Apple may have finally figured out what they are

June 11, 2013
24 94 45

Apple Logo iPad 2 1600

Heading into WWDC, Apple made no bones about what we’d be getting from them. Unlike I/O, which is full of delightful mystery in the months leading up to it, Apple is fairly straightforward about WWDC. Walking into the event, banners with “7” and “X” decked the Moscone center. