So, Marco Arment, John Gruber, and MG Siegler (has anyone ever seen them in the same room?) all jumped on a quote from Eric Schmidt which was supposedly very arrogant and proves Schmidt knows no developer likes Android. The joke’s on them, though, since none of them actually bothered to watch the source video to verify Schmidt was quoted properly. As it turns out, he was not, as Julian Yap notes. Update: Arment, Siegler, and Gruber have posted updates.
Schmidt was misquoted by CNet, and without verifying by actually checking the video of the interview on YouTube, Arment, Gruber, and Siegler jumped on Schmidt’s quote as yet another opportunity to bash Google. This is how CNet misquoted Schmidt:
Whether you like Android or not, you will support that platform, and maybe you’ll even deliver it first.
As it turns out, though, the real quote, including the context, is very, very different. Not only is the quote itself substantially different, Schmidt is actually honest by pointing out several mistakes Google has made, and by praising Apple for doing a fantastic job with their application store. The real quote:
Whether you like ICS or not, and again I like it a great deal, you will want to develop for that platform, and perhaps even first.
Not only was Schmidt actually talking about Ice Cream Sandwich and not Android as a whole, the key here really is the verb “want”, which changes the entire atmosphere of the quote. All this just proves once again that when it comes to directly quoting someone, you have to first look at whether the quote is correct, as well assess the context. In other words, you have to actually check the source of the quote (if possible).
Now, we at OSNews never have any problems with admitting mistakes (I’m only human, after all) – now let’s see just how big CNet, Arment, Gruber, and Siegler really are. They are all influential bloggers or websites, and should know better by now.
What a coincidence. Yesterday I read about cnet bundling malware with their open source apps for Microsoft. Today I read a totally misquoted article making Schmidt and Android look bad. Maybe Microsoft has totally taken over cnet?
Sorry, but those are just some sell-out aholes that can’t see past their own behinds.
Edited 2011-12-08 13:02 UTC
I wanted to vote you +1000 but I’d rather make a distinction between the three of them:
– Marco Arment is a developer who occasionally writes useful software;
– John Gruber tries to appear reasonable but, since he really isn’t, can’t keep up the pretense for very long;
– MG Siegler, on the other hand, has no redeeming features whatsoever — but he could have been a great pon-pon girl!
RT.
Gruber is an Apple marketing bot. Everybody who reads his crap even just because so many people read it is ugly and stupid. Sorry, Gruber has the most one-sided view of the world one can think of. If you think you have a brain and you read Gruber you don’t really have one and I don’t really get why he is mentioned so often everywhere. That one ad on his site (which everybody probably reads via RSS) pays for his family? Yeah sure … Apple is paying. No doubt about that.
You don’t actually read his blog, do you? Or if you do, you come in with that chip on your shoulder and automatically assume the worst of everything he says.
Glancing over his articles, he seems to be very good at predicting where the industry will go and seems – despite constant baiting by people like yourself and Thom – to be quite polite and reasonable.
His baseball obsession is rather strange, however.
I read enough of his garbage to make up own mind. And even now his “correction”(well update) is more like: “Yeah well, I suck as a blogger and don’t check my sources but I am still great and IOS is still pure awesomeness and Android sucks and everything I wrote is still kind of right although it was proven to be wrong.
Everybody who reads that kind of horse manure needs to get his head checked PERIOD
I really admire Google’s manipulation of people and very subtile advertising. The marketing people at Google are very good and thought hard to come up with this simple sentence:
“Google is your friend”
Simply genius. Many people write it, and say it everyday without knowing that Google is doing. Google has been working hard to spread that sentence among common people. And people dont know they are spreading and instilling what Google want us to think of Google. Never mind all the espionage Google and Facebook does on us. Everybody should chant “Google is nice”, “Google is your friend”, “Google is not evil”. etc
Why is google my friend? What friend? How is Google nice? Is Facebook also my friend? Should I give Facebook and Google access to all my personal data?
And Apple is nicer, more of a friend, etc… ?
