This morning I woke up and saw an interesting headline on Techmeme from Forbes writer Brian Caulfield: Why Google Is Stealing Apple’s Ideas. Wow, a story involving two of the world’s largest technology companies and scandal? This was going to be good.
And then I read the story, which turned out to be a strange hit job on Google for no apparent reason, trying to imply that Google has somehow bypassed Apple’s “renowned secrecy” and used its ideas to foster the development of its new Chrome OS. And somehow, Google CEO Eric Schmidt is behind it.
Caulfield claims that Apple may have “missed a spot” by letting Schmidt stay on Apple’s board. First off, why does everyone seem to assume that Apple isn’t well aware of the fact that Eric Schmidt is the CEO of Google? To paraphrase John Gruber, does anyone actually think Steve Jobs is too shy to confront Schmidt? Of course, Caulfield immediately goes on to say that Schmidt isn’t actually a spy, but rather that somewhere along the line Apple and Google have become “accidental competitiors” who have simply yet to realize it. Right.
But the Schmidt point can be forgiven. It’s possible, however improbable, that Eric Schmidt has somehow been accidentally abusing his position at Apple to gain insider knowledge that he then leveraged to empower Google, all under Jobs’ nose, and without realizing that he was competing with Apple. After all, he is a very smart man.
So on to the points where Google has apparently copied Apple, which range from the silly to utterly ridiculous.
Caulfield points out that Chrome OS runs on x86 and ARM processors and is based on Unix. But look: Apple’s OS X also runs on both x86 and ARM processors, is based on a Unix variant, and NeXT Step (which laid the ground work for OS X) was used to build the web. Frankly I have no idea what that last point is even relevant to (maybe that Chrome is optimized for browsing the web?). Moving on, OS X is built to run on a wide range of devices, including the iPhone, servers, and Mac PCs. Clearly, Chrome’s planned support for both netbooks and eventually desktops is entirely derivative of Apple’s idea to allow an operating system to perform on multiple products.
Caulfield fails to point out the major obvious differences between the two operating systems. For one, Chrome OS will probably be entirely browser driven — many of the details are still speculative, but it’s likely that Chrome PCs will boot directly into the browser, with a boot time ranging in the single digit seconds. Applications will all be reliant on ‘the cloud’, rather than storing data locally. In contrast, Apple’s OS X is totally different. It’s not cloud based. It’s a full fledged OS that doesn’t boot into the browser. It seems that Caulfield honed in on just about every other obvious similarity while ignoring the mountains of differences.
Caulfield then gets into the similarities between the iPhone and Android. This is well-trodden territory, and Apple and Google are definitely competitors here. But trying to say Google stole the idea of a smartphone OS from Apple is strange — Apple and Google are taking very different approaches to their software (Google is free and used on devices from multiple vendors, Apple’s isn’t). And Apple wasn’t exactly the first company on the mobile block, though they did revolutionize the touchscreen. So, okay, we can see where Caulfield is going with this.
Then :
Apple launched a Web browser for the Windows operating system Safari in June of 2007. Google launched the Chrome Web browser for Windows in September 2008. Apple offers a full suite of office productivity software for the Mac. Google offers its own Web-based alternative, Google Docs. Apple has an e-mail service. So does Google.
Let’s just go through these one by one. Eric Schmidt was just quoted by the Financial Times as saying “[Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin] wanted to do this project since founding the company”. In other words, Google has been thinking about doing this for over a decade. But Google didn’t actually wind up releasing Chrome until well over a year after Safari hit Windows. Point Caulfield, I guess. Of course, by this logic, Apple was “stealing” that whole Windows browser thing from Microsoft to begin with.
Next up, Apple’s office productivity suite iWork vs. Google Docs. I don’t think anyone who has ever actually tried using both iWork and Google Docs would put them anywhere near the same ballpark. Google Docs is a cloud-based service that allows for easy collaboration. But it isn’t where you’re going to be doing any heavy document lifting — I can’t imagine writing anything longer than a few pages in it, not to mention create a media-heavy presentation. Yes, you can edit documents in both of them, but calling this a “stolen” idea is pretty ridiculous.
Finally, Apple’s Email service vs Gmail. This one is just laughable. When Gmail was released back in 2004, it revolutionized webmail, offering a full gigabyte of storage space to users (not to mention a great interface). Mail services at the time that had previously been restricted to a tiny fraction of that — in fact, Apple’s premium .Mac, which cost $100 a year, was only giving out a measly 15 megabytes of storage.
