Steve Jobs dubs Google's 'don't be evil' motto 'bulls**t' Steve Jobs has dubbed Google's "don't be evil" mantra "bullshit." Or at least "a load of crap." According to multiple reports, Jobs unloaded on Google last week during an Apple "town hall" meeting at the company's One Infinite Loop headquarters. As originally reported by Wired, the Apple cult leader attacked his former …
Do you suppose he's a bit narked everyone's taking the piss out of his new baby?
Hitler - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjO89DU3oBk
Dom Joly - http://www.funnyordie.co.uk/videos/d2b714361c/hello
Even Peewee Herman! - http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/f7a03edbd7/pee-wee-gets-an-ipad
This post has been deleted by its author
I say the same exact thing about most of Apple's recent products: they're bullshit, or at the very least a load of crap.
Though they do know how to make their stuff look pretty, and they know how to make weak-minded people give in to temptation (and come back later to defend their weakness by telling us how awesome their expensive toys are), but other than that I don't see them as more or less evil than Google, Microsoft or any other massive corporation.
Evil Stevie icon, because it was put there for articles just like this one.
And here is a perfect example of the innate need to mock and deride any minority. Of course, you have extensive experience of Apples products, thereby enabling you to come to your reasoned and intelligent conclusion.
What's that? You don't own any Apple products? STFU, then.
"What's that? You don't own any Apple products? STFU, then."
I don't own any Apple products apart from a battered old second-hand iPod, but I do work with them and I am expected to support them.
In my experience they are a nightmare. Ok, I'll agree that they're reliable, but that's the only good thing I can say about them. They're nasty, locked-down Fisher Price excuses for computers. They're a puzzle to configure, a pain to customize, and if anything does go wrong they're reluctant to spit out anything remotely useful.
As for Macs and Active Directory? Don't even get me started...
"I say the same exact thing about most of Apple's recent products: they're bullshit, or at the very least a load of crap."
But you didn't have the balls to post that under your own name though did you?
He's right - "Don't be evil" is a load of crap, it's just a shame it's taken him till now to say it.
Of course, "don't be evil" has always been a load of crap - everybody knows that. However, the interesting thing is not that it took Steve till now to say it but the context in which he said it: "Google attacks the JesusPhone _therefore_ must be evil." And this is a comparable amount of crap. But what did you expect from Holy Steve?
(Steve, cause this is as close to a crap icon as it gets)
No part of my post made judgement on Apple or Steve Jobs or anyone, except the post I replied to.
It is high time people started calling Google what they are - scary, power mad control freaks.
Are Apple the same?
Quite possibly - on the other hand - Apple have never declared a desire to be the gate keepers of all human knowledge.
Jobs temperatmentally is a control freak. The way the industry has evolved is like a sort of business petri dish with lots of uncoordinated activities merging, combining, competing, and all kinds of products and companies coming out of the process. This is something Jobs cannot stand.
The ideal for him, and with the iPhone and the iPod he gets as close as he dares, is to have you only able to do or load onto your Apple device what Apple allows you to. All developers and all writers or musicians or publishers will do as they or told or get cut off. Users will buy what they are given.
You want a Touch with usb mode? Tough. You want to copy your tracks over using a file manager? Tough. You want an app that is not in the App store? Tough. You want a mid range Core2 tower for your OS that has a couple hard drive slots? You my friend are SOL. Go down to Walmart you redneck, while you still can, and buy your cheap beige box to go with those TV dinners.
Its a weird mixture of snobbery and control and contempt for the buyers. Ugly stuff. Very ugly indeed.
Where one "i"-toy comes, the rest follows. With their own filesharing protocol, discovery protocol, own inter-toy communication and all of them tightly bundled around iTunes.
Apple is the ultimate Vertical. I am surprised they did not take the relationship with ATT further and did not launch an Apple ISP which kind-a works with non-Apple toys, but works properly only on Apple hardware. Probably the Death Star did not want to bend over that far...
Google should just be straightforward about their megalomaniacal intentions. Let us stop waiting in suspense. for the day when the friendly Google logo will read, 'w3 0wnz j0000'.
I'm not saying it was nice, but I notice that I don't share in Jobs' pain, about Apple's competition.
Oh well! :shrug:
Does anyone else feel like this is decade is going to be interesting?
2010 has kicked off with a whole lot of posturing, from Apple, Google, Amazon and book publishers even. Who's next? Do we actually get anything sensible out of it all?
Feels like a good time for a new underdog, but would anyone notice them amid all the bickering?
This year Google is *again* pouring loads of money into GSoC, where they pay many students and organizations to write open source. I still need to see Apple give the Open Source community anything back (Apple is very good at taking, not just your money but also your code).
GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/History (1987, not Apple or Jobs ... Stallman)
LLVM: http://llvm.org/pubs/2002-12-LattnerMSThesis.html (2002, Chris Lattner UIUC)
CUPS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CUPS (1997 not Apple, Sweet, later bought by Apple)
"Michael Sweet, who owns Easy Software Products, started developing CUPS in 1997. The first public betas appeared in 1999.[2] The original design of CUPS used the LPD protocol, but due to limitations in LPD and vendor incompatibilities, the Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) was chosen instead. CUPS was quickly adopted as the default printing system for several Linux distributions, including Red Hat Linux.[citation needed] In March 2002, Apple Inc. adopted CUPS as the printing system for Mac OS X 10.2.[3] In February 2007, Apple Inc. hired chief developer Michael Sweet and purchased the CUPS source code."
Those are just the easy ones. If you care about being taken seriously, you'll want to look carefully into the development of the other applications you mention, too, as you will find Apple once again "standing on the shoulders of giants" to get to where they are, today ... just like Jobs proudly claimed with the launch of the iPhone.
So ... your favorite flavor of Jobs' Kool-Aid is ... grape?
I don't know about Apples, but if you want to finger about the only piece of software that can bring an entire Linux box to its knees, it's Flash.
That is not the fault of Linux, Gnome, KDE, Canonical, Novell, Red Hat or anyone else. It is 100% the fault of the donkeys at Adobe for not writing their code efficiently.
HTML5 held out some hope of removing large amounts of the parasite that is Flash from the web, but Google dropped a clanger and moved away from open standards, preferring instead patent-encumbered bullshit (or should that be, load of crap?) just as Apple do.
Thus Flash will be around for ages yet and we will continue to hear dual and quad cores scream in agony as they chew through the quagmire that is Flash code. Flash does have it's place, and that place should be the dustbin of history.
This reminds me of the time Apple promised Apple Corps (the Beatles company) that they wouldn't ever go into the music business.
Then they released iTunes and er... went into the music business.
So it's ok for Jobs to muscle in on someone elses business, but he doesn't like it when the same thing happens to him? Tough. Shit.
I suggest you grow a pair Steve. If you had any confidence at all in your products then you wouldn't let a company like Google phaze you. Maybe you're upset because you know you sell expensive tat, and the thought of someone selling something popular and cheaper (tat or not) is just too much?
I do seem to recall Apple (Computers) promising Apple Corps back in the late 1970's (well, I wasn't actually born then, so the remembering part is actually remembering reading about it) that they would never enter the music business as long as Apple Corps never entered the computer business.
Is that a steaming pile of hypocrisy you're rolling around in Steve or does this tirade mean that you are effectively shutting down the music part of iTunes and stop selling these iPod's that you wax so lyrically about?
Exciting developments for sure.
The problem with the Apple "no to Flash" stance is that it reduces customer choice - so they will choose not to use Apple.
IMHO a bit of a shame. Instead I'd tell Adobe not "no" but "fix it so it works and we'll talk again".
As for Google, that's a strong reaction - they really must have pissed off each other..
Throwing his toys out of the pram because he knows he can't hold on to the smartphone market in the face of an open competitor?
He's probably also a little sore after the reception his latest creation received, and knowing full well that many Android powered devices will be breathing down the Pad's neck with better specs, prices and versatility.
So Apple didn't do search? Thank the (insert deity of choice). Would websites have to submit their site to Applesearch for inclusion like the appstore? I sure the wits and wags on here can think of funnier things but the thought of Apple trying to take on Google at search just makes me laugh.
And the iphone is pants. Pretty, but pants. I'll stick with my 6310i.
So presumably Apple is evil too. After all they entered the phone market to compete with the others. So that makes Apple evil? I used to work for a guy like this. At the slightest upset all the toys are thrown out of the pram and a major tantrum starts.
(Have to concede though that I think he's right about Adobe. Soooo much potential, but wasted. Flash & acrobat are overweight rotting corpses. Photoshop should've left everything else for dust, but is bearly better than what comes free on the front of monthly magazines.)
Hey, if Steve says it's crap, it must be, everything Apple has ever said and done has been totally above board and not intended to stifle competition right?
It's not like Apple lock you into proprietary standards or force you to use their services exclusively or render your hardware useless if you decide you'd like to use it your own way is it?
Oh, wait, *that* Apple, umm, ignore everything I just said.
Flames of hell to indicate the level of evil...
Oh, as for Dave Hands, I'm, another AC but only because I'm skiving work to write this. Now run Dave, I can hear Steve calling you, he needs his morning fanboi fawning session and you're late.
People thought the iPad would be sexy and exciting, like making love to a Hollywood actress.
Instead it turned out sinister and disturbing, like waking up to find someone's shoved a dirty bog brush through your letterbox in the middle of the night.
I can see why Steve is a bit grouchy. I don't think he even saw the iPad while it was being designed. Like when Homer Simpson's half-brother and president of Powell Motors asked Homer to design his next car, and said he didn't want to see anything until it was finished.