In today’s world, as long as you have a connection, whether it be a cell phone, home phone, cable, internet, or anything, you have given your information to the world. Even buying a car, you sign those papers, and they sell your information to the world. Why? Becahse they make money. At least with Google, I am aware of this, and it is known, unlike other companies who try and hide the fact. Everyone knows Google makes money off of the people who use their products, but people are ignorant to think companies like, Apple, HP, Dell, and others do not.
There are companies that do not do that, and actively fight against it. Take Mozilla for example.
Er, what? Mozilla makes most of its money from Google: http://www.osnews.com/comments/25398
(Comments removed by user)
Edited 2011-12-08 13:36 UTC
What has this to do with Thom’s post? Short attention span or? 😉
RT.
Char-perfect copy of a post he made somewhere else. It made sense in the context of the topic where it was initially posted.
But Google knows as much about users of its services and products as Apple, or any other service provider. To their credit Google manages to attract so many users despite spending frugal amounts for advertising when compared to humongous ad budget of Apple (which was almost $700 million in 2010).
The only difference is that with Microsoft and Apple you PAY real money for the privilege of having you data shared with advertisers. Thanks but not thanks. Either way I’ll go the free route.
There is a big difference between Apple and Google. Google’s entire business hinges on advertising and their primary goal is to increase that through different vectors (Android being one). Apple makes their money from selling devices and software, and it is in their best interest to protect the experience of their users.
It’s just a question of motivations. The whole point of android is to increase advertising revenues for Google. Given equal scenarios, I’d much rather trust my data to Apple (or Microsoft for that matter, although they are also expanding into advertising)
Edited 2011-12-08 16:04 UTC
MG Seigler is an irrational Apple fanboy who makes a living by nitpicking on Google, scavenging the web and by sensationalism. The others who have jumped the gun must be fan boys too. They have all made the usual mistake of shooting before seeing.
Ecocide continues unabated…who really in the scheme of things gives a stuff what Schmidt said?
Yes – and I will pre-empt the advice many of you will mentally entertain if not actually give – I don’t have to read it but on the other hand, if you were all thinking human beings, you wouldn’t be perusing this article either but doing something else more essential to your own and the world’s welfare instead.
Peace out.
I agree we need to step back from the brink occasionally, this is really a whole lot of hot air in a cold bag from Boise.
There are many valuable causes that deserve our attention more, I would leave it up to each to find one that suits their beliefs. I also understand that this can actually just be a past time for some, and as that its okay too. We can only save the world for so long before we have to save ourselves from the weight of trying to save the world.
They were good 10 years ago, but have been trending downhill for years. Their writers are terrible with little substance or understanding of what they are actually writing about.
I’ll be very suprised if they do say they made a mistake.
Rebuttal on sensationalist articles is scarce as it is.
In my view it’s not a sign of weakness for thought leader, opinion writers or factual journalist to acknowledge they are wrong.
For me it makes them more endearing and easier to relate to.
Fan boys that take words and change them out of context.
Fan boys that apologise leaders of big corporations who gives them no benefit.
Social studies are true, even if you do not believe in God, you will always have the need to kneel to something or someone, the Internet is not the exception to the rule.
You are accusing three people of complaining “Schmidt knows no developer likes Android.” Yet you quote those three people a total of zero times. Would you care to actually stand by your post and update it with the quotes that indicate any of them said anything like this?
ok. I’ll bite.
Marco: “Is he implying that Android is widely disliked, and it doesn’t matter to him?”
Gruber: “I can’t see any way to read his remarks other than as an acknowledgement that Android is widely disliked by developers, and that he doesn’t mind this because he doesn’t think it matters.”
Siegler: “It sounds arrogant and worse, as Gruber follows up with, it sure sounds like Google is missing the bigger picture: it’s not just Android these developers are overlooking, it’s Windows.”
See, all three are parroting the point about developers not liking Android. Which, maybe they don’t, but that isn’t the point. The point is that the text quoted from Schmidt was wrong. Next time click on the links and read them for yourself.
Which is not a quote that says, or even implies “Schmidt knows no developer likes Android.”
Yes, Gruber does make a claim that is similar to what Thom said.
Which says absolutely nothing about whether developers like or dislike Android and does not fit Thom’s claim.
