I'll never understand why people put Steve Jobs on a pedestal. He might have been a very astute businessman , but by all accounts he was a horrible human being and a colossal prick.
He used to eat only fruit and smelled like shit, he's my hero for that one
Say what you want about Steve Jobs, he's the guy who killed Steve Jobs
Oh that's so hilariously dark.
I think I've heard that as a Hitler joke. Say what you want about Hitler, at least he killed Hitler.
That’s more fitting. It’s a miss on Steve Jobs though. For one he didn’t kill himself, cancer did. And for another, just because he could be a prick doesn’t make him a bad person worth killing.
He had a very treatable cancer that was found in the early stages and was given an excellent prognosis, but in his infinite megalomaniac manner he decided he knew better than the doctors and opted to treat his cancer at home with homeopathic remedies. His home made new age "cures" clearly didn't work and by the time he finally decided to get proper treatment his cancer had metastasized and he was beyond help... sounds to me like he played a large hand in his own demise so the joke plays.
He thought his fruitarian diet would help him against pancreatic cancer. He tried to fight P.C. with apples.
Oranges, actually. Ironic
Oranges actually have a fairly low iron content.
Fairies would have been just as effective to treat pancreatic cancer.
Underrated comment right here lol
Yeah I get what you’re saying. It’s still something entirely different to bomb yourself to death vs. to not do enough to stop a disease. And even with all the haters in here, I don’t think any reasonable person would want Steve Jobs dead, it’s not like he murdered people.
Billionaires murder people by existing
Sure, if you say so. On a different note, I recently watched Paradise on Netflix, where you can basically live forever if you’re rich enough. In the background someone says on tv at one point something like "the climate crisis has been solved by the top 5 richest people", which made me laugh quite a bit.
Tbf the top 5 richest people could do theoretically do a lot to solve the climate crisis, but it would mean ceasing to be the top 5 richest people, and I'm disillusioned of them ever doing so voluntarily
I found it funny because it’s probably true. And since they live forever in the movie they were motivated to fix the planet for themselves. Not sure if that came across, but that’s what I meant.
He did nothing to stop the disease and actively rejected treatment and advice from medical professionals because he thought he knew better. So while this isn't the same as actively killing oneself, he is still more than likely responsible for his own death due to his own actions (or inaction).
Getting a treatable cancer and then choosing to do nothing about it other than eat fruit and refuse proper medical care is tantamount to killing yourself IMO.
Cancer did. And just because he could be a prick doesn’t mean he deserved to die so soon.
Iono, the kind of prick he was (narcissist who traumatized his own daughter and headed a company which needed suicide nets for the workers who made their product), paired with the fact that he signed his own death from his own deliberate delusions makes me conclude he did deserve to die, in more than one sense of the word 'deserve'.
He went down the homeopathic route cause science bad
He helped.
Never said he deserved to die. Interesting what words you're choosing to put in my mouth.
He had a very treatable cancer and chose to eat oranges about it instead. He killed himself with his own hubris.
He's really awful too, or at the very least he used to be.
He's done a lot of rebranding himself as being a great guy as of late, and put his money towards some great causes.
But when he was in charge of Microsoft he'd openly treat people like shit, openly steal things, openly do anticompetitive and illegal business practices, deliberately put small companies out of business, and openly bribe politicians to look the other way as he built his illegally-gained business empire.
The technology landscape today is vastly more closed and monopolised because of his/MS's actions.
All the recent stuff is him trying to whitewash his image so he isn't remembered as the bastard he is. Unfortunately, it's working.
At least he some good causes are getting something out of it
put his money towards some great causes
Don't forget how much MS lobbied countries all over the world to spend public money on MS products. Plus the anticompetitive shenanigans, it's more of an our money.
If you accept his research money (which people don't seem to do anymore) there are so many strings attached that if you find something you'll probably be liable even if you give it all up for free.
I'm still waiting for something good coming out of his pocket money spendings for good causes.
I'm still waiting for something good coming out of his pocket money spendings for good causes.
The eradication of polio isn't good enough for you?
He's a billionaire.
Cheated on his wife.
Travelled to Epstein's Island.
Got removed from Microsoft for propositioning female employees for sex
Used Microsoft's market position to kill off any competition. Remember Netscape?
His foundation pushed hard to make the COVID vaccines intellectual property of drug manufacturers so they would get richer, leaving the world dependent on them for doses instead of allowing everyone to produce it.
Don't forget the incessant lobbying for charter schools even though nobody wants them and there's no research to suggest they are better than the public system.
He's a giant asshole too (I mean when you look at Microsoft it's not very positive) but he's worked a lot on his image in the last decades
He have really taken an adolf nobel turn.
He should have copied Jobs and just died sooner!
Bill Gates does some genuinely great things for humanity.
With money he got from a monopoly, meaning the money he took plus the deadweight loss are even worse for humanity. Computers would be even better today if it wasn't for him, and we would've produced better things than we have today.
Monopolists "giving back" is insidious because it's much easier to see what they gave us than what they took away.
I agree with you but he's not on the same page as Steve Jobs, not in my book. Billionaires can't exist in a fair system so they're existence isn't justified but comparatively speaking he is better than Jobs
We may have better computers but Malaria may be more of an issue, whereas without Jobs nothing of note would be missing other too many biopics.
It might as well be that if Jobs were still alive, he'd be running some PR washing campaign to also be all good ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Malaria is still around though, spending pocket change for a cause doesn't mean it's helping (especially with all the strings attached if you actually get a grant).
Malaria will be beaten with classic research. I mean it's still all around...
The standardization of operating systems was an important step though. If there were hundreds of different OS’s on the market, then the PC generation would have stalled. The fact that there were basically only three dominant platforms meant that we could have market stability.
Where have you heard that a monopoly can be more beneficial than harmful because of standardization? Has that happened with any other monopolies?
It’s common sense. If you have hundreds of operating systems, then it becomes a pain to get the right software. First, developers are discouraged because they don’t know what platform will be best to develop on and users will be discouraged because they might need to install twenty different OS partitions in order to run the software they want to run.
No offense but no it is not common sense. The economics of monopolies have been studied for centuries, including any benefit from standardization (like with Standard Oil). It creates a costly deadweight loss.
For what it's worth I was there, and the handful of OSes in the 1980s (not 20) weren't as problematic as the monopoly later. It seems like common sense to me that today's multiple browsers are better than IE standardization was.
From what I’ve read he definitely had a strong personality and I don’t think anyone sees him as flawless. But that made for some very funny moments. And he definitely was the person that Apple needed at that time.
Strong is one way to wash over his narcissism, delusions, and the abuse he doled out. And you're wrong, there's plenty of people who take the washing-over to a degree where they think he was a genius above reproach. Yeah, let's focus on the funny moments and brush all that abuse and whatnot under the rug, that's better. I'm so glad a company got to profit from a sociopath's leadership in the end, gives me the fuzzies. Could you imagine giving up iphones and iOS for some alternative imaginary version of those products? Oh my.
I had a former boss who idolized him. Which was... concerning as his employee.
Steve Jobs was the Elon Musk of his time, he just died too soon for everyone to see him for the villain he was.
Steve Jobs did at least actually do things. Musk just buys things and claims he did them.
Nah Jobs didn't do anything himself. From Wozniaks first computer up to the multitouch display for the iPhone, all of these things were just bought/stolen/copied. Jobs just knew how to put these technologies into something that would sell.
So elon but a good businessman
Salesman
without the good, or the (hu)man(ity)
There's no version of this reality where Jobs isn't a good businessman. You might not like the company or their products, but they've somehow managed to build a huge and successful business selling those overpriced toys to tons of people. They managed to create a cult around expensive consumer electronics. That is a massive success no matter how you slice it. And you can't deny that Jobs played a big part in that.
The weird thing is that Apple without Jobs was a failure, but also Jobs without Apple was also a failure.
it was just a gag for comic effect. it wasn't the breadth and depth of my thoughts and feelings of the digital and manufacturing epochs since the 1980s.
But also, it was kind of begging the question of "is there such thing as a good business man?"
There's good for /their/ business. But is that- in general - good?
Does the current head of Larian Studios count as a businessman? If so, that's one I would consider good for the company AND the consumers
Also you can tie it directly to Jobs, because when he was gone for a bit, apple fuckin tanked, and then he came back and they came out with the iPod.
That's not an accident.
Yeah, Steve Jobs was definitely an asshole, and he didn't personally design any of his products, but he did know what direction to move things in and what consumers wanted in a phone. He was the first to put a truly usable portable touchscreen computer into our pockets with a phone in it, and every phone nowadays is basically just a reimagined, upgraded version of the first iPhone. The way we communicate is forever changed because of the iPhone.
But yeah iPhone's are kind of the pinnacle of "how much can we fuck you over before you notice" now. All because of the little Apple on the back of the phone.
There is a story that the concept of touchscreen phones was stolen from a Nokia engineer who tried to get nokia to produce them but the feature was dismissed as a 'gimmick'.
I could believe that too tbh
He didn't know what customers wanted in a phone.
He knew what customers would want in a phone when they were taught about its existence.
The customers had no idea they would want it before he showed it to them.
Jesus I'm no Elon fan but how many companies do you have to take from a couple million to hundreds of billions before you're good at your job?
What is it with modern society and the need to reduce everything about a person just because they're a POS? He might be evil but he's clearly pretty good at being a businessman or you wouldn't even know his name.
But… he literally isn't. Like just look at twitter, he has ruined it from day one with bad decisions day after day whose impacts haven't shown directly, but now appear more and more with embarrassing effects (The verification badge which is now worthless and has been used to impersonate people and cooperations, the two factor authentification which stopped working, the self-DDOSing, the maximum amounts of tweets one could view per day, the old tweets that got deleted due to a glitch, etc.)
And in other companies it's mostly other people managing the stuff and cleaning up the mess he leaves; especially SpaceX is currently just glad that he isn't too busy with his X playtoy to bother them.
The only thing you may call him somewhat successful in is making out companies that have a potential so he could get into them early and claim their success.
Elon is (maybe was) very much good at what he does. Twitter is a bad example because that whole shit show was a dick measuring content from the get-go.
Fact is, SpaceX wouldn't be SpaceX and Tesla sure as fuck would not be Tesla without his leadership.
He's a piece of shit as a person, and I'd never want to work for him, because his work ethic is unhealthy to say the least (and I personally have a pretty extreme work ethic), but it's schoolyard nonsense to claim he's somehow bad at business. Leading a business may be the one thing he is good at. It's tossing shit just to toss shit.
