What happens when the enemy of your enemy is no longer your friend? You cast him out, as Steve Jobs seems to have done to Google CEO Eric Schmidt, who today resigned his seat from Apple’s board. An alliance which began with a mutual distrust of Microsoft is now under strain because of a mutual distrust of each other. Google is not so much the enemy of Microsoft as it is the enemy of the old model of device-centric computing which both Microsoft and Apple represent.
The announcement comes on the heels of an FCC investigation into Apple’s iPhone App Store that was announced on Friday evening. The subject of that investigation is nominally the rejection of a Google app, Google Voice, from the App Store, but it is really an investigation into the closed and arbitrary nature of how apps get approved for the iPhone.
In other words, Google brought down the disapproving scrutiny of the FCC onto Apple on Friday night, and on Monday morning Schmidt resigned. It is difficult not to make a connection between these two events. The FCC investigation, of course, is never mentioned in the press release (that would only invite more pesky questions from the FCC). Instead, what Steve Jobs does say in the press release is that Google’s entry into mobile operating systems with Android and desktop operating systems with Chrome OS is increasingly becoming a “conflict of interest” for Schmidt. As a result, Schmidt had to go. It also says that both executives “mutually decided” it was time for Schmidt to resign. (I can only imagine how that conversation went. Jobs: “You are going to have to resign.” Schmidt: “Okay, but can I say it was my idea?”)
Regardless of how the resignation came about (maybe it was the other way around with Schmidt telling Jobs that the two companies were increasingly coming at odds with each other), what made the two men come to grips with reality all of a sudden? If nothing else, last Friday’s letters from the FCC was a wake-up call to Apple that Google stands on the opposite side of the fence when it comes to the evolution of the mobile Web. Google wants the mobile Web to be as open as the Internet. It’s entire mobile strategy is predicated on open access for all apps, devices, and services because that creates a larger, more vibrant, and more searchable mobile Web.
Apple is not about being open. It never has been. Every app on the iPhone (all 50,000 of them) must be approved individually, for instance. This difference in approach wasn’t a problem until Google started to have mobile aspirations of its own. Asked to choose between furthering Apple’s mobile agenda or Google’s, Schmidt must choose Google’s. It is his fiduciary duty. That conflict is only going to grow. And that is perhaps why Jobs says his “effectiveness as an Apple Board member will be significantly diminished.” Also, the more they compete, the more they expose themselves to antitrust questions from the FTC as long as Schmidt remains on the board.
Schmidt had to go. Not just because of the dust-up with the FCC and the Google Voice app. But because Google has a different set of agendas which already are putting strains on the relationship. Google wants to diminish the importance of any single computing device in favor of Web apps which sit in the cloud and are accessible from all devices—mobile phones, Macbooks, Dell laptops, or whatever. As much as is physically possible, it wants to replace the operating system with the Web.
Ultimately, that is a bigger threat to Apple than Microsoft ever was.
(Image via Photoxpress).
first one!
Bing gains another 1 percent of U.S. search http://bit.ly/15ZH2g
Above bitly link is not spam..
Why, or why not Erick, you analysed enough since last friday. A reset in equation, i had this shmidt thing for considerably long since copycat android app store. And you dumb not understand knowing rival’s thing 1 year before launch.
Why doesn’t Apple buy Yahoo and try to fight google. Not sure about the mobile internet. I don’t think free everything in the cloud will work.
Microsoft already bought Yahoo..?
When you come out from under your rock check the major news of the last 2 weeks.. Google Voice was blocked from Apple iPhone, Microsoft bought Yahoo, Schmidt resigned, Steven Frank + more quit the iPhone, Paul Carr is hilarious.
Woops Paul Carr being funny isnt new. Just true.
I LOOVE google!
and I LOOVE google ceo!
He is better of apple!
we love google too!
no, we love them more!
I is better than that.
Kinda sad – their alliance was revered.
But Bill Gates are Steve Jobs are still buds – so they both say.
Bill Gates is long gone.
The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.
Or, the enemy of my enemy is actually a worse enemy than my enemy
.
