Is Apple Really Trying To Kill Google?

[Odell]

Interesting read. It gives a little perspective to these patent lawsuits against Android devices.

 

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-really-is-going-to-try-to-kill-google-2012-6

[bigsnake49]

Well, Google got into the mobile handset business, so Apple is getting into the local search business in a roundabout way. It did not help that Eric Schmidt was a member of the board at Apple while they were working on their first iPhone, so he was intimately familiar with their plans. A spy in their midst, so to speak. From 10,000 feet up, Android looks a hell of a lot like iOS except with uglier icons. WebOS and Windows Phone look entirely different. It also did not help that Samsung blatantly copied some of Apple designs. So, Apple will put a big dent in Google's ad revenue from their iDevices.

[Odell]

Well Google got into the mobile OS business but I see your point. The main difference I see is that Apple isn't trying to compete on innovation and creativity but they are using the broken patent system to harm their competitors. I also think that Apple's attempt to completely remove Google from the mobile OS space is harmful to the lower income communities which Apple has no interest in serving. Right now I can go to a carrier like Cricket or Virgin and get a servicable Android phone for $70 with an affordable monthly data plan. Apple doesn't produce a handset for that market nor does it indicate that it has any plans to.

[Pillowsplat]

Let the games begin. Ok its been going on for sometime. Hopefully they beat the crap out of each other and we get more for less. I suspect the the war cry is beat Google but don't sacrifice margin to do it.

 

The whole game seems like a pretty big waste of resources. But the strategy makes sense reduce your competitors $$$$ supply to the point it will struggle.

 

It may be more profitable to steal market share than to inovate.

[bigsnake49]

I think the Maps spat is because Google tried to keep the turn by turn directions for Android only. That probably pissed off Apple and prompted them to develop their own Maps. They acquired 3 different companies that were in the mapping business. I'm pretty sure Google will have turn by turn navigation in their Google Maps in iOS real soon. What I will be really interested in is whether the new iOS Maps will have an offline mode. I was going through an area about a year or so ago that had no AT&T service for about 30 miles. Google Maps was useless because it did not cache enough tiles beforehand. I think both mapping programs will get better because of competition.

[bigsnake49]

Well Google got into the mobile OS business but I see your point. The main difference I see is that Apple isn't trying to compete on innovation and creativity but they are using the broken patent system to harm their competitors. I also think that Apple's attempt to completely remove Google from the mobile OS space is harmful to the lower income communities which Apple has no interest in serving. Right now I can go to a carrier like Cricket or Virgin and get a servicable Android phone for $70 with an affordable monthly data plan. Apple doesn't produce a handset for that market nor does it indicate that it has any plans to.

 

Don't you think they created this market of touch screen smartphone market out of thin air and they have improved their offerings every release. They need to safeguard their IP.

If you look at the ultrabooks they are blind copies of the MacBook Air down to the same radius of the rounded corner, aluminum body and chicklet keyboard. They want the unsuspecting customer that see the ultrabooks for the first time to think that it is a Macbook Air!

 

I am not against ultrathin laptops from other manufacturers. But please don't copy everything!

Edited June 12, 2012 by bigsnake49

[Odell]

From Mike Elgan's post about Apple's "Thermonuclear War" (as Steve Jobs called Apple's planned assault on Google);

 

Nuke #4: Apple’s maps to replace Google Maps

Apple recently bought a mapping company called C3. Apple had previously acquired mapping companies Placebase and Poly9. It seems pretty obvious that Apple intends to launch its own mapping service so it doesn’t have to keep using Google Maps, which is currently bundled on all iPhones and iPads.

Once Apple is ready to launch its own Maps-like service and application based on these three acquisitions, you can be sure they’ll drop Maps from iOS devices, and flip the switch on Siri’s default mapping service as well.

 

Source:http://www.cultofmac.com/128254/here-comes-apples-real-thermonuclear-war-against-google/

 

With Apple's announcement yesterday you can be pretty sure that Google Maps will be gone from future iterations of iOS.

