4 ms·

I do remember Steve Jobs wanted "to go thermonuclear" on Android (mostly Samsung and Google), saying "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen produc

I do remember Steve Jobs wanted "to go thermonuclear" on Android (mostly Samsung and Google), saying "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product." Other motives, same behavior.

rsynnott 3y ago
No, different behaviour. If Apple had announced its own Android derivative called Apple Android++, somehow forced all major OEMs to pre-install it, designed it such that 'Android' apps written for it wouldn't work on real Android, then killed it, that might be the sort of behaviour that would be closer to the mark. Like, Steve Jobs making vague threats isn't really in the same league as what MS was getting up to in the 90s.
bee_rider 3y ago
Different results. MS was pretty effective at destroying the competition.
jonhohle 3y ago
Similar behavior would have been to go to all of the retailers and say they couldn’t sell iPhones if they sold Android phones. Apple sued for patent infringement and that was about the extent of it. Suggesting that their behavior is at Microsoft’s level is naive.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  > Apple sued for patent infringement and that was about the extent of it. You're massively understating the scope and scale of Apple's war on Android. Apple transfered patents to a NPE that sued Android vendors - possibly Google itself. Apple also spent billions on this war - Apple et al spent over $4B to outbid Google on Nortel patents, Google spent even more billions to buy Motorola and its patents, prior to that, Google had virtually no defensive parents.
  - jonhohle 3y ago
    I said Apple sued over patents, you said Apple sued over patents. I think we’re agreeing.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      I'm quibbling with the phrasing of the last half of your sentence, as it's a bit of an understatement, no? > that was about the extent of it Apple didn't only sue over patents they already owned: they went out of their way and bought billions worth of more patents to sue with, partnered with patent-trolls who also sued OEMs on their behalf. So we agree, but the breadth and depth of Apple's actions was remarkable - they didn't just sue, they went to great lengths to do so.
whynotminot 3y ago
> Other motives, same behavior. If you are absolutely committed to doing zero further analysis, then sure I can see why you would think that.
fakedang 3y ago
To be fair, Apple today is more about going thermonuclear on apps inside its own ecosystem, as compared to Android or Android apps. (I don't mean just the commission rate, but the blatant copying of successful app concepts).

I do remember Steve Jobs wanted "to go thermonuclear" on Android (mostly Samsung and Google), saying "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product." Other motives, same behavior.

rsynnott 3y ago

No, different behaviour. If Apple had announced its own Android derivative called Apple Android++, somehow forced all major OEMs to pre-install it, designed it such that 'Android' apps written for it wouldn't work on real Android, then killed it, that might be the sort of behaviour that would be closer to the mark. Like, Steve Jobs making vague threats isn't really in the same league as what MS was getting up to in the 90s.

bee_rider 3y ago

Different results. MS was pretty effective at destroying the competition.

jonhohle 3y ago

Similar behavior would have been to go to all of the retailers and say they couldn’t sell iPhones if they sold Android phones. Apple sued for patent infringement and that was about the extent of it. Suggesting that their behavior is at Microsoft’s level is naive.

sangnoir 3y ago
> Apple sued for patent infringement and that was about the extent of it. You're massively understating the scope and scale of Apple's war on Android. Apple transfered patents to a NPE that sued Android vendors - possibly Google itself. Apple also spent billions on this war - Apple et al spent over $4B to outbid Google on Nortel patents, Google spent even more billions to buy Motorola and its patents, prior to that, Google had virtually no defensive parents.
- jonhohle 3y ago
  I said Apple sued over patents, you said Apple sued over patents. I think we’re agreeing.
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    I'm quibbling with the phrasing of the last half of your sentence, as it's a bit of an understatement, no? > that was about the extent of it Apple didn't only sue over patents they already owned: they went out of their way and bought billions worth of more patents to sue with, partnered with patent-trolls who also sued OEMs on their behalf. So we agree, but the breadth and depth of Apple's actions was remarkable - they didn't just sue, they went to great lengths to do so.

whynotminot 3y ago

> Other motives, same behavior. If you are absolutely committed to doing zero further analysis, then sure I can see why you would think that.

fakedang 3y ago

To be fair, Apple today is more about going thermonuclear on apps inside its own ecosystem, as compared to Android or Android apps. (I don't mean just the commission rate, but the blatant copying of successful app concepts).