The enemy of your enemy is yourself and if you become an enemy of yourself, then you need to look for another enemy of yourself to help you blame somebody else. They’re called shrinks and don’t come cheap.
I was the first. Whatever you say after me is fair game.
Stop eating paste buddy…
I love Google, but I’m a little concerned that they have unified Microsoft, Apple, and Facebook against them. Are they fighting on too many fronts?
This is a pretty interesting post… thanks for sharing..
yeah, thanks for pointing out the obvious connection between the resignation and the FCC action.
Hey, what about FTC thing?
Apple is just becoming a major player now one of the big boys and now they have other viable businesses that the other big boys want.
He had to go, because TechCrunch said so! And because our masters at the Church of Googlentology want it to be this way!
i would call that oversimplification by a fanboy..
it still amazes me today how apple misses out on the scrutiny that microsoft has been receiving for years. I applaud Mr.Arrington for stop using their mobile platform, and would be better if he stopped using their desktop one as well. I hope others follow.
Arrington is a tard. “Oh no, I can’t get Google Voice from the App Store, and I dont like how they dont approve everything”.
screw him.
He’s also a fugitive on the run from UK authorities, after sentenced in a libel case (and he doesn’t seem intent on paying the costs).
Really?
Fugitive? You watch too much TV… Libel cases don’t warrant the issuance of “fugitive” status. The judgement was 1/10th of what legal fees would have been to fight… simple abacus math deduces it was the right move…
cease, you are right! but google need the same scrutiny!
google is a pimp of open source movement! of course they are for googlead$ bloggs about it!
iPhone is Apple’s business.
You agree with the terms or you buy Nokia, Motorola, Sony or whatever.
How hard is it to understand this?
Their house, their rules. If they don’t like it then they can finger to whatever they like
Put your socialism hat on, and then its very easy to understand. The scales are tipping away from capitalist model, my friend.
You don’t need a fancy iPhone or any Apple product.
Go buy Nokia and shut the fuck up.
You have the choice. You don’t have to own iPhone just to bitch about them protecting their business.
They did it and their right to use i Tunes, iPod, iPhone, Macs however they want.
If you don’t like you can buy from others. I can’t see “socialism” here faggot.
It’s obvious @Sanjay Sharma has his Ars-Hat on. As with any model you need balance, the FTC/FCC is what keeps the capitalist model balanced to keep innovation and competition strong. These latest investigations are simply the system at work. Learn a little more about capitalism before you start spouting your commie BS!
Yeah, like Apple has been blaming the telcos for the same thing Apple’s now doing. I guess you’re so satisfied with your phone network, huh?
No, they don’t own the wireless airspace. We all have to share that. You don’t get to make a closed system however you want it when your product is sending signals through the air that go through everyone every day.
“do no evil” with the comments!
My opinion is this: Eric needs his ‘free’ time now | Bing gains another 1 percent of U.S. search http://bit.ly/15ZH2g
Wow. That’s one useless post. A post explaining he had to go due to conflict of interests? The press realease said that.
Pageview whores.
No! this was an EXCELLENT post! I am much more enlightened now! After confirming that techcrunch is with me in my devotion to google!
Wow, Uber Epic Fail.
I live in D.C. about four years ago ads on craigslist and other classifieds started to appear for google hiring lobbyist up the wazoo. Having big firms on retainer is like insurance. You keep paying it and when you need it you use them. At this point in time it seemd to be the right move for google to use it. Apparantly Apple did not respect Schmits presence on the board enough to approve his firm app. So why should he stay. “You give the marijuana dispensary app a green light but not mine. Hey I’m on the board” Writing was on the wall. “You know where the door is Mr. Schmidt”
I guess we could summarize the approaches as:
Apple: Controls desktop hardware, OS, Application, Cloud, Mobile hardware, Mobile OS, Mobile Software, …
MS: Controls OS, Some Applications, Mobile OS, Some Mobile Applications. Does NOT control desktop hardware, majority of desktop apps, cloud, mobile hardware, majority of mobile apps,
Google: Controls some cloud applications, Mobile OS. Does NOT control the majority of the rest.
