Is this why Apple and Google hate each other?

Business

In this month’s Bloomberg Businessweek cover-story entitled Larry Page’s Google 3.0, reporter Brad Stone touches upon what may be the root of ongoing bickering between Apple and Google. While the two companies continue to work with each other in many areas, there is no denying the public hostility they show one another. It’s more than just marketing jabs and a competitive nature — these two giants are constantly at each other’s throats. From the Businessweek feature:

As Android became a threat to Apple in 2008, Apple began resisting Google’s claim to valuable location data gathered whenever an iPhone owner used Google Maps. [Vic Gundotra's] negotiations with Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller grew so heated that Schmidt and Steve Jobs had to intervene to settle the matter, according to two people familiar with the incident. (Apple announced earlier this year that it had developed its own location-monitoring system. Gundotra and Schiller both declined to comment on the incident.)

The iPhone’s influence over the Android operating system is also thought to play a role in the quarrel. Many will recall that early Android prototypes bore an OS that looked and operated much like RIM’s BlackBerry operating system. Android was also intended for touchscreen and non-touch devices at the time. At launch, however, Android had shed many of its BlackBerry-like features and had instead adopted several elements that mirrored Apple’s iPhone OS. The alleged spat between Google’s VP of engineering Vic Gundotra and Apple’s marketing boss Phil Shiller is believed by some to have been influenced by that shift in Android strategy. The rest, as they say, is history — Google and Apple will likely grow further apart as their battle in the mobile space and beyond continues to heat up.

Read

56 Comments
  • http://www.bloise.co.uk Frankie Bloise

    Like the Jobs matrix alike illustration of this article hahah!

    • BrownGuy

      Just like Jobs to bring 2 iPads to what’s clearly a single tablet battle. You should be ashamed…….

      • http://www.bloise.co.uk Frankie Bloise

        hahah, i just said the pic is funny… and yeah, we all know jobs is a coward!

      • Steve W

        That’s not two tablets, that’s 1 iPhone and 1 iPad.

        Android guy only has a phone in the picture. You can bet he will arm himself with a tablet too – “Real Soon Now”!

      • davewuvswaffles

        “That’s not two tablets, that’s 1 iPhone and 1 iPad.”
        Really? I couldn’t tell the difference.

      • http://twitter.com/brian_george Brian

        I guess Schmidt should have brought the 100 mediocre Android tablets then?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Chris-Marsh/100001099991895 Chris Marsh

    As if all this bickering wasn’t good for marketing anyway, right?

    • Anonymous

      Hopefully it means they cant get together and tag team the customers.. These spats should mean more development and lower profits which is a win for us all

  • Anonymous

    Google hates apple because google wants everything to be open source and free.

    Apple hates google because the idea of open source and free undermines profitable project (and the only thing Jobs/Apple cares about is being unfathomably rich, just look at their charity giving record)

    • Anonymous

      Hmmm. . . so if being “open source and free” undermines profitability, and Google is open source and free with everything, then Google isn’t profitable, right? Oh wait, they are profitable. How can this be? It’s simple: in terms of their advertising services (AdWords, AdSense, etc), where 95% of Google’s revenue is found, Google is completely closed. If you don’t believe me, feel free to e-mail Google and ask them for access to the IP underlying AdSense and AdWords, and see if they give it to you. Here’s a hint: they won’t.

      It’s not really that Apple is more closed than Google, but rather that Apple has multiple revenue streams, such as iOS, the Mac, software, etc, and those revenue streams are most definitely closed. But since 95% of Google’s revenue comes from advertising, the only part of their business which is closed is the advertising, thus allowing them to portray themselves as being about freedom and openness, when in fact their simply an advertising company which gives a ton of things away at little or not cost merely to support advertising.

      • Anonymous

        You make no argument against my post. I said that Google wants everything to be open source and free. I did not say that GOOGLE was open source and free. Their services undermine the profitability of other companies efforts.