Even if all these points held water, Caulfield could have used nearly exactly the same argument trying to accuse Google of “stealing” from Microsoft. Microsoft has a browser too, as well as a tiny productivity suite called Office, and an Email service called Hotmail. You may have heard of them. Google isn’t stealing, it’s competing. It’s releasing new products in an effort to beat out its rival. Likewise, Apple is out to beat Microsoft as well, so the two sometimes wind up releasing similar products. If anything, this is a case of convergent evolution, not cloak and dagger espionage.
That article is idiotic. but it’s true Google’s been copying Apple, MS, and other companies lately.
Google = 1 hit wonder who got lucky with search
Not sure I would call Google “lucky.” They definitely earned their success with search by doing it better and faster than anyone else.
Thats true, luck does not play fair always, its the efforts which gets you results & google has proved this always!
Google did develop a superior search product. But a product alone doesn’t equal revenue. To do that, Google stole their biz model and monetization from Overture.
But don’t cry for Apple – they ripped off enough stuff in the early days from Xerox Parc and enough of the iPhone from F-Origin.
BULLSH*T
Apple stole NOTHING.
It paid a princely sum in return for using parc ip. I believe it traded a nice wad of dirt cheap shares in return for access to the crown jewels sitting, gathering dust.
IJIOT! P>)
heather is a doll-face
Good article. I absolutely agree. It is an obvious move for Google to build an OS.
I am one single ordinary developer and I recently built my own Linux remaster, so to speak, using a bunch of tools and scripts. Open source software is meant to be reused by everyone.
Can we say that Microsoft stole jQuery from John Resig ?
Microsoft stole the whole f_cking .Net concept from Java. Virtual machines, C#, binary security tools etc. They stole the XML way of storing web configuration data. They stole the GUI ideas from Linux Compiz Fusion to make Vista UI.
Microsoft, totally ignorant of ACLs stole the idea from POSIX standards around NT4 and now in Vista. Microsoft internally uses the bazaar model of development rather than the cathedral model it loved earlier.
Microsoft stole (and subverted) the idea of using open source in their products by promising source code for .Net libraries – like Java used to provide source code for the entire SDK, only to read, back in 2000 or earlier.
Microsoft stole the idea of browser-based scripting from Javascript – Livescript from Netscape.
In every program Microsoft has sold, there are elements that someone else already used to sell a product. And there’s cut throat competition in the browser market now because Microsoft finally decided to not suck.
Microsoft stole search ideas for Bing from Google, Yahoo, Powerset, Grokker and Cuil.
This is the daily business of discarding stupid patent claims for so many judges, patent clerks, lawyers, IP attorneys, and the rest of their ilk.
This guy wants to create a sensational story based on the conspiracy theory of corporate espionage at the highest level.
If he wants to use program features to prove corporate espionage then he risks losing his credibility in the tech world. Eric Schmidt isn’t probably an angel, but neither is anyone else in the corporate world.
Google has more engineers with PhDs than anyone else. The amount of ideas that are generated on public Google forums and their private intranet far exceed anything that has been sold in the open market to date.
Eric Schmidt has no need to look anywhere to get good ideas to topple competitors – and the PhDs code very fast too.
Content-free sensationalist journalism.
“Stealing” in the software world is called “Keeping competition alive”. There is nothing wrong with copying what your competitors do and bring some new features or just execute the idea in a different world.
All software company copy each other. And I am fine with that.
The only thing sensationalist was your reply,From reading the article this a Apple/Google piece,yet you turned it into an anti Microsoft/in defense of Google answer.
Google can start branding TV’s for all I care and the lovers will come out claiming its the second coming of Christ.
Anything Google does is in the interest of Google and nothing else and pretending that Apple and Google are best buddies is a dellusion.
The point isn’t so much about companies copying other companies (which happens all the time, duh) as it is Schmidt being on Apple’s board and possibly having real time insider information about things that are either a) good ideas for Google to do itself or b) ideas that might be crossing Google’s already internal plans.
Whether it is true or not, that is where discussing the issue becomes relevant….not your stupid attempt to dump your Microsoft anger.
It’s a bad economy, even Forbes is short on $$$ for good hires.