Given Apple’s success as end-to-end integration, it looks like both Google and MS are going to have to have to work overtime to provide a truly integrated user experience.
I have been waiting for over a month for the http://www.appgiveaway.com app to be approved by Apple.
I have emailed, and even called Apple to tell me why is it taking so long however I dont seem to be getting any answers.
Can someone tell me whether 1 month+ is the standard average time one must wait to have his app featured in the app store or to even get a YES/NO reply.
Eric Schmidt, there is a job available with me if you want it only not sure I can pay you the wage and bonuses you have been use to
Expect to take it longer than a month. Expect that you will never get an answer to an inquiry. Expect that the only communication that you’ll get is being informed of an app rejection and the reason why (and hopefully how it can be fixed, often due to violation of user interface guidelines.)
When you say “featured” in the app store, that has a specific meaning, being listed in the “Featured” apps section, which has a very low probability but would help sales enormously. Don’t expect to be there unless your app really stands out after being on sale for some time.
Thanks alot for the information. I just want my app in the App Store where users can go and download it.
I and my team are capable of promoting the app afterall that is what we do (check out my website we promote apps
).
You need to update the Crunch database! Schmidt no longer with Google!
Your a little late to the game there Jeff.
u mean Apple?
Well spotted
Fantastic post Erick, one of your best recently.
I LOOVE google!
era of apple (if there ever was) is coming to an end… again
agreed. Google and Apple are HUGE competitors. It’s either going to be Android or iPhone. There is no in between here.
Really, Palm and Blackberry are already bankrupt in your eye’s?
There not going down with out a fight. When the Mobile web is as open as the internet is when the real fight begins.
Agree entirely, that Google will be a bigger competitor for Apple than Microsoft in the future, but by how much is not yet known. This open everything idea isn’t proven in any way successful, although in theory it makes some sense. Apple is being too slow to accept the change that web apps mean, even given the fact that the iPhone has been a huge reason why this move by Google is now seen as possible. Apple needs a system to approve apps based on a security model but not seen as approval/disapproval based on subjective choices.
There is only one solution for those of us that still believe in the old model of device-centric computing…Apple & Microsoft must form an alliance against the evil Google!
That would be SO FRAKIN AWESOME to see but is a hugh pipe dream for so many of us.
I still in love with iPhone, but the passion is slowly fading. I guess the whole point is that this situation makes us to make a stand either with Apple or Google.
“Ultimately, that is a bigger threat to Apple than Microsoft ever was.”
Nonsense. In a world where portability across devices is easy, Apple stands to gain. As a dominant provider of “quality computing equipment”, ie. over-1000$ computers, it would have roadblocks removed for users wishing to migrate.
BMW didn’t go out of business because cars standardized on steering wheel/controls.
Yeah, this was the sentence that stood out for me too.
I don’t see Google as EVER being a threat on the scale of Microsoft. MS was ruled in court to be a MONOPOLY, fer crissake, and then they bribed the DOJ to let it drop. Wake me up if the same ever happens with Google…
Fast forward 2 years from now…
Justin Long is still the Mac guy, but now the PC guy is actually the Chrome Guy… And the Mac is now poking jokes at Chrome.
Gotta love this industry…
Is it me or is everyone scared to death of Google. Who cares about a this stupid google voice application. Don’t like the App Stores admission Policy, go use a crappy google andriod phone.
I just get tired of Google, they are starting to give me a fucking headache with all these applications they throw at you every day. Chome, Voice, Docs, gmail, Chrome OS, what the hell they call that email killer thing again? …
They are a like my 6 year old daughter with a million questions, and crazy ideas. After about 6 hours in the car, I need a valium. Same goes for Google.
No Kidding, I really want things to stay the way it is. Who the hell needs innovation, right? I mean, I am sure it is safe to assume that you are still using a black screen monitor with green text.
lol – I still use an editor with green text on black background for development (including iPhone).
The problem here is that Apple’s Business model is being threatened by Google’s view on what the future should be.
