Steve Jobs dubs Google's 'don't be evil' motto 'bulls**t' Steve Jobs has dubbed Google's "don't be evil" mantra "bullshit." Or at least "a load of crap." According to multiple reports, Jobs unloaded on Google last week during an Apple "town hall" meeting at the company's One Infinite Loop headquarters. As originally reported by Wired, the Apple cult leader attacked his former …
I don't think Google want to "kill" the iPhone, they just are after their share. Maybe they want to be dominant but I'm sure Nokia, HTC, Samsung, etc. all want this and that's the basis of competition, no?
As for Adobe Flash, it seems the Mac must have real issues. Flash hasn't even crashed my browser for years, let alone my PC! How can a browser component crash a whole machine? And surely buggy code is the fault of the developer?
"No one will be using Flash...The world is moving to HTML5"
This is well funny given the recent expansion in supported hardware for h/w-accelerated Flash.
Lets see now - I have hardware accelerated flash on an ION-based HTPC which means the HTPC can actually playback the BBC iPlayer (had to get an "i" in there somewhere!) HD* content while consuming a piddling 32W of power. The Wii now does SD Flash video perfectly acceptably. XBox has it, PS3 has it. Its on a shitload of mobiles. Its on some NAS boxes. It is in fact close to becoming ubiquitous :)
Now what's HTML5 going to do for me on my phone/console/htpc? Here's a hint - I don't own an iPhone.
Total fail. If he'd been whinging about Flash even 2 years ago then fine I could sort of understand as it was pretty much only useable on PC. Strange how I've never seen Flash crash a single Windows machine. Ever. The player might crash but the machine doesn't. Must be a mac thing :D
He needs to get a clue. Fast. Not going to happen though.
*what the BBC says is HD anyway - some is, most isn't.
This is a good thing because I think Flash and HTML5 might co-exist which is the best situation for competition and innovation as they both have strengths. Apple's decision provides fuel for HTML5 being established - which is a good thing - Flash needs competition for its own ongoing development, otherwise it becomes complacent. All of your devices you mention could potentially support HTML5 etc. as well as Flash.
Flash is a closed, proprietary bolt-on binary format which 1) makes it less easy to search within, 2) less easy to integrate with the rest of the web page its in and 3) excludes smaller developers innovating with it because of the cost of its tools. All three go against the open-to-all principle of the web. Streaming flash video and audio is unnecessary and superfluous: I don't believe flash itself adds value as to the efficiency of the video codec. The two value adds by Flash here is 1) a large existing de-facto installed base of browsers, backed by a well respected company called Adobe and 2) a cross-platform DRM facility provided by the A.I.R. that is favourable to publishers such as the BBC that want to protect their content (rightly or wrongly). Flash is great for visualisation, training and games with its powerful animated and interactive anti-alisaed vector graphics features.
Meanwhile, open standard plain-text, searchable XML based HTML5, SVG with AJAX and alternative video and audio codecs such as MPEG4 AAC can potentially do the same job as Flash, with sufficient development.
"Apple's decision provides fuel for HTML5 being established"
Unless you figure Jobs taking a stand will make Microsoft finally support HTML5 at any level in any of their browsers, then "Apple" taking a stand does nothing to advance HTML5 in general use, as HTML5 has been supported just fine for a couple of years, without any specific help at all from Steve Jobs' obfuscation.
Microsoft's Internet Explorer is the ONLY browser you have heard of that does not support the basic pool of HTML5 code. Sure there are some trick items that no browser currently supports, as usual with new standards, but MSIE supports *none* of it, unlike any browser made using Gecko or the WebKit base (Firefox, Safari, Opera, etc, etc.)