It’s a little disheartening how much the mainstream news is out of touch with technology. Is it really so difficult to hire someone who knows how to write and knows something more about computers than how to boot up a word processor on them?
I recently had to do a similar dressing down of Time:
http://www.exam...with-the-iPhone
you mean someone like the writers for TC!!!!
these guys seem to think all you need is a really souped up browser!
as far as i’m concerned.. if you don’t know the diff between bits/bytes/big/little endian.. don’t even think you know software tech….
peace
I would still say that Chrome OS will not be a big hit, but have to agree that the Forbes article did not state good points to say that Google steals ideas from Apple.
Like as u said about the OS and the x86 and ARM processors, chrome is going to be a totally different concept OS than Apple’s Mac OS.
So no point of comparing them in that way..
Lame article written there by Forbes team.
I just found that, that was the best review I have read in a while, I was enticed by your writing skills and found that I had to continue reading as if it was some si-fi novel…
I totaly agree that they are competitors, they each bring out a product that though does the same thing, does it in different ways and targets different markets demographics…
Thanks, Jason, the extensive comparisons throw enough light on these two OS – Apple OS X and Chrome OS. The success of google products over Apple is due to the fact that Google gave them free to the users.
There are many OSes out there and it makes sense for Google Chrome, but Apple already has a new OS – no it isn’t Snow Leopard it is the iPhone OS – they should rebrand it as OS i. No matter what OS you need great apps and Apple has that. Even outside developers do a better job when creating apps on OS X. Apple also has great hardware, so if they open source the OS it will only increase their market share and not make the mistakes that M$ made, we the consumers are in for great technology. Hey guys you have mentioned OPERA, buggy but ahead of Chrome.
I liked one of the comments on the Forbes article comment wall–It said that Google & Apple in fact are tag teaming to kill Microsoft, and Schmidt being on Apple’s board is just part of their plan to work together to make it happen.
Google didn’t steal anything. Maybe they’re just sharing. They’re friends, amirite?
Definitely a good article.
.Mac (aka MobileMe) gives you 20GB for storage. Not 15MB.
You can adjust the storage space to anything you want (between the email and storage portion).
In 2004?
Well, in that case, it’s a good thing Jason said that .Mac, which cost $100 a year, WAS giving out 15 megabytes of storage
WAS !!
Want proof? Here: http://www.orei...time_again.html
Google are looking to take everyone’s marketshare. I love the sheer stupidity of some of the naive idiots who think they’re teaming up with Apple to defeat MS.
Seriously, what colour is the sky on the planet you people come from?
Oh and Caulfield is a twit.
Chrome OS will fail for the reason the Network Computer failed.
it’s the same stupid idea with a different name.
I also think Google stole the idea to use a keyboard from Apple.
I have to agree, I hardly think corporate espionage in the boardroom is a big problem. Much more troubling are interlocking boards which consolidate corporate power in the hands of a few people and invites collusion and anti-competitive behavior. It is a glaring omission from antitrust law that individuals are permitted to serve on multiple boards, probably best explained by the fact that these are the folks that write the antitrust laws through their lobbyists.
Wouldn’t it be funny if Apple and Google are collaborating? Read between the lines of what these two companies have done together. The compete and collaborate across the board.
gmail’s email service is capable of a much larger capacity than apple’s. I’d say it’s not a bad idea for google to create their own operating system, it’s just going to be hard to compete.
While I agree I can’t help but wonder why Apple has not removed Schimdt from the board.
I remember when Android was announced and Schimdt mentioning that he recuses himself whenever the iPhone is mentioned. Now with the iPhone making up a huge % of Apple’s revenue and product sales over the last 2 years how can you justify a board member who can’t attend meetings about a product that is nearly your best seller?
http://blogs.co...lict_with_apple
Schmidt and Jobs are members of a club, and it’s the rest of Apple that was afraid to confront Schmidt and Jobs about the conflict of interest. Even if Mac OS X and Chrome OS don’t overlap, they will compete for many of the same dollars. Conclusion: Schmidt should have outted himself long ago, but now we’ll get to watch the SEC take him out.
You’re reaching Jason.
The author isn’t accusing Google of stealing, he’s accusing Google of not having any original ideas.
Its unfortunate that the author went down the safari/chrome and email paths because the main point needs to be explored further.
Have you heard the phrase “if you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail”? Well, browser based search is Google’s “hammer” and all the products discussed appear as “nails” to Google.
