You can always tell when someone gives a damn.
In personal relationships it shows up pretty fast.
Does he open the door for you?
Does she make you soup when you’re sick?
With businesses, its all about whether they care that the product or service they are selling you is great. Do they court you? Do they CARE?
I am not what one would call an iTard (an Apple zealot that buys every Apple product that comes out) but I definitely think the iPhone is superior and no one can convince me otherwise and I’ve used every Android but that’s not what I want to talk about.
What I wanted to talk about is the the fact that a jury just days ago awarded Apple $1B dollars in damages in their patent lawsuit against Samsung. This is huge. WAIT A MINUTE?! but thats STIFLING INNOVATION! Right? That’s the argument a lot of people have for the win. Apple is stifling innovation.
Here’s how it REALLY is.
First, make no mistake, Samsung made their phones to run Android at the behest of Google and had an internal strategy around copying Apple from the China level up. They left a big paper trail, it was all shown to the jury.
Google got into the mobile market specifically to complete with the iPhone due to… ding ding MOBILE SEARCH.
Mobile search in the next decade (i think much sooner) is going to be THE only relevant search.
Lets think about why Google had to get into mobile or die.
- Out of 4B mobile phones 1B are smartphones
- By 2012 Mobile Internet Users will outnumber desktop internet users (developing nations have smartphones and not desktops a trend that will continue)
- 50% of Local Searches are done on mobile devices
- 86% of mobile internet users use their device while watching TV.(See Pretty Infographic at the bottom of this post for more info on mobile and search)
Wow, that seems like a category that an ADHD company like Google has to get in on and since all of Googles money comes from ad spend and ad spend is linked to searches and mobile searches will be the dominant search method specifically location based searches, their relevancy would become nothing in under a decade. Ok fine.Now lets look at some moral/ethical issues here for a company whose motto has always been “Do No Evil.”The Android Open Source Project was essentially funded and backed by Google starting in 2005. Incidentally this is when the iPhone was really starting up development at Apple. I’m sure this had nothing to do with the fact that Eric Schmidt CEO of Google was ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS at Apple which gave him high level knowledge of their roadmap. For you tech heads, if IBM had suddenly backed Linus Torvals/Linux in a play to compete with Microsoft, that’s basically what we are talking about here.
While Google was developing Google Maps and location based search for Apple, they were secretly building Android to mimic iOS and planning to shop it out to any manufacturer that would make phones for it.
First, it’s a PRETTTY big conflict of interest to have the CEO of a company like Eric S on Apples board then have his company Google launch a competing product.
But that was plenty of time to share key “guiding” info with Google.
And the strategy Google and Schmidt used to compete with the juggernaut that is a supremely easy to use iPhone/iOS/iTunes/Record Label/TV Company ecosystem was in fact, a page of the Mack Daddy of the Bait & Switch .. straight from the Book of Gates.
In the 70s, Microsofts main revenue source was developing software for the Mac. They too had the desktop PC graphic user interface roadmap and knocked it of in Asia with their first of Windows 1.0 and brought it to market close to the Mac Launch back in 1985.
It wasn’t the first time Jobs trusted someone a bit too much and they took Apples roadmap and built a sub-standard version of the product BUT, made it multi-platform and jumped into bed with any manufacturer that would have them giving them superior market share, albeit with a crap product.
And this is what Google/Android is all about. They did not care about a decent mobile experience.
It was about putting search dollars in Google’s pocket.
If you learn Android on one phone, it will be a different experience on another. Updates are rare and most users don’t upgrade because it’s difficult. Developers like to think they are building on the teched out speeds and feeds mobile platform but they make just 7% of what Apple developers make.
It’s a system on its way to a slow unsustainable implosion.
It’s all totally different on all of these manufacture’s handsets below and also shown as % of market share.. everyone wants to do up Android in their own way and they don’t play friendly.
Apple and Steve Jobs wanted to change the world and put money in their pockets but they didn’t start with the money side of it, they started with bold daring innovative well thought out products with taste and love put into features and designs… and for who? for them? No for you. For us, the customer. They gave a crap about those things. User experience, usability, testing etc.
That is why I am SO happy about the results of the Samsung Lawsuit.
Apple will not let someone “innovate” while using their creative and original ideas (pinch to zoom etc). They let Microsoft happen and overtake them back in the day and are not planning on letting it happen again with iOS and mobile. Did Apple take an idea from Xerox for what Jobs called “a kernel of an idea”? Here’s his comments about Xerox.
Also before anyone get’s their Fandroid panties in a bunch about APPLE STOLE FROM XEROX TOO, they did not.
They paid Xerox $1,000,000 in pre-IPO stock for a tech demo on something that was already shelved in their research division. Short sighted for Xerox leadership, sure but they paid $1,000,000 which only a year later ended up as $17.6M post-IPO…adjusted for 1980 inflation Xerox made $45.9M for Steve Jobs and Bill Atkinson’s 3 day trip to Xerox, but I digress.
So Why Samsung and not Google?
Tactics. Android makes Google no direct revenue only ad dollars and the manufacturers are easier to sue. Samsung got a little stuck in the middle. Now companies will think twice before grabbing features just for market share if it means paying out a $1,000,000,000.00 as a result of not checking patents first.
Me personally as someone who has a good amount of intellectual property which I litigate for on a regular basis, I know what it feels like to see your properties making other people money. Before you condemn someone for stifling innovation, think about how you would feel if your ideas were being used to help others innovate and make money on your creativity.
All I know is I’ll be getting an iPhone 5 in a few weeks and I am pretty sure that I will be quite happy with it.