There might eb a lot of "hardware accelerated" flash out there, but that only means for flash APPS and basic flash video. Video files like Hulu uses are encrypted flash, and rely on Java applets as well as flash code to run, and take significantly more horsepower as well. You will NOT be able to watch hulu on Flash accelerated phones and tablets, not in this fashion, and not without FULL multitasking (above and beyond what even Android allows, including hot loading one app from within another). This practice of DRM is one major reason why flash violates so many security rules, and given Adobe's lazy programmers and lack of vision, it;s no wonder it;s one of the least stable and most insecure applications in history.
i have flash nowhere near my stuff. I have it on one PC only for the sites I'm occasionally sent to for business that don't have non-flash versions.
HTML5, webkit, java, and I hate to say it but Silverlight, all have Flash in their sites.
Realy, what the.. That was uncalled for for using a c rather than a k. I'm not a mac lover and not a yank. What the hell was that insult for? Did your mummy not breast feed you or something? Fuck off back to 4chan and leave the real discussion to the adults.
Well at least we know who has been going around down voting even the most innocuous anti mac comments.
No, it was *entirely* called for! I'm not a "yank" either BTW. I'll quote your original post:
> "And stop crying in to your coolaid Jobs. Welcome to the real world where people don't just do what you say."
Funnily enough, I don't recall Jobs ever telling anyone what to do -- even in these town hall meetings. He expressed and opinion, which he is entitled to, just like you and me. To my knowledge, no-one has ever been threatened by an agent or employee of Apple to do anything. Jobs was calling at as he saw it. Was he right? Well, yes! Adobe are fucking lazy! I've been using their products for about 20 years and I've seen them grow and get progressively worse! Are you also claiming that Googles "Don't be evil"(tm) mantra isn't bullshit? Hey, Apple and Jobs are no saints, but come on! I'm sure that Larry and Sergey think just as highly as Jobs! But you commentards seem to take this all way too personally and way too seriously! I'll repeat myself (and I HATE having to do that), but more explicitly. If you are going to jump on a bandwagon and not really add to the discussion, have the decency to get the insult right, sunshine! It ain't that fuckin' hard! As you are blatantly a n00b at all of this flame stuff, here's the history, just for you! The product being quoted is "Kool-Aid". It is a reference to the Jonestown cult which commited mass suicide on the orders of "Reverend" Jim Jones by drinking poisoned Kool-Aid (apparently fact fans it was actually Flavor-Aid). Now, if you are going to wantonly through insults around, however innocuos they may be, be prepared to get it back, and sometimes worse. It's nearly as bad as when you dick write MAC for Mac computers! For the record, that'd be Media Access Control...
I've got to take umbrage with the "Fuck off back to 4chan and leave the real discussion to the adults." line, as it's not as if you were adding to the discussion in the first place, fucknuckle! It's exactly the sort of bollocks I'd expect to see somewhere like ZDnet! As for "Well at least we know who has been going around down voting even the most innocuous anti mac comments." Personlly I'm anti dickwadery! I REALLY haven't been doing what you suggest, I'm not that sad, but isn't that the point of the up/down vote? To show whether or not you disagree with a comment? Or, ironically, are the people that you'd acuse of being cultist not allowed to disagree with your own brand of hive thinking? What a dick.
EPIC fail for a open web "standard" to contain patent encumbances. HTML5 might be All That and then some, but H.264 has no place in it unless it is free and open.
Getting rid of code-with-issues (Flash etc) is a good thing. Replacing it with code-with-issues (the H.264 codec in some jurisdictions) is not so good. I'll keep my eye on Theora...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H264#Patent_licensing
"We did not enter the search business," Jobs said in reference to Google. "They entered the phone business."
So what? It's a free market, isn't it? (This is a very peculiar outburst to make unless Steve knows something we don't. Maybe there was a gentleman's agreement to keep tanks off lawns.) Maybe Google no longer feel that MS are such a threat that they (Google) have to have alliances with everyone else in the industry. Maybe it's a bit like how Apple and Adobe seem to be spoiling for a fight right now.
'Oooh No! Someones trying to hitch a ride on my technology'
Dont like it Steve? Stop hitching a ride on everyone else's technology and build your own Internet for your customers.