You can not like him and acknowledge he is good at things.
Tesla sure as fuck would not be Tesla without his leadership.
You're right, it wouldn't; it would almost certainly be a better company.
Musk got Tesla where it is financially entirely through blatant fraud. "Earning" the company's absurd valuation based almost entirely on dishonest promises of releasing a technology that is entirely unachievable, undesirable, and dangerous is an unsustainable business model, and it's already showing cracks.
The fact that you seem to think that being highly profitable through constant ethical violations in every aspect of the company is to viewed as a succsess is honestly pretty gross.
I live in the real world, in which the Tesla turnaround happened before the self driving shit
It's a completely different business vertical. Running a government rocketship contract or vehicle manufacturer isnt the same as software development or social media. Plus he's made so many decisions that are laughably stupid to the layman that it almost seems like he's tanking it purposefully.
Businesses aren't all the same and the same type of person can't run all of them. It's like asking your heart doctor to give you a urologists opinion.
Tesla started with almost nothing, SpaceX was his from the ground up. I'm not certain how much of Paypal was his but something tells me he was in management there too.
No one's claiming he developed the Tesla Model 3, or engineered the landing system of the Dragon boosters himself. He has been in charge of the people who have though, and he seems to be doing well enough of a job to keep those companies going.
So he's not good at managing a social media platform specifically, if he's actually trying and this isn't just a long con to destroy the site for some other end goal.
Being a succsessful businessman does not make one a good businessman. Half of the equation is ethics, because it fucking matters.
A successful businessman with bad ethics and an unsuccsessful one with good ethics are both bad businessmen.
The only good businessman is one who both succeeds and has good ethics.
While he has had some success, he's also demonstrably been a glory hog benefiting from crazy good luck.
He had an Internet company during the first dot com boom. He got a bunch of cash from Compaq for effectively nothing, because businesses had to snap up anything vaguely Internet. Right place at right time, basically won a lottery.
So then he founded an Internet bank. But want allowed to lead it, no matter, either way it was overshadowed by PayPal, which was a runaway success. Somehow he managed a merger with him being put in charge of the joint company. Then he almost tanked it and was put aside to salvage the company. However, he managed to be popularly thought of as "the PayPal guy"
He founded SpaceX. Off the top of my head, that one seems fair enough.
Then you have Tesla, which existed prior to him Knowing about it, yet he still insisted on being called a founder. It's possible that without him, Tesla wouldn't have gone far, but either way, he's been a glory hog about it to the point of again getting himself framed as "the" Tesla guy.
Also in the case of Tesla, it was a company entering a market with virtually zero competition. Compare the available fully electric cars of 2013-4 and take a wild guess as to which consumers were drooling over: the one that looks like an actual car or ones that screams "eco-friendly toy" (Mitsubishi i, Nissan Leaf)?
Just like how Elon did not design his rockets, SpaceX engineers did, Steve did not design the iPhone, Apple engineers did.
Also everyone seems to conveniently forget about the factory workers actually building them.
Jobs insisted on removing the keypad from a smartphone. He didn't make the multitouch display, but he did force app developers to take it seriously.
The iPhone didn't originally have apps other than basic ones that shipped with the phone, like Safari, YouTube, calculator, etc...
People hacked the first gen to run things like an NES emulator. Apple promptly shut that down and introduced the app store.
I don't hate Jobs for that, but I despise almost every other fucking company panicking in order to copy that shit. Blackberry keyboards were great stuff in the early 2010s.
I feel like he had a part in the first apple. Wozniac did the work but Jobs sold it. Selling and marketing are not easy and a different skill set. I'd be curious what Wozniac has to say about it though.
Not only Jobs managed to sell, he managed to sell way above cost. Apple became synonymous with premium features, even when it was clearly lagging behind the competition in terms of raw power (late 80's) or offering sub par experiences.
He was a visionary who was able to see the applicability of new technology, and was able to force his will for better than the standard upon people who would otherwise have thought the improvements impossible. The guy was a fucking jerk, that's true, but he also completely changed the world with his vision. To say he was nothing more than a Musk, or a thief, is to be disingenuous.
but he also completely changed the world with his vision
Which is a fucking shame, because his vision sucked for the most part. "Less power to the consumers, let them grovel for our products; You can only use our products the way we demand you to; Fuck repairability, buy new; Fuck keyboards"
Gonna have to learn how to necromance if you wanna keep sucking that dick.
What things did he do?
He invented the rounded rectangle, all hail
There's also the flat mouse
Jobs insisted on selling a touchscreen-only smartphone. Turns out, he was right on that one.
But like, he didn't design or build it himself. His company did.
So by that logic he's still the same as Musk, who insisted on a mass-market EV car or reusable rockets.
His company did.
It wasn't even his company, they stole the concept from another company. The home button also wasn't an apple original. The "sum of the parts" was the "original" thing
He was also right about not supporting Flash on the iPhone. People wanted to crucify him for that, but better video and web standards came about because of it, and we're all better off living in a world without Flash.
He was a world-class jump-ropesman, for one
This sells Musk short. He is making smart entrepreneurial decisions for the most part. I hate the monkey testing controversy though.
Tru
Didn't Musk start SpaceX? That's, at least, one thing. Too bad he can't stick to it.
No, he bought it from others and made them sign a contract letting him claim he's the original founder.
Start? Nope.
Woah; that's just so wildly inaccurate; I have no idea what to even say.
Are you really saying Jobs was a transphobic right-wing extremist whose father got super rich and helped him to just buy into uprising companies without really doing anything by himself?
He did father a child he denied to the day he died, intentionally screwed Woz out of his fair share of the apple fortune, killed himself by treating cancer with quackery. Jobs is probably more self made, but that's about it.
Jobs is probably more self made, but that’s about it.
I just gave you some pretty major differences. To me, most things that defines Musk as the horrible person he is aren't true for Jobs. Again: The extremist position, transphobia, the fact that he bought into his companies and didn't actually invent these things and made these breakthroughs by himself (which is just not true for Jobs, even if you have reasons to not like him), that he just got his money by his father's mine and hasn't made such successes by himself, etc. All of that doesn't apply to Jobs.
Those things you mention are just… cases of him doing awful stuff; most of them not even related to Musk in any way. But if "he did awful stuff" is enough to set him on the same layer as Musk, then he is also "the same person" as a good share of all people living.
He did not deny her until the day he died. She even lived with him during highschool, and he named a computer after her, even though he made up a bogus acronym to pretend that wasn't his motivation.
Woz was worth $500m at one point and is worth $100m today. It's not like he was cut out of the game, he just wasn't interested in money or success the way Jobs was. Without Jobs drive for success, Woz would never have shared his inventions with anyone, it was just a private hobby to him.
Steve was definitely an asshole, but there are plenty of valid criticisms to levy at him, you don't need to misrepresent anything.
’s not like he was cut out of the game, he just wasn’t interested in money or success the way Jobs was.
You really buy that? That's some bullshit someone says when they got fucked over and know they'll lose and come out worse if they try to get what's rightfully theirs.
Woz himself has said as much. The guy has more money than he'll ever be able to spend. He's fine.
Woz himself has said as much.
That's why I said:
That’s some bullshit someone says when...
Don't get me wrong, I don't give a shit about the contentedness of any of these treasure hoarding shitdragons, but there never has been and never will be a person who is fine with getting ass fucked out of hundreds of millions of dollars. Even Muskrat is throwing an endless tantrum and fucking up people's lives over a bad deal, even though he did it to himself on purpose.
there never has been and never will be a person who is fine with getting ass fucked out of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Hi, you don't know me... but for a single hundred million dollars, you can ass fuck me out of as many hundreds more as you want.
Sounds like a deal.
Not to stand up for jobs, but from what I've seen of woz, I can totally believe he wouldn't see more money as worth the bother.
From what I've seen:
If you're making 36k a year, your are obsessed with opportunities to get more, no matter who you are. Your life is financially difficult and any chance to overcome that is worth it.
If you are making 200k a year, you start seeing different sorts of folk.
Some will not stop until that number is as big as it can be. Their lives will be consumed by that as a "high score"
Some care less about money and more about titles and conspicuous status symbols, like a coveted office.
Some are happy to just do their work the way they like without having to worry about the money anymore, or to work on hobbies and afford to walk away from working.
I know folks that are 200k as "bird in the hand" money and chasing bigger numbers is worth considering, but they are more concerned about risk to their perceived status or working conditions than pay.
Take one of those last sort of folk, get them to tens of millions of wealth and they are likely happy to just stop thinking about the money, even if it means they are sonetimes the chump as a result.
That's true, he was not nearly as bad as Musk. I was mainly talking about how he's a general asshole who steals from others and is revered by techbros. I was maybe being a bit hyperbolic in my comparison.
I don't necessarily agree with that, but I get this point (in contrast to how you phrased it before), so fair I guess.
But just one thing:
is revered by techbros
I actually don't know any people who revere Musk. I know this is dependent on the bubble, but at least with Jobs being generally seen pretty favourable and Musk seen extremely unfavourable by most people, I think there's a big difference.
did he ever reconcile with his kid? hard to imagine just ignoring your own child like that...
Who, Elon or Steve? /s
he just died too soon for everyone to see him for the villain he was
iOS user: "DUDE have you seen [new iOS feature]? This is the bee's knees!" [10 minutes of gushing omitted for brevity]
Android user: "...Yeah, we've had that for 15 years."
Even the iPhone itself was just a more advanced version of a PDA or other handheld PC device that existed years before it. Logically, phones would have advanced similarly with or without Apple.
To be fair, Apple had a PDA, the Newton, back in 1993... Not that it was the 1st again...
I had one called the iPaq.
Apple has since then made it illegal to trademark products starting with "i". Irony.
iRony.
"Irony", its probably what the "I" stands for.
KkI wouldn't even say the iphone was more advanced than what came before it haha.
I still have 2 fully functioning Palm TX devices from 20 or so years ago, they were released mid 2005 while iPhone was June 2007 I think?
Looking back, I cannot fathom (aside from marketing) how apple beat palm in that market.
Here are the specs, keep in mind the TX was released several years before the original iPhone
Ram:
Palm TX: 128 Mb iPhone: 128Mb
Screen
palm TX: 480×320 iPhone 480×320
Processor
TX: 312Mhz iPhone 416 Mhz
So, for a 3 year or so delay, the original iPhone imo still doesn't completely dwarf the TX, but I'm also not through as there are plenty of features that the TX had but the iPhone lacked.
