Slashdot Mirror


Why Apple Denied the Google Latitude App

awyeah writes "A recently revealed Apple patent looks remarkably similar to the functionality of Google Latitude, which Apple relegated to WebApp status earlier this year. Obviously if Apple is working on their own version of Google Latitude (or owns the IP rights to this functionality), they'd be hesitant to put an app with the same functionality on their devices from another company."

7 of 308 comments (clear)

  1. single good thing? by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Has there been a single good thing to come out of software patents? It seems like every single day there is a story posted about a patent that has clear prior art or is trivial and doesn't innovate or invent anything. The US needs to stop software patents if they want to let technology innovate.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  2. The evil of a closed platform by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have an iPhone, and it's a wonderful device, but as soon as my contract runs out (maybe sooner), I'll be moving to a different platform, and this is exactly why.

    As long as the iPhone is a closed platform with the only way to get apps through the app store, you will be dealing with this. Apple isn't going to allow competing applications on the device because they simply don't have to. They give a good song and dance about how closed the device is being about the "user experience," but the simple truth is that they don't want competition from other sources. That's their business model, it's how they work.

    It's a crying shame, because Apple really is a good company when it comes to style and design, and especially in figuring out exactly what scratches consumers' itches. But this is almost historically identical to what happened with the Macintosh a couple of decades ago. They kept it so closely-held and closed that when the PC came along, which allowed users to shrug off proprietary and use it how they wanted to instead of how some company told them to, Apple damn near went out of business.

    I really do hate to see them rebuild their reputation (and market value) again, just to throw it all away like they did last time, but damned if it doesn't look like that's exactly what they're trying to do.

    1. Re:The evil of a closed platform by Rockoon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      yes. Many people just don't know this about Apple. In the mid to late 80's Apple was well known for being extremely obtuse about low level programming information and tools for the Mac. Not only did they refuse to give out development tools for free, but they also refused to allow others to have enough information to develop their own .. at any price.

      Apple has been asshats since the first Mac, but somehow in the 90's they managed to turn popular opinion around while remaining asshats.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    2. Re:The evil of a closed platform by pydev · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Steve Jobs doesn't "hate" using open source. For example, he tried to keep the Objective-C extensions to GCC closed source in violation of the GPL; it took a lot of legal saber rattling by GNU to get him to comply.

      Apple is somewhat better now than they were 20 years ago, but they are still taking much more from the open source community than they are giving back. Without FOSS, Apple would be out of business; but even if all of Apple's contributions to FOSS disappeared overnight, people would hardly notice.

  3. Re:I Smell Patent War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Either way, this is a pretty clear example of why no company should be allowed to have control over what software consumers can put on devices that they own. It was wrong when the phone companies tried to be sole arbiter, and it is just as wrong for Apple to play that role. It is guaranteed to be abused sooner or later in a way that prevents competition in the marketplace and harms consumers. It was only a matter of time.

    I so badly want to see the FTC slap Apple with fines every day until they open the iPhone up to apps sold outside the app store without Apple vetting. That is the only action that sets a strong enough precedent that consumers are in charge of devices that they paid for and have a right to tinker.

  4. Re:Times change by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple does shitty things, but isn't in a position of direct power over other companies

    What was the topic of this story again? Oh yes, that Apple denied Google's app from the app store because it would compete with Apple's own offering. Sounds like power over other companies to me.

    But the whole "Microsoft is a monopoly" argument never really worked for me. If both Microsoft and Apple do something that is morally wrong, then more people will be affected by Microsoft. But this doesn't make it less morally wrong for Apple. Not being the monopoly is not a "get out of jail free" card.

  5. Equivalency by Powys · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What if Microsoft were to ban the installation of OpenOffice, LotusNotes, Word Perfect, etc. because they compete with their Office? I bet this would be a whole different conversation.