I did read them myself, and what was said does not fit Thom’s claim. Your quotes of them do not fit Thom’s claim. Your description of Thom’s claim isn’t even accurate. Since Thom is all up in arms about misquotes, perhaps he should make a correction this post since he is, flat out, misquoting at least two individuals.
Get your head out of your a.. and stop rambling like a moron. The whole point of Thoms posting was about all three of them using a “quote”, published by the third party, without first checking the original source!
SIGLER also quoted the same twisted phrase”
Thom just pointed out that, in their blind hatred for everything non apple, all of these guys jumped the gun as soon as the quoted phrase hit the web… they are sad excuses for human beings
Don’t you think there is some serious hatred from some people towards anything Apple related?
I don’t think his post implied that only Apple have fanboys, although I believe they were one of the first companies in computer history that actively tried to turn otherwise smart people into these sub-human things.
Steve (the Jobs one) wanted no one messing with his products, but his intention was for them to enrich people’s lives by making stuff easier to use than other stuff.
It’s a concept that he held true until his death I guess. Apple product are easy, simple to you with uncluttered interfaces. A lot of effort went in to this.
Real geeky power users probably won’t like this, as it takes away a lot of possibilities to fiddle around with stuff, but the masses seem to like it.
I don’t see how Apple sees its customers as subhumans, although some probably are.
Uhm… I guess my post was really badly written. Here’s take 2.
There are these partially subhuman things called fanboys, roaming the internet and mindlessly defending a company, which we both agree the OP was referring to. But I don’t think that he implied that only Apple has some.
However, on an unrelated note, I believe that Apple were one of the first computing companies to use so-called “evangelism” marketing techniques, that actively attempt to spread religious faith in the user base, effectively creating fanboys.
Edited 2011-12-08 19:40 UTC
And a pretty good technique!
From my view, from the Apple fanatic side, it’s of course true that some of us defend Apple beyond reason. But so do Linux people (I used to be on that side too) and strange enough even Windows users.
What I do notice is that some Apple haters invent Apple claims and then attack them. For example the idea that Apple claims to have invented tablet computers or media players. Haters say Apple claim this and attack them with examples of products that predated Apple’s stuff.
This article is also a dubious one. Why is this front page news? Some guy gets misquoted, a few people respond to this misquote and get put on the wall of shame of this site. I saw some lines in my RSS feeds about Eric saying something, but none of those headlines caused me to read the article.
It’s really boring news. But I guess great news if you hate Apple and try to discredit people considered to be down with the fruit machine.
I am a deep Apple hater (and I am not talking about fruit here), but I have (nor will) ever invent claims in order to attack apple or anyone else. In Apple’s case I don’t have to, either, they provide enough reasons to fuel my dislike for them. At the same time I don’t profess to have intimate knowledge of Jobs, or Gates true motives and modus operandi which all fanboys claim to have (including yourself in the earlier post). I do however have an impression of what they are trying to achieve, which may or may be not acurate. I do not go around advertising my impression as the ultimate truth like fanboys do. I state my opinion of someone and put a disclaimer that it is just an opinion, I may include facts to explain how I derived that opinion but that’s it.
As for why this made it to the front page, I don’t know, I am not involved with the editorial policies. But I did notice an attempt by a fanboy to skew and discredit Thom’s post with not merit what so ever.
We should all strive to be as acurate as possible in what we post especially in the public domain, and hence when we quote a source escpecialy if it is a third party source we should do our due dilligence which afore mentioned ifans did not, and they deserve to called on for it.
DISCLAIMER:
too many typos but I don’t care right now
Edited 2011-12-08 20:53 UTC
Well, I read the book.
But generaly you generalize Apple users (proving my case) and by hating Apple you should ask yourself if that’s normal or even healthy.
And by reading the book you got a true understanding of what Steve was all about?? For real??
I would hope that in your attempt to come across as an objective person you would at least distinguish between my generalization of apple users from iFans. I do generalize iFans, but not apple users.
As for my health (thank you for your concern by the way) it is in pretty bad shape but that is more due to my lifestyle then my hatred for apple which, contrary to what you seem to think, is not pathological but rather ethical/logical hence it is very normal.
