Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Apr 2012 20:36 UTC
Google I wasn't just wrong, I was being an idiot. "When Google was in the thick of Android's development in 2006 and 2007 - long before the platform ever reached retail - it was a very different product, almost unrecognizable compared to the products we used today. Documents dated May of 2007 and made public during the course of Oracle's lawsuit against Google over its use of Java in Android show off a number of those preliminary user interface elements, prominently marked 'subject to change', and you can see how this used to be a product focused on portrait QWERTY devices." I'm hoping I can dive into this a little deeper tomorrow; since it's the busiest period of the year for my little company right now, I don't have the time to do it today. Just to make sure nobody thinks I'm just going to ignore this, I figured it'd be a good idea to post a quickie today. I'll get back to this tomorrow, or Friday at the latest.
Thread beginning with comment 515944
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Why Steve hates android
by karunko on Fri 27th Apr 2012 12:39 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Why Steve hates android"
karunko
Member since:
2008-10-28

What changed things, disrupted the phone market and led to a widespread mutation in phone design was the iPhone.

I already made clear that, as a consumer, I couldn't care less about who copies who, and I have no problem saying that there's a lot to like about the iPhone but... Disrupted? Widespread mutation?!?

Please, tell me you're shooting for a job with Apple's PR department rather than being just pathetic! ;-)


RT.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Why Steve hates android
by zima on Sun 29th Apr 2012 14:20 in reply to "RE[7]: Why Steve hates android"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, he outright said once "I write to defend Apple" (a quick google search: site:osnews.com "I write to defend Apple" returns it http://www.osnews.com/thread?507146 ), and that he's been enamored by them for the last 3 decades or so (so presumably also in a decade when they had clearly sub-par and overpriced offerings; either way, a bit crazy, for so long just about some company, or about anything)

And so, I guess (and as Thom Holwerda points out in the sub-thread returned by the above google search), to him Apple PR gives out facts. Or (Bill Shooter of Bul) he sees challenging such company whorship as a result of hate towards his darling and/or whorship of another one.

If the events are more complex, then that's just bad for them, I suppose. Like (vs. most of what he claims above) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada#iPhone_controversy

Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, “We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.”

But then, he also shoots himself in the foot from time to time (like with "So what is the significance of the Prada? [...] a product that indicated roughly the direction that phone design was going to take" above, or how he praises the supposed innovation brought by Apple vs. what I point out at the end of the other result of the mentioned google search http://www.osnews.com/permalink?511154 )

Reply Parent Score: 2