The onslaught of legal pursuit on behalf of the non-Android smartphone cartel (Rockstar e.g. Microsoft, Apple, primarily — Sony mostly joined for defensive reasons, one might suspect — prisoner’s dilemma, of a sort) is the result of one conclusion that was made over the course of the open-source platform’s meteoric rise: non-Android platforms cannot win the battle of distribution — they will get favorable mindshare, design accolades, a large % of global profits, and win customer appreciation / usage metrics, but they will never be the most widely installed/sold platform — typical incumbent/insurgent dynamics. This began as a feud of ego (or survival, in MSFT’s position), and is against the DNA of Apple/Google — which is why it should end amicably, sooner than later.
This post is a response to “Rockstar, Patent-Holding Firm Partially Owned by Apple and Microsoft, Sues Google and Android Handset Makers" by John Gruber, famed Apple/technology enthusiast.
Fact: Google/Motorola NEVER wanted to limit consumer choice through litigation (nor will they ever). The scenario is this:
You see, without any type of LEVERAGE, Apple/Microsoft will not end their barrage out of benevolence. (The hypocrisy of this entire scheme is exacerbated by the fact that Apple was founded on piracy — lifting the IP, research, and design progress of Xerox PARC — similarly, Microsoft built an empire by following the same strategy as Android — Google executes it better). Here’s how the conversation plays out:
Tim Cook: Since you’ve gained formidable ground in litigation (you’ve won, or are about to win XX cases worldwide on XX patents) — we never thought you’d get this far — we’d like to call this battle a draw.
Larry Page: Thanks, Tim — we never wanted to resort to these tactics — we have complete respect and adoration for Apple’s innovation leadership. We simply believe that there must exist an operating system that is economically feasible for 3rd-party OEMs (to allow for a full, healthy industry) — it’s the ideological complement to iOS. We want every person in the world to have a mobile device in their hands — but that wasn’t possible for 2/3 of people in your integrated approach. We’ll iterate on the design over time, at which point you will recognize our unique contributions to mobile computing far beyond what is apparent today, particularly in hardware at Motorola. We’ve never sued you or other competitors first, only in response — that position will never change. We feel crummy about using ‘FRAND’ patents, but that was the strongest bargaining chip at the time — we know better now. Please don’t bully us again like this.
Tim Cook: Glad to hear that, Larry. We’re still going to fiercely compete, but let it be done outside of the courts. Good luck, dude.
Larry Page: That’s a deal, Tim.
This is precisely how Google feels (though I can’t and don’t claim to speak on their behalf, here), which I am able to attest to after working there for two years, getting broad exposure to senior leadership (undeniable cool-aid drinkage went down, but take this post content at its merits). Google’s (and by extension now, Motorola’s) stated goal with Android was to make computing (and thus, information — including Google Services) more accessible to the other 4 *Billion (wow!) people on our planet who couldn’t reasonably afford it prior — the economics of Apple/iOS simply wouldn’t have provided a global operating system (Microsoft, oppositely, has a despicable beef, which nobody would deny — they’re a grumpy curmudgeon). Note, this is not a critique of 3rd-party OEMs, or Android’s design influence, which are worthy of a separate conversation. Despite what John Gruber’s position would have you to think, Google/Motorola is in the process of ending the patent war, not perpetuating it.@1 month ago with 1 note
As I wrap up preparation for my upcoming trip to the realm of Apocalypse Now and Hangover 2, it became obvious that sharing the result of my packing efforts might be useful to others (and perhaps pass along some affiliate dollars; thanks Amazon)! It’s worth mentioning that my knowledge derived primarily from one place: www.travelindependent.info … consider reading that as well!
My trip needs to be as independent, comfortable, and sustainable as possible; achieving that requires a pack that’s light, compact, and durable. Even the lightest of backpackers would agree that a 28L is ambitious but, with careful planning, it’s entirely possible.
@1 month ago