Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 10th Sep 2012 14:51 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Apple Written by Scott Cleland: "With so many fanboys spinning Silicon Valley history, it's sometimes easy to forget about the real chain of events that led to the ongoing Apple-Google thermonuclear war, how the romance turned to hate. This timeline presents an interesting case about why, despite patents and prior art, Steve Jobs had plenty of personal reasons to despise Schmidt, Page, and Brin." Cleland has a very, very good point; quite coherent and well-reasoned... That is, if you haven't got a single shred of historical sense and completely and utterly ignore the 30-odd years of mobile computing development that preceded our current crop of smartphones. It's hard not to be reminded of how certain groups of people dismiss millions of years of fossil records because this record inconveniences their argument. In any case, a comment on the article answered the question properly: "Jobs was a businessman. He was angry he was losing money. Simple."
Permalink for comment 534672
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Losing money?
by Laurence on Mon 10th Sep 2012 23:47 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Losing money? "
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

Apparently, you tried to make a digressive dig at Apple's patent strategy while trying to argue that Apple stood a high risk of collapsing from some made-up bubble.

No I wasn't. It was never a dig and the bubble was a side issue. My point was Apple don't have much in the way of unique products so need to prevent sales of their competitors to protect their revenue.

You're reading way too much into things.


You seem to think that by injecting this unrelated patent argument into the conversation that it proves that it is "easy" to "compete with" or "copy" Apple... I'm not buying that it is "easy" to "do" Apple -- superficially, technologically, strategically, or financially. Least of all financially.

The patent argument was the central and primary point of my post. You're the one that took this off on a tangent.


In retort to your notion of many players nibbling away at Apple

There was nothing to retort to given I said that was a highly speculative flipside to the absurd suggestion you made that for one business to go under, it must be from the direct hands of another business.

I made it perfectly clear that I didn't think Apple were going out of business any time soon.

So please don't twist my words around to suit your own agenda.

Yup. Did you think otherwise?

Ahh, so everyone who doesn't match your view point is obviously deluded.

Typical fanboy mentality.

As you're one of those guys who simply has to have the last word, I'll end this cycle now. So unless you have anything more compelling than the tripe you've already posted (and baring in mind I'm the only one who's offered up opinions and evidenced them), I'm ending this discussion here.

Enjoy your evening and remember, not everyone who offers up a non-idealogical view of Apple are haters out to "dig". So you'd go much further in life if you didn't treat us like so. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 4