Well that's the iPad. Big, ugly, stupid. Probably has 3 delete keys. You can never find a delete key when you're mad. And Steve is mad 100% of the time if the movie Pirates of Silicon Valley is to be believed.
Maybe he should lay off the drugs.
"Instead it turned out sinister and disturbing, like waking up to find someone's shoved a dirty bog brush through your letterbox in the middle of the night."
DUDE, I'm trying to work here! Quit putting Eraserhead stuff in my mind!
Can't agree with anything else you wrote though. If you think that *anything* Stevo goes on stage with did not pass his personal approval process you clearly have no idea whom you're talking about.
I thought the American way as far as corporations was concerned was all about beating the competition into oblivion by any means that won't actually lead to jail time - i.e. the big guy wins (or at least, those with the best lawyers and friendly politicians). Surely it would be un-American to suggest that such behaviour is evil?
This post has been deleted by its author
I don't think Google want to "kill" the iPhone, they just are after their share. Maybe they want to be dominant but I'm sure Nokia, HTC, Samsung, etc. all want this and that's the basis of competition, no?
As for Adobe Flash, it seems the Mac must have real issues. Flash hasn't even crashed my browser for years, let alone my PC! How can a browser component crash a whole machine? And surely buggy code is the fault of the developer?
"No one will be using Flash...The world is moving to HTML5"
This is well funny given the recent expansion in supported hardware for h/w-accelerated Flash.
Lets see now - I have hardware accelerated flash on an ION-based HTPC which means the HTPC can actually playback the BBC iPlayer (had to get an "i" in there somewhere!) HD* content while consuming a piddling 32W of power. The Wii now does SD Flash video perfectly acceptably. XBox has it, PS3 has it. Its on a shitload of mobiles. Its on some NAS boxes. It is in fact close to becoming ubiquitous :)
Now what's HTML5 going to do for me on my phone/console/htpc? Here's a hint - I don't own an iPhone.
Total fail. If he'd been whinging about Flash even 2 years ago then fine I could sort of understand as it was pretty much only useable on PC. Strange how I've never seen Flash crash a single Windows machine. Ever. The player might crash but the machine doesn't. Must be a mac thing :D
He needs to get a clue. Fast. Not going to happen though.
*what the BBC says is HD anyway - some is, most isn't.
This is a good thing because I think Flash and HTML5 might co-exist which is the best situation for competition and innovation as they both have strengths. Apple's decision provides fuel for HTML5 being established - which is a good thing - Flash needs competition for its own ongoing development, otherwise it becomes complacent. All of your devices you mention could potentially support HTML5 etc. as well as Flash.
Flash is a closed, proprietary bolt-on binary format which 1) makes it less easy to search within, 2) less easy to integrate with the rest of the web page its in and 3) excludes smaller developers innovating with it because of the cost of its tools. All three go against the open-to-all principle of the web. Streaming flash video and audio is unnecessary and superfluous: I don't believe flash itself adds value as to the efficiency of the video codec. The two value adds by Flash here is 1) a large existing de-facto installed base of browsers, backed by a well respected company called Adobe and 2) a cross-platform DRM facility provided by the A.I.R. that is favourable to publishers such as the BBC that want to protect their content (rightly or wrongly). Flash is great for visualisation, training and games with its powerful animated and interactive anti-alisaed vector graphics features.
Meanwhile, open standard plain-text, searchable XML based HTML5, SVG with AJAX and alternative video and audio codecs such as MPEG4 AAC can potentially do the same job as Flash, with sufficient development.
"Apple's decision provides fuel for HTML5 being established"
Unless you figure Jobs taking a stand will make Microsoft finally support HTML5 at any level in any of their browsers, then "Apple" taking a stand does nothing to advance HTML5 in general use, as HTML5 has been supported just fine for a couple of years, without any specific help at all from Steve Jobs' obfuscation.
Microsoft's Internet Explorer is the ONLY browser you have heard of that does not support the basic pool of HTML5 code. Sure there are some trick items that no browser currently supports, as usual with new standards, but MSIE supports *none* of it, unlike any browser made using Gecko or the WebKit base (Firefox, Safari, Opera, etc, etc.)
There might eb a lot of "hardware accelerated" flash out there, but that only means for flash APPS and basic flash video. Video files like Hulu uses are encrypted flash, and rely on Java applets as well as flash code to run, and take significantly more horsepower as well. You will NOT be able to watch hulu on Flash accelerated phones and tablets, not in this fashion, and not without FULL multitasking (above and beyond what even Android allows, including hot loading one app from within another). This practice of DRM is one major reason why flash violates so many security rules, and given Adobe's lazy programmers and lack of vision, it;s no wonder it;s one of the least stable and most insecure applications in history.
i have flash nowhere near my stuff. I have it on one PC only for the sites I'm occasionally sent to for business that don't have non-flash versions.
