On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 14:15:47 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Thursday, 9 November 2017 at 00:09:32 UTC, Joakim wrote:
smaller search company, did with Android, leaving aside Apple
because of your silly claims that their existing software gave
them a headstart, which is why those former computing giants
are all either dead or fading fast.
It is hardly a silly claim:
NextStep (1989) ==> OS-X (2001) ==> iOS (2007)
That is 18 years of evolution and experience, and it also meant
that they had the development tooling ready + experienced
developers for their platform (macOS programmers). It also
mattered a lot that Apple already had the manufacturing
experience with prior attempts and also the streamlining of the
iPod-line as well as the infrastructure for distribution and
following up customers (again from the iPod line).
So, for Apple it was a relatively modest step to go from
iPod + Mac frameworks + standard 3rd party chips + existing
tooling + iTunes
=>
iPhone
I think you are forgetting that hardly anyone wanted to develop
apps for Android in the first few years. Android was pariah,
and everybody did iOS apps first, then if it was a big success
then maybe they would try to port it over to Android (but
usually not).
I agree that Apple had an advantage in getting into the
smartphone market, but MS, RIM, Nokia, etc. had much larger
advantages in this regard. And you continue to ignore that
Android and google started their mobile OS from scratch and now
ship on the most smartphones. Of course, they just grabbed
existing tech like the linux kernel, Java, and various other OSS
projects and put it all together with code of their own, but
that's something any of the computing giants and many other
upstarts like HTC or Asus could have done.
Yet, they didn't, which suggests a lack of vision or some other
technical ability than "OS expertise."