        Businesses exist to make money. Apple makes money, Google makes money. But, as you so poignantly revealed, Google and Apple have very different business models. Google does make the vast majority of it’s money from advertising, but so do a lot of other companies. It’s how Google does it that sets them apart. Apple makes money by creating false needs in the consumer market, and marking up their products tenfold. Google usually takes services that existed previously, and offers them for free in exchange for us having to ignore a banner ad.

      • Anonymous

        You’re still making the same logical error. If Google wants everything to be “open source and free,” why sell advertising? Why not give it away? I understand it’s about profit, but when you repeat that “open source and free” line, you make it clear you don’t understand how incompatible that statement is with the goals of revenue and profit.

        Google doesn’t want “everything” to be open source and free, because if everyone gave away services the way Google does, the business advantage of giving those products away would be eliminated. So no, Google doesn’t want “everything” to be open source and free. They’d much rather everyone else charge for things Google gives away, thus guaranteeing them a steady flow of customers who would rather not pay for things like e-mail service and maps.

        Now, if you say that Google wants all of their services, outside of advertising, to be free, then I can accept that. But you’re using the word “everything,” which is what makes the statement incompatible with the idea of a profitable business. Google doesn’t give things away to be charitable; they do it to ensure a steady flow of people to whom they can show ads. In fact, it’s not really that the services are free, but rather that the advertisers bear the cost, not the consumer of the service. If Google could charge end users for Google Maps, GMail and other services while still seeing the same number of visitors and without fear of being underbid by, say, Microsoft, they absolutely would charge for those services.

      • Anonymous

        I utterly agree! I mean, just look at the list of False Needs that Apple has suckered me into:

        1) the “need” for nonsequential access to my voicemail (what pray tell is wrong with listening to 30 messages in order hitting “#” after each one to get to the one you want),

        2) the “need” to replace my perfectly good 500-page textbooks with a reliable, searchable, portable database of the medications that I prescribe and that my patients need,

        3) the “need” to video chat with my grandparents in Taiwan, keeping them in touch with my six month old daughter. What a waste of time!

        Even worse, I had to pay $199 for the privilege, which, if my math is correct, is exactly Ten Times Marked Up compared to the $199 Google’s Nexus S on contract with T-mobile… wait, I might have misplaced a zero there somewhere… no matter, where was I… erm… oh yes:

        Darn those snake oil-peddling, reality-distorting salesmen!!!

      • Anonymous

        Thats the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. Hey brainiac wheres the freedom when you have to give up all your browsing, buying, and travel habits? Wheres the freedom when everything you do is stored and used to generate more banners which is then used to generate more profits for Google and friends. You’re being used as a cash cow you dumbass.

    • Anonymous

      Google wants their software and services to be free so it can get it in the hands of as many people as it can. Cuz they don’t make money doing that. They make money selling ads afterwards to the millions and millions of people using their services.

      Whereas Apple makes money selling the actual hardware and software.

      They’re both companies. That exist to make money. Neither is “better” or “worse” than the other; morally at least. There is no good or evil. Just money.

      If something were to happen to Google’s ability to sell ads, they’d be just as pissed as Apple would be when something happens to their ability to sell products.

    • Anonymous

      Oh come on now Google wants everything to be free and open source. That must be some wicked weed you’re smoking if you really believe that BS. Google is just another greedy tech company just like crApple and Microcrap. I don’t know how many times I have to say this to you idiots ANDROID ISN’T REALLY OPEN SOURCE. A 6 year old can see the truth are you really that stupid?

      • Anonymous

        The weed IS pretty good, and yes business exists to make money, but thag doesn’t mean each companies business model is the same thus producing the same results.

        And a six year old can also read the that I never said “android is open source.” Are YOU smarter than a fifth grader?

      • Anonymous

        QUOTE:
        Google wants their software and services to be free so it can get it in the hands of as many people as it can. Cuz they don’t make money doing that. They make money selling ads afterwards to the millions and millions of people using their services.