HTML5, webkit, java, and I hate to say it but Silverlight, all have Flash in their sites.
Realy, what the.. That was uncalled for for using a c rather than a k. I'm not a mac lover and not a yank. What the hell was that insult for? Did your mummy not breast feed you or something? Fuck off back to 4chan and leave the real discussion to the adults.
Well at least we know who has been going around down voting even the most innocuous anti mac comments.
No, it was *entirely* called for! I'm not a "yank" either BTW. I'll quote your original post:
> "And stop crying in to your coolaid Jobs. Welcome to the real world where people don't just do what you say."
Funnily enough, I don't recall Jobs ever telling anyone what to do -- even in these town hall meetings. He expressed and opinion, which he is entitled to, just like you and me. To my knowledge, no-one has ever been threatened by an agent or employee of Apple to do anything. Jobs was calling at as he saw it. Was he right? Well, yes! Adobe are fucking lazy! I've been using their products for about 20 years and I've seen them grow and get progressively worse! Are you also claiming that Googles "Don't be evil"(tm) mantra isn't bullshit? Hey, Apple and Jobs are no saints, but come on! I'm sure that Larry and Sergey think just as highly as Jobs! But you commentards seem to take this all way too personally and way too seriously! I'll repeat myself (and I HATE having to do that), but more explicitly. If you are going to jump on a bandwagon and not really add to the discussion, have the decency to get the insult right, sunshine! It ain't that fuckin' hard! As you are blatantly a n00b at all of this flame stuff, here's the history, just for you! The product being quoted is "Kool-Aid". It is a reference to the Jonestown cult which commited mass suicide on the orders of "Reverend" Jim Jones by drinking poisoned Kool-Aid (apparently fact fans it was actually Flavor-Aid). Now, if you are going to wantonly through insults around, however innocuos they may be, be prepared to get it back, and sometimes worse. It's nearly as bad as when you dick write MAC for Mac computers! For the record, that'd be Media Access Control...
I've got to take umbrage with the "Fuck off back to 4chan and leave the real discussion to the adults." line, as it's not as if you were adding to the discussion in the first place, fucknuckle! It's exactly the sort of bollocks I'd expect to see somewhere like ZDnet! As for "Well at least we know who has been going around down voting even the most innocuous anti mac comments." Personlly I'm anti dickwadery! I REALLY haven't been doing what you suggest, I'm not that sad, but isn't that the point of the up/down vote? To show whether or not you disagree with a comment? Or, ironically, are the people that you'd acuse of being cultist not allowed to disagree with your own brand of hive thinking? What a dick.
EPIC fail for a open web "standard" to contain patent encumbances. HTML5 might be All That and then some, but H.264 has no place in it unless it is free and open.
Getting rid of code-with-issues (Flash etc) is a good thing. Replacing it with code-with-issues (the H.264 codec in some jurisdictions) is not so good. I'll keep my eye on Theora...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H264#Patent_licensing
"We did not enter the search business," Jobs said in reference to Google. "They entered the phone business."
So what? It's a free market, isn't it? (This is a very peculiar outburst to make unless Steve knows something we don't. Maybe there was a gentleman's agreement to keep tanks off lawns.) Maybe Google no longer feel that MS are such a threat that they (Google) have to have alliances with everyone else in the industry. Maybe it's a bit like how Apple and Adobe seem to be spoiling for a fight right now.
'Oooh No! Someones trying to hitch a ride on my technology'
Dont like it Steve? Stop hitching a ride on everyone else's technology and build your own Internet for your customers.
I'm fed up with tossers like Apple, WIndows and Adobe shedding their toxic loads all over the information highway and then sitting there demanding recompense from someone else's low emmission vehicle.
I'm shocked to hear it! That's what I am, SHOCKED!
I bet Adobe were cut to the heart that Youtube now has an HTML5 option as well as Flash. And now Apple's latest fashion accessory is doing the same? Good. I hope HTML5 leaves Adobe back in the dark ages, where they belong. Pull your finger out and write some code that doesn't require a Cray to execute at reasonable speed, Adobe.
And while you're at it, can we have a Creative Suite that will open in less time than it takes to boil the kettle, make coffee, drink it, wash up the mug and wait so long I feel like another one. Thanks.
Mr Jobs, I don't remember Nokia and SE saying you are evil, you don't support Flash because you will loose your stranglehold over what users can run on *your* iPhones, and you sir are a douche!
P.s. I like the look of your iPad, but I'm waiting for the Ubuntu (Cracked) version so I can choose what apps to run, including Flash, if I'm paying money for a computer, I choose what software I run on it, not you.
...But then neither are Apple!
I mean come on, did he really and truly think that he could blow off a bit of steam on this subject and not have it reach the outside world! What?