The TX was also touch screen (I find it much more responsive) and was meant for a stylus instead of fingers. To this day, I still love writing and drawing on the TX. Oh, and the stylus fits neatly into the TX on the right side. Also, it has a nice little replaceable flip cover for the screen.
But that's not all, it has an SD card slot for expandable storage, something the iPhone omitted.
It also has wifi 302.11b support and Bluetooth as well, yes, Bluetooth in 2005 and it was very easy to activate and use.
But no, that's not all, it also had an IR transmitter/receiver! Something the iPhone helped to kill. Those things were underrated!
They made the TX the perfect universal remote! I had a program on the TX that listed every T.V/DVD/VCR/Cable etc. Manufacturer you could imagine, you'd just select the manufacturer for the device you wanted to control, aim the TX at it and bam, you had control.
This helped me a lot as essentially I could control almost any device I could see. Lost remote for the DVD player? TX got you. It wasn't just for t.v's and whatnot though, many things run on IR and I miss when smart devices supported it.
Ah, and I'm still not done, the TX had BUTTONS. Actual factual buttons. Not only was it 100% touch screen, but it had 4 buttons and a directional pad with another button in the middle iirc.
Those buttons made it great for emulation and I believe I had a snes emulator on it though that may have just been Nes, either way, the buttons were much more fun to play with than touch screen, it made the device actually feel.. made for what you were using it to do.
In fact, everything on the device felt made for what you were doing, and not just an afterthought. It came preloaded with plenty of useful apps. A web browser that was even YouTube capable for one, which in 2006 or so when I got the TX blew my mind, YouTube in my Palm?
Maybe I went a little overboard in this comment but my point is, damn, some more competition may have been nice.
Oh, and one last thing, My TX devices still run like the day I got them, hell, the battery life is insane as well. I left one on for at least 2 weeks and it still had power last I checked. How many original iPhones that were opened in 2007 are still running? Heck, even an iPhone 5 from 2012, how many of those are still up and running?
Yet my 2005 TX runs just the same as it always did. It's insane to look at a device from 2005 and feel like in 2023 we should be taking notes, but we should.
Our devices won't last that long on standby today because they're filled with bloatware processes that refuse to stop running. The TX powers up instantly after it's been sitting for days and will be on 99% battery. My modern smart phone will kill its own battery within a day or two, tops, just sitting on my desk without me touching it.
Palm needs to make a comeback. Devices with SD, IR, buttons, built in stylus etc. Should as well.
Oh, and the OS was perfect. Calendar, web, paint etc, an Aux jack, these little things were and still are badass. If it wasn't for the limited capability due to not being able to access the web like before I'd probably still use them daily.
But I'd never use an original iPhone daily, they just aren't good for anything that I can't do with any other device.
Not that I'm anti IPhone as I realize my comment seems, don't get me wrong I do prefer androids for my uses but iPhones aren't too shabby either. Top notch hardware, all of their devices sharing the same hardware also mean their apps tend to be better optimized and more reliable, etc. They're dependable, reliable devices but.. my Palm from 20 years ago can do things no iPhone can, like still run after 2 decades, control IR devices, have an SD card inserted etc.
The closest thing I've had to a TX was an LG Stylo 6, and for it's day if was a decent device but the screen cracked in my pocket within a year and the battery life had shortened significantly. I was carrying around mophies and chargers like nobody's business. My TX though? 2 decades without even a scratch that I can see on either of the 2 that I own, and when I'm using it the battery almost seems limitless as I can go for quite some time using it without seeing that 99% battery drop a digit.
I know we've changed battery types a time or two since then but can't help but wonder how are modern batteries are so unreliable in comparison? Planned obsolescence is a factor, surely because I'm seeing a year or so tops before major performance reduction with these lithium ions of late. Whereas the TX still outlasts them 20 years later,
Just love my old tech and wish it were updated! I'd love a new palm device built as well as the TX was.
It wasn’t an entirely new concept but it completely redefined what it could be. Look up what Android looked like until the iPhone was demoed.
iPhone was announced January 2007 and released in June. The phone you’re linking to was released September 2008.
What was your point again?
Yeah that’s exactly it. This phone was a reaction to the original iPhone. I was there
Doesn’t look like a black rectangular piece of glass to me. I think the point they were making was that there was a design paradigm shift when the iPhone came out.
Floating apps. And split screen. I was playing Pokemon Go with reddit open in the corner in 2017 and it was old then. I dunno when iOS got it, but it's recentish.
Copy muthafuckin paste. That was a laugh, listening to explanations of why you didn't need it, until they "invented" that too.
Neither floating apps nor split screen were ever released for iOS. Split screen was added a while ago for iPadOS, but floating apps (Stage Manager) was released just last year.
Wait, floating apps as in being able to keep an app in the corner (like YouTube) when I'm using another app primarily right? iOS just got that?
It's definitely old for Android as I can remember it being a thing for at least 5 years, and before that it was P-I-P "Picture in Picture" even on old CRT t.v's with cable boxes lol. My old "Web TV" setup had PIP and was already old when I got it in the early 2000's
No, that has been a feature for years on iOS and iPadOS. I’m talking about movable apps, like a desktop, a feature many android phones have. Only iPadOS has this feature to date.
Oh okay, I'm late to the party on that and actually had to Google it. I've just been using split screen for that purpose haha
This happens the other way too FWIW
Genuinely curious, what did iOS have first that Android then adopted? Not doubting at all just curious as to what
This is sort of hard to answer because of the number of varieties of Android from different vendors could have things that weren’t in core Android but some user will be like I had a Samsung phone in 2012 that did that or something, so I’ll just base my answers on Android core.
Notification badges were a big one I wanted on Android that iOS had done since the beginning. You could sorta have them with nova launcher for a while, but it wasn’t as good. Eventually Android came around, I think?
I think the ability to swipe up and navigate opened apps also existed in iOS long before Android, though I think Samsung may have copied it shortly after, as they do with most solid iOS innovations.
iOS’s privacy controls have always been better than Android’s, though that’s not super surprising given Google’s market is advertising, Android did eventually try to add granular privacy controls but it feels lacking compared to iOS.
Also screen recording, is it even in Android yet? It’s been in iOS forever.
There’s a lot more than that, but reading any Android community and you’d think that the copying only happened one way.
Haha I agree with that actually, I'm an Android fan but don't see the issue with all the copying. If iPhone users want it and we have it, why can't they? Also, conversely, if there's an iOS feature that I don't yet have so what if I finally get it?
I can't too much understand being all too competitive about this. plus, comparing them is apples to oranges. Apple, who I actually used to work for 😂 is one company making one device.
Android? Anyone can make one, anyone can make apps for them. Of COURSE we're going to get some features first.
And yes, you're also right, depending on the manufacturer some Android devices have had features we're just now getting today many, many years ago but as we're not consolidated into one company sometimes they're forgotten or omitted from later Android barebones cores.
Screen sharing being one of those things lol. I've had it on a few devices throughout the years but probably couldn't pinpoint the device as I've switched between Google, Motorola, LG etc. And also try more 3rd party stuff than most. I believe the first time I saw it native was OS10 or whatever it's called as that was my last phone, a Motorola Ace something from Verizon.
Good phone btw! Had some badass features that iOS most likely doesn't have yet, like can you flick your wrist twice to activate the camera instantly anytime for quick shots? Or can you shake it twice to activate the flashlight?
However, the fucking cameras on that thing were awful. Advertised as 48Mp but really just a 12, 2 and 16 megapixel camera strapped to the back. Why? Because not Apple. With an iPhone you know that you're getting something consistent with great hardware. Some of the androids I get may have a feature or two that iOS doesn't yet have, but I also miss out sometimes and have to pay for that feature in other ways because androids are the wild west of smartphones.
Love my androids for my personal needs, freedom and the price but can definitely get why iPhones work better for some.
Also, yes the privacy shit is insane on these devices. I constantly have to fight to keep it from spying and sending reports about my usage to anyone that will listen.
Apple pioneered a moderately useful mobile browser and fully touch screen UI (except for the home button).
They've been copying each other ever since, to the point where I watch the WWDC keynote thinking "they didn't already have THAT!?" most of the time.
More like Apple copies an android feature that is more than a decade old then claims it as some kind of innovation.
slaps a buzzword on it and makes a trillion. Can't believe some iphone users consider widgets modetn
My old boss would always buy the new IPhone the day it came out and brag about features and a lot of the times I would be scratching my head being like how is that different then what I have on my 4 year old android Galaxy 6??
They just got widgets? Widgets have been on Android since my first smart phone in 2011 at the very least
Now they do, but the iPhone was revolutionary when it was released. Apple literally changed the world with their invention.
A lot of people forget the early days.
Android had copy/paste first, Apple didn't for a long time.
Android had MMS support first, Apple didn't for a long time.
Android had multi tasking apps first, apple didn't for a long time.
Android allowed app store apps to duplicate inbuilt apps, like web browsers, music players, email clients. Apple banned these for a long time.
I remember having to jailbreak my iPhone 3GS to have swipe down toggles we now know as normal today. It was called SB settings from cydia. I'm pretty sure this was also standard on Android. And file manager.
Android was a poor comparison when iPhone first released. I had one of them. It was neat because it was new, but realistically it was a piece of shit compared to the iPhone. I'm no Apple fan boy, but they genuinely changed the world in many ways
When iPhone first released... it was a piece of shit compared to the HTC Dream with Android. The main improvement Apple did, was removing the keyboard.
If there were slide qwerty phones I'd still be buying them to this day.
I miss them so much. Those, and IR transmitters being common, That's a major one to me. Almost 20 years ago, I had control of every single T.V, DVD player, VCR, etc. That came my way thanks to the palm TX, it had IR and a nice little app where you'd just choose the make/model of the device you're trying to control and bam, your screen became the remote you needed. Iirc the buttons also could be used so you didn't necessarily have to do everything touch screen.
Now on my super fancy modern smart phone I couldn't dream of doing that. Hell, I even struggle to use it as a remote for my Roku because I use my device as a hotspot and Roku requires both devices be on the same network. Why can't we figure out how to do what we did so easily 2 decades ago?!
Android was not aimed at blackberry. It was to be a completely new phone OS from the ground up and add extensive capabilities to the phone world over what the blackberry (the most popular phone at the time) could. Yes the G1 had a similar form factor to the most popular phone at the time and it wasn't even the only form. The phone in the picture was from prototype stage and never shipped in that form factor. The shipping go had a screen and button under it. The screen slid sideways to reveal a keyboard. The Motorola droid was the most popular android phone when they actually shipped. I had a droid and a coworker had a G1. Development problems and companies scared to gamble on a radical new product delayed Androids launch behind iPhones. Apple did a fantastic job of developing the iPhone in secret, knowing the Android was coming.
