are the only company allowed to make black rectangular devices with touch screens. Seriously, here's an excerpt from one of the most recent legal documents where Apple claims to be the only one with the right to make black, rectangular devices. It's listing things Samsung needs to do to stop infringing on Apple's supposed patent on black rectangles with touch screens.You should follow your own advice.[/citation]

The quality of the device is precisely what Apple innovated. It's exactly what drove the whole smartphone revolution that exists today. While similar things had been done, worse, in the past, Apple was the only one able to make it so much better than everyone would want one. THAT IS the revolution that they claim they made. As I already explained to you, in very simple words, they never claimed they owned the 'idea' of the smartphone. As I already explained to you, in precisely these words, they simply claimed to have revolutionised it, which they did.

Apple has no patent on smartphones. They have patents on the aspects of smartphones which THEY CAME UP WITH, the very things which turned the smartphone from an undesirable piece of junk to the multi billion dollar industry. Just like they are now doing with the iPad.

As for the Apple legal document, again you simply expose your complete lack of understanding. They listed EVERY way in which the Samsung Galaxy Tab was the same as the iPad. It was the COMBINATION of ALL THESE ELEMENTS which led to the COURT AGREEING that Samsung had infringed upon copyright. Not because of the shape, but because of the culmination of so many design decisions which had been blatantly copied from Apple.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.