3 ms·
Agreed. Ars got this particular point wrong. Android wasn't developed to fend off Apple. It was developed to fend off Microsoft. Andy Rubin was already in V
by GeekyBear 8y ago
Agreed. Ars got this particular point wrong.
Android wasn't developed to fend off Apple. It was developed to fend off Microsoft.
Andy Rubin was already in Vegas at CES to show off Android to carriers and device makers (back when it was going to be a Blackberry knockoff) when Steve Jobs was on stage to demo the iPhone.
>On the day Jobs announced the iPhone, the director of the Android team, Andy Rubin, was six hundred miles away in Las Vegas, on his way to a meeting with one of the myriad handset makers and carriers that descend on the city for the Consumer Electronics Show. Rubin was so astonished by what Jobs was unveiling that, on his way to a meeting, he had his driver pull over so that he could finish watching the webcast.
“Holy crap,” he said to one of his colleagues in the car. “I guess we’re not going to ship that phone.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-day-google-had-to-start-over-on-android/282479/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-d...
Google did change Android from being a Blackberry knockoff to being an iOS knockoff after seeing the iPhone demo, but Android was already long in development, because Google then feared Microsoft would engage in exactly the sort of behavior that Google was just found guilty of.
>Google executives were convinced that if Windows on mobile devices caught on, Microsoft would interfere with users’ access to Google search on those devices in favor of its own search engine. The U.S. government’s successful antitrust trial against Microsoft in the 1990s made it difficult for the company to use its monopoly on desktops and laptops to bully competitors. It could not, for example, make Microsoft’s the default search engine in Windows without giving users a choice between its search engine and those from Google, Yahoo, and others.
However, on smartphones, few rules governed how fiercely Microsoft could compete. It didn’t have a monopoly there. Google worried that if Microsoft made it hard enough to use Google search on its mobile devices and easy enough to use Microsoft search, many users would just switch search engines.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-day-google-had-to-start-over-on-android/282479/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-d...
- speedplane 8y agoOnly partially agree here. Ageee that Android wasnt a response to Apple, but don’t think it was a response to MS either. It was a response to Oracle, and their tight grip of Java and the devices supported by it. At the time, Java owned most devices and Oracle had tight licensing requirements (you could either GPL all your code or pay Oracle a nice fee). Android created a (semi) compatible runtime that allowed companies to side-skirt Oracles licensing requirements. This of course brought a huge lawsuit from Oracle to Google (touching on fundamentals legal issues on whether large APIs are copyrightable), but Google seems to have come out on top. Android effectively unlocked Java from Oracle, turning it into a (sort-of) open platform, while gaining access to their huge developer base.
- GeekyBear 8y agoI'd have to point out that Oracle never developed a competing search engine and ad network the way Microsoft did, and their CEO had not been publicly quoted as threatening to "kill" Google. Google's fears turned out to be unfounded (given the way things turned out) but it was Microsoft that they feared.
- speedplane 8y agoThere was never a moment where MS’s search engine was seriously competitive with Googles, whether that’s 2003 or 2018. Google was worried, but it wasn’t about the search algorithm. It was who would control the platform that controlled which search to run. Back then, MS clearly had the desktop (this was well before the widespread adoption of Chrome). Oracle/Java had a shaky but real lead in devices. The answer to desktop domination / MS was Chrome and taking the lead on new web standards that Google could control. But the answer to device / Oracle domination was Android. If Google didn’t wage that battle, every Android advertisement would have a “powered by Oracle” slogan in the bottom corner.
- GeekyBear 8y agoWe're going to have to agree to disagree. Hindsight may tell us that Microsoft turned out to be a paper tiger, but as the article I cited points out, it was Microsoft that Google feared a the time.