Gmail is a great application and I’m sure the search share numbers of gmail users is higher than it is for yahoo mail or hotmail users. Same with Google Docs and Chrome. (although ironically, I use Bing as my default search engine).
The good times though stopped with the iPhone. Google is no longer the default search function on the iPhone. Stocks, weather, news, sports, shopping, travel are all actions that are primarily driven by apps on the iphone. Hell, Google hasn’t made one dime from me as an iPhone user, meanwhile many other much smaller companies have.
Maybe I’m an outlier as an iPhone user, but it seems plausible to me that Google is discovering that in certain use cases if it doesn’t control the entire user experience it finds itself operating at an extreme disadvantage. If this is true its Android strategy may have proven to be a mistep since the carriers are going to add their own apps and “search” as Google sees it is still going to be secondary.
Enter ChromeOS, which will be successful if it can convince Netbook buyers that they are looking at the same nails Google thinks it sees.
Whoops. Just realized I did not finish the main point…
ChromeOS isn’t a new idea. Its more of the same from Google which is increasingly becoming a problem for Eric, Sergey, and Larry.
One of the best down-to-earth-holy-shit-people-stop-with-the-apple-crap articles I’ve seen in a long time. Well done, we need more like you.
“If anything, this is a case of convergent evolution”
Um, that was the nut graf. Read again please.
why is techmeme pumped so much on this site/ couldnt you just say an article from fortune? must the techmeme pump be included? ok, its a next gen aggregator…i get it…
am I the only one who saw this a year ago??? Google is the new Appel’s Microsoft http://gzones19...latform-is.html
Personally I HATE GOOGLE!!!
I don’t use them for anything from search to maps, to email etc… YOU GET MY POINT!!!
I think I would have to be the most GOOGLE hater in the world!
If you look back though comment posts on this site and others you will see i have always said google suckz!
I will not advertise my business with them, or any service that is owned by Google.
Lets put it this way, if Google buys Twitter I will delete my account/s straight away!
also
http://www.yout...h?v=57LuqfbEVyU
Apple & Jobs are smart enough to fend off any challenge from Google. Remember they fought the evil empire and survived!
the ripoff of James bond is bull shit. Take a break fro the web and encourage your children to be smarter then you.
LOL… Brian Caulfield is an idiot!
Google is trying to shoot Microsoft and Apple. Google is trying to tell the world that look we are not just search . Now that we are big in search let us use that user base and get into the real software world. so it has introduced crappy android and half baked chrom ( browser and OS ) in reponse to the netbooks/OS from Apple and Microsoft and iphone , windows mobile.
Google is becoming more like playground for their execs . they are just doing anything that will harm Microsoft or Apple.
so google is not evil.
Rubbish article. Google’s the best!!!
What’s the point of espionage here
I agree with GodLike:
Googles’ a one hit wonder relegated to copying other companies ideas.
Sergie and his friend should go back to school. And come to realization that they’re no Steve Jobs; just a likely pair of kids.
And Dr. Smart ass should just keep buying those Ivy League clothes that make him look like a 1960s geek.
I have always found the idea of Eric Schmidt sitting on the board of Apple totally bizarre, especially as both Google and Apple are 2 of the big 3 from the Tech World.
Considering how lame Microsoft has been in building a strong web base over the past 10 years, Apple and Google have to be the Numbers 1 and 2 of the web world.
But not for one second would Coca-Cola ever allow the CEO of Pepsi to sit on their board.
Google is just another multi billion multinational who’s every move is in its own self interest and nothing else.
Let me make a prediction: Eric Schmidt isn’t going anywhere. He will remain on Apple’s board. Why? Because Apple and Google are in cahoots to take down Microsoft.
Naturally, Google’s ideas are derivative, since Apple’s management thought them up. I suspect that Steve Jobs has been planning this for a decade and it took some time to bring Google’s management on board. Microsoft’s attempt to buy Yahoo, last year, was a direct attack on Google. Chrome may be Google’s reply. Neither company can be blatant about exposing this conspiracy, so they will say nothing. You have to watch what they do, not what they say.
The idea is for Apple to hit Microsoft from the upper end of the consumer space. It will be adding the compatibility that the IT personnel want, but Apple won’t be entering the Enterprise markets. Why? Because that is Microsoft’s home turf. Apple wants the Small to Medium sized Business market because it is more flexible. The SMB companies often allow their employees to choose the computers that they will use.
