Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Businesses Apple

Apple vs. Google, Who Will Control the iPhone? 213

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the that's-a-good-question dept.
Pieroxy writes "Theiphoneblog carries a nice article on the reason Apple rejected the Google Voice application even though it doesn't violate any terms and services. The article goes in depth over the issue of controlling the hardware (Apple) vs. controlling the software (Google & Apple so far) and how Apple doesn't want Google to take over a critical part of its phone. Just like Google is going into the OS business to make sure it never gets cut out, Apple is also building a huge data center to — they guess — take over some online cloud computing business of their own and be less dependent on Google for these services."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple vs. Google, Who Will Control the iPhone?

Comments Filter:
  • Equally Bad Logic. (Score:4, Informative)

    by nato10 (600871) on Monday August 24, 2009 @10:24AM (#29172879)

    The TechCrunch rebuttal to the points of Apple's letter is spot on, but the idea that somehow Google has power over the iPhone, or that Google Voice gives it more power, is nonsense. It's hard to believe Apple really thinks this, or that TechCrunch would accept it as a valid explanation. How does having iPhone users receive calls via their Google Voice number affect the iPhone overall at all? iPhone users still have to use AT&T for their calls? It no longer ties the user strongly to their iPhone phone number, but with number portability that represents no advantage for Apple or AT&T. Having Google manage your calendar and contacts doesn't make any difference to the iPhone in general. Google Voice may give Google more power over individual iPhone users, but not over the iPhone itself.

    And all Apple would have left is the browser? No, Apple would still have the industry's most advanced, user-friendly handheld OS and probably a hundred thousand apps, including--if they turn out to popular enough to be a thread--Google Voice. If Google has any power over the iPhone, it stems only from their willingness to pull a Microsoft and withdraw those apps and technologies from the iPhone at some point in the future, such as when it comes time for Apple and Google to renegotiate their license for YouTube, maps, and search. But the flip side is equally true; there's no question that its to Google's advantage to be a prominent part of the smart phone platform likely to cell hundreds of millions over the next five years.

    In short, I don't think we've heard the real rationale; certainly TechCrunch didn't provide a believable one. I think it's more likely that Apple perceives Google's calendar and contacts apps as a threat to Mobile Me, which does compete directly with Google. Or that Google Voice potentially interferes with something else Apple considers a unique advantage, perhaps something that they aren't even using yet but is in development. And finally, it's possible that Apple really isn't worried about Google Voice per se, but is worried about opening the door to other challenges to their "no duplication of built-in functionality" rule.

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Monday August 24, 2009 @10:48AM (#29173159) Homepage

    For simplicity I like Microsoft media center. For functionality either xbmc or myth. The last two are a pita to setup.

    Wha...What???

    XBMC can be set up faster and easier than you can get the Windows Vista install CD out of the box. XBMC live does it all for you.

    The same for MythTV Mythbuntu does everything but set up the cable provider zipcode.

    If you think for a minute that Windows Media center can even touch those in ease of setup you have never tried XBMC or MythTV or your experience is from 5 years ago.

  • by VGPowerlord (621254) on Monday August 24, 2009 @11:52AM (#29173899) Homepage

    It's why Apple has no computer to compete against the low-end PCs

    I guess the Mac Mini [apple.com] is just a figment of my imagination, then?

  • Nope, but let me help you out with perspective. The Inspiron 537 slim [dell.com] is entry-level at $269 including a DVD+/-RW, 2GB RAM, etc. Like the Mini, it doesn't include a monitor, but with the recommended 18.5" flat panel, it becomes just $499, still $100 cheaper than the Mini (and comes in multiple colours).

    Apple's cheapest offerings are still a lot more expensive than the cheapest PCs out there.

  • by PitaBred (632671) <slashdotNO@SPAMpitabred.dyndns.org> on Monday August 24, 2009 @01:54PM (#29175483) Homepage
    Windows Media Center is severely limited by the DRM that it supports [harvard.edu]. MythTV will never be limited by that.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24, 2009 @01:55PM (#29175493)
    Posting anon for modding, but the dell item you list has the celeron processor. To get it up to Mini core duo, the starting price is $499, and that is with Vista Home. To get it with XP (for grins let's say that XP compares with OS-X) then you are paying another $120. In my opinion you're better off with the Mini, but they are at that point comperable in terms of performance and price. I will gladly pay $100 more to get OS-X over Vista. But really I wish that it would come from dell with MythBuntu already installed and set up. Then the $499 is a decent deal, and something I can use with my 32" 1020p LCD TV. Ashtangiman
  • by Alizarin Erythrosin (457981) on Monday August 24, 2009 @02:11PM (#29175673)

    If you're going to do the install yourself rather than try something else like Mythdora (Fedora with Mythtv all-in-one install, like Mythbuntu), give the Fedora/Mythtv install guide [wilsonet.com] a look. It's what I used to set mine up, and have done so whenever I upgrade. I've got a back-end server with dual tuners and I use old modded xboxes as my front-ends.

We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile. Prepare to be assimilated.

Working...