I'm fed up with tossers like Apple, WIndows and Adobe shedding their toxic loads all over the information highway and then sitting there demanding recompense from someone else's low emmission vehicle.
I'm shocked to hear it! That's what I am, SHOCKED!
I bet Adobe were cut to the heart that Youtube now has an HTML5 option as well as Flash. And now Apple's latest fashion accessory is doing the same? Good. I hope HTML5 leaves Adobe back in the dark ages, where they belong. Pull your finger out and write some code that doesn't require a Cray to execute at reasonable speed, Adobe.
And while you're at it, can we have a Creative Suite that will open in less time than it takes to boil the kettle, make coffee, drink it, wash up the mug and wait so long I feel like another one. Thanks.
Mr Jobs, I don't remember Nokia and SE saying you are evil, you don't support Flash because you will loose your stranglehold over what users can run on *your* iPhones, and you sir are a douche!
P.s. I like the look of your iPad, but I'm waiting for the Ubuntu (Cracked) version so I can choose what apps to run, including Flash, if I'm paying money for a computer, I choose what software I run on it, not you.
...But then neither are Apple!
I mean come on, did he really and truly think that he could blow off a bit of steam on this subject and not have it reach the outside world! What?
Well I for one have never believed that Google mantra, does not stop me using their products though. Of course, that is because I do not have to pay to use their search engine, email, photo storage etc., where as Apple, whose products I believe are a total pile of steaming faecal matter, expect me to vastly over pay to use them. And then defend them against those people who have not been ensnared by the cult of Jobs. For in my opinion that is what those products from Cupertino tend to inspire in people who buy and use them, a cult like obsession with Jobs and everything he says and does. Oh and the Nexus One... Yeah that's not great either... And I have serious issues with Android too...
Apple Comcputers vs. Apple Records? That was a trademark issue, and at least at the time -- as has already been noted -- Apple Computers didn't sell music. Did they promise that they never would?
Google's "Don't be evil" IS a load of crap. They proved that themselves when they censored results in China and handed over IP addresses to authorities.
Stevo calling "load of crap" might be the pot calling the kettle black. It's also calling a spade a spade.
Steve/Apple afraid of Google? No more so than any business is, or ought to be, afraid of their competitors.
"Apple Computers didn't sell music. Did they promise that they never would?"
Yes, they did. But it didn't stop them for long; under OS 8 they had a beep sound called "Sosumi", as in "Well, yeah, we promised to stay away from music... Sosumi." Of course, a beep sound is nowhere nearly as egregious a violation as, say, ITMS, right?
St Jobs seems to have been riled that Google is stepping on his toes in territory he reckons he owns, but it goes much deeper than that. It's the capitalist desire to become a sole, monopolistic dominant force with no alternative choice which is the true evil. Most mega-corporations seem to have that goal.
I have no problem with making money, profiteering, nor with proprietary product, but I do have a problem with lack of choice, even if that is with another proprietary manufacturer.
Google IMO are far more evil than Apple and Microsoft. Google seeks to dominate the entire interweb and communications medium from browsing, email, storage through to OS and communication devices and all to generate advertising revenue through profiling. Microsoft would rightly get slammed if they kept copies of everything a user produced, posted it back to Redmond where the data was mined and users were profiled, but Google can do that behind closed doors while hiding behind it's "do no evil" claim. Google is rapidly expanding, running web sites on their own servers ( see other El Reg article ), taking control of ISP email ( Virgin Media and others ), no doubt by offering sweet deals. Expect them to be looking at supermarket store card data, handling ID Cards, national databases, identity and vetting, and so on ( they do have better infrastructure than others ) and once they have PayPal, banking and auction sites captured what more is really left ?
It all looks so innocent, can easily be spun as "it's great for customers", and customers often feel that it is, but no one outside the Chocolate Factory truly knows what Google's full plans are once they've captured the market, and once they have control of 'everything' it will be very hard for any alternatives to emerge or compete.