Something something Xerox
Found the commenter who is old enough to retire
I think every nerdy person knows about it though. Gates and Jobs have a pretty famous exchange over it.
Retirement? In this economy?
Fucking wish I could retire
You can... maybe not for long, and not out of the streets, but technically anyone can "retire" at any moment...
If it's not final, it's not retiring. Pretty sure "comfortably" is implied as well.
Y’all need to watch pirates of Silicon Valley
It's like the Halloween 3 of the Pirates franchise: pretty good but quite a departure for the series. Notably, neither Captain Sparrow nor Captain Stagnetti make an appearance at all - amongst many other differences.
Amazing review, and shockingly accurate. Well done.
He meant "photostat" though.
If you're not in the know, google "a neighbor named xerox gates jobs"
Dig an inch and you realize woz has more tech talent in his left pinky than jobs ever did.
Eli5 about it? Please?
I think this captures the highlights of the issue.
[…] Gates responded: "Well, Steve, I think there's more than one way of looking at it. I think it's more like we both had this rich neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it."
I half expected you to just say “Google it”
Thanks man I appreciate it
Here are the stats nowadays. Just to make Steve Jobs roll in his grave, once again! 😂
Those are weird stats lumping in phone OSes with desktop/notebook OSes.
while excluding other types of computer like embedded devices, servers and whatnot
If you include servers and embedded devices Linux is gonna go brrrr
And if you count Android and ChromeOS as androidLinux, which I guess they are (though bastardised somewhat), it's an absolute bloodbath.
I think you meant "if you count Android and ChromeOS as Linux"
Ooof you're right, thanks. These nightshifts I'm working have my brain in a mess! Corrected
Since we are doing a big mix of everything why not throw there Minix that resides on all Intel chips?
There's also the fact that there's no source for the chart. Why is there an unknown category there? Why is it different from other in this context?
I'd guess unknown means whatever was used to record this information couldn't determine the os (so it's probably linux lol), whereas the other category is probably BSD and the like.
Just a guess though, I have no idea
the unknown is BEOS.
I liked BeOS for what it was.
Clearly it's TempleOS.
Considering how many people use a phone as their primary computing device now, it makes sense to me.
I think hed be pretty happy with that! That 13% may be less, but its all from 1 manufacturer or brand. They dont need to share a piece of the pie!
Android4Life! But come on, give up that graph that combines mobile + desktop operating systems! They are totally, completely different and should be kept separate. But only based on who buys them, who uses them, who supports them, customer vs corporate customers, etc...
Only 1% for Linux? Come on, all of Android is Linux!
I miss when devices came with infrared transmitters..
Also it had a mini sim & built-in Bluetooth/wifi at that time, wow.
Xiaomi phones still come with infrared, mostly used to control TVs, fans, AC units, etc.
He was just Salty 🧂.
iPhone undeniably brought the technology forward by years, even if only in terms of software. I don't even like iOS, but it seems disingenuous to compare iPhone to those, or the Samsung tablets, or anything that came before it.
Here in the UK it took over 3 years, after the initial release of the iPhone, for it to even support MMS messaging. Most people around me had Blackberries until Apple actually gave reason for them to consider switching, which took years. It was largely considered to be like the iPods before it: focused on the fashion/'cool' aspect of it.
I would not say they brought technology forward, and I'd go as far as to say the strive to bring forward functionalities of the iPhones improved after Jobs (I understand this is a hot take and may result in downvotes, just my opinion based on local experience).
While apple did improve the design, they mostly made it “cool”. Before that they were “nerd” phones. The Motorola V3 was a “cooler “phone at the time until the iPhone came out.
I’m with you, but it seems like this post got taken over by passionate haters
Lol haters. Can't really blame ppl for saying fanboy if talk like that.
You post a hateful quote and ppl nuance it. Doesn't seem that bad.
Why does this asshole live rent free in all your heads? I never hear Apple fanboys bitch about that creep Andy Rubin.
Because his company was (and continues to be) a powerful force acting against consumer rights.
He was also a self absorbed asshole that's still idolized for some reason.
People like people like them.
Your first question is fair, but Apple fans don't know who that is.
99% of android fans don't know him either
It's almost like Android fans are fans of the OS and the features it provides instead of who made it.
Also true.
fortunately our mobile OS manufacturer operates the most widely used search engine - so it's a triviality to find the answer
Almost nobody knows who that is!
Man all this money in the bank and still ranting like a loser. Mfer his company steals all product ideas from other companies right from VR headsets to features from Android and then he says this. Innovate harder bitch 🤣🤣
What are you talking about? He’s dead.
I know. Sorry English is not my first language but i meant everything i said.
At least normal billionaires pretend to be fans of free markets where competition keeps prices in check. Steve Jobs was just honest enough to admit he's a piece of shit
He says great artist steal then says he wants to destroy android for stealing? Like he did anything but hype shit up on stage
He hates artists
It's a good example of how people's morals vary greatly based on their present situation, rather than being some kind of deeply held, unchanging foundation. What people believe is good and bad is largely a function of where they happen to be at the moment.
Yeah Android might have copied IOS. But why not. Android would have been developed any way sooner or later. It is based on Linux. And that is open sourced.
It only took a year for Android to be released after iOS. How long has it taken China to come up with a competing operating system? I'm pretty sure Google was working somewhat in parallel to Apple.
The first iPhone was released in 2007. Android development started in 2003, with the first pitches to phone manufacturers in 2005. So yeah, Android wasn't merely a copy of iPhone.
The timeline is technically correct but misleading, and please google what Android looked like prior to the iPhone announcement. While you're there, might also want to check out the technical differences like iPhone prioritizing things like animation and user interaction. Wouldn't also hurt to check out the first, say, 1-4 Android devices compared to literally just the first iPhone and tell us which one our phones look like today. Also, do we think that Apple was just like "here's a new OS we made over winter break?" They announced in '06. Android was developed probably at a similar time, bought by Google, and then had to pivot hard after iPhone announcement, and harder still after hardware actually got into customer hands.
The replies throughout this entire post are incredible. You are exactly right, yet downvoted for it.
In many way iOS had copied android and sometimes they did it late (multitasking, ...)
If I remember correctly, android was already under development, but huge changes were made after the iPhone came out.
Android was close to being released, but it was going to be much more like a BlackBerry, with a keyboard focus. They delayed the release to retool it somewhat with more of a touch focus.
"somewhat" is doing a lot of work here. I mean, they didn't re-write the kernel, but you can google example of the UI pre and post iPhone announcement.
Just about every invention is obvious in hindsight. Take a look at what Android looked like pre-iPhone announcement and then post.
Maybe he should have said "The best artist is the one with the best lawyer."
rofl. apple stole their gui from xerox, so I guess he knew how it worked.
still failed, rather epically
Apple, with the iphone, did pioneering capacitive touch screen and biometric. Android brought smartphone to the mass and trigger the stupid camera war.
Apple-Fanboii-Checklist:
Trace everything back to the original iPhone
Be sure to mention Apple's Marketing buzzwords like "biometry" or "live photo"
Offhandedly treat "Android" as "product for the common masses" with a hint of snobbery
Treat "The Android" as a monolithic entity instead of a licensed OS that has nothing to do with the devices it runs on per se
Call anything that was a marketing focus for Android-Using-Companies but not for Apple for a time some derogatory name because only what Apple did was right
Nice try though, have been an android user all my life and only own one ipad. Typical stupid online generalization.
Too late, you already angered the android extremists. Come at me haters
All hail the little robo dwarf trashcan thing that is supposed to be an Android while looking nothing like a human!
I’ve never seen someone shit and vomit so hard into a 5 point list before. Congrats on that one, go grab some water.
Named the one pioneering thing they actually did
Didn’t use that word but biometrics have nothing implicitly to do with iPhone. Regardless, imagine referring to a named functionality by its own name - so controversial. You’re just trying to take words away from people.
You’re being paranoid, where do you see snobbery in this comment please point it out if you’re willing to defend this point
Again, imagine referring to something as it is socially known. Android, pedantically, is an OS yes but everyone in the fucking world when they hear “android or iPhone” know that means an iPhone or a phone running android. 🙄
What the fuck are you smoking
Cool username by the way. What’s the origin? Sounds awfully a lot like a specific slur I know of. A trolls MO certainly would line up with whatever your shit post of a comment was.
What...the....fuck?!
More riveting conversation, what a surprise.
"riveting conversation" eh?
Watch the completely uncalled for aggression you spewed towards a silly little post about brand fanboiis. Insults followed by attacks, followed by calling me racist for my nickname. This is pathetic and nothing more. You may believe you dealt some sort of blow to me and "win" or something, yet the only thing you did is flail around like an angry child.
All this aggression against a post that was meant to tease someone, which you might have noticed had you read my other post 3 answers down.
Even if there was a conversation to be had about Android vs iOS or the like (there is none, everyone should use their hard earned money to buy whatever is the best products for them and that's it), even if you made some interesting point somewhere in that ball of hatred you call "conversation", I'd not engage with that point since the tone you set is not worth my - or everyone else's - time.
Not reading that wall of text, know damn well it equates to I don’t have anything intelligent to contribute to this convo and I am a troll.
Textbook.
Okay, shorter then: your bio asked me to point you there if you were "unduly rude or disrespectful" , so here we go: @stevedidWHAT
Edit: corrected quote and link
I'll admit that I made a rash judgement call on your personality based off a stupid comment and thats ignorant, unfair, and not the kind of person I wanna be.
Your 5th point however is what tipped my judgement - that didn't read like a tease to me and, specifically, read like you were accusing someone of calling android companies derrogatory names when they hadn't done anything close to that. It read like you were trying to paint them like some snobbish asshole, which this person was nowhere near in their response. (See your 3rd point as well.)
I apologize for the rash judgement of your character and that alone.
Refer to your bio for being unduly rude
Keyword being unduly
Dude tried to shit on someone with nonsense, I responded, albeit irked, with points and logic and all I got back was “huuuh” “whaaat” “I’m not gonna talk” which is classic troll bs as we’ve all seen on the rise, and called it out. I take that rule seriously (thanks for looking through) so I would like to talk about this in specifics if possible. What specifically did I say that was rude/uncalled for?