Did you read the book?
I read the book, which got its information from Steve, his friend and his enemies. I actually know a guy who knew Steve and was in contact with him not too long before he died. I’ve been following Apple news for some time and I guess it has been generally agreed that Apple (thanks to Steve) is about user experience, even if this limits freedom and choice for the enduser.
Even if they are not about user experience, their products tend to be high up the scale, certainly compared to products of rival companies. They must have been very lucky to end up with a great user experience even if they didn’t focus on it.
In any case there is a lot of proof and many hints that this is what Steve was and Apple is about, yet you question it while generalizing Apple fanatics apparently to an extend that you have developed a deep hatred.
I just find this a bit odd.
I will admit that I have not read the book, nor will I ever. Even in the case of a very objective writter, how much insight does a book provide into someone’s personality?? I do not create opinions on someone based on third party accounts or descriptions. I look at some fundamental values and consistency of upholding those fundamental values over time. This is where Steve and Apple by extension have failed miserably in my eyes. I absolutely despise business ethics of apple and Steve (I should have said lack of). And what gets me really worked up are people that get so blinded by some brand loyalty that deliberatly skew facts just so that they can continue to live in denial. While their products have some qualities (throw in this mix MS as well) it is the fundamental values and ethics where both these companies fail. And they do so big time.
If you hate a company based on ethics you probably hate around, well, pretty much all of them.
Why would you think so? I like Red Hat, I like the company where I work, and many others, at the same time I dislike (to put it mildly): telus, nhl, and so on. And there are many companies that leave me indifferent …
A lot of companies do or have done stuff that’s not ethical. Ones that haven’t most likely do business with an evil business. It’s hard to run a company without using Windows, PCs with poisones components, and rain forrest cutting paper.
If they all were ethical prices of tech stuff, food and clothes for example would be much higher.
I recently read an article that a western person in effect has x number of slaves working for him.
You just described brand-loyalty. Businesses have been doing that since before we were born.
Microsoft deserve all credits for appearance of FANBOYs!
If you ware user of Amiga, Atari or Mac in 80’s than you could watch as utterly CRAP of platform (Wintel) run over superior Amiga, Atari and Macs. (today most popular professional programs conceive their life not on Wintel, but on one of these three platforms (or *nix))
you could do some evangelism but at the end, you sit and wait for about 7-10 years for Microsoft to make good enough GUI OS witch can support all these application from Atari, Amiga or Mac.
nice.
bravo!
If fanboy = I can see things more clear than bunch of Wintel lusers
than I am a fanboy
Would you be ready to admit, given some precise and objective arguments, that global menu bars are not a huge bag of win, that the OS X UI is not very good at managing multiple opened documents, or that Macs mostly don’t have much viruses because nobody actually bothers trying to code some ?
Would you be ready to justify what makes the Wintel platform so terrible in your opinion, using objective and up-to-date arguments ?
If so, I do not consider you a fanboy. All current OSs have their major trade-offs, one should use what works best and is least annoying in his/her well-informed opinion. What I despise is people who exhibit blind faith/hate with respect to something and publicly expose it.
Edited 2011-12-09 14:47 UTC
Apple, Google and MS are not your friend, but they are not your enemy either. They are companies.
Clearly you are coming at this from an unbiased point of view.
Right, and then Thom attributed a quote to at least two people who didn’t say what Thom claimed they said.
And Thom pointed this out by falsely attributing a statement to people. It’s like hypocrisy doesn’t even register with you people.
Oh, and by the way, I nominate you as the sole individual who should be used to represent the human species due to your clear superiority over those foolish Apple product using sub-humans.
Never did I claim to be unbiased when it comes to apple. You totally missfired on this one
Either I can’t read or you are a deliberate liar!! All three people have the missquoted phrase on their pages, with Marco adding an update where he stands corrected.
You know it isn’t that hard to click on the links that are provided by Thom and see the missquoted phrases for yourself … you know just move the mouse to the appropriate location and click on the link … when you are done with that talk about hypocrisy again
Thank you from the bottom of my heart for this nomination. I will strive to provide enlightment to all iZombies and free them from iClaws.