[bigsnake49]

From Mike Elgan's post about Apple's "Thermonuclear War" (as Steve Jobs called Apple's planned assault on Google);

 

 

 

Source:http://www.cultofmac...against-google/

 

With Apple's announcement yesterday you can be pretty sure that Google Maps will be gone from future iterations of iOS.

 

I don't think it will be gone. It will be relegated to just another Navigation app. Not THE built-in Maps app.

Edited June 12, 2012 by bigsnake49

[S4GRU]

Under the Apple patent philosophy, the original Microsoft PC Tablets should have been patented and there never could have been iPads or Android tablets, because the whole tablet concept would have been taken. We could all just live with whatever Microsoft could have come up with over the years.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC

 

In my opinion, you should not be able to patent a shape, a type of equipment, software, ideas, etc. when it comes to electronics. You should be only to patent code, and a specific manufacturing process. If someone can create a new widget with a similar or better function without using the same exact methods and materials to get there, more power to them.

 

Apple would love to push out all competition so it can dictate to the masses what we want and then charge us more than top dollar for it. And they are pushing consumers to madness. I believe It's starting to back fire on them.

 

Robert

[QWIKSTRIKE]

Well, Google got into the mobile handset business, so Apple is getting into the local search business in a roundabout way. It did not help that Eric Schmidt was a member of the board at Apple while they were working on their first iPhone, so he was intimately familiar with their plans. A spy in their midst, so to speak. From 10,000 feet up, Android looks a hell of a lot like iOS except with uglier icons. WebOS and Windows Phone look entirely different. It also did not help that Samsung blatantly copied some of Apple designs. So, Apple will put a big dent in Google's ad revenue from their iDevices.

 

 

Google isn't in the handset business, and many are misinformed about this. Google is in the Ad business, and the handset is merely a tool to make the consumer a walking bill board for ad's and cross services offered to sellers. Apple is now seeing the light and is trying to imitate what Google has already achieved. That is to make each consumer able to buy from the ad's that sellers have where ever they are located creating ad revenue from links clicked, and search's performed where ver the consumer may be.

 

 

Google pretty much would give these services away for free like Google maps to create interaction with sellers that they promote in search there by creating revenue. Google originally wanted data to be $10.00 for unlimited service but the carriers shot this down to monetize data as they all are doing now.

Edited June 12, 2012 by QWIKSTRIKE

[bigsnake49]

Under the Apple patent philosophy, the original Microsoft PC Tablets should have been patented and there never could have been iPads or Android tablets, because the whole tablet concept would have been taken. We could all just live with whatever Microsoft could have come up with over the years.

 

http://en.wikipedia....osoft_Tablet_PC

 

In my opinion, you should not be able to patent a shape, a type of equipment, software, ideas, etc. when it comes to electronics. You should be only to patent code, and a specific manufacturing process. If someone can create a new widget with a similar or better function without using the same exact methods and materials to get there, more power to them.

 

Apple would love to push out all competition so it can dictate to the masses what we want and then charge us more than top dollar for it. And they are pushing consumers to madness. I believe It's starting to back fire on them.

 

Robert

 

While they could have tried, there was prior art to interacting with tablet and a stylus (albeit a smaller size). Apple's Message Pad and Palm's PDA's were there first before Microsoft's tablets. The reason why Microsoft's tablets failed is because they tried to shoehorn a desktop operating system onto a tablet format. I believe that their Windows 8 Desktop will fail for the exact same reasons. Trying to shoehorn a tablet or phone operating system onto the desktop. I like the way Apple is doing it, borrowing functionality from the mobile segment but never replacing the desktop paradigm.

[S4GRU]

While they could have tried, there was prior art to interacting with tablet and a stylus (albeit a smaller size). Apple's Message Pad and Palm's PDA's were there first before Microsoft's tablets. The reason why Microsoft's tablets failed is because they tried to shoehorn a desktop operating system onto a tablet format. I believe that their Windows 8 Desktop will fail for the exact same reasons. Trying to shoehorn a tablet or phone operating system onto the desktop. I like the way Apple is doing it, borrowing functionality from the mobile segment but never replacing the desktop paradigm.