Microsoft always gets portrayed as the villain here, but in actuality is embracing the could as the future in some form.
Its hard to cut through all the noise in the silicon valley echo chamber, but Google is all for open source and transparency as long as it has nothing to do with search, otherwise Apple has nothing on Google when it comes to a lack of cooperation or secrecy .
Google is as big a corporate hypocrite as you will ever find.
+1
I have two words: F… Apple!
I have two words: F… Socialists!
I have two words: F… wingnuts!
Way I see it, they represent 2 extremes and users would be best served with a sweet spot solution with just the right ingredients.
Closed enough such that package (device + software + service + content) is robust, usable, reliable and gels nicely with how users work today – yet open enough to not lock down in proprietary systems whose progress could be commanded by a single company.
Schmidt should never have been on Apple’s board to begin with. A major contributing cause of the current financial crisis is the herd mentality among corporate leadership. Allowing individuals to serve on multiple boards shuts out innovative thinking and creates fertile ground for anti-competitive collusion.
If markets are to be competitive, corporations must be free and independent actors, not fronts for small cadres of allied board members serving their own interests at the expense of shareholders and consumers.
Great post! I particularly applaud your last paragraph and last sentence. More than just regurgitating the news, you provided the correct extra insight (for all of the naysayers who just didn’t get it these last few months and thought Schmidt on Apple’s board was not a problem).
bing replacing google on apple product search defaults in 5,4,3…
laughable. even if they switch, it’s barely going to be a 5% increase for bing
Put everything on the web, and everything will be vulnerable to a government intent on limiting free speech (a long list, getting longer). Today in China Facebook, Twitter, Blogspot, YouTube, etc. are all blocked. I’d rather have my OS and my essential apps on my hard drive, where I can control them.
Agree with you, although I would expand this thinking beyond government entities. It’s each other we should be equally worried about.
You are right. Let’s make our networks closed. Let’s put everything on our PCs. That way we won’t be able to communicate and no one will be able to censor us. Brilliant
Don’t be intentionally ignorant. Obviously there is a balance. The point is that totally open/online is just as suboptimal as totally closed/offline. With the online/openness euphoria, people have a hard time remembering that.
Schmidt had no place in apple. Apple is the remnants of 80s obsolete computing, closed doors development piled with huge amounts of marketing bullshit. What was he doing there anyway?
I ‘d love to hear him castigate apple’s closed model from now on.
Although it really is sad to see such a great relationship end, I too think it was necessary. I’ve always trusted Google, and from what I’ve seen, they’ve always had good intentions. However, when it comes to Apple, I buy their products with a bit of hesitation. For a company that designs great products and a superior operating system, I would expect better support in dealing with the AppStore. But, they created the AppStore themselves, and they will do as they goddamn please. I understand that they own it, but when they are jerking me as a consumer around, I recommend their products less and less and offer better alternatives (Palm Pre, Google Android, but never a fucking Blackberry, that thing is atrocious) .
Oh come on … anti-fanboys unite!
This sure brings out the Apple == dead/evil/obsolete/evil crowds.
Come on folks, Apple is not scared, Google is not fighting them — this was a conflict of interest.
Y’all got all up in a lather because you’ve never liked Apple products, plain and simple.
Good post. But does Google want to replace the OS with the Web?
I would argue that they want to replace the client written applications with browser based JavaScript applications, accessable from a URL.
That’s a different deployment model and runtime environment to apple.
Apple has circumvented the code security issue of a sandbox by using a vetting process. It’s a pragmatic approach to a technical problem. It means that the platform can never be open and therefore the carrier can never be open.
I think we’ll end up with a hybrid approach.
Good stuff.
http://paulfwal...hael-arrington/
Was really impressed with the lack of coverage to teh Arrington losing against Sam Sethi
http://paulfwal...hael-arrington/
Interesting story my bet is Steve Jobs kicked him!
The current fights are Twitter vs. facebook, MS and Yhoo versus google and Apple!
Wow. No Nokia, no japanese player
With great competition (with integrity) we are all winners. Way to go Apple and Google! (Note both are US companies!!!!!!!!)