The "stupid camera war" killed the amount of UFO and ghost sightings, while increasing the sightings of meteors and police brutality, so not all that stupid.
capacitative touch screen
Motorola PDA's form 1999 already had it. I was playing jawbreaker instead of working back in 2001.
You're too young for the stance you want to take. Let the adults talk.
Give the credit where its due. Android was designed to be used on a device similar to BlackBerry (Sooner), the success of the first iPhone made them switch to a touch design from the ground up. Your Motorola didn't start any trend. That's why I use the word "pioneering". Use shit just to claim "first" without making any major impact is called "gimmick", like the 2k screen on my old LG G3 (hate it).
Empty barrel truly make the most noise.
👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻
Jsyk I downvoted not because you’re necessarily wrong but because you were a dick when the other dude hadn’t even engaged in anything like that
I'll never understand why people put Steve Jobs on a pedestal. He might have been a very astute businessman , but by all accounts he was a horrible human being and a colossal prick.
He used to eat only fruit and smelled like shit, he's my hero for that one
Say what you want about Steve Jobs, he's the guy who killed Steve Jobs
Oh that's so hilariously dark.
I think I've heard that as a Hitler joke. Say what you want about Hitler, at least he killed Hitler.
That’s more fitting. It’s a miss on Steve Jobs though. For one he didn’t kill himself, cancer did. And for another, just because he could be a prick doesn’t make him a bad person worth killing.
He had a very treatable cancer that was found in the early stages and was given an excellent prognosis, but in his infinite megalomaniac manner he decided he knew better than the doctors and opted to treat his cancer at home with homeopathic remedies. His home made new age "cures" clearly didn't work and by the time he finally decided to get proper treatment his cancer had metastasized and he was beyond help... sounds to me like he played a large hand in his own demise so the joke plays.
He thought his fruitarian diet would help him against pancreatic cancer. He tried to fight P.C. with apples.
Oranges, actually. Ironic
Oranges actually have a fairly low iron content.
Fairies would have been just as effective to treat pancreatic cancer.
Underrated comment right here lol
Yeah I get what you’re saying. It’s still something entirely different to bomb yourself to death vs. to not do enough to stop a disease. And even with all the haters in here, I don’t think any reasonable person would want Steve Jobs dead, it’s not like he murdered people.
Billionaires murder people by existing
Sure, if you say so. On a different note, I recently watched Paradise on Netflix, where you can basically live forever if you’re rich enough. In the background someone says on tv at one point something like "the climate crisis has been solved by the top 5 richest people", which made me laugh quite a bit.
Tbf the top 5 richest people could do theoretically do a lot to solve the climate crisis, but it would mean ceasing to be the top 5 richest people, and I'm disillusioned of them ever doing so voluntarily
I found it funny because it’s probably true. And since they live forever in the movie they were motivated to fix the planet for themselves. Not sure if that came across, but that’s what I meant.
He did nothing to stop the disease and actively rejected treatment and advice from medical professionals because he thought he knew better. So while this isn't the same as actively killing oneself, he is still more than likely responsible for his own death due to his own actions (or inaction).
Getting a treatable cancer and then choosing to do nothing about it other than eat fruit and refuse proper medical care is tantamount to killing yourself IMO.
Cancer did. And just because he could be a prick doesn’t mean he deserved to die so soon.
Iono, the kind of prick he was (narcissist who traumatized his own daughter and headed a company which needed suicide nets for the workers who made their product), paired with the fact that he signed his own death from his own deliberate delusions makes me conclude he did deserve to die, in more than one sense of the word 'deserve'.
He went down the homeopathic route cause science bad
He helped.
Never said he deserved to die. Interesting what words you're choosing to put in my mouth.
He had a very treatable cancer and chose to eat oranges about it instead. He killed himself with his own hubris.
He also washed his feet in toilets. I'm not joking.
I mean that is pretty weird but it does actually make sense.
They were public toilets.
People liked Bill Gates so ... IDK.
what is personally wrong with gates?
He's really awful too, or at the very least he used to be.
He's done a lot of rebranding himself as being a great guy as of late, and put his money towards some great causes.
But when he was in charge of Microsoft he'd openly treat people like shit, openly steal things, openly do anticompetitive and illegal business practices, deliberately put small companies out of business, and openly bribe politicians to look the other way as he built his illegally-gained business empire.
The technology landscape today is vastly more closed and monopolised because of his/MS's actions.
All the recent stuff is him trying to whitewash his image so he isn't remembered as the bastard he is. Unfortunately, it's working.
At least he some good causes are getting something out of it
Don't forget how much MS lobbied countries all over the world to spend public money on MS products. Plus the anticompetitive shenanigans, it's more of an our money.
If you accept his research money (which people don't seem to do anymore) there are so many strings attached that if you find something you'll probably be liable even if you give it all up for free.
I'm still waiting for something good coming out of his pocket money spendings for good causes.
The eradication of polio isn't good enough for you?
Don't forget the incessant lobbying for charter schools even though nobody wants them and there's no research to suggest they are better than the public system.
He's a giant asshole too (I mean when you look at Microsoft it's not very positive) but he's worked a lot on his image in the last decades
He have really taken an adolf nobel turn.
He should have copied Jobs and just died sooner!
Bill Gates does some genuinely great things for humanity.
With money he got from a monopoly, meaning the money he took plus the deadweight loss are even worse for humanity. Computers would be even better today if it wasn't for him, and we would've produced better things than we have today.
Monopolists "giving back" is insidious because it's much easier to see what they gave us than what they took away.
I agree with you but he's not on the same page as Steve Jobs, not in my book. Billionaires can't exist in a fair system so they're existence isn't justified but comparatively speaking he is better than Jobs
We may have better computers but Malaria may be more of an issue, whereas without Jobs nothing of note would be missing other too many biopics.
It might as well be that if Jobs were still alive, he'd be running some PR washing campaign to also be all good ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Malaria is still around though, spending pocket change for a cause doesn't mean it's helping (especially with all the strings attached if you actually get a grant).
Malaria will be beaten with classic research. I mean it's still all around...
The standardization of operating systems was an important step though. If there were hundreds of different OS’s on the market, then the PC generation would have stalled. The fact that there were basically only three dominant platforms meant that we could have market stability.
Where have you heard that a monopoly can be more beneficial than harmful because of standardization? Has that happened with any other monopolies?
It’s common sense. If you have hundreds of operating systems, then it becomes a pain to get the right software. First, developers are discouraged because they don’t know what platform will be best to develop on and users will be discouraged because they might need to install twenty different OS partitions in order to run the software they want to run.
No offense but no it is not common sense. The economics of monopolies have been studied for centuries, including any benefit from standardization (like with Standard Oil). It creates a costly deadweight loss.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Monopoly_and_efficiency
For what it's worth I was there, and the handful of OSes in the 1980s (not 20) weren't as problematic as the monopoly later. It seems like common sense to me that today's multiple browsers are better than IE standardization was.
From what I’ve read he definitely had a strong personality and I don’t think anyone sees him as flawless. But that made for some very funny moments. And he definitely was the person that Apple needed at that time.
Strong is one way to wash over his narcissism, delusions, and the abuse he doled out. And you're wrong, there's plenty of people who take the washing-over to a degree where they think he was a genius above reproach. Yeah, let's focus on the funny moments and brush all that abuse and whatnot under the rug, that's better. I'm so glad a company got to profit from a sociopath's leadership in the end, gives me the fuzzies. Could you imagine giving up iphones and iOS for some alternative imaginary version of those products? Oh my.
I had a former boss who idolized him. Which was... concerning as his employee.
Steve Jobs was the Elon Musk of his time, he just died too soon for everyone to see him for the villain he was.
Steve Jobs did at least actually do things. Musk just buys things and claims he did them.
Nah Jobs didn't do anything himself. From Wozniaks first computer up to the multitouch display for the iPhone, all of these things were just bought/stolen/copied. Jobs just knew how to put these technologies into something that would sell.
So elon but a good businessman
Salesman
without the good, or the (hu)man(ity)
There's no version of this reality where Jobs isn't a good businessman. You might not like the company or their products, but they've somehow managed to build a huge and successful business selling those overpriced toys to tons of people. They managed to create a cult around expensive consumer electronics. That is a massive success no matter how you slice it. And you can't deny that Jobs played a big part in that.
The weird thing is that Apple without Jobs was a failure, but also Jobs without Apple was also a failure.
it was just a gag for comic effect. it wasn't the breadth and depth of my thoughts and feelings of the digital and manufacturing epochs since the 1980s.
But also, it was kind of begging the question of "is there such thing as a good business man?"
There's good for /their/ business. But is that- in general - good?
Does the current head of Larian Studios count as a businessman? If so, that's one I would consider good for the company AND the consumers
Also you can tie it directly to Jobs, because when he was gone for a bit, apple fuckin tanked, and then he came back and they came out with the iPod.
That's not an accident.
Yeah, Steve Jobs was definitely an asshole, and he didn't personally design any of his products, but he did know what direction to move things in and what consumers wanted in a phone. He was the first to put a truly usable portable touchscreen computer into our pockets with a phone in it, and every phone nowadays is basically just a reimagined, upgraded version of the first iPhone. The way we communicate is forever changed because of the iPhone.
But yeah iPhone's are kind of the pinnacle of "how much can we fuck you over before you notice" now. All because of the little Apple on the back of the phone.
There is a story that the concept of touchscreen phones was stolen from a Nokia engineer who tried to get nokia to produce them but the feature was dismissed as a 'gimmick'.
I could believe that too tbh
He didn't know what customers wanted in a phone.
He knew what customers would want in a phone when they were taught about its existence.
The customers had no idea they would want it before he showed it to them.
Jesus I'm no Elon fan but how many companies do you have to take from a couple million to hundreds of billions before you're good at your job?
What is it with modern society and the need to reduce everything about a person just because they're a POS? He might be evil but he's clearly pretty good at being a businessman or you wouldn't even know his name.
But… he literally isn't. Like just look at twitter, he has ruined it from day one with bad decisions day after day whose impacts haven't shown directly, but now appear more and more with embarrassing effects (The verification badge which is now worthless and has been used to impersonate people and cooperations, the two factor authentification which stopped working, the self-DDOSing, the maximum amounts of tweets one could view per day, the old tweets that got deleted due to a glitch, etc.)
And in other companies it's mostly other people managing the stuff and cleaning up the mess he leaves; especially SpaceX is currently just glad that he isn't too busy with his X playtoy to bother them.