Well I for one have never believed that Google mantra, does not stop me using their products though. Of course, that is because I do not have to pay to use their search engine, email, photo storage etc., where as Apple, whose products I believe are a total pile of steaming faecal matter, expect me to vastly over pay to use them. And then defend them against those people who have not been ensnared by the cult of Jobs. For in my opinion that is what those products from Cupertino tend to inspire in people who buy and use them, a cult like obsession with Jobs and everything he says and does. Oh and the Nexus One... Yeah that's not great either... And I have serious issues with Android too...
Apple Comcputers vs. Apple Records? That was a trademark issue, and at least at the time -- as has already been noted -- Apple Computers didn't sell music. Did they promise that they never would?
Google's "Don't be evil" IS a load of crap. They proved that themselves when they censored results in China and handed over IP addresses to authorities.
Stevo calling "load of crap" might be the pot calling the kettle black. It's also calling a spade a spade.
Steve/Apple afraid of Google? No more so than any business is, or ought to be, afraid of their competitors.
"Apple Computers didn't sell music. Did they promise that they never would?"
Yes, they did. But it didn't stop them for long; under OS 8 they had a beep sound called "Sosumi", as in "Well, yeah, we promised to stay away from music... Sosumi." Of course, a beep sound is nowhere nearly as egregious a violation as, say, ITMS, right?
St Jobs seems to have been riled that Google is stepping on his toes in territory he reckons he owns, but it goes much deeper than that. It's the capitalist desire to become a sole, monopolistic dominant force with no alternative choice which is the true evil. Most mega-corporations seem to have that goal.
I have no problem with making money, profiteering, nor with proprietary product, but I do have a problem with lack of choice, even if that is with another proprietary manufacturer.
Google IMO are far more evil than Apple and Microsoft. Google seeks to dominate the entire interweb and communications medium from browsing, email, storage through to OS and communication devices and all to generate advertising revenue through profiling. Microsoft would rightly get slammed if they kept copies of everything a user produced, posted it back to Redmond where the data was mined and users were profiled, but Google can do that behind closed doors while hiding behind it's "do no evil" claim. Google is rapidly expanding, running web sites on their own servers ( see other El Reg article ), taking control of ISP email ( Virgin Media and others ), no doubt by offering sweet deals. Expect them to be looking at supermarket store card data, handling ID Cards, national databases, identity and vetting, and so on ( they do have better infrastructure than others ) and once they have PayPal, banking and auction sites captured what more is really left ?
It all looks so innocent, can easily be spun as "it's great for customers", and customers often feel that it is, but no one outside the Chocolate Factory truly knows what Google's full plans are once they've captured the market, and once they have control of 'everything' it will be very hard for any alternatives to emerge or compete.
"Do no evil", my arse.
... that the interesting thing here is that Steve looks like he thinks of Google as more of a threat than Microsoft.
10 years ago, a move to use Windows Live Search on an Apple device would have been unheard of. Now (even if the rumour is untrue), it's seen as a possibility worth the dead-tree press' time to comment on it.
Oh, and for all of the people who want neither Apple nor Google near their devices or personal info (and I count myself amongst them): is this a result of the level of tech packed into a phone/MP3 Player/search engine backend? In order for us to be able to afford this Star Trek-style wizardry it needs to be subsidized by other forms of income, as well as the ticket price.
All of a sudden, Linux is looking more interesting- or, Microsoft isn't looking so awful. A company who makes money from the ticket price and comes with no incidentals or major privacy concerns... Is that going to be the new USP for a chunk of the market?
Could that be the hot tech direction for the 2010's?
I posted this as a reply further up the thread, but think it's probably worth it's own thread:
Competition is good, but it has to be fair competition:
While Apple were developing the iPhone, they had a senior member of Google sitting on their board of directors. Google then went out and, while still having someone on Apple's board of directors, made themselfs into a direct competitor of Apple producing a staggeringly similar product. It is highly unlikely that Apple's board of directors didn't have a large amount of focus on the iPhone project and then in turn that Google didn't have fairly good understandings of the problems and pitfalls Apple had to deal with along the way.
As I understand it, Apple no longer have anyone from Google on their board of directors, but this is a very serious matter, it casts Google in a bad light and while it may be perfectly legal, it does call into question their "don't be evil" and I can see reason for Steve Jobs to be mighty annoyed.
Google: Make something fairly good, subsidise it heavily (through the advertising you can put on it later), price the rest out of the market.
Apple: Make something at best alright, price it as if it's the second coming, rely on the hype machine to ensure it sells like the second coming too.
no evil google icon yet?