 

I like what Apple is doing, as far as products go. Apple takes ideas and makes them better...ala iPad. However, they then think that their expansion of ideas should be the end of the road. That's the problem. I think someone should be allowed to make a better iPad. And the Apple can make a better replacement to that replacement. It's kind of the spirit of mankind. To show each other up! And consumers win.

 

Robert

[QWIKSTRIKE]

While they could have tried, there was prior art to interacting with tablet and a stylus (albeit a smaller size). Apple's Message Pad and Palm's PDA's were there first before Microsoft's tablets. The reason why Microsoft's tablets failed is because they tried to shoehorn a desktop operating system onto a tablet format. I believe that their Windows 8 Desktop will fail for the exact same reasons. Trying to shoehorn a tablet or phone operating system onto the desktop. I like the way Apple is doing it, borrowing functionality from the mobile segment but never replacing the desktop paradigm.

 

As some one who is running Windows 8 I don't see where MS is getting rid of the desktop, or is making the tablet a desk top. I actually like how they merged them together yet have them separate. The desktop is fully functional with touch appeal that can be run by mouse and key board

[pyroscott]

Well, Google got into the mobile handset business, so Apple is getting into the local search business in a roundabout way. It did not help that Eric Schmidt was a member of the board at Apple while they were working on their first iPhone, so he was intimately familiar with their plans. A spy in their midst, so to speak. From 10,000 feet up, Android looks a hell of a lot like iOS except with uglier icons. WebOS and Windows Phone look entirely different. It also did not help that Samsung blatantly copied some of Apple designs. So, Apple will put a big dent in Google's ad revenue from their iDevices.

 

From 2 miles up (10, 000 feet) an iPhone could look like a microwave...

 

Sent from my CM9 Toro

[bigsnake49]

From 2 miles up (10, 000 feet) an iPhone could look like a microwave...

 

Sent from my CM9 Toro

 

From 10,000 feet up, it would look like a really, really, really small microwave.

[bigsnake49]

I like what Apple is doing, as far as products go. Apple takes ideas and makes them better...ala iPad. However, they then think that their expansion of ideas should be the end of the road. That's the problem. I think someone should be allowed to make a better iPad. And the Apple can make a better replacement to that replacement. It's kind of the spirit of mankind. To show each other up! And consumers win.

 

Robert

 

I have no problem with that, as long as they don't use the same gestures and interactions with the pad. Like using 3D gestures ala Kinect. If all you're doing is using the same basic icons, using the same touch gestures, and on top of that use exactly the same materials, dimensions and overall design, ala Samsung, I have major problems with that.

 

Palm's webOS was a much better design. On top of that, Palm had beaucoup patents on smartphones and PDA's. If Google had acquired Palm, Apple would have had a lot less problems with them because at least they brought a lot to the table.

Edited June 12, 2012 by bigsnake49

[S4GRU]

I have no problem with that, as long as they don't use the same gestures and interactions with the pad. Like using 3D gestures ala Kinect. If all you're doing is using the same basic icons, using the same touch gestures, and on top of that use exactly the same materials, dimensions and overall design, ala Samsung, I have major problems with that.

 

IMO, you cannot patent a gesture. Anything that people do naturally, like slide their finger, wave, tap, etc., these are functions of people's bodies that they do to use a function. NO WAY that Apple can patent what I do with my body when it interacts with a device.

 

Robert

[bigsnake49]

IMO, you cannot patent a gesture. Anything that people do naturally, like slide their finger, wave, tap, etc., these are functions of people's bodies that they do to use a function. NO WAY that Apple can patent what I do with my body when it interacts with a device.

 

Robert

 

Sure they can. It it the application of that gesture on that device and the results that it produces that can be patented. The pinch and zoom certainly can.

[S4GRU]

Sure they can. It it the application of that gesture on that device and the results that it produces that can be patented. The pinch and zoom certainly can.

 

And that's where we disagree. Intuitive gestures should not be able to be patented. To me, that's like saying all computers can have a power button, but Apple patented pushing the button, so everyone else needs to do something else with that button. And another one slides the button, the other does a swirly motion to the button.

