Apple vs Google vs Microsoft

Found this graphic in Wired. Thought it was interesting.

My own preferences breakdown this way. Could be more winning 3rd party apps out there. Where might I have gotten it wrong?

iBooks for style
Google Books for number, accessibility, search.


Cloud Services:
Google Apps.
Various 3rd party apps (Dropbox, for one.)

Apps Store:
iTunes (and that needs a make over).

Video service:
None of the above


Google Maps

Mobile Ads:
Whatever mobile Adblocker is.



Safari/ Firefox


MS Office out of habit
iWork for style, flexibility
Google Docs for sharing, easy online publication

Living Room:
None of the above



Portable music:

App Store

Some of those comparisons are completely idiotic. E.g.:

iTunes vs Zune vs Youtube? Youtube?

Quicktime vs Silverlight? Seriously?

I get the general feeling no one at Gizmodo is capable of competent writing, thinking, or fact checking.

xbox vs app store.

See previous post…

This comparison is balls to the wall silly.

the itunes vs zune vs youtube makes total sense. lady gaga didn’t get to 1 billion views if people weren’t using youtube as not only a music source, but a significant portion of their music source. yes, that sounds ridiculous at first, but there are many people who mostly listen to music from their computer. i mean, just divide that play count into the number of lady gaga track buys, and the conclusion i think becomes clear.

how do people share music tracks they like on facebook, twitter, blogs, etc? by posting a link to a place you know everyone can get it… youtube.

also, since google doesn’t actually have a music-purchasing-service for android one can hypothesize that a person with an android will more be more likely than an iphone owner to have pirated their stuff.

one of the most readily available source of getting wide-open for the taking content on the web is simply running the studio-release HD version of a youtube vid through any of a number of youtube-to-mp3 converter sites or proggys.

but that’s actually the hard way if you have an android phone. on an android it is easier to steal music directly to the device with imusic than to download it from say itunes on your desktop then sync.

this goes back to “tyranny vs freedom” / “premium quality for premium price vs freetarded” that is the google vs apple war. google doesn’t care if the the content becomes free (and neither does apple, actually, they would rather it were… they are just playing nicer with the publishers).

quicktime v silverlight should be “hijacking html5 standards push and making it your bitch” v silverlight. yah, that one was totally off.

the thing i believe this totally misses is that when webapps work well, apple wins too. google has been cloud since they started and microsoft is trying its ass off to get there also.

there is a reason their aapl shares have been on a basically variance-free climb since the ipad announcement in january. the market is speaking, and it is saying it likes the strategy they are steadily revealing. and, imo, the market is the best “crowdsourcing” there is - people backing their feelings/beliefs/conclusions with their money.

Not really, no.

Amazon MP3 store

Its actually quite nice.

This is also false. Apple wants stuff to cost money because they get a 40% cut

please elaborate your thinking on this, because it is to google’s advantage if music sales were totally replaced with on-demand streaming and search would be the main way to get music.

google, if they wanted could have already vertical searched the entire web to provide this service. but that wouldn’t sit well with publishers. that’s ok, though, because people are already doing this exact thing with youtube and they are getting their ad rip from it just fine.

also, since google doesn’t actually have a music-purchasing-service for android one can hypothesize that a person with an android will more be more likely than an iphone owner to have pirated their stuff.

Amazon MP3 store

Its actually quite nice.[/quote]

please read that i wrote google doesn’t have a music-purchasing service. a partnership and owning/operating this are two totally different things, if even from the simple act of signalling.

then there is the whole business of making the track you downloaded on the phone play well with your desktop.

not to mention the fact that the amazon app mp3 app is not stock, and not in-your-face discoverable as itunes is when you first get an iphone. there is something to be said about being built in and obvious. the typically more “geeky” android users can probably get around this, but then again, it is this kind of thing that could keep android from being the benchmark as the iphone is in phones.

once again the question. do you believe these devices are consumer devices or computers?

No, I mean google does not care. They are an advertising company. Apple does care, because if everything were free they would get no cut.

google definitely cares because last time i checked, people use phones to listen to music.

also, as i mentioned here before, i thought this was widely known and accepted, but apple doesn’t really turn much of a profit with itunes. some napkin analysis will show this, also. it is simply a means of creating more value for their devices. or as i have made the analogy here before: better rides in the amusement park to keep selling admission tickets.

Apple Inc. F1Q10 (Qtr End 12/26/09) Earnings Call Transcript … pt?page=-1

[quote]Maynard Um–UBS
We have seen a number of industry revenue forecasts for applications and just given kind of the expected explosive growth there I am just wondering if that is still a break-evenish type of business as you look forward over the next couple of years?…

[Apple CFO] Peter Oppenheimer
…Regarding the App Store and the iTunes stores, we are running those a bit over break even and that hasn’t changed. We are very excited to be providing our developers with a fabulous opportunity and we think that is helping us a lot with the iPhone and the iPod touch platform.[/quote]

…was hoping this thread applied to stock performance…but, since it doesn’t, I’ll just say that chart is ridiculous in it’s comparisons…

lol if we were comparing stock performance, we would all be crying why we didn’t dump our goog before last thursday.

on the flip side how about that msft for a change!

…aapl is worth shedding a tear, too…if you sold in feb…

Wow, the battle between Google and Apple continues. Google decides to get into selling hardware to compete with Apple’s iPhone. Apple gets pissed off and buys a mobile ad company to complete with Google in that space. Now Google has bought a mobile chip company started by former Apple engineers, who were involved in the design of the iPad’s current A4 processor. What’s next?

interesting comparison… keep up developing!! :discodance:

For those of you who haven’t been keeping track in the battle between these 3 companies lately, it goes something like this:

Apple makes it official that the iPhone OS won’t be supporting Flash anytime soon.
Microsoft agrees with Apple that HTML5 is a better option than Flash.
Google goes against MS and Apple, by integrating Flash with their Chrome browser, and announcing that the next version of Android will come with Flash.
Microsoft decides they won’t be coming out with their Courier tablet PC to compete with Apple.
HP cancels their iPad competitor Slate tablet PC running on Microsoft Windows.
Apple purchases a mobile search company to compete with Google in concierge type services.
Google decides to go after the TV industry
Google purchases a company that creates a 3D desktop OS.
Yahoo thinks Google should diversify more (!!!)

This was only last week folks!

[quote=“Adam_CLO”]Apple makes it official that the iPhone OS won’t be supporting Flash anytime soon.
Microsoft agrees with Apple that HTML5 is a better option than Flash.[/quote]
I’m no more of a fan of Adobe’s closed technologies than the next guy, but to hear Apple expound openness and Microsoft bragging about standards-compliant web browsing is so disgustingly hypocritical that I threw up a little in my mouth. Flash will eventually need to go away, but these two industry giants ought to examine their own closets before putting on the holier-than-thou robes.

Apple is taking a beating in the popular media lately, which can’t be good for them, since this would be their main fan base (being beaten in the tech media is another thing, since regular mainstream folk may not see those).

First, Jon Stewart ripped them for 8 minutes for the whole Gizmodo-Gate incident.
Now, Ellen was forced to apologize to them for an iPhone parody video she did.

I think Apple needs to upgrade their PR campaign, as they used to be the cool guys! Maybe becoming bigger than Microsoft is getting to them, as they are no longer the underdogs.

When you are selling freezers to Eskimos image is everything. I don’t agree with it, but I totally understand them zealously protecting their image. If you take away the “Apple Factor” they would be where they were back in the 90s.