5 ms·
"We think it would have been better if they had kept ours. But what do I know?" Schmidt told a small group of reporters in Tokyo. "What were we going to do, for
by kumarm 14y ago
"We think it would have been better if they had kept ours. But what do I know?" Schmidt told a small group of reporters in Tokyo. "What were we going to do, force them not to change their mind? It's their call."
Eric Schmidt a real gentleman always. Also this puts to bed the arguments from Apple cheerleaders suggesting that Google might be the one that removed Maps from iPhone.
- pilif 14y agoNot that it's really relevant for us end-users, but this still says nothing. It only means that Apple didn't want to continue using Google Maps. It says nothing about what terms Google was suggesting for continued use. If Google demanded something totally unreasonable (like a patent agreement legitimizing Android, or 10 times the money Google was asking before), then Apple didn't really have a choice to leave - no matter how Eric Schmidt is wording this now. In the end the only thing that matters is that we end-users lose greatly functionality-wise because two large companies behave like children. And us end users don't know better than finger-pointing and playing along (not that we have any choice in the matter anyways)
- kumarm 14y ago> two large companies behave like children I only see one child (Apple) here.
- techtalsky 14y agoPerhaps, but you really just have no idea what conversations are happening behind closed doors.
- tobylane 14y agoGoogle did something to cause Apple to do this, as well as Apple already reducing their use of Google, and it's all private. Childish things would include talking in public.
- rys 14y agoHow do you know Google did anything?
- flyinRyan 14y agoThey took it public with this statement, right?
- dvhh 14y agoProbably Apple had preferential access to API ( like free for 5 years ), Apple still wanted to have free access plus probably extended APIs (like directions, vector maps). But since Google is not providing Maps API for free anymore for high volume, they may have wanted Apple to pay like everybody else. Apple said no (too expensive, akin to microsoft tax on FAT LFN ), Google said sorry. End of story.
- jgeorge 14y agoThe only people I see acting like children here are Apple fanboys, Google fanboys, and tech blog writers. Not Apple themselves, nor Google, except where one of the three groups above starts putting words in their mouth. Full disclosure: I am one of those three types of people above but that doesn't mean I agree with the actions of others in that group.
- Shooti 14y ago"something totally unreasonable (like a patent agreement legitimizing Android)" Doesn't strike me as that unreasonable.
- pilif 14y agoNope. For us, that's perfectly legitimate. But it likely isn't for Apple who seem to follow the philosophy lately that any phone that's not an iPhone should be illegal. And that would make a patent agreement entirely unreasonable for Apple
- davedx 14y agoIt's very easy to make assumptions that the reason Apple chose to roll their own was because Google hiked their prices, but where's the smoking gun?
- arrrg 14y agoThere isn’t one, why should there be?
- jgeorge 14y agoThe point isn't that "Google hiked their prices," the point is that there are more than a few possibilities for legitimate Google-driven business reasons for the maps change instead of just assuming Apple hates their users and wants them to have crappy maps.
- esolyt 14y agoI think it's pretty clear from the quote that Google did not offer unreasonable terms.
- chris_j 14y agoHow is it clear from the quote that Google did not offer unreasonable terms? Would you mind expanding a little?
- jrmg 14y agothis puts to bed the arguments from Apple cheerleaders suggesting that Google might be the one that removed Maps from iPhone It really says nothing to imply that there were not terms attached to the use of Google's maps that a reasonable observer would not conclude were unreasonable for Apple to agree too. It says nothing to imply that there *weree either, but we still can't say either way.
- taligent 14y ago> Eric Schmidt a real gentleman always. Pretty sure a real gentleman wouldn't sit on the board of a company whilst at the same time building a competitor product.
- BitMastro 14y agoI don't think a single statement is enough to define someone a gentleman or not, but anyway, he did resign from apple's board to avoid conflict of interest. Source: http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/03/googles-eric-schmidt-resigns-from-apple-board-over-conflict-of/ http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/03/googles-eric-schmidt-resi...
- esolyt 14y agoAs far as I know, he refused to attend some meetings pertaining to iPhone and he eventually decided it would be best for him to resign.
- epo 14y agoNonsense. For one, that word "gentleman" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. His PR people have briefed Schmidt on making Delphic pronouncements which mean all things to all people. Who knows what "keeping ours" involved, perhaps a long term contract, perhaps a vastly increased fee?
- nicholassmith 14y agoWe still don't know what concessions Google was trying to force from Apple over the negotiations. He's probably right, Apple did make the call, but we still don't know whether it was a case of Apple being a child or Google trying to extort them. It's very possible that Google went in to the negotiations hostile.
- jgeorge 14y agoSpoken like a true CEO. Everyone reading into this "it must be Apple's fault because Google said they're innocent", congratulations, you've been trolled by corporate politics. Of course Google thinks it would have been better if Apple kept their maps, they lost license revenue and a bunch of all-important user metrics with the change. The above statement is in no way absolution of Google's involvement in the decision. It's just a tactful response to a situation where fanboys on both sides of the fence are going to go apoplectic over anything more specific. The second sentence after that quote could just have easily been "It's their call, all we were doing is asking for 10x licensing fees and a blanket agreement to stop suing Android handset makers for patent infringement, which I think is perfectly reasonable. They got all mad at us and said they'd do their own maps instead. They're totally at fault here."
- flyinRyan 14y agoIs he still CEO?