 

If you think about it, all those things on a screen are virtual buttons. Slide it, press it, it doesn't matter, it's a button. And pinch and zoom is just replicating actions you do with a scrolling mouse that you cannot do on a tablet. This kind of patent logic is Draconian, and it would box everyone into a corner of the technological dungeon. But I think Apple is OK with doing exactly that.

 

Robert

[Odell]

Sure they can. It it the application of that gesture on that device and the results that it produces that can be patented. The pinch and zoom certainly can.

 

By that logic then tap to click is a gesture that can be patented. This is all quite ridiculous. If these were legitimate patent arguments then Apple would be making them against the developer of the software which violates the patent. That would be Google. Apple isn't doing that. They are using the broken patent and customs system to hinder imports of hardware from foreign companies. Any objective view of the situation should be able to see that Apple isn't waging a protection of intellectual property battle. This is all an extension of the personal vendetta that Steve Jobs stated he would carry on to his last breath and Apple's last dollar.

[WiWavelength]

Sure they can. It it the application of that gesture on that device and the results that it produces that can be patented. The pinch and zoom certainly can.

 

Let it be known that I am filing a patent on the gesture of typing "Sprint" into a post in The Forums at S4GRU. I ask that all others cease and desist.

 

AJ

[S4GRU]

Here is a good article of a request to Apple to focus on battery technology: http://news.cnet.com/8301-33617_3-57450603-276/dear-apple-please-spend-your-billions-on-radical-battery-tech/

 

Now this is the type of things Apple could be doing. And they can patent a battery technology. That would make a lot of sense.

 

Robert

[bigsnake49]

And that's where we disagree. Intuitive gestures should not be able to be patented. To me, that's like saying all computers can have a power button, but Apple patented pushing the button, so everyone else needs to do something else with that button. And another one slides the button, the other does a swirly motion to the button.

 

If you think about it, all those things on a screen are virtual buttons. Slide it, press it, it doesn't matter, it's a button. And pinch and zoom is just replicating actions you do with a scrolling mouse that you cannot do on a tablet. This kind of patent logic is Draconian, and it would box everyone into a corner of the technological dungeon. But I think Apple is OK with doing exactly that.

 

Robert

 

 

Robert, they can invent a new user interface mechanism like Microsoft did with the Kinect or people have done with gloves. It's not the gestures that you're patenting, it's what results those gestures produce within the context of the particular interface paradigm. Pinch to zoom is not an intuitive gesture out in real life. What does it do in real life? It might get you some bewildered looks, but that's about it. After you see it in action on an iPhone, then it becomes a natural, not before. I was one of the first people to get an iPhone. People would look at me kind of strange on the plane when they saw me pinch or flip. Finally somebody had the temerity to ask me what I was doing. I showed them them. Ahhhh, they said that is very smart....

Let me give you an example. Let's say you have a 3D interface and you are constructing a query from database tables that are hanging around you in 3d space. Let's say that the way to pick the columns from the table that you want in your query is to circle your pointer finger in the air circling the columns you want, either individual columns or a group of columns and then flicking them or swiping them towards the query. Within the context of the 3d interface as it pertains to databases, tables and queries, that is a patentable implementation.

 

Let's take the slide to unlock gesture. There is a hell of a lot of other ways to unlock your phone. Hold the phone button until you're blue in the face, face recognition, fingerprint recognition, voice recognition, etc. Yet Samsung chose to copy Apple because they're lazy.

Edited June 13, 2012 by bigsnake49

[bigsnake49]

Here is a good article of a request to Apple to focus on battery technology: http://news.cnet.com...l-battery-tech/

 

Now this is the type of things Apple could be doing. And they can patent a battery technology. That would make a lot of sense.

 

Robert

 

Actually Apple has done quite a bit of work on battery controllers. Their batteries are a bit more sophisticated than other people's. They just have not bothered with battery chemistry before. They might, though.

[bigsnake49]

Let it be known that I am filing a patent on the gesture of typing "Sprint" into a post in The Forums at S4GRU. I ask that all others cease and desist.

 

AJ

 

Don't be silly AJ. I have already filed on that!