        So in other words it’s NOT REALLY free now is it? I’m glad the weed you’re smoking is pretty good. Keep on puffing away killing braincells and living with your head stuck up your ass. That’s what most of these mega corps want a brainless drone. Personally I prefer the fresh air and the healthy ability to think for myself and see what’s real and what’s a load of BS.

        You should try leaving the walled garden of corporate BS a take a nice healthy breath of reality. But hey who am I to judge enjoy being used like a 5 dollar crack whore.

      • Anonymous

        @digital freak… what does that last part even mean? Was that an insult or are you coming on to me?

  • Anonymous

    Google knows where you are… always…

  • http://beenswank.tumblr.com/ brandonmccall

    Google clearly has the advantage in this battle.

  • Midi45

    Well it’s not a big mystery that android is a complete knock off of Apples iOS. And I’m sure Apple would rather have had MobileMe better more successful but Google was smart and stole MS’s IP and marketed first.

    • Brett

      Yeah, you are right. And iOS is just a rip off of every PDA that came before it. There are only so many ways to do something. Notice most cars have 4 wheels? Complete knock off!

      • Joebutler85

        All the features added into the iPhone 4 were already being offered in Androids and to a lesser extent Blackberries from anywhere to months to years. Apple as of late has been lifting ideas from their competition as well. Aside from launching the Original iPhone and the App Store, Apple hasn’t exactly been trailblazing new innovations for their products either.

      • Anonymous

        If Apple put everything into one iPhone how are they going to sell you a new model next year?

    • Drew

      LOL!!! You don’t even believe your own bullshit… You “guys” (Apple apologists) say the Android UI is hideous, yet in the same sentence it’s a total ripoff of iOS. Which is it?? And while I’m on the subject, I’ve yet to have anyone explain to me aside from grid of icons, what is Android ripping off UI/UX -wise?? If you took away all of the icons on iOS, it would do absolutely nothing. Not one task can be performed without those dreaded icons. No widgets, no live wallpaper, no desktops…nothing. And while you’re at it, quit ripping off RIM with the push email. that failed HORRIBLY

      • http://twitter.com/mljonesy Mike Jones

        “No widgets, no live wallpaper, no desktops…nothing.”

        LOL! This is the weakest and most used Android defense point there is. Widgets are marginally useful… I wouldn’t mind a Facebook/Twitter feed but that’s really about it. Can’t speak for others though I guess. Live wallpaper is ridiculous. Cute to look at but not really a useful function. Desktops… eh. I’m not sure what the big deal is about these features but I really wish people would stop making them out to be “deal breakers” when comparing phones. I’ve never heard anyone say “Well I wanted to get an iPhone, but there aren’t any live wallpapers!” Just like I’ve never heard anyone say “I wanted to get an Android phone but I can’t create folders!” Its ridiculous lol. Android has so many other awesome features, why the need to talk about ones that don’t matter?

        p.s. Aren’t widgets and live wallpaper battery drainers?

  • google-apple

    I’m still pretty sure it infuriates Steve Jobs that Google got Motorola’s Honeycomb out on the Xoom before he was able to get it to the iPad — and probably doubly annoyed that Gingerbread is already out too. The Google team just ports iOSes faster than Apple (and Blackberry!!!)

    • Anonymous

      Ignoring that most of your post makes no sense, I doubt Apple or Jobs are even mildly annoyed at this. Apple has a set development schedule which they stick to.

      The difference here is that when apple releases an update anyone with a compatible device can have it whenever they choose to download it. When google releases one, it all depends on who made your handset. You might get it now, a month from now, 6 months from now, or never.

      • http://twitter.com/XMonster_ X Monster

        Thats not really right. Apple bullies you into installing their upgrade and forces you to stay at that newer Version. No downgrades possible. Thats not the case with Android, not even with the locked down Motorola Handsets.

      • Anonymous

        How exactly does Apple bully me into installing their upgrade? Last time I checked I get a reminder when I turn on itunes, not Apple goons showing up at my doorstep. Not sure about you, but I don’t exactly find that intimidating. Also, outside jailbreaking, I don’t remember ever wanting to downgrade in most cases? I’ve yet to get an update for my iphone (and I’ve had one since the 2G days) that made me wish for the previous version. If I did, I simply keep an older update file (or download one) and reset my phone with it.