This post has been deleted by its author
Don't get me wrong, I use Google services, and I use Apple products (I also use a host of other competing goods and services here, thats not the point). I think what people are missing here, and falling short in making the comparision with, is not that Apple is any more inherintly "Good" than Google (although I have been getting a little antsy with google's growing hunger for handling all your data over the last 12 months). However, I think what is really a dig here, is that unlike MS vs Apple, where they have been competing with each other for quite some time now, made small invasions with each other via software that was compatibile for the others OS, there was never a sense of working partner ship, simply competition (unlike the fanbois, which flamed like they lived on 4chan). Nor was this really the case when Apple moved into the phone market (though they may have indeed poached some patent technology from other phones makers). Here, Google and Apple have been obvious bed fellows, all the while Google, gaining apple support and advertising, suddenly springs out a competing browser, OS, phone OS, and then Phone in a short span of how many months?
It's a fair cop; Google has taken a good advantage where it could, and snagged a pretty nice free ride to an entry position in the smart phone market. I don't think it's about Apple being less threatened by an MS phone than a Google phone - diversity drives innovation (which never sucks), I think it's more a question of how much Apple really got out of the deal, and how long Google had this plan in mind.
Not that of course, Apple, or most other companies are free of stones for this kind of tactic.
Under Snow Leopard with Safari, flash crashing doesn't even affecty the browser, it just dies and all your tabs with flash content get replaced with a blue cubed question mark. Refresh the page and it reloads.
It really is a pig though and desperately needs graphics hardware support to be able to play HD video, which is sorely lacking under the existing Mac release and beta versions.
Lack of hardware acceleration in Flash on the Mac is annoying; Adobe want access to the hardware for H.264 decoding, whereas Apple want Adobe to use the QuickTime API.
As to who is right for the consumer? On Apple's side the hardware abstraction means future compatibility is guaranteed, whereas on Adobe's side they might include hardware H.264 decoding on GPUs that can do it (such as 8600M GT in my MacBook Pro) where Apple choose not to let old hardware support this feature.
"So, over in the good 'Ol US of A, is 'bullshit' a worse word than 'crap'?"
Yes.
Also "pants" means "trousers", not underwear, which catches a lot of Americans out when they visit here. They don't use "bloody" as an epithet either, and don't realize it is offensive. Not that the Brits bother to avoid using offensive language themselves anymore.
My wife, proud of her command of idiomatic Spanish, once committed the social gaffe of assuming that cabron and maricon were roughly equivalent on the offensometer scale on one of the Balearics, only to find that one of them was THE deadly insult. I don't remember which.
Cabron is THE deadly insult for a spanish man as far as A level Spanish memory serves. The implication being female goats are not faithful to their male partners. So calling a hombre cabron (male goat) is a direct attack on your masculinity i.e. your wife/girlfriend cheats on you, therefore less of a man in their very machismo culture.
Just for informative pruposes....
They built iTunes for mac because, well that's what they do.
Eventually, somebody realised that if the ipod was going to become truly ubiquitous, the seething hordes of 'doze users must have a means of using the ipod too, so they resigned themselves to porting itunes to that platform. A secondary benefit of doing this was to give those 'dozers a small taste of what it is like over in Apple World and perhaps encourage a few to switch.
As far as St Jobs is concerned there is absolutely no benefit in porting itunes to linux. The user base is insignificant, and what there is of it is often rabidly against closed systems and drm not to mention accustomed to getting stuff for free.
Mr Jobs sells closed systems, even more so than Microsoft. He might take advantage of open source stuff when it suits him, but he has no intention of fostering or encouraging the use of open source products when those products compete directly with his own closed and proprietary stuff.
I wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for a port of _any_ apple software to linux* if I were you.
* apart from the afore mentioned open source stuff he uses in his products for which he has to contribute back his code additions of course.
As much as I dont like apple, Stevie sure does have a point here.
In EU there is a thing called competition law, something that many of these companies dont seem to understand, or are just pain walking over. The law is there to help innovation and increase competition. What's happening here is stifling just those things!
Its shameful the way Google have used their advertising network to push the Nexus one. Many adsense advertisers are complaining about lack of advertising clicks due to the infiltration of nexus one ads. Many bloggers using adsense are complaining about nexus one ads constantly showing up on their websites, pushing irrelevant ads to their readers. Often these sites have nothing to do with mobile phones whatsoever. Remember Google owns the adsense network, so its probably costs nothing to push these products on consumers.
Google seem to be able to enter any market, free of charge, destroy everyones business in the process and walk away. Look at all the Satnav companies, not to mention analytics industry, or video sites like metacafe vs youtube (of course youtube will win if it receives premium position). Also the doubleclick purchase (which holds virtually every large advertisers information), is a shocker.
A competition/privacy timebomb is ticking. Makes me sick to the bottom of my stomach!
Contrary to what Jobs claims to think competition is not evil. Monopolies are.
Just consider the benefits to the industry and to consumers as second sourcing becomes available.
Apple would be wise to consider the benefits of encouraging HP, DELL, ACER and others to offer Mac compatible PCs and laptops. Instead they go around suing companies like PSYSTAR so they can benefit from their monopoly prices.
Consumers do not benefit in any way shape or form from only having Apple as a source for products. Any product. That is a scheme to maximize the price consumers pay. Same with the iPhone and AT&T.