The only thing you may call him somewhat successful in is making out companies that have a potential so he could get into them early and claim their success.
Elon is (maybe was) very much good at what he does. Twitter is a bad example because that whole shit show was a dick measuring content from the get-go.
Fact is, SpaceX wouldn't be SpaceX and Tesla sure as fuck would not be Tesla without his leadership.
He's a piece of shit as a person, and I'd never want to work for him, because his work ethic is unhealthy to say the least (and I personally have a pretty extreme work ethic), but it's schoolyard nonsense to claim he's somehow bad at business. Leading a business may be the one thing he is good at. It's tossing shit just to toss shit.
You can not like him and acknowledge he is good at things.
You're right, it wouldn't; it would almost certainly be a better company.
Musk got Tesla where it is financially entirely through blatant fraud. "Earning" the company's absurd valuation based almost entirely on dishonest promises of releasing a technology that is entirely unachievable, undesirable, and dangerous is an unsustainable business model, and it's already showing cracks.
The fact that you seem to think that being highly profitable through constant ethical violations in every aspect of the company is to viewed as a succsess is honestly pretty gross.
I live in the real world, in which the Tesla turnaround happened before the self driving shit
It's a completely different business vertical. Running a government rocketship contract or vehicle manufacturer isnt the same as software development or social media. Plus he's made so many decisions that are laughably stupid to the layman that it almost seems like he's tanking it purposefully.
Businesses aren't all the same and the same type of person can't run all of them. It's like asking your heart doctor to give you a urologists opinion.
Tesla started with almost nothing, SpaceX was his from the ground up. I'm not certain how much of Paypal was his but something tells me he was in management there too.
No one's claiming he developed the Tesla Model 3, or engineered the landing system of the Dragon boosters himself. He has been in charge of the people who have though, and he seems to be doing well enough of a job to keep those companies going.
So he's not good at managing a social media platform specifically, if he's actually trying and this isn't just a long con to destroy the site for some other end goal.
Being a succsessful businessman does not make one a good businessman. Half of the equation is ethics, because it fucking matters.
A successful businessman with bad ethics and an unsuccsessful one with good ethics are both bad businessmen.
The only good businessman is one who both succeeds and has good ethics.
While he has had some success, he's also demonstrably been a glory hog benefiting from crazy good luck.
He had an Internet company during the first dot com boom. He got a bunch of cash from Compaq for effectively nothing, because businesses had to snap up anything vaguely Internet. Right place at right time, basically won a lottery.
So then he founded an Internet bank. But want allowed to lead it, no matter, either way it was overshadowed by PayPal, which was a runaway success. Somehow he managed a merger with him being put in charge of the joint company. Then he almost tanked it and was put aside to salvage the company. However, he managed to be popularly thought of as "the PayPal guy"
He founded SpaceX. Off the top of my head, that one seems fair enough.
Then you have Tesla, which existed prior to him Knowing about it, yet he still insisted on being called a founder. It's possible that without him, Tesla wouldn't have gone far, but either way, he's been a glory hog about it to the point of again getting himself framed as "the" Tesla guy.
Also in the case of Tesla, it was a company entering a market with virtually zero competition. Compare the available fully electric cars of 2013-4 and take a wild guess as to which consumers were drooling over: the one that looks like an actual car or ones that screams "eco-friendly toy" (Mitsubishi i, Nissan Leaf)?
Just like how Elon did not design his rockets, SpaceX engineers did, Steve did not design the iPhone, Apple engineers did.
Also everyone seems to conveniently forget about the factory workers actually building them.
Jobs insisted on removing the keypad from a smartphone. He didn't make the multitouch display, but he did force app developers to take it seriously.
The iPhone didn't originally have apps other than basic ones that shipped with the phone, like Safari, YouTube, calculator, etc...
People hacked the first gen to run things like an NES emulator. Apple promptly shut that down and introduced the app store.
I don't hate Jobs for that, but I despise almost every other fucking company panicking in order to copy that shit. Blackberry keyboards were great stuff in the early 2010s.
I feel like he had a part in the first apple. Wozniac did the work but Jobs sold it. Selling and marketing are not easy and a different skill set. I'd be curious what Wozniac has to say about it though.
Not only Jobs managed to sell, he managed to sell way above cost. Apple became synonymous with premium features, even when it was clearly lagging behind the competition in terms of raw power (late 80's) or offering sub par experiences.
He was a visionary who was able to see the applicability of new technology, and was able to force his will for better than the standard upon people who would otherwise have thought the improvements impossible. The guy was a fucking jerk, that's true, but he also completely changed the world with his vision. To say he was nothing more than a Musk, or a thief, is to be disingenuous.
Which is a fucking shame, because his vision sucked for the most part. "Less power to the consumers, let them grovel for our products; You can only use our products the way we demand you to; Fuck repairability, buy new; Fuck keyboards"
Gonna have to learn how to necromance if you wanna keep sucking that dick.
What things did he do?
He invented the rounded rectangle, all hail
There's also the flat mouse
Jobs insisted on selling a touchscreen-only smartphone. Turns out, he was right on that one.
But like, he didn't design or build it himself. His company did.
So by that logic he's still the same as Musk, who insisted on a mass-market EV car or reusable rockets.
It wasn't even his company, they stole the concept from another company. The home button also wasn't an apple original. The "sum of the parts" was the "original" thing
He was also right about not supporting Flash on the iPhone. People wanted to crucify him for that, but better video and web standards came about because of it, and we're all better off living in a world without Flash.
He was a world-class jump-ropesman, for one
This sells Musk short. He is making smart entrepreneurial decisions for the most part. I hate the monkey testing controversy though.
Tru
Didn't Musk start SpaceX? That's, at least, one thing. Too bad he can't stick to it.
No, he bought it from others and made them sign a contract letting him claim he's the original founder.
Start? Nope.
Woah; that's just so wildly inaccurate; I have no idea what to even say.
Are you really saying Jobs was a transphobic right-wing extremist whose father got super rich and helped him to just buy into uprising companies without really doing anything by himself?
He did father a child he denied to the day he died, intentionally screwed Woz out of his fair share of the apple fortune, killed himself by treating cancer with quackery. Jobs is probably more self made, but that's about it.
I just gave you some pretty major differences. To me, most things that defines Musk as the horrible person he is aren't true for Jobs. Again: The extremist position, transphobia, the fact that he bought into his companies and didn't actually invent these things and made these breakthroughs by himself (which is just not true for Jobs, even if you have reasons to not like him), that he just got his money by his father's mine and hasn't made such successes by himself, etc. All of that doesn't apply to Jobs.
Those things you mention are just… cases of him doing awful stuff; most of them not even related to Musk in any way. But if "he did awful stuff" is enough to set him on the same layer as Musk, then he is also "the same person" as a good share of all people living.
He did not deny her until the day he died. She even lived with him during highschool, and he named a computer after her, even though he made up a bogus acronym to pretend that wasn't his motivation.
Woz was worth $500m at one point and is worth $100m today. It's not like he was cut out of the game, he just wasn't interested in money or success the way Jobs was. Without Jobs drive for success, Woz would never have shared his inventions with anyone, it was just a private hobby to him.
Steve was definitely an asshole, but there are plenty of valid criticisms to levy at him, you don't need to misrepresent anything.
You really buy that? That's some bullshit someone says when they got fucked over and know they'll lose and come out worse if they try to get what's rightfully theirs.
Woz himself has said as much. The guy has more money than he'll ever be able to spend. He's fine.
That's why I said:
Don't get me wrong, I don't give a shit about the contentedness of any of these treasure hoarding shitdragons, but there never has been and never will be a person who is fine with getting ass fucked out of hundreds of millions of dollars. Even Muskrat is throwing an endless tantrum and fucking up people's lives over a bad deal, even though he did it to himself on purpose.
Hi, you don't know me... but for a single hundred million dollars, you can ass fuck me out of as many hundreds more as you want.
Sounds like a deal.
Not to stand up for jobs, but from what I've seen of woz, I can totally believe he wouldn't see more money as worth the bother. From what I've seen: If you're making 36k a year, your are obsessed with opportunities to get more, no matter who you are. Your life is financially difficult and any chance to overcome that is worth it.
If you are making 200k a year, you start seeing different sorts of folk.
Some will not stop until that number is as big as it can be. Their lives will be consumed by that as a "high score"
Some care less about money and more about titles and conspicuous status symbols, like a coveted office.
Some are happy to just do their work the way they like without having to worry about the money anymore, or to work on hobbies and afford to walk away from working.
I know folks that are 200k as "bird in the hand" money and chasing bigger numbers is worth considering, but they are more concerned about risk to their perceived status or working conditions than pay.
Take one of those last sort of folk, get them to tens of millions of wealth and they are likely happy to just stop thinking about the money, even if it means they are sonetimes the chump as a result.
That's true, he was not nearly as bad as Musk. I was mainly talking about how he's a general asshole who steals from others and is revered by techbros. I was maybe being a bit hyperbolic in my comparison.
I don't necessarily agree with that, but I get this point (in contrast to how you phrased it before), so fair I guess.
But just one thing:
did he ever reconcile with his kid? hard to imagine just ignoring your own child like that...
Who, Elon or Steve? /s
Oh he died soon enough.
Even the iPhone itself was just a more advanced version of a PDA or other handheld PC device that existed years before it. Logically, phones would have advanced similarly with or without Apple.
To be fair, Apple had a PDA, the Newton, back in 1993... Not that it was the 1st again...
I had one called the iPaq.
Apple has since then made it illegal to trademark products starting with "i". Irony.
iRony.
"Irony", its probably what the "I" stands for.
KkI wouldn't even say the iphone was more advanced than what came before it haha.
I still have 2 fully functioning Palm TX devices from 20 or so years ago, they were released mid 2005 while iPhone was June 2007 I think?
Looking back, I cannot fathom (aside from marketing) how apple beat palm in that market.
Here are the specs, keep in mind the TX was released several years before the original iPhone Ram: Palm TX: 128 Mb iPhone: 128Mb Screen palm TX: 480×320 iPhone 480×320 Processor TX: 312Mhz iPhone 416 Mhz
So, for a 3 year or so delay, the original iPhone imo still doesn't completely dwarf the TX, but I'm also not through as there are plenty of features that the TX had but the iPhone lacked.
The TX was also touch screen (I find it much more responsive) and was meant for a stylus instead of fingers. To this day, I still love writing and drawing on the TX. Oh, and the stylus fits neatly into the TX on the right side. Also, it has a nice little replaceable flip cover for the screen.