    • Anonymous

      Gingerbread isn’t exactly “out”. It is on the Nexus S alone as a Google release, and the company has been busy squashing bugs since the Nexus S release.It apparently wasn’t ready for release, but the deals with BestBuy and Samsung dictated that the Nexus S (at minimum) would be released last Dec. Now every NS owner gets to pay for the privilege of beta testing Gingerbread.

      To that end, there is no merit in porting OSs faster unless there is a clear advantage in having the newest iteration.There was a leap between Donut and Cupcake, and between Eclair and Donut, but less of an upgrade to Froyo and I am really wondering what great advantage comes with Gingerbread (aside from NFC capabilities, which mean nothing to me or my phone). A “new” OS should bring greater stability and efficiency over the older version, and/or significant new features; thus far, Gingerbread seems to have swung and missed at all of those criteria. As such, it appears to be nothing more than Android v 2.2.4, rather than a more significant v 2.3.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_74LY7MTUCXKCMKF66CFQDQ6QP4 Robert

      You are aware that ipad runs ios, not android? SJ could care less.

  • Anonymous

    Sounds Like Magneto Vs. Professor X

  • MooseDaddy357

    It’s all BS, they need each other so they don’t become monopolies. I’m sure at some point Jobs said to Schmidt “dude, make or buy a mobile OS so we can release the iPhone on verizon. Please?”

    • http://twitter.com/mattsinopoli mattsinopoli

      Yes I’m sure that is exactly what happened.

  • 1T2dirtnap

    We all know the iPhone was the catalyst of todays smart phones. Many of the designs we see today all mimic the iPhone in one way or another. The only phone developer that has stayed somewhat true to its roots would have to be BlackBerry. They tried with the Storm but failed, luckily Verizon helped push sales despite the miserable job of trying to copying the iPhone.

    Samsung would have to be the iPhone copycat of the industry, it’s no secret, they wanted their Touchwiz 3.0 to look like the iPhone. Now LG is following in their footsteps with their own version of Touchwiz.

    It’s funny how people try to discredit Apple/iOS/iPhone yet that Samsung Galaxy S, HTC, Motorola DROID you’re holding in your hand right now, was influenced by the iPhone.

    • Anonymous

      The thing I find most funny is the heated arguments these things start up. So what the iphone changed the approach of the smart phone and others caught on. Isn’t this how the consumer industry works? Follow the leader, the leader being what’s hot at the moment. Yet, the tech industry geeks are at each others throats more than comic book fans ever were.

    • David Reyna

      The storm was a great phone that brought innovation to the market. BB introduced an entire new dimension for interacting with your touch screen, and most anyone who has ever used sure press loves it.

      Touch screen phones were around long before the Iphone was a concept. The only innovation that Apple brought to the table is how we interact with the touch screen. The app store wasn’t even an innovation, but the implementation of the app store was a home run no doubt.

      People are going to be fighting this forever. Apple didn’t make anything new, they just combined available tech and made it look and feel fluid. And I give them credit for that, they definitely changed the game.

      • http://tablets-planet.com Scott Garrison

        So they did you something new. Nobody before them made things look great and perform more fluidly.

  • Anonymous

    Who cares, I just buy what I want,I don’t care if this two companies nuke each other, other companies will just step in and do the same thing.

    • Joes

      I totally agree. I had a blackberry when the iphone came out. I loved it so I got that. Then when it came down to the iphone 4 or the galaxy s, I went with the galaxy s. To me the iphone 4 didn’t offer me anything that wow’d me. Now I’ll wait to see how this dual/quad core battle plays out for a year and then I’ll get what’s good then. Who is on top and who is on the bottom doesn’t concern me. I’m going to get what appeals to me. I like to test out new things and I always have 15 days to return it if I don’t like it and try something else.

      who

    • Anonymous

      Well what do you know someone on here finally made an intelligent comment. Way a go dude that’s the best attitude a consumer can have.