Just imagine what you would pay if AMD did not exist. Or, if only one of HP, DELL, ACER and the others were to survive.
The last thing that anyone wants is another screwed up market caused by a Microsoft.
Steve Jobs should go into search if he is unhappy. Or license OEMs to sell the Mac OS.
Consumers gain nothing from the attitude put forward by Mr. Jobs.
The main reason for the stability of OS X over Windows is that the former only has to support a limited range of hardware. Imagine if you were writing software that had to run on hundreds of versions of hardware of different specs, it would be a nightmare. All the hacks you had, or did, put in would fall over and it would end up as a hideous ball of crapulance. The fact that I can run Win7 for as long as I do with few problems says a lot. When I use my Mac I know it will work because the OS and hardware are designed with each other in mind. Don't get me started on Linux, I've tried it and didn't get on with it. Too much effort required compared to the others which worked out of the box.
How many more times does this have to be explained?
Apple makes money from selling hardware (Macs).
To do this, they install OS X on them, to differentiate them from the many companies using Windows as their choice of OS.
Apple therefore makes money only indirectly from OS X. The cost of the development of the OS is seen as a loss worth making if it sells hardware.
Allowing other companies to put OS X on their computers to sell would only lose Apple the money they make from hardware sales. Apple have already done this in the mid-1990's and nearly went under as a result.
So they are not going to do it again, ever!
Any other facts you'd like explained?
I was ready to shell out the cash for an iPad, but no flash support, forget about it. No flash support means no access to millions of flash based sites.
Using HTML5 is going to be a pain for developers that create animated sites. They will have to create an HTML5 version of their animation in addition to a Flash version for older browsers to fall back on. Of course, I don't see people writing script to create animation ... so you will start seeing the equivalent of the Flash development environment that generates HTML5 animation for the canvas. Then again, adobe is clever enough that it will probably end up generating .swf and a html5 version of an animation along with code that downgrades to flash based on their browser support.
It would be nice if browser providers required users to force upgrade the the latest version as it comes out. It is already a pain in the neck, as a web developer, to have to deal with creating hacks for IE6, IE7, iE8 and of course FF on the Mac renders differently than FF on windows.
"Whenever a Mac crashes more often than not it’s because of Flash. No one will be using Flash...The world is moving to HTML5."
Ok, so let me get this right... the "World most advanced operating system" can't handle badly behaved applications? Maybe someone should buy Jobs a copy of the Minix book?
The "World most advanced operating system" doesn't crash, the application crashes, ie Safari or Firefox. Your quote is a mis-quote of sorts. It should read "Whenever [a piece software on] a Mac crashes..." In my own experience, I've had a few Kernel panics in OS X, 2 to be exact in 10.6. I've had 12 BSOD in Windows 7; 3 on the iMac and 9 on the laptop (Dell). So what is the difference, or why does this happen? Flash, as described is the biggest cause of application crashes on OS X. Is that really that difficult to believe? As for Windows, it was down to drivers, since I installed the manufacturers drivers, all is fine. They are BOTH good OS's...
my iPhone 3G contract expires pretty soon.... the "4G" replacement had better be a lot more kick ass than the iPad, or Nexus here I come.....
... no wonder Steve is peeved, he's just realised that the 4G iPhone is a POS and that the future is robotic!
- Terminator head, the ultimate android!
I've completely missed this Flash stuff. Its apparently buggy, bloated code that's already obsolete and shouldn't be allowed near anyone's computer......except....
I'm sure I've seen it running on all sorts of hardware, old and new, all sorts of platforms. Its everywhere. I've never really thought about it before; it seems to work, its probably ugly code, its probably proprietary and its probably making Adobe scads of money.
Which is probably what the problem is. You've got all these dogs fighting for the food scraps. I don't mind competition -- Adobe could do with a bit -- but this dissing a a tool to gain market share is beyond me. (Remember the HD-DVD vs BluRay fanboy spat? How Bluray was so superior? It wasn't, it isn't, it never was -- it was all about who could serve up the most captive customers.)
Hypocrite: someone who believes it's OK to do something, but only if they're the ones doing it. See "Jobs, Steve". Also see "free market", "competition" and "don't be evil".
Though I do agree fully on his assessment of Google's company motto. Large corporations are evil by nature, for Google to pretend otherwise is, well...evil!
<-- EPIC
"Whenever a Mac crashes more often than not it’s because of Flash. No one will be using Flash...The world is moving to HTML5."
Man, could Jobs tell that to my MBP? It crashes more than Windows does. It's probably due to crappy hardware, but take it to a Genius, and all they'll do is take your laptop off your hands for a few days, and give it back w/ the HD wiped saying they couldn't reproduce the problem.
