Slashdot Mirror


Apple vs. Google, Who Will Control the iPhone?

Pieroxy writes "Theiphoneblog carries a nice article on the reason Apple rejected the Google Voice application even though it doesn't violate any terms and services. The article goes in depth over the issue of controlling the hardware (Apple) vs. controlling the software (Google & Apple so far) and how Apple doesn't want Google to take over a critical part of its phone. Just like Google is going into the OS business to make sure it never gets cut out, Apple is also building a huge data center to — they guess — take over some online cloud computing business of their own and be less dependent on Google for these services."

19 of 213 comments (clear)

  1. Who will control the iPhone? by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Probably at the end of the day it will be some 17 year old hardware hacking genius from Croatia.

    The skills and resources of the hardware hacking community is far out-stepping the biggest corporations. I'm surprised at their resourcefulness every day when I read about a new hack.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Who will control the iPhone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, cause hacking something developed by talented engineers from scratch takes so much more talent.

    2. Re:Who will control the iPhone? by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually yes. MythTV kicks the utter crap out of any other PVR ever made.

      The MythTV developers are at least 800% more talented than ALL of the TiVo dev team combined.

      do you not understand how 3000 developers are better than 10? did you not pass basic math in high school?

      I'm not bagging on the Myth guys at all -- they've done a great job. But I know from experience that creating the second new something is much easier than the first. This is the "First Waffle Theory". This theory works especially well if you can get someone else to make that first one.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    3. Re:Who will control the iPhone? by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Funny

      You are thinking of the it takes nine months to make a baby put 9 women on it. It *DOES NOT WORK*. You end up with product that does to much with too little focus.

      Yeah, but there's one hell of a lucky male in that picture that you forgot to mention ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:Who will control the iPhone? by iphayd · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not in nine months.

  2. Love the blog tagline... by iamhigh · · Score: 5, Funny

    THE IPHONE BLOG
    For those who dare to phone different... just like millions of others.

    --
    No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
  3. This proves that software is where the money is. by master_p · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is very important for the industry. It proves, once more, that software is more important than hardware.

    It also proves that Apple follows a wrong path selling hardware. It has some nice software in its hands, and it could become an alternative to Microsoft/Google if they wanted to.

    Now Google comes and stills their business - if users are accustomed to Google services, they could be tempted to buy an Android-based phone in the future, since the services would be similar to the ones they were used to.

  4. who will control the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know who should control it, the user.

    1. Re:who will control the iPhone by Pieroxy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With Apple, it is very doubtful that the users will have a say. Jobs is the ultimate end-user of Apple products and will dictate his views no matter what.

    2. Re:who will control the iPhone by Qubit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mod parent up!

      Name one large company that you'd trust to hold the reigns to your personal computing devices. Just one.

      How about i-rootkit-you-Sony, or i-turn-you-in-Yahoo? Plays-for-only-a-limited-amount-of-time-for-sure-Microsoft?

      Large companies by necessity will bow to government pressures. Large companies by necessity (and legal duty) will listen to the demands of their stockholders. The users are several steps down on the list.

      --

      coding is life /* the rest is */
    3. Re:who will control the iPhone by KnownIssues · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With Apple, users do have a say... with their wallets. And users will continue to pay money to Apple because Apple continues to make products that do what those users want better than the alternatives (Microsoft, *nix, etc). So Apple will continue to dictate what can be done on/with their platform.

  5. When playing at being an analyst.. by onion2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These articles crop up pretty much daily on various blogs. They all follow a very clear pattern:

    1. Pick a hot IT company.
    2. Pick a service they're not providing.
    3. Pick something that they're spending money on.
    4. Relate points 2 and 3.

    There's no evidence that the two things are related. For all we know Apple might be getting back into selling time-slices on servers because Steve Jobs has hit his head and thinks it's 1983 again. These sorts of poorly researched, uninsightful articles that are absolutely nothing more than *a guess* are completely pointless.

  6. Google is dependant on all phone manufacturers by mcwop · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Daring Fireball had a good piece on this:
    Googleâ(TM)s dependence on hardware and carrier partners puts the final product out of their control â" and into the control of companies whose histories have shown them to be incompetent at design and hostile to users.
    Iâ(TM)d be happy to be proven wrong, but my hunch is that the only way weâ(TM)ll see an iPhone-caliber Android phone is if Google does what theyâ(TM)ve said theyâ(TM)re not going to do, which is to design and ship their own reference model âoegPhoneâ. That doesnâ(TM)t mean Android wonâ(TM)t still be successful in some sense if it remains on its current course, but that I donâ(TM)t expect it to be successful in the âoeholy shit is this awesome!â sense that the iPhone is.

    http://daringfireball.net/2009/08/the_android_opportunity

    --

    "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

  7. Re:This proves that software is where the money is by readthemall · · Score: 5, Insightful
    And if you don't want to pay Apple or Google for such 'services', you can stick to the traditional model where one can choose among hundreds of phone models and use them with several providers. Just like we have several big photo camera manufacturers, and a few more independent lens manufacturers.

    A phone is just a phone and we don't need it to become another computer platform to be monopolized. Stop selling me services, please, I only need a phone (that is, hardware).