But that's not all, it has an SD card slot for expandable storage, something the iPhone omitted.
It also has wifi 302.11b support and Bluetooth as well, yes, Bluetooth in 2005 and it was very easy to activate and use.
But no, that's not all, it also had an IR transmitter/receiver! Something the iPhone helped to kill. Those things were underrated!
They made the TX the perfect universal remote! I had a program on the TX that listed every T.V/DVD/VCR/Cable etc. Manufacturer you could imagine, you'd just select the manufacturer for the device you wanted to control, aim the TX at it and bam, you had control.
This helped me a lot as essentially I could control almost any device I could see. Lost remote for the DVD player? TX got you. It wasn't just for t.v's and whatnot though, many things run on IR and I miss when smart devices supported it.
Ah, and I'm still not done, the TX had BUTTONS. Actual factual buttons. Not only was it 100% touch screen, but it had 4 buttons and a directional pad with another button in the middle iirc.
Those buttons made it great for emulation and I believe I had a snes emulator on it though that may have just been Nes, either way, the buttons were much more fun to play with than touch screen, it made the device actually feel.. made for what you were using it to do.
In fact, everything on the device felt made for what you were doing, and not just an afterthought. It came preloaded with plenty of useful apps. A web browser that was even YouTube capable for one, which in 2006 or so when I got the TX blew my mind, YouTube in my Palm?
Maybe I went a little overboard in this comment but my point is, damn, some more competition may have been nice.
Oh, and one last thing, My TX devices still run like the day I got them, hell, the battery life is insane as well. I left one on for at least 2 weeks and it still had power last I checked. How many original iPhones that were opened in 2007 are still running? Heck, even an iPhone 5 from 2012, how many of those are still up and running?
Yet my 2005 TX runs just the same as it always did. It's insane to look at a device from 2005 and feel like in 2023 we should be taking notes, but we should.
Our devices won't last that long on standby today because they're filled with bloatware processes that refuse to stop running. The TX powers up instantly after it's been sitting for days and will be on 99% battery. My modern smart phone will kill its own battery within a day or two, tops, just sitting on my desk without me touching it.
Palm needs to make a comeback. Devices with SD, IR, buttons, built in stylus etc. Should as well.
Oh, and the OS was perfect. Calendar, web, paint etc, an Aux jack, these little things were and still are badass. If it wasn't for the limited capability due to not being able to access the web like before I'd probably still use them daily.
But I'd never use an original iPhone daily, they just aren't good for anything that I can't do with any other device.
Not that I'm anti IPhone as I realize my comment seems, don't get me wrong I do prefer androids for my uses but iPhones aren't too shabby either. Top notch hardware, all of their devices sharing the same hardware also mean their apps tend to be better optimized and more reliable, etc. They're dependable, reliable devices but.. my Palm from 20 years ago can do things no iPhone can, like still run after 2 decades, control IR devices, have an SD card inserted etc.
The closest thing I've had to a TX was an LG Stylo 6, and for it's day if was a decent device but the screen cracked in my pocket within a year and the battery life had shortened significantly. I was carrying around mophies and chargers like nobody's business. My TX though? 2 decades without even a scratch that I can see on either of the 2 that I own, and when I'm using it the battery almost seems limitless as I can go for quite some time using it without seeing that 99% battery drop a digit.
I know we've changed battery types a time or two since then but can't help but wonder how are modern batteries are so unreliable in comparison? Planned obsolescence is a factor, surely because I'm seeing a year or so tops before major performance reduction with these lithium ions of late. Whereas the TX still outlasts them 20 years later,
Just love my old tech and wish it were updated! I'd love a new palm device built as well as the TX was.
It wasn’t an entirely new concept but it completely redefined what it could be. Look up what Android looked like until the iPhone was demoed.
HTC Dream with Android.
What was your point again?
iPhone was announced January 2007 and released in June. The phone you’re linking to was released September 2008.
What was your point again?
Yeah that’s exactly it. This phone was a reaction to the original iPhone. I was there
Doesn’t look like a black rectangular piece of glass to me. I think the point they were making was that there was a design paradigm shift when the iPhone came out.
Floating apps. And split screen. I was playing Pokemon Go with reddit open in the corner in 2017 and it was old then. I dunno when iOS got it, but it's recentish.
Copy muthafuckin paste. That was a laugh, listening to explanations of why you didn't need it, until they "invented" that too.
Neither floating apps nor split screen were ever released for iOS. Split screen was added a while ago for iPadOS, but floating apps (Stage Manager) was released just last year.
Wait, floating apps as in being able to keep an app in the corner (like YouTube) when I'm using another app primarily right? iOS just got that?
It's definitely old for Android as I can remember it being a thing for at least 5 years, and before that it was P-I-P "Picture in Picture" even on old CRT t.v's with cable boxes lol. My old "Web TV" setup had PIP and was already old when I got it in the early 2000's
No, that has been a feature for years on iOS and iPadOS. I’m talking about movable apps, like a desktop, a feature many android phones have. Only iPadOS has this feature to date.
Oh okay, I'm late to the party on that and actually had to Google it. I've just been using split screen for that purpose haha
This happens the other way too FWIW
Genuinely curious, what did iOS have first that Android then adopted? Not doubting at all just curious as to what
This is sort of hard to answer because of the number of varieties of Android from different vendors could have things that weren’t in core Android but some user will be like I had a Samsung phone in 2012 that did that or something, so I’ll just base my answers on Android core.
Notification badges were a big one I wanted on Android that iOS had done since the beginning. You could sorta have them with nova launcher for a while, but it wasn’t as good. Eventually Android came around, I think?
I think the ability to swipe up and navigate opened apps also existed in iOS long before Android, though I think Samsung may have copied it shortly after, as they do with most solid iOS innovations.
iOS’s privacy controls have always been better than Android’s, though that’s not super surprising given Google’s market is advertising, Android did eventually try to add granular privacy controls but it feels lacking compared to iOS.
Also screen recording, is it even in Android yet? It’s been in iOS forever.
There’s a lot more than that, but reading any Android community and you’d think that the copying only happened one way.
Haha I agree with that actually, I'm an Android fan but don't see the issue with all the copying. If iPhone users want it and we have it, why can't they? Also, conversely, if there's an iOS feature that I don't yet have so what if I finally get it?
I can't too much understand being all too competitive about this. plus, comparing them is apples to oranges. Apple, who I actually used to work for 😂 is one company making one device.
Android? Anyone can make one, anyone can make apps for them. Of COURSE we're going to get some features first.
And yes, you're also right, depending on the manufacturer some Android devices have had features we're just now getting today many, many years ago but as we're not consolidated into one company sometimes they're forgotten or omitted from later Android barebones cores.
Screen sharing being one of those things lol. I've had it on a few devices throughout the years but probably couldn't pinpoint the device as I've switched between Google, Motorola, LG etc. And also try more 3rd party stuff than most. I believe the first time I saw it native was OS10 or whatever it's called as that was my last phone, a Motorola Ace something from Verizon.
Good phone btw! Had some badass features that iOS most likely doesn't have yet, like can you flick your wrist twice to activate the camera instantly anytime for quick shots? Or can you shake it twice to activate the flashlight?
However, the fucking cameras on that thing were awful. Advertised as 48Mp but really just a 12, 2 and 16 megapixel camera strapped to the back. Why? Because not Apple. With an iPhone you know that you're getting something consistent with great hardware. Some of the androids I get may have a feature or two that iOS doesn't yet have, but I also miss out sometimes and have to pay for that feature in other ways because androids are the wild west of smartphones.
Love my androids for my personal needs, freedom and the price but can definitely get why iPhones work better for some.
Also, yes the privacy shit is insane on these devices. I constantly have to fight to keep it from spying and sending reports about my usage to anyone that will listen.
Fun fact: Android is older.
Technically correct, but it was originally aimed at Blackberry. https://www.pcworld.com/article/464050/original_android_prototype_revealed_during_google_oracle_trial.html
Apple pioneered a moderately useful mobile browser and fully touch screen UI (except for the home button).
They've been copying each other ever since, to the point where I watch the WWDC keynote thinking "they didn't already have THAT!?" most of the time.
More like Apple copies an android feature that is more than a decade old then claims it as some kind of innovation.
slaps a buzzword on it and makes a trillion. Can't believe some iphone users consider widgets modetn
My old boss would always buy the new IPhone the day it came out and brag about features and a lot of the times I would be scratching my head being like how is that different then what I have on my 4 year old android Galaxy 6??
They just got widgets? Widgets have been on Android since my first smart phone in 2011 at the very least
Now they do, but the iPhone was revolutionary when it was released. Apple literally changed the world with their invention.
A lot of people forget the early days.
Android had copy/paste first, Apple didn't for a long time.
Android had MMS support first, Apple didn't for a long time.
Android had multi tasking apps first, apple didn't for a long time.
Android allowed app store apps to duplicate inbuilt apps, like web browsers, music players, email clients. Apple banned these for a long time.
I remember having to jailbreak my iPhone 3GS to have swipe down toggles we now know as normal today. It was called SB settings from cydia. I'm pretty sure this was also standard on Android. And file manager.
Android was a poor comparison when iPhone first released. I had one of them. It was neat because it was new, but realistically it was a piece of shit compared to the iPhone. I'm no Apple fan boy, but they genuinely changed the world in many ways
When iPhone first released... it was a piece of shit compared to the HTC Dream with Android. The main improvement Apple did, was removing the keyboard.
If there were slide qwerty phones I'd still be buying them to this day.
I miss them so much. Those, and IR transmitters being common, That's a major one to me. Almost 20 years ago, I had control of every single T.V, DVD player, VCR, etc. That came my way thanks to the palm TX, it had IR and a nice little app where you'd just choose the make/model of the device you're trying to control and bam, your screen became the remote you needed. Iirc the buttons also could be used so you didn't necessarily have to do everything touch screen.
Now on my super fancy modern smart phone I couldn't dream of doing that. Hell, I even struggle to use it as a remote for my Roku because I use my device as a hotspot and Roku requires both devices be on the same network. Why can't we figure out how to do what we did so easily 2 decades ago?!
Android was not aimed at blackberry. It was to be a completely new phone OS from the ground up and add extensive capabilities to the phone world over what the blackberry (the most popular phone at the time) could. Yes the G1 had a similar form factor to the most popular phone at the time and it wasn't even the only form. The phone in the picture was from prototype stage and never shipped in that form factor. The shipping go had a screen and button under it. The screen slid sideways to reveal a keyboard. The Motorola droid was the most popular android phone when they actually shipped. I had a droid and a coworker had a G1. Development problems and companies scared to gamble on a radical new product delayed Androids launch behind iPhones. Apple did a fantastic job of developing the iPhone in secret, knowing the Android was coming.