Thom claims all three said “Schmidt knows no developer likes Android.” Find a quote of Marco or MG saying that.
Which is irrelevant to what I was saying. Thom claims all three said “Schmidt knows no developer likes Android.” Find a quote of Marco or MG saying that. You can’t, because they didn’t. So Thom is accusing people of commenting on a misquote (they didn’t make up the misquote, they commented on it) and in his accusation is claiming they said something they clearly didn’t. THOM IS LYING ABOUT WHAT MARCO AND MG SAID. Is that clear enough for you?
Please provide the quote from Thom’s write up for this statement or admit that you still need to attend elementaru school and learn how to read
You realize that even Thom, who directly replied to me, isn’t disputing that he claimed Marco and MG said “Schmidt knows no developer likes Android.” As a matter of fact, he defended the claim. I have no idea what you’re attempting to do with your multiple posts asserting otherwise. So I’m going to let you rant in the fantasy land you seem to have created for yourself.
I didn’t claim they said that at all, nor am I defending they said that. This is what I’m defending:
“… all jumped on a quote from Eric Schmidt which was supposedly very arrogant and proves Schmidt knows no developer likes Android.”
Which is substantially different. The fact that you don’t grasp the difference is interesting, to say the least.
I take it that since you failed to provide a quote where Thom explicitlystates that, you are admitting that you were wrong. It would have been nice to act like a grown man and say so, but I guess that is too much to ask from you. The only reason why there were 2 (two) posts from me inviting you to substantiate your claims is because I replied to your own 2 posts where you made such claims. As to who lives in a fantasy world … it is pretty self-evident so no need to comment on that one
This is a common rhetorical technique. The fact you fall for it is interesting.
Wrong part of Siegler’s article. Here is where he says what I was referring to:
So, 3/3. Nice try.
This is a common rhetorical technique. The fact you fall for it is interesting. [/q]
It’s a common rhetorical technique that doesn’t say what you are claiming. Marco is asking if Schmidt cares if developers like Android, he is not implying that Schmidt knows no developers like Android. There is vast difference between caring about developers feelings and musing about their actual feelings. You were talking about the latter, not the former.
Wrong part of Siegler’s article. Here is where he says what I was referring to:
So, 3/3. Nice try. [/q]
Except MG said that his experience is that developers don’t like developing for Android, he isn’t attributing that sentiment to Eric Schmidt. Because, if we don’t stop there (notice the dangling colon) the point MG is making is “If all developers cared about was scale, they’d go with Windows. But they don’t. And Google would be wise to at least try to understand why this is the case.” In other words, for MG the interesting thing about Schmidt statement is it ignores developer preference and simply talks about scale. Since 99% of the developers MG talked to said they like iOS better, and if scale is the only thing which is going to bring developers in the Android phone, they why don’t they develop for Windows (or Symbian for that matter). Nothing about what MG is saying comes even close to what you are claiming.
So no, it isn’t 3/3 unless you really think that reading deep meanings into words that plainly mean something different is a legitimate quoting technique. Seriously, it’s almost insulting that you are trying to twist things to cover the fact that you are lying about what other people are saying to fit your narrative about what terrible people they are. It’s disgusting and you should be ashamed.
Rhavyn- If you read the links, you would see that all three people clealy believe that developers like iOS and dislike Android. Further, the text Thom quoted what on all three of their sites. Its not text that the thrhee authors said, its text that they misquoted. Thom clearly expressed that in his article. Further, what these authors think is really irrelevant, compared to the fact that they used cnet as a source, which completely misquoted Schmidt.
You completely missed my point. Thom is claiming it’s terrible that they commented on a missed quote. But in THIS VERY ARTICLE, Thom is completely making up the fact they Marco and MG said something. I didn’t say anything about whether the three like iOS or dislike Android, because it’s absolutely irrelevant to the point. Thom is flat out lying about what people are saying.
Well, you’re failing at convincing anyone here about that, so have you considered you’re wrong?