"Do no evil", my arse.
... that the interesting thing here is that Steve looks like he thinks of Google as more of a threat than Microsoft.
10 years ago, a move to use Windows Live Search on an Apple device would have been unheard of. Now (even if the rumour is untrue), it's seen as a possibility worth the dead-tree press' time to comment on it.
Oh, and for all of the people who want neither Apple nor Google near their devices or personal info (and I count myself amongst them): is this a result of the level of tech packed into a phone/MP3 Player/search engine backend? In order for us to be able to afford this Star Trek-style wizardry it needs to be subsidized by other forms of income, as well as the ticket price.
All of a sudden, Linux is looking more interesting- or, Microsoft isn't looking so awful. A company who makes money from the ticket price and comes with no incidentals or major privacy concerns... Is that going to be the new USP for a chunk of the market?
Could that be the hot tech direction for the 2010's?
I posted this as a reply further up the thread, but think it's probably worth it's own thread:
Competition is good, but it has to be fair competition:
While Apple were developing the iPhone, they had a senior member of Google sitting on their board of directors. Google then went out and, while still having someone on Apple's board of directors, made themselfs into a direct competitor of Apple producing a staggeringly similar product. It is highly unlikely that Apple's board of directors didn't have a large amount of focus on the iPhone project and then in turn that Google didn't have fairly good understandings of the problems and pitfalls Apple had to deal with along the way.
As I understand it, Apple no longer have anyone from Google on their board of directors, but this is a very serious matter, it casts Google in a bad light and while it may be perfectly legal, it does call into question their "don't be evil" and I can see reason for Steve Jobs to be mighty annoyed.
Google: Make something fairly good, subsidise it heavily (through the advertising you can put on it later), price the rest out of the market.
Apple: Make something at best alright, price it as if it's the second coming, rely on the hype machine to ensure it sells like the second coming too.
no evil google icon yet?
This post has been deleted by its author
Don't get me wrong, I use Google services, and I use Apple products (I also use a host of other competing goods and services here, thats not the point). I think what people are missing here, and falling short in making the comparision with, is not that Apple is any more inherintly "Good" than Google (although I have been getting a little antsy with google's growing hunger for handling all your data over the last 12 months). However, I think what is really a dig here, is that unlike MS vs Apple, where they have been competing with each other for quite some time now, made small invasions with each other via software that was compatibile for the others OS, there was never a sense of working partner ship, simply competition (unlike the fanbois, which flamed like they lived on 4chan). Nor was this really the case when Apple moved into the phone market (though they may have indeed poached some patent technology from other phones makers). Here, Google and Apple have been obvious bed fellows, all the while Google, gaining apple support and advertising, suddenly springs out a competing browser, OS, phone OS, and then Phone in a short span of how many months?
It's a fair cop; Google has taken a good advantage where it could, and snagged a pretty nice free ride to an entry position in the smart phone market. I don't think it's about Apple being less threatened by an MS phone than a Google phone - diversity drives innovation (which never sucks), I think it's more a question of how much Apple really got out of the deal, and how long Google had this plan in mind.
Not that of course, Apple, or most other companies are free of stones for this kind of tactic.
Under Snow Leopard with Safari, flash crashing doesn't even affecty the browser, it just dies and all your tabs with flash content get replaced with a blue cubed question mark. Refresh the page and it reloads.
It really is a pig though and desperately needs graphics hardware support to be able to play HD video, which is sorely lacking under the existing Mac release and beta versions.
Lack of hardware acceleration in Flash on the Mac is annoying; Adobe want access to the hardware for H.264 decoding, whereas Apple want Adobe to use the QuickTime API.
As to who is right for the consumer? On Apple's side the hardware abstraction means future compatibility is guaranteed, whereas on Adobe's side they might include hardware H.264 decoding on GPUs that can do it (such as 8600M GT in my MacBook Pro) where Apple choose not to let old hardware support this feature.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