The IT departments in bigger companies will be forced by their management to let in the iPhone and the Mac. Apple will satisfy the Enterprise market’s needs no matter how often Microsoft attempts to sabotage this.
Google will be hitting Microsoft from the low end, e-waste, razor thin profit margin, computer market. That is why Chrome will be free. Apple has resisted playing in this area, because the profits are meager and the quality of the hardware would sabotage Apple’s reputation.
The problem is that there is too much competition in the low end market and none of it serves its customers well. Linux is too chaotic. There are too many distros and none of them look very good. X11 copied MS Windows look and feel; It behaves too much like it, too. So, X11 must go.
If your intent is to wean the computer market off of Microsoft then a one-two punch is advisable. Chrome is likely to look and behave like a Mac. If this is so, it will not an accident or from stealing. It will be part of the plan. Google has said that Safari will run on top of the Chrome OS. Both Safari and the Chrome Browser use the Webkit foundations.
Software as a Service is fine for very light and casual computing. The Internet, as good as broadband is, is not reliable enough for anything more. When you start placing heavier demands on your computer or need to protect your data, where are you going to go — to Microsoft Windows? No. That would require a new learning curve when moving from Chrome to the Mac will feel natural.
Both Apple and Google will benefit from this. I suspect that Chrome will act like a Mac OS lite. It will serve as a stepping stone toward the Mac as Chrome’s customers increase their computing demands. Chrome will get them when they are young and Apple will get them when they grow up and get more money.
Apple uses the Mac OS to sell its hardware. Google will be using the Chrome OS to get people to use its Google Apps and search engine where they will see Google’s advertisements. These business plans do not conflict. The Chrome OS will always be simplistic because it must run on the cheapest hardware. It will be always five years behind Apple. Discriminating consumers will buy Apple hardware even when they are using Google’s Applications.
The biggest problem with that theory is the fact that Apple’s computers cost thousands of dollars more. No, Chrome will not be the “stepping stone” to Macintosh computers; not unless they suddenly get 20x more computer literate/richer.
After that, everything you said falls apart… yes, Google and Apple will always be close, and Google will try and get in as much AdSense advertising as possible, but Microsoft has 90% of the market share. That’s still what will get them the most money.
Listen Microsoft is like IBM– both had beens. Only the corporate enterprise that have billions invested in their crappy useless technologies buy their stuff.
It’s so funny how the rest of the world is passing corporate America by. Get this making a new graphic for a Power Point presentation is still the big thing in corporate America.
Meanwhile, iPhone users are developing all kinds of 21st century applications to the tune of 56,000!
It is very true. But the fact is that Google knows that what we want & what we don’t very well than Apple, Microsoft or any others. Thats why Google is always popular. Actually now a days, we can live without Apple, Microsoft but we can’t live without Google. Thats why Google rocks. Google Zindabad!!!
Really? You can’t live without Google? I think for me it is the easiest of the three (Apple, Google, Microsoft) to drop like a rock.
Oh really!!! Do you know wats the problem is? Its very easy to say that I will do this, do that, but it is harder to perform. People like you live on Google from your early morning rise up to late night bed. Because you people always use Google to search for your toothpaste to bed sheet and any other information you need as you people know nothing except eating burgers, french fries and drinking beer & cocacola, pepsi and giving your heart a attack by increasing cholesterol and fats. Google Rocks
One has to wonder what Google’s real agenda is behind chrome os. As one just cannot create an entire computer system overnight from scratch.
Ace, Google is not looking to create a Computer O/S.
What they aiming to do is develop a Web O/S.
Chrome O/S is for the Cloud, whilst Windows O/S is built inside your system.
Imagine just how cheap future Netbooks and Laptops could be if they are packaged with Chrome O/S instead of the usual Windows O/S.
Google stealing from Apple? I think it’s competition and nothing else.
Google stealing from Apple? I think it’s competition and nothing else. I can’t wait to see what this Chrome ‘cloud OS’ will look and feel like!
The main problem of these people are that they see the negative thing first (no matter how many positives are there) and start to give their comments as they know everything better than the rest of the world. Why don’t you people start a new company of your own and start developing an OS (whatever it is) or join Google and contribute your brilliant ideas? Stealing is a bad idea, but taking inspiration or idea to make something better is always a good practice.