Apple and Google at least have something compelling for the customer. Adobe on the other hand is milking their inventiveness from 15+ years ago and curse the world with some of the most bloated insecure software that would make even M$ blush. Seriously lets all burn the pony tail hippie non techy web devs that forced adobe on us all. Web devs for the most part are the janitors of the code development world.
It's one thing to compete fairly on something, it's entirely different to let your competitor tell you all of the major obstacles they encountered, while they think you're working for them.
That having been said, I would agree that Google hasn't indicated *here* that they're as evil as Apple is - merely that they're somewhat evil. That having been said, given Google's positioning, it's only a matter of time before someone truly evil takes over - if, in fact, it's not already run by such.
I am sure that the same was said about Apple by the other companies when the Iphone was launched. How dare apple intrude into their business field they should stick to what they were making 'overpriced' computers.
Really who gives acrap what Steve Jobs thinks and who cares if Google turns out to be evil.
Jobs really needs to stop throwing the bottle out of his cradle and stop screaming for his diaper to be changed and grow up!
The three companies have grown so big and eaten all the competition in their fields now, the only people left are equally as big so it will end in a stalemate, or in all 3 going t*ts up. There's no such thing as too big too fail (ahem... banks). So all this arguing and reactive business is only going to allow some of the smaller and more innovative players to creep up and take the mantle.
I suppose the customer will ultimately pay for it all because all the crap that all 3 companies seem to be rushing out is getting bought by us lot, and then a few hours later they announce there's a new one out next week because they've had a look at the competitions one and decided it's shinier or has more buttons.
..."don't be evil", turn into "Don't compete with Steve Jobs"
Childish prick, not like google have not had to fight for every success and every failure the same as the rest of the business world.
Are these really direct quotes from the top dog at Apple? He sounds like a youtube comments emo kid!
People hate it when a company becomes too big and too powerful. Google was great when it started out but now it has turned into this big monster that pisses all over everyones privacy. Microsoft were never this bad! Sure they sold a lot of crap but at least the consumer had a choice whtether to buy it or not!
Part of the problem is the misconception that you show in the last sentence. It really is possible to live without Google (and by that I mean completely, YouTube, Blogspot, DoubleClick, Google*). The reason they're so powerful and, by extension, dangerous is because people refuse to look at alternatives.
I've had their entire IPv4 and 6 space blocked both ways long before the majority realised what a dangerous behemoth Google was becoming and I can still function on the 'net.
As far as I'm aware Google don't actively subdue their competition. They came to power because they were offering better services than others, and the services they offer are still pretty good. Yes, they data mine stuff but so does everyone else, although Google do it publicly rather than doing it on the QT and try to get away with it (Facebook for example).
This extends beyond web services: No Google application has tried to take over my computer in the way that Apple ones do. For example: Apple now bundle quicktime with everything you download from them for the PC. When you install it Quicktime tries to associate itself with filetypes that you have associated to other media players, then embeds itself in your browser to take over handling of files in that. I have just spent a week reconfiguring quicktime on machines during a rollout because it stopped people printing TIF files from a web based document management system because it was making them open in quicktime rather than the picture and fax viewer. Tifs in quicktime in the browser just prints blank pages when you try. Don't even start me on itunes.
So Jobs, who created the most locked down vendor tied piece of hardware ever made, thinks Google is evil because they not only competed but did so with a product that had nowhere near as much lockdown - one that is on a par with or slightly better than contemporary manufacturers and can be easily hacked to give more. So far the only evidence of them complaining about this was a small legal spat with Cyanogen that was easily worked around, as opposed to Apple who have been going nuts trying to make their phones unjailbreakable with ever more complex firmware being pushed down to them, as well as a lot of sabre rattling.
I deeply suspect that most people are on the bandwagon of Google=Evil as they are the biggest target. They have been nowhere near as bad as IBM and Microsoft were when they were respectively considered the "big evil" company at various periods of time.
I find it ironic that Apple did the infamous "1984" ad suggesting they were the the means of freedom from tyrannical big corps, yet these days Apple are drinking are drinking at the Chestnut tree cafe and, although not the market leaders, are equally tyrannical as their ad's big brother figure with their own internal "secret police" and loving to tell people what they can and cannot do with stuff they bought.
I'm wondering if there is a way to put this rant in Flash for iPhone/pad (iPhad?) users...
The head of the Church of Jobsian has spoken.
Jesus phone owners get stuffed its not yours it never will be and you are only allowed to do what we want you to do with it.
"Its our piece of bling tat with our crap software on it and if you dont like it we can brick it"
I own one so feel within my rights to comment.
Jobs is an egotistical up his own poop shoot, extreemly rich tosser.
Fair play from getting rich off of us but throw those financing your lifestyle a bone and give everyone support for one of the most widley used online eye candy.
A Mac is not a computer its a Mac ffs what kind of retard actually believes that.
Rant over great article this man does everything possible to make himself look even more of an arse than I originally thought him.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
