What Really Made Steve Jobs So Angry at Google?

Gizmodo ^ | 10 September 2012 | Scott Cleland

[redgolum]

Funny thing.

The jocks in my high school tried that a few times, till I showed them that a farm boy can really kick a$$ if you make him mad.

The football couch laughed so hard he was almost sick. Told the guys “Don't mess with Red. He castrates 200 lb boars on the farm, and you guys are not that mean!”

Also a funny thing. I have a good job as an engineer, many of those guys ended up working for minimum wage.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks ShadowAce. I thought this was a nice summation:

This "don't be evil" mantra is bullshit."

Heh...

[Revolting cat!]

I could care less.

Then why don't you care less?

[Revolting cat!]

Everything, Steve, wherever you are, is a “stolen product”, as even Bob Dylan observes in the latest interview accusing him of plagiarism.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks!

[Revolting cat!]

The inventor laptop computer died the other day I read somewhere (his name I forgot.) Shouldn’t we have just one brand of laptop computers now?

One car company, one washing machine company, one nuclear bomb company, one refocusable photography company, one healthcare company, OK, OK, I’ll stop!

[SunkenCiv]

http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=490

“Only Wanna Be With You” Songfactsâ„¢

This song is a tribute to Bob Dylan. It contains lyrics from various Dylan songs, including a mention of Dylan’s “Tangled Up In Blue.” Some of the words come directly from Dylan’s track “Idiot Wind”... Apparently, Dylan felt the “tribute” infringed too closely on original work, and he sued the group for unauthorized use of his lyrics. According to VH1, he received a large, out-of-court settlement in 1995.

[Lurkina.n.Learnin]

The iPhone is better because of the competition.

[CodeToad]

To be a perfectly good American: So f****ing what? I got some really cool toys, cheap.

[Swordmaker]

Jobs stole from Xerox and now karma has come to bite him. What comes around, goes around, Stevie!

How do you steal something you PAID FOR? Apple paid Xerox for those visits to PARC with pre-IPO Apple common stock shares... and had permission to use anything they learned in two 8 hour visits. You cannot STEAL what you bought and paid for. Please quit spreading lies.

[Swordmaker]

Not to mention I’m pretty sure I already had one of those in 2005, an HTC 6700 Windows Mobile phone from Sprint.

You mean this thing?

Not at all anything like the iPhone... , blue LED backlight, 240 x 320 pixel resolution 2.88" 64K color TFT color resistance grid touch screen, requiring a stylus to make selections, and it did not have the capabilities of the iPhone... it had addressbook, browser (if you could call it that), mail, calendar, calculator, notes, messaging, a simple camera, and a few simplistic games. It was a "feature phone." It had no multitouch, no music, no video, no capability of adding third party apps.

[Swordmaker]

how many sci-fi shows from the 60’s to present used the same tech? hardly original.

ZERO. They had props. Nothing worked. That is not what is referred to as prior art.

[mongrel]

I’m not trying to make the point that the 6700 is exactly like the iphone. I am responding to this article, which is making the case that the idea of Google developing a smartphone itself is part of the whole feud between Jobs and Google. I’m saying that’s a unwarranted reason for Jobs’ anger problem.

There are a number of things that make the Samsung case unique to Samsung, not Android as a whole.
1. While Samsung argued prior art, it did not make a believable case that it was inspired by these things at the time of development.
2. Apple did a good job uncovering documents that seemed to indicate that Samsung was directly copying Apple as it developed their phones and hardware. Thus the “willful” patent violations. I think Apple would have a much harder time finding that kind of willful violation for the larger Android ecosystem.
3. Samsung’s defense mistakenly didn’t ask for a change of venue. This trial took place a few miles from Apple’s headquarters. The comments from jurors after the trial seem to indicate that was a factor in their decision. Samsung came across as the foreign company stealing from the good-old home-grown company. That is not the case with Google.
4. Many observers have stated that the jury had no way of fully understanding the complexity of the case with such a short deliberation.