Slashdot Mirror
Jobs Wanted To Destroy Android
hype7 writes "It's clear Steve Jobs didn't pull any punches from the interviews for his forthcoming biography. In the latest release from the book, hosted over at AP, 'Isaacson wrote that Jobs was livid in January 2010 when HTC introduced an Android phone that boasted many of the popular features of the iPhone. Apple sued, and Jobs told Isaacson in an expletive-laced rant that Google's actions amounted to "grand theft." ... "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this." ... In a subsequent meeting with Schmidt at a Palo Alto, Calif., cafe, Jobs told Schmidt that he wasn't interested in settling the lawsuit, the book says. "I don't want your money. If you offer me $5 billion, I won't want it. I've got plenty of money. I want you to stop using our ideas in Android, that's all I want." The meeting, Isaacson wrote, resolved nothing.'"
What features were stolen?
Icons in a grid? Nokia phones had those for years.
On-screen keyboard? Palm had those since day dot.
Multipoint touch gestures? I remember seeing those in Minority Report
If by "stole" you mean "bought and used with permission" then yes, you are correct.
Apple did not steal from Xerox. Apple was already developing a GUI back in the late '70s.
The first GUI computer, the Xerox Alto, was designed in 1973, 2 whole years before Jobs & Wozniak started developing the Apple I, and 5 years before work started on the Lisa, Apple's first GUI computer.
Keep repeating a myth and people believe it. Apple did not steal from Xerox. Apple was already developing a GUI back in the late '70s.
And yet Xerox PARC had it in '73. Wikipedia also has an interesting read on the history of GUI.
Keep repeating a myth and people believe it. Apple did not steal from Xerox. Apple was already developing a GUI back in the late '70s.
Awe....aren't you cute. Can't deal with the truth about St. Jobs? Dude - dudedette, for those of us who were around back then, in the early '80s, Jobs himself admitted to seeing PARC's GUI and basing the whole Mac GUI on that.
At the time, Xerox was your typical complacent big corporation that had a R&D arm. And as such, they're managers were too short sighted to see the potential of their GUI OR felt that it was irrelevant to their business and therefore let it slide. Jobs saw the potential and ran with it.
BUT....unlike Google, Jobs didn't borrow/steal from a product being currently marketed - it was just a prototype in PARC's lab at the time and absolutely no indication from Xerox that they'd be using it. So, St. Jobs' reputation is still intact as the wizard of technology and marketing.
REMEMBER what the Iphone looked like pre-LG Prada. So, do you want to admit that:
1. Ideas develop simultaneously.
or
2. Apple stole the LG Prada designs.
Either way, it proves your point is full of crap.
I'm sorry that you're upset that Android it better, but please you're just embarrassing yourself here.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
What's more pertient is that Apple didn't invent those things any more than Google did.
Jobs was a giant fake. Better at using the work of others than at coming up with a single thing on his own.
As I recall, there was this guy they called Woz who did most of the heavy lifting for Cult Of Steve Jobs.
One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
From those of us that have used touchscreens for 20 years. Yes tapping an icon is the same as clickong on an icon. It's not revolutionary in any way.
I had the first Tablet PC, a Dauphin DTR-1 it ran windows 3.11 and acted just like a iPhone except for swipes and gestures.
Honestly, you think tapping an icon is revolutionary?
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Where does this ahistorical gibberish come from? Xerox sued Apple in 1989, claiming that that Apple ''intentionally and purposefully concealed'' the derivation of the Lisa and Macintosh software from Xerox software and that Apple's copyrights were invalid. (Xerox's suit was barred for technical reasons of standing.)
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Stop rehashing the same myth over and over. Jobs paid Xerox PARC $1M in pre-IPO Apple stock for the right to look over their technology.
"So Jobs proposed a deal: he would allow Xerox to buy a hundred thousand shares of his company for a million dollars—its highly anticipated I.P.O. was just a year away—if parc would “open its kimono.” A lot of haggling ensued. Jobs was the fox, after all, and parc was the henhouse. What would he be allowed to see? What wouldn’t he be allowed to see? Some at parc thought that the whole idea was lunacy, but, in the end, Xerox went ahead with it."