>>”.. Google wants the mobile Web to be as open as the Internet.”
perhaps, but it is absolute hypocrisy for Google to be pimping “openness” when it’s almost as secretive as Apple itself wrt to product launches, company communication, and PR.
while that’s not atypical of any large company, it’s particularly curious for Google to be standing on the Open soapbox when its own internal communication is about as transparent as a lump of coal.
i’m just sayin’…
oops.. forgot to close the italic.
- HTML moron (again).
It’s versus Its, Erick. Different words.
“It’s entire mobile strategy…” – fail.
I’ll have to agree with this article’s insistence that Google stands for web-centric applications. After all, it’s upcoming PC operating system, Chrome OS, is going to be based on its web browser (Sources: http://www.mark...080309&mv=1 & http://www.huff...r_n_249853.html )
“It’s [sic] entire mobile strategy “
You’ve got this all wrong. Apple and Google planned this all along so that this would encourage the FCC to open up the fu*cken carriers. Apple wants an open mobile internet so that it can sell a billion ipod touches with just a wireless IP connection. Uses don’t care about voice; they just want to a wireless IP connection to any content.
It is in both Google’s and Apple’s interests to have an open mobile Internet. For now it is closed.
Why don’t you think about what users want and how this benefits both companies. Then you’ll be a decent reporter (not an analyst).
What about Arthur Levinson? He is on AAPL and GOOG boards. Then of course there is Al Gore who is a partner of GOOG board member John Doerr. Is Gore still an adviser to GOOG?
“It’s entire mobile strategy is predicated on open access for all apps, devices, and services because that creates a larger, more vibrant, and more searchable mobile Web. ”
For goodness sake: “its” not “it’s”
re: Friday’s letters from the FCC was a wake-up call to Apple
It is hard to believe that the letters from the FCC were unexpected by Apple. Apple must have a huge legal department whose role is not just to be reactive, but proactive and to anticipate/prevent/prepared for various actions from various government agencies along with from competitors.
It appears highly unlikely for their lawyers not to anticipate the FCC’s move and not to be prepared with some legitimate response.
both geniuses and probably will still talk away from the “boardroom”.
At the risk of tooting my horn, in March of LAST year, I wrote a post called ‘The Chess Masters: Apple versus Google’ that essentially asserted two things.
One that Apple and Google are without peers in terms of their ability to build products that cross the once impenetrable boundaries between PC, mobile, media and Internet segments.
Two that given their respective mammoth ambitions, ‘friends’ Apple/Google are destined to become ‘frienemies’ ala Apple/Microsoft (circa 1990).
Looks like destiny is being realized.
Check out the post if interested:
The Chess Masters: Apple versus Google:
http://bit.ly/P9HJs
Mark
It’s too bad that a lot of companies don’t have any morals and try to hussle their users into submission. Microsoft has done this mainly through Windows and Office, but Apple has also always been trying this with iPod and iPhone (just with lesser succes).
I think both the abovementioned companies suck, because they put their interests above user interest, whereas google has made their succes dependend on how much they please their consumers.
Roy, I have to disagree with you on all of your statements.
MS wants everyone to use their products. Apple makes a product that is so popular (due to quality, marketing, buzz, publicity, etc.) that people choose to use their stuff. Balmer recently said the Apple model was high quality, high mark-ups, smaller sales numbers. He omitted high profits, but that’s another story. He also stated that the MS model was high sales numbers and lower mark-ups. He said nothing about quality, so draw your own conclusions. The main point, however, is that their models are completely different.
BTW, all companies put their interests above user interest. Likewise, all companies have to please their consumers or they will fail. For MS, the primary consumer is the enterprise IT department. That’s why they make such a godawful, convoluted OS and application–it makes their prime consumer, the “IT guy,” happy. Apple’s primary consumer is the actual end user. They keep that person so happy that he or she is willing to pay a lot more for a Mac. That’s why Apple has 91% of the market for computers over $1,000.
Jobs: “You are going to have to resign.” Schmidt: “Okay, but can I say it was my idea?”
LOL!