No, there is absolutely no way that anyone who knows English can read Marco or MGs comments and come out with the message “Schmidt knows no developer likes Android.” They didn’t say that, period.
And, really, not one person who has “disagreed” with me, except you, has actually disputed my point. They are commenting on the “misquote” aspect of this, which is hysterical since you aren’t just misquoting people, you are flat out making things up.
Or just don’t know how to read!! Either post the sentence where Thom claimed that any one of the three sources made a statement or apologize to everyone who wasted their time reading your hysterical ramblings. Here is a quote from Thom’s write up:
To every sane person this sentence is very simple and easy to understand. Why can’t you understand it?? Please quote Thom’s article to prove your point or stop rambling incoherently.
Edited 2011-12-09 04:59 UTC
Have you considered that maybe a lot of people are put off from participating in the discussions here by the general atmosphere and the lopsided discussions? That’s how I feel, by the way (which is why I usually never bother to comment here, it’s pointless, unless you like experiencing pain).
Now, I do think it’s bad that Gruber and the other guys fell for the misquotes (and I don’t like nor read his blog). It’s really crappy. And I’d wish they’d cut back some of their righteousness. Then again, I’d wish the same for OSnews…
By the way, the three guys did upside their blog posts by now, addressing the misquote. Maybe you want to update your post, too, mentioning that? After all, you are right to say “They are all influential bloggers or websites, and should know better by now.” Then again, isn’t OSNews an influential website, so shouldn’t you have learned, too? Yet you point to a misquote of your own in the article from a few days ago, and proudly announce how you stand up to your mistakes, making it sound as if those guys didn’t… Seems a bit unfair to me.
Anyway, I’ll creep back to my hole now. For it feels *really* silly to keep riding up and down on this particular issue. At the end of the day, Gruber, OSNews etc. matter very little to the whole of the world. I am much more upset by the gross misquotes, misrepresentations and false explanations put forth by major news papers and TV news shows every day, which reach a much wider audience and have a much bigger influence on things :-(. Compared to those, the influence of Gruber, OSnews and the others seem rather insignificant. (Which, of course, is no excuse not to properly do research before on whether quotes and other facts are correct!)
samo goes to…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QzJa_OU0tI
pundits never bother to open eyes and minds…
http://www.director.co.uk/ONLINE/2010/09_10_innovation_secrets_of_s…
so plz stop bitching !
I love how google is so good, they have to make bad shit up to make them look bad!
*Gives Thom and Gruber both a lollypop and tells them to shake hands now*
Seriously Thom, I can live with OSNews being OSOpinions, I can even live with it being OSBias, but I wholeheartedly advise you to start thinking about changing the name of this website, since you’re driving a stake trough what a site like this should be about with these random rants on the main page. Call it ThomsBlog, call it AndroidZealots, or whatever. But something to do with OS and News, it has very little.
With every post like this appearing, it makes the level of your website come crashing down to new unimaginable depths.
People looking for actual OS news have ZERO interest in reading about your bickering and arguing with other people about what someone else said. Suggesting otherwise is simply pathetic and frankly an insult to any of your informed readers. You guys sound like a bunch of 9 year olds for crying out loud.
Now back to your typewriter and go write us some real news.
Edited 2011-12-09 08:53 UTC
Whether you like ice-cream sandwich or not, I already developed an appetite for it. What should I say, I have a sweet tooth.
Rhavyn:
Maybe English isn’t your native language, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Here is what I get out of the articles:
From Macro: “Is he implying that Android is widely disliked, and it doesn’t matter to him?”
Marco, by saying this, is implying that Schmidt thinks Android is widely disliked, but that devs will still support it.
Siegler, on his blog, quotes Gruber who notes that developers prefer iOS and iPads and iPhones. He then goes on to say “For 99% of developers I’ve ever spoken to, this is the case.”
This is a much more direct comment that devs don’t like developing for Android compared to iOS.
I am going to just leave it at that.
I’m still trying to figure out
a) who the heck these guys are
b) why I, or anyone, should give a crap about what they say
Seriously, it’s like “some random people on the Internet said some stuff that is incorrect”. Wow, damn. Stop the presses.