Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 27th Jul 2011 22:09 UTC
Legal Two different graphs. Both happen to be published at Ars Technica, with one of them coming from a different source. Seemingly completely unrelated, but when you ponder the waterfall of recent lawsuit-related news, these two graphs suddenly tell all there is to tell. These two innocent little graphs illustrate why Apple is attacking Android so ferociously.
Thread beginning with comment 482721
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

Well, I think he's good at capitalizing on the up and coming markets which he predicted along with others. Though I don't believe he's actually responsible for those markets. If Bill Gates and Steve Jobs never came to be, there's no reason to think we'd be at a technological loss today - just different people to take the credit.


If it wasn't for Jobs wanting to make a computers a consumer device we would not be having this conversation.

Maybe it is time for you to watch "Pirates of Silicon Valley".

IMHO, apple is not good at competing in a crowded market - it never was. I doubt Jobs learned anything from apple's history. With him gone, maybe apple can fix his mistakes before apple becomes irrelevant again. I know, it's all blasphemy to you, but mark my words apple's stance on controlling everyone will drive people away once the hype has faded.


WHAT?? Seriously ... They have been doing pretty well in the notebook market, which is ridiculously crowded, they have something like 15-20%.

Edited 2011-07-29 12:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

If it wasn't for Jobs wanting to make a computers a consumer device we would not be having this conversation.


Oh enough already of this idiotic revisionist history.

What about Alan Kay and his Dynabook? What about Ian Sutherland's Sketchpad? What about the fact that the graphical user interface was invented at Xerox? What about the Amiga, which was developed in the same timeframe as the original Mac and Lisa but was about ten million times as advanced? What about Digital Research's GEM, developed in the same timeframe?

Fcuk this idiotic notion that Jobs is solely responsible for making computing easy for the masses. It's such a load of massive, smelly, rotten crap I refuse to take anyone who still spouts it even REMOTELY serious.

Reply Parent Score: 1

MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Commodore was unable to market the Amiga as a serious computer.

I wonder what would have happened if they did and kept feeding dollars to their R&D department instead of doing too little too late.

The Amiga would drop the Mac off at elementary school while on its way to its teaching job at an university.

Reply Parent Score: 1

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Calm down Thom...

I am not saying he was the only influence ... but he was a major influence ... I am not saying these guys didn't have an impact ... but he sold it to consumers and businesses ...

What did Xerox do with their research? ... they sold it to Jobs ... Jobs saw the potential, Xerox didn't. Then Gates ripped him off and we had Windows which is the dominate Desktop OS.

That is the accepted course of events ... the other stuff didn't make it ... while innovative ... didn't make it for whatever reason.

Yes there are other players, but without the Apple II, the whole thing wouldn't have got started in the first place. It is generally accepted the original Mac was the first successful computer with a GUI.

I am a Windows Fanboy and I can tell that Apple makes good, nice products ... and a lot to do with that is because of Jobs's attitude ... I even gave a link to the guardian article where they actually went to Apple and spoke to the employees ... have you?

I expect you didn't even watch the presentation either? It was pretty interesting IMO (after 2minutes, the intro).

Stop having a little hissy fit ...

Edited 2011-07-29 14:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

kovacm Member since:
2010-12-16

Oh enough already of this idiotic revisionist history.

What about Alan Kay and his Dynabook? What about Ian Sutherland's Sketchpad? What about the fact that the graphical user interface was invented at Xerox? What about the Amiga, which was developed in the same timeframe as the original Mac and Lisa but was about ten million times as advanced? What about Digital Research's GEM, developed in the same timeframe?

Fcuk this idiotic notion that Jobs is solely responsible for making computing easy for the masses. It's such a load of massive, smelly, rotten crap I refuse to take anyone who still spouts it even REMOTELY serious.

f--k to all PC dumbass (l)users that used second rated technologies through 80s!!

*** VIVA Amiga, GEM and others! ***

;) ;) ;) ;) now we did say it Thom ;) ;)

(at least, for Apple it did not take 15 years to copy Xerox GUI! ;) and Atari ST was far more hardware wise engineered than Mac and Amiga was intergalactic technology compared to original Mac ;) and PC was... khm... I will be polite and shut up! ;) )

Edited 2011-07-29 23:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

lucas_maximus,

"If it wasn't for Jobs wanting to make a computers a consumer device we would not be having this conversation."

This is so exaggerated it made me laugh. It's not a half bad joke.

"WHAT?? Seriously ... They have been doing pretty well in the notebook market, which is ridiculously crowded, they have something like 15-20%."

It's just an opinionated prediction for apple's tablets and phones if they stick to pushing users and developers into restrictive walled garderns that they don't want or need. The market is becoming too competitive for apple to maintain such draconian tactics.

I know some apple fans will really do anything to come out in favor of apple regardless of the news, the mental reasoning has already been made to defend all of apple's actions (yes the opposite can be true too). But face it, apple ARE control freaks and under the hard apple fan shell there is animosity over the extent of apple's anti-consumer DRM, which is expressly designed to lock users and developers into apple.

In any other context this is an obvious negative, but because the name is "apple", fans see the need to defend the practice anyways.

Reply Parent Score: 2