Skip to comments.Steve Jobs vowed to 'destroy' Android
Posted on 10/21/2011 7:07:59 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
21 October 2011 Last updated at 09:40 GMT
Steve Jobs vowed to 'destroy' Android
Steve Jobs said he wanted to destroy Android and would spend all of Apple's money and his dying breath if that is what it took to do so.
The full extent of his animosity towards Google's mobile operating system is revealed in a forthcoming authorised biography.
Mr Jobs told author Walter Isaacson that he viewed Android's similarity to iOS as "grand theft".
Apple is suing several smartphone makers which use the Android software.
According to extracts of Mr Isaacson's book, obtained by the Associated Press, Mr Jobs said: "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."
He is also quoted as saying: "I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong."
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
I've got droid tablet for the same exact reason. Soured on Apples popietary thing a long time ago. But I have no problem with Jobs trying to crush google.
But there WAS a Patient on the car.
You know the difference between bought and stolen? If not check out where Bill Gates got DOS.
Apple didn't invent MP3 players but they made them into a product that people wanted to buy. The iPhone was a new beast all together.
The fact that Google sat on the board of Directors shows Job's had a shortcoming in his trust factor, the same can be said for SamSung who happens to have their hands on most of Apples secrets, since they make a major portion of their products.
Hah, I got two hamburger patties for less than one tenth of the price of a prime rib, piker.
>Jobs took the whole icon interface idea from Xerox.<
It was the other way around, FRiend. Bill Gates was the one who “borrowed” the idea because he simply...asked Xerox if they can “please” demonstrate for a private party how this GUI thing works.
That was the time that he explained to Ballmer that “throughout history, geniuses have stolen ideas and they never borrow” (something like that)
I wasn’t saying that he stole the ideas, but I also am reasonably sure he didn’t pay for them. In any event, the GUI ideas didn’t originate with Apple. Xerox made several thousand Alto computers that used the interface (and mouse) for universities and reseachers. Strangely, Xerox lacked a serious interest in commercializing its GUI. Had Xerox realized what it had, the history of Xerox and the micro-computer industry would have been radically rewritten.
I think you will find you have confused things. Apple adopted the Xerox GUI (and mouse)first. Some years later Microsoft incorporated it in Windows. Then in 1988 Apple sued Microsoft for copyright infringement. Apple lost almost all of its case in court, but the matter wasn’t finally settled until 1997.
The truly creative guys were the SRI/Xerox PARC computer scientists. Apple just got lucky on the GUI and, I think, never paid Xerox a cent for the GUI (Apple did hire some of the Xerox/PARC team, though). Losing to Microsoft was karma.
The earlier post is “false” only if “took” can only be interpreted as “steal”, which is false. My point was that Apple wasn’t as creative as people commonly think.
As for the license, I don’t believe there is one. Jobs wanted to look at what Xerox had, and ultimately I believe Xerox said he could take a look in exchange for letting Xerox have 100,000 Apple shares (pre-IPO) for $1 million. “Taking a look” means Jobs got tours and could inspect the technology while on the tours.
Many at PARC thought allowing Jobs to take a look was crazy, but apparently the corporate executives in Rochester didn’t care. There was no license (at least at that point), but I also believe that PARC hadn’t patented the mouse or done any legal intellectual property work on the GUI. Consequently, from a legal perspective both the GUI and the mouse were only protected as trade secrets, which protection would have been waived by the tours in the absence of a confidentiality agreement, of which there was none that I know of. This is why I say that I don’t think there is a license agreement. Moreover, while I was in Silicon Valley during those years I never heard anyone say or suggest that Apple licensed the mouse or the GUI from Xerox. If you have a 10K or something similar that says Apple is a licensee (and this would almost certainly have to be disclosed because the GUI was a major asset of Apple) I will gladly concede the point.
There are many, many, many patents related to internal combustion engines,
Xerox management is Kodak writ small.
A more apt one from a while back:
Apple can’t go under, or Microsoft will lose its R&D department.
The Mac GUI was actually quite an improvement over what was at Xerox. Extra creativity went into making a GUI that could work on a machine costing only $2,500 instead of the $50,000 Xerox machines.
No doubt yours is the definitive accounting...the short version at least. I like how Xerox got one million pre-IPO shares of Apple stock in payment. What great days those were for pioneers with hi-IQs and guts!
IIRC, there have been three splits since the IPO, so those original 1 million shares would be 8 million times ~$400 a share or about $3.2 billion.
That 100,000 for $1,000,000 is a misreporting of the actual facts. Xerox BOUGHT nothing. Apple GAVE Xerox 1,000,000 shares of Apple pre-IPO common stock with a face value of $7 a share in exchange for the visit. Why would Xerox pay Apple to visit them? Apple PAID Xerox For the visits and the right to use what they learned.
There's a lot you "don't know of" since PARC did not invent the mouse or the concept of the GUI. In fact PARC got many of their ideas from Jef Raskin, an ex-professor of computer science and human interface who had lectured at PARC before they started work on their GUI, who was then head of Apple's GUI project and suggest that he and Jobs visit PARC . . .