

Schmidt also expresses frustration with patent wars; disdain for Windows Phone








Eric Schmidt
[Image Source: The Sydney Morning Herald]


II. Former CEO Addresses Criticism, Says Microsoft is no Threat






Comments     Threshold


RE: Interesting, very interesting
By invidious on 12/5/2012 1:35:50 PM , Rating: 3
Copying trade secrets that aren't well protected is not a crime and is not wrong. When Apple allowed the Google CEO to sit on their board they gave away their secrets. Obviously they didn't expect Google to get into the phone market, but legally that is irrelivant.

Copying is not a bad thing, it is a cornerstone of capitalism. It is essential to innovation to allow companies to copy and improve upon each other's work. Copyrights and patents need to be respected, and both Apple and Google have not been good about that.

RE: Interesting, very interesting
By Tony Swash on 12/5/12, Rating: -1
RE: Interesting, very interesting
By Rukkian on 12/5/2012 3:43:51 PM , Rating: 2
I would love to see the proof you have to show that
the Android strategy has been a total failure from the point of view of Google's business, it's still a massive cost centre
. I am not talking about them making more money off apple (as we have all heard from you numerous times), I want to see where you can show that they have lost money on android.

I am not saying you are incorrect, just would like to see your proof, as it does not seem correct from everything I have seen.

By Cheesew1z69 on 12/5/2012 3:53:25 PM , Rating: 5
He doesn't have proof, it's all in his head.

RE: Interesting, very interesting
By Boze on 12/5/2012 4:08:45 PM , Rating: 2
Unethical... but sadly not illegal.

By sprockkets on 12/5/2012 4:45:31 PM , Rating: 1
It IS illegal. The very fact that apple hasn't sued Google over it is proof enough. Heck, he even recused himself when details of the iphone were being discussed at meetings.

Why do you think he had to leave the board of apple? Hint: Cause if he didn't he'd be in trouble with the law, even if apple didn't care.

By BifurcatedBoat on 12/5/2012 5:17:49 PM , Rating: 5
If we are to get into the ethics of copying, then Apple wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Starting with the company name, which Apple lifted from well... Apple. (It's confusing to talk about, since what's now Apple Corps was just Apple back then, while today's Apple was Apple Computer.)

So then Apple and MS both lifted their OS design from Xerox. They got away with it legally, but I guess we're supposedly talking about ethics.

Apple took most of their ideas from others as they were growing in a company, and in Steve's own words, his company was shameless about it.

Even the iPhone design itself, as revealed in the Apple/Samsung trial was Apple's attempt to copy what they thought Sony was making, but without the benefit of a picture to use as a basis point.

So a company is going to talk about the evils of copying, it should be a company that doesn't do it themselves, wouldn't you think? Although, that might be hard to find, since almost all innovations are based on something that came before, and sometimes the improvements are pretty minor.

RE: Interesting, very interesting
By bug77 on 12/5/2012 5:53:13 PM , Rating: 3
...the Android strategy has been a total failure...

Total failure? Having millions of additional devices to show ads on must be a real death-blow to Google's core business.

By CubicleDilbert on 12/13/2012 1:33:18 PM , Rating: 2
Copying trade secrets has always been one od the driving forces of human nature and business. I agree with you.
In the 1850s England was by far the most technologically advanced nation in the world. They kept everything for themselves, sanctioned every bit of information transfer.

So continental Europeans started to work in England to find out their secrets such as production processes, materials, patents and so on.

While England did continue their slow way, Europeans exploited everything in continental markets and quickly surpassed England. Then and only then England began to market their machines and equipment to other nations. But it was already too late. Machines are Made in Germany. Qulity is Made in Germany. That was the fact 50 years later.
One key advantage was that continental Europe didn't care much about patents and scientific ownership. In England it was mostly reserved for the aristocratic upper class. In France, Germany and Italy those trade and science secrets were wide spread immediately among all workers, business men etc.
Competition at its best.

And where is England now and where is Germany?

Apple had a few ideas but after some time their development stalled. Others take over and based on old ideas they improve stuff. That's competitive evolution.

If Apple doesn't change, they go the way of The Wright Brothers. The brothers invented the airplane, got a US patent and kept it all to themselves. In Europe it was replicated and dramatically improved. Wright brothers made history, but others made the business.