  8. Equally Bad Logic. by nato10 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The TechCrunch rebuttal to the points of Apple's letter is spot on, but the idea that somehow Google has power over the iPhone, or that Google Voice gives it more power, is nonsense. It's hard to believe Apple really thinks this, or that TechCrunch would accept it as a valid explanation. How does having iPhone users receive calls via their Google Voice number affect the iPhone overall at all? iPhone users still have to use AT&T for their calls? It no longer ties the user strongly to their iPhone phone number, but with number portability that represents no advantage for Apple or AT&T. Having Google manage your calendar and contacts doesn't make any difference to the iPhone in general. Google Voice may give Google more power over individual iPhone users, but not over the iPhone itself.

    And all Apple would have left is the browser? No, Apple would still have the industry's most advanced, user-friendly handheld OS and probably a hundred thousand apps, including--if they turn out to popular enough to be a thread--Google Voice. If Google has any power over the iPhone, it stems only from their willingness to pull a Microsoft and withdraw those apps and technologies from the iPhone at some point in the future, such as when it comes time for Apple and Google to renegotiate their license for YouTube, maps, and search. But the flip side is equally true; there's no question that its to Google's advantage to be a prominent part of the smart phone platform likely to cell hundreds of millions over the next five years.

    In short, I don't think we've heard the real rationale; certainly TechCrunch didn't provide a believable one. I think it's more likely that Apple perceives Google's calendar and contacts apps as a threat to Mobile Me, which does compete directly with Google. Or that Google Voice potentially interferes with something else Apple considers a unique advantage, perhaps something that they aren't even using yet but is in development. And finally, it's possible that Apple really isn't worried about Google Voice per se, but is worried about opening the door to other challenges to their "no duplication of built-in functionality" rule.

  9. Its phone? by houghi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple doesn't want Google to take over a critical part of its phone.

    Uh, I thought it was MY phone and I bloody well should be able to decide who takes over and how they do it. If the provider is not happy with what I send over it, that is another matter, because I RENT that. I BOUGHT the phone.

    Have people become so ignorant that there is no difference in buying and renting anymore?

    It is actually pretty simple. If you SELL something, the other person becomes the owner and it isn't YOURS anymore. Perhaps they should make a version of "mine" and "yours" like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H9MUWhU7Xw

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  10. Here's what they should do by eldridgea · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Here's what they should do:

    Get with Google and make the iPhone completely run on Google Voice VoIP.

    Make it carrier-agnostic (duh) and make it data-only.

    The iPhone would become a data only device that would have VoIP built right into the device.

    It would work an any network and could even change networks with impunity.

    Also, it *should* be cheaper since you're not paying for tradition phone/voicemail/SMS.

  11. I prefer Cotton by chfriley · · Score: 4, Funny

    Personal preference.

  12. Re:This proves that software is where the money is by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It also proves that Apple follows a wrong path selling hardware. It has some nice software in its hands, and it could become an alternative to Microsoft/Google if they wanted to.

    Apple DOESN'T want to. They are in a nice spot right now - they can sell fewer product, but at higher margins than the rest of the industry. They don't care that their sales volume is smaller, or their marketshare is 1/10th of their competitor. Once you start lusting after more people, it becomes a race to the bottom. It's why Apple has no computer to compete against the low-end PCs, why the mid-range Apples don't have features enthusiasts want (i.e., expandability), etc. It gets harder to meet the needs of more diverse set of people, and marginal costs to support the next customer rise faster than revenue gained from those extra customers.

    The iPod is an irregularity, and while a money maker, you can tell Apple's not really liking having to sell a whole range of iPods - the line's pretty much stagnated except for the Touch. The only thing keeping them up there is that their competitors are equally stuck - unable to out-iPod the iPod.

    This cannot be understated. The computer industry experienced exponential growth once it became open. It all started the day Compaq produced the first IBM PC clone. That day will only come for phones/PDAs when people can use any phone, with software from any company or individual, with any telephone service provider.

    The cellphone industry already has seen this. 10 years ago, the cellphone population was nowhere near where it is now. Maybe 20 years ago if we include the rest of the world. Cellphones are everywhere. Nokia makes the vast majority of the phones sold, and thus, the vast majority of the phones sold can also run Java applets. There's very little growth left - those who want "a phone" have the low end (which is increasingly including stuff like cameras, mp3 players and such). Those who want an awesome email platform have the millions of Blackberry models out there. Those who want to surf the web have tons of phones that run WebKit. All Apple brought to the table was innovation - the only way to break into a crowded market. Even the iPhone's low marketshare makes Apple happy - they command a good chunk of industry revenues.

    And we won't see open hardware and open OS distributions anytime soon - phones are embedded devices and highly customized to their hardware. Take a look at DD-WRT for open hardware and open OS, and see how many different binaries you need to support all those routers. And that's just because they all are based off similar hardware designs, but still there's no "install this software package and it'll configure itself" distribution.

    As for the "any service provider" - we're already there. It's called GSM (or UMTS/LTE... 3GPP anyhow). Buy an unlocked phone. Buy a SIM card. Put latter into former. Make calls. Go to another country. Buy a new SIM card. Replace existing SIM. Make calls.