41–50 of 55 posts
As for attitude though, it does perfectly capture what they consider "superior", i.e. stuff Apple does (platform-mediated payments), not necessarily stuff that benefits users (portability).
Well, no surprise there. That's been the case for a long time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This absolutely captures their strategy. They are clearly building a walled garden for their own benefit, while selling it as the user's benefit. I can't imagine users complaining about having the option to switch to android.
> They are clearly building a walled garden for their own benefit, while selling it as the user's benefit. On the contrary, I think this highlights that Jobs thinks, "They want to compare? Great, let's force them to really compare." Jobs: "If they want to compare us to Android, let’s force them to use our far superior payment system." It's one thing to build a walled garden that's crap but users get stuck with it. It…
While the primary message is that there are Kindle apps on lots of mobile devices, the secondary message that can’t be missed is that it is easy to switch from iPhone to Android. Not fun to watch.
Steve Jobs:
What do you recommend we do? [then suggests as first step to show how better the payment experience is on iOS]
The conversation is about a problem identified by Phil Shiller. The problem is that switching from iOS to Android seems easy.
Jobs proposes (as a first step) to show how the iOS payment system is superior. This is a nice response to a threat from the competition, but it does not change the basic fact: Apple considers that easy switching to Android is a problem, and something must be done about it.
This is consistent with Apple not supporting Android (no Apple app to access iTunes content, etc). Google on the other hand makes apps for iOS, e.g. the books app[1]. When an iOS app is not available (e.g. for music where the app is in the works[2]) users can still use the Web services.
[1] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/google-play-books/id40098900...
[2] http://www.imore.com/google-play-music-all-access-officially...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, Google certainly builds walls for its garden. Looking at things like nuking Reader in favor of G+, nerfing its applications on iOS compared to Android (funny how quickly iOS got turn by turn Google Maps once Apple released its own map application), and even initiatives like Free Zone in developing nations that provide free internet only for checking G+, gmail, and sites opened directly from a Google search). Ju…
Actually, you're wrong, sometimes the iOS apps have features that Android doesn't have yet, for example, iOS Maps actually had the new Maps interface before Android. Also, Google has Google Takeout, which lets you leave Google and take everything with you. Android is not vendor lock in, because Google isn't the vendor in this scenario, Samsung, Amazon, Sony, etc are. For example, Amazon doesn't include Google's servi…
I didn't say they didn't, nor did I even imply it. Understand that this doesn't change the fact that Google witheld app features from other OEMs and kept enhanced versions for its own partners for competitive reasons. Just because Apple did it too doesn't mean Google didn't (as I already pointed out).
>Android is not vendor lock in, because Google isn't the vendor in this scenario, Samsung, Amazon, Sony, etc are.
I was talking about walled gardens, and wasn't making an arbitrary distinction of "vendor" lock-in.
As I was saying though, from the standpoint of a walled garden, Android as a free operating system has been remarkably successful as a soft wall for Google, getting their advertisements on more handsets more quickly than any other method. Instead of risking consumers switching, they are eliminating competitors before consumers even get the option to switch. OEMs have been keen to adopt an OS that cost them next to nothing and played nice with branding and in house apps.
Clearly Amazon and Samsung modifying the OS is a concern of Google's, and they are combating this with native apps, web apps, and their own competitive offerings (hardware included).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The difference between Apple and others is that Apple products are far superior" Really? How are superior?
I hope this is a joke, but.. Go a head, take OSX and Windows 7 and compare between them, see how much it takes Windows 7 to crash and tell you: "do you want to send us a report?". The report should be sent automatically and analyzed by computers before it reaches humans.
I have not seen a OS crash since years. If you're talking about app crashing I see more less the same on both oses
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> while selling it as the user's benefit I disagree. Facebook, Google, Microsoft have a walled garden, in-fact every company on earth thinks on how to keep customers from leaving. The difference between Apple and others is that Apple products are far superior, i can't imagine myself using any Microsoft product if Apple provides it.
Well, no. Google releases pretty much all of its products on iPhone. Apple doesn't releases anything on other platforms and when they do because they have no choice (iTunes on Windows), they do it poorly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope this is a joke, but.. Go a head, take OSX and Windows 7 and compare between them, see how much it takes Windows 7 to crash and tell you: "do you want to send us a report?". The report should be sent automatically and analyzed by computers before it reaches humans.
Okay, XCode crashes on me about every hour of use or so on my Mac Mini (especially when I leave it and come back). None of my Windows 7 programs have crashed on me in over a month. Btw, once XCode crashes, Apple offers to let me send in a technical report. *Sent from my Linux Mint machine.
Out of curiosity, why did he think Apple had far superior payment system? I personally think Apple's payment gateways no better than Amazon Checkout or Google Checkout experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, you're wrong, sometimes the iOS apps have features that Android doesn't have yet, for example, iOS Maps actually had the new Maps interface before Android. Also, Google has Google Takeout, which lets you leave Google and take everything with you. Android is not vendor lock in, because Google isn't the vendor in this scenario, Samsung, Amazon, Sony, etc are. For example, Amazon doesn't include Google's servi…
>Actually, you're wrong, sometimes the iOS apps have features that Android doesn't have yet... I didn't say they didn't, nor did I even imply it. Understand that this doesn't change the fact that Google witheld app features from other OEMs and kept enhanced versions for its own partners for competitive reasons. Just because Apple did it too doesn't mean Google didn't (as I already pointed out). >Android is not vendor…
Chrome serves the same function. It ensures Google is not blocked by browser default search engine changing, it prevents other people's walls. But would you claim Chrome is "vendor lock in"?
Android is primarily a defense mechanism. If Apple and Microsoft together had nearly 100% of the market for the mobile web, they could change the default search engine to Bing and sink Google overnight.
Android if anything, preserves choice and prevents lock-in, because unlike iOS, it is an open OS, and vendors can always change the defaults.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On an iOS device they already have your payment details due to the inability to use the device with out providing a credit card. 9/10 times the user is already signed in to that AppStore/iTunes account and thus just needs to enter their password. Thus when buying on iOS it's always easier to use Apple's system because you're already half signed-in and they already have your credit card. But yes, if you re-enter your…
Well, you don't need to reenter your payment details if you want to buy an Amazon book or a Google book. They also already have them
Have you ever thought that Android in app purchases are lower because they allow developers to use Paypal to buy stuff, and don't require a credit card to use the device?