  • Thinkweknoqitall

    All I can say is why aren’t have of u running your own companies? You do realize you guys think you know better than some of the CEO’s of the most successful in the world. Apple had over 60 billion in cash to spend. Half of u are lucky to have $60 to spend. It’s easy to sit at home and post negative comments or think u know what’s best for these companies. Im pretty sure they know way more than u do about business. Just because it may not make sense to you or agree with your closed mind doesn’t mean it’s wrong. If Apple would have listen to half of you about the ipad not to mention the name it was given they would not only missed out on BILLIONS of dollars we as customers would be missing out on a new category of device. I remember reading many people just like many of you who thought they new more than Apple that blogged how stupid the ipad was and how dumb the name was and that it never will sell and it would be the end of Apple. Here we are a year later and now every company is racing to launch a tablet to compete with sales of over 17 million units sold. Not shipped but sold.
    I guess all I’m trying to say is just because you have access to a computer don’t think you know more than these CEO’s who have proven themselves for many years. If you think you know more then these guys quit writing how you think they should run their company and start your own and try to compete!!!! That’s how Microsoft and Apple started. It’s easy to be an arm chair CEO. That’s why we all do it.

    • http://foxpacific.myopenid.com/ James

      LOL @ Arm Chair CEO…. Arm Chair CEO = Monday Morning Quarterback… hahahahaha

    • Santino..

      wow lol….. I concur !

  • Anonymous

    I actually much prefer my juggernaut companies at each other’s throats. That means they’re constantly trying to one up each other. That means they’re constantly improving their offerings to the public.

    That means we all win, fanboys.

  • Nathaniel Jason

    As long as the devices keep getting better I don’t really care why they don’t like each other.

  • http://foxpacific.myopenid.com/ James

    Hahahaha… Looks like Apple tried to “dictate” to the wrong people. Sounds like they tried to do to Google what they do to people who develop apps for their app store. Except they barked at the wrong dog. Google can kill entire markets by coming in and offering free and open services, which makes competing in that market pointless.

    Apple is a once trick pony anyways, they did the iPhone which was revolutionary, then their next “revolution” was “make it bigger” and the iPad was born. They would have ruled the roost for a long time because, of course, whey won’t let anyone else install iOS on their hardware, and it would take forever for most people to come up with a legitimate competing platform. Enter Google and their purchase of Android. Who now says, here take this OS and install it on any hardware you want, oh yeah, and you can have it for FREE!!! Apple should have just played nice, shared the information and corralled everyone to Google’s ads in the first place (which is what Google really cares about), but noooo, Apple needs to control everything their involved in. So, now their closed system is going to be the death of them today, just as was against Microsoft in the past. When the iPad came out they had 96% of the market, the release of the Galaxy Tab alone captured 22% of the market for Android… and that wasn’t even the tablet OS. What happens to Apple when the rest of the tablets flood the market all sporting Google’s Android, driving the traffic to Google services? Then what happens when Apple releases the iPad 2 with all the features that are already in the Xoom and other tabs months before? Should have just played nice with the boss dog…

    • Anonymous

      You are sooooo right. Google WILL HAVE 100% share of the market in EVERYTHING tech by this time next year. And everything they do is FREE. All they want is all our information and all our buying and behavior patterns. And you know what? I don’t mind because they don’t do evil and they fight evil companies such as Apple.

  • Kev

    Just buy both Google and Apple stock and reap the rewards of both. I did 8-)

  • Ayoo456

    The UI changes in gingerbread is very welcomed. And the keyboard. I don’t want to go back to froyo on my nexus one. This is worthy of being called 2.3.

  • Anonymous

    so is about half the posters on here

    • Anonymous

      disregard bad post

  • Anonymous

    so is about half the posters on here

  • Anonymous

    sixmemos– a laugh riot! :-) A great post… and just shows what the anti-Apple crowd keeps missing!

blog comments powered by Disqus