Something something Xerox
Found the commenter who is old enough to retire
I think every nerdy person knows about it though. Gates and Jobs have a pretty famous exchange over it.
Retirement? In this economy?
Fucking wish I could retire
You can... maybe not for long, and not out of the streets, but technically anyone can "retire" at any moment...
If it's not final, it's not retiring. Pretty sure "comfortably" is implied as well.
Y’all need to watch pirates of Silicon Valley
It's like the Halloween 3 of the Pirates franchise: pretty good but quite a departure for the series. Notably, neither Captain Sparrow nor Captain Stagnetti make an appearance at all - amongst many other differences.
Amazing review, and shockingly accurate. Well done.
He meant "photostat" though.
If you're not in the know, google "a neighbor named xerox gates jobs"
Dig an inch and you realize woz has more tech talent in his left pinky than jobs ever did.
Eli5 about it? Please?
I think this captures the highlights of the issue.
https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-answers-reddit-question-about-copying-steve-jobs-2017-3
Haha, I like this part:
I half expected you to just say “Google it”
Thanks man I appreciate it
Here are the stats nowadays. Just to make Steve Jobs roll in his grave, once again! 😂
Those are weird stats lumping in phone OSes with desktop/notebook OSes.
while excluding other types of computer like embedded devices, servers and whatnot
If you include servers and embedded devices Linux is gonna go brrrr
And if you count Android and ChromeOS as
androidLinux, which I guess they are (though bastardised somewhat), it's an absolute bloodbath.I think you meant "if you count Android and ChromeOS as Linux"
Ooof you're right, thanks. These nightshifts I'm working have my brain in a mess! Corrected
Since we are doing a big mix of everything why not throw there Minix that resides on all Intel chips?
There's also the fact that there's no source for the chart. Why is there an unknown category there? Why is it different from other in this context?
I'd guess unknown means whatever was used to record this information couldn't determine the os (so it's probably linux lol), whereas the other category is probably BSD and the like.
Just a guess though, I have no idea
the unknown is BEOS.
I liked BeOS for what it was.
Clearly it's TempleOS.
Considering how many people use a phone as their primary computing device now, it makes sense to me.
I think hed be pretty happy with that! That 13% may be less, but its all from 1 manufacturer or brand. They dont need to share a piece of the pie!
Android4Life! But come on, give up that graph that combines mobile + desktop operating systems! They are totally, completely different and should be kept separate. But only based on who buys them, who uses them, who supports them, customer vs corporate customers, etc...
Only 1% for Linux? Come on, all of Android is Linux!
I like that "unknown" is OSX's biggest competitor
Did he forget about windows mobile pda phones that predated the iPhone? I had one of these before the iPhone was a thing: https://m.gsmarena.com/o2_xda_iis-933.php
I miss when devices came with infrared transmitters.. Also it had a mini sim & built-in Bluetooth/wifi at that time, wow.
Xiaomi phones still come with infrared, mostly used to control TVs, fans, AC units, etc.
He was just Salty 🧂.
iPhone undeniably brought the technology forward by years, even if only in terms of software. I don't even like iOS, but it seems disingenuous to compare iPhone to those, or the Samsung tablets, or anything that came before it.
Here in the UK it took over 3 years, after the initial release of the iPhone, for it to even support MMS messaging. Most people around me had Blackberries until Apple actually gave reason for them to consider switching, which took years. It was largely considered to be like the iPods before it: focused on the fashion/'cool' aspect of it.
I would not say they brought technology forward, and I'd go as far as to say the strive to bring forward functionalities of the iPhones improved after Jobs (I understand this is a hot take and may result in downvotes, just my opinion based on local experience).
While apple did improve the design, they mostly made it “cool”. Before that they were “nerd” phones. The Motorola V3 was a “cooler “phone at the time until the iPhone came out.
I’m with you, but it seems like this post got taken over by passionate haters
Lol haters. Can't really blame ppl for saying fanboy if talk like that.
You post a hateful quote and ppl nuance it. Doesn't seem that bad.
Why does this asshole live rent free in all your heads? I never hear Apple fanboys bitch about that creep Andy Rubin.
Because his company was (and continues to be) a powerful force acting against consumer rights.
He was also a self absorbed asshole that's still idolized for some reason.
People like people like them.
Your first question is fair, but Apple fans don't know who that is.
99% of android fans don't know him either
It's almost like Android fans are fans of the OS and the features it provides instead of who made it.
Also true.
fortunately our mobile OS manufacturer operates the most widely used search engine - so it's a triviality to find the answer
Almost nobody knows who that is!
Man all this money in the bank and still ranting like a loser. Mfer his company steals all product ideas from other companies right from VR headsets to features from Android and then he says this. Innovate harder bitch 🤣🤣
What are you talking about? He’s dead.
I know. Sorry English is not my first language but i meant everything i said.
At least normal billionaires pretend to be fans of free markets where competition keeps prices in check. Steve Jobs was just honest enough to admit he's a piece of shit
He says great artist steal then says he wants to destroy android for stealing? Like he did anything but hype shit up on stage
He hates artists
It's a good example of how people's morals vary greatly based on their present situation, rather than being some kind of deeply held, unchanging foundation. What people believe is good and bad is largely a function of where they happen to be at the moment.
Yeah Android might have copied IOS. But why not. Android would have been developed any way sooner or later. It is based on Linux. And that is open sourced.
It only took a year for Android to be released after iOS. How long has it taken China to come up with a competing operating system? I'm pretty sure Google was working somewhat in parallel to Apple.
The first iPhone was released in 2007. Android development started in 2003, with the first pitches to phone manufacturers in 2005. So yeah, Android wasn't merely a copy of iPhone.
The timeline is technically correct but misleading, and please google what Android looked like prior to the iPhone announcement. While you're there, might also want to check out the technical differences like iPhone prioritizing things like animation and user interaction. Wouldn't also hurt to check out the first, say, 1-4 Android devices compared to literally just the first iPhone and tell us which one our phones look like today. Also, do we think that Apple was just like "here's a new OS we made over winter break?" They announced in '06. Android was developed probably at a similar time, bought by Google, and then had to pivot hard after iPhone announcement, and harder still after hardware actually got into customer hands.
The replies throughout this entire post are incredible. You are exactly right, yet downvoted for it.
In many way iOS had copied android and sometimes they did it late (multitasking, ...)
If I remember correctly, android was already under development, but huge changes were made after the iPhone came out.
Android was close to being released, but it was going to be much more like a BlackBerry, with a keyboard focus. They delayed the release to retool it somewhat with more of a touch focus.
"somewhat" is doing a lot of work here. I mean, they didn't re-write the kernel, but you can google example of the UI pre and post iPhone announcement.
Just about every invention is obvious in hindsight. Take a look at what Android looked like pre-iPhone announcement and then post.
Maybe he should have said "The best artist is the one with the best lawyer."
rofl. apple stole their gui from xerox, so I guess he knew how it worked.
still failed, rather epically
Apple, with the iphone, did pioneering capacitive touch screen and biometric. Android brought smartphone to the mass and trigger the stupid camera war.
Apple-Fanboii-Checklist:
Nice try though, have been an android user all my life and only own one ipad. Typical stupid online generalization.
Too late, you already angered the android extremists. Come at me haters
All hail the little robo dwarf trashcan thing that is supposed to be an Android while looking nothing like a human!
I’ve never seen someone shit and vomit so hard into a 5 point list before. Congrats on that one, go grab some water.
Cool username by the way. What’s the origin? Sounds awfully a lot like a specific slur I know of. A trolls MO certainly would line up with whatever your shit post of a comment was.
What...the....fuck?!
More riveting conversation, what a surprise.
"riveting conversation" eh?
Watch the completely uncalled for aggression you spewed towards a silly little post about brand fanboiis. Insults followed by attacks, followed by calling me racist for my nickname. This is pathetic and nothing more. You may believe you dealt some sort of blow to me and "win" or something, yet the only thing you did is flail around like an angry child.
All this aggression against a post that was meant to tease someone, which you might have noticed had you read my other post 3 answers down.
Even if there was a conversation to be had about Android vs iOS or the like (there is none, everyone should use their hard earned money to buy whatever is the best products for them and that's it), even if you made some interesting point somewhere in that ball of hatred you call "conversation", I'd not engage with that point since the tone you set is not worth my - or everyone else's - time.
Not reading that wall of text, know damn well it equates to I don’t have anything intelligent to contribute to this convo and I am a troll.
Textbook.
Okay, shorter then: your bio asked me to point you there if you were "unduly rude or disrespectful" , so here we go:
@stevedidWHAT
Edit: corrected quote and link
I'll admit that I made a rash judgement call on your personality based off a stupid comment and thats ignorant, unfair, and not the kind of person I wanna be.
Your 5th point however is what tipped my judgement - that didn't read like a tease to me and, specifically, read like you were accusing someone of calling android companies derrogatory names when they hadn't done anything close to that. It read like you were trying to paint them like some snobbish asshole, which this person was nowhere near in their response. (See your 3rd point as well.)
I apologize for the rash judgement of your character and that alone.
Refer to your bio for being unduly rude
Keyword being unduly
Dude tried to shit on someone with nonsense, I responded, albeit irked, with points and logic and all I got back was “huuuh” “whaaat” “I’m not gonna talk” which is classic troll bs as we’ve all seen on the rise, and called it out. I take that rule seriously (thanks for looking through) so I would like to talk about this in specifics if possible. What specifically did I say that was rude/uncalled for?
The "stupid camera war" killed the amount of UFO and ghost sightings, while increasing the sightings of meteors and police brutality, so not all that stupid.
Motorola PDA's form 1999 already had it. I was playing jawbreaker instead of working back in 2001.
You're too young for the stance you want to take. Let the adults talk.
Give the credit where its due. Android was designed to be used on a device similar to BlackBerry (Sooner), the success of the first iPhone made them switch to a touch design from the ground up. Your Motorola didn't start any trend. That's why I use the word "pioneering". Use shit just to claim "first" without making any major impact is called "gimmick", like the 2k screen on my old LG G3 (hate it).
Empty barrel truly make the most noise.
👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻
Jsyk I downvoted not because you’re necessarily wrong but because you were a dick when the other dude hadn’t even engaged in anything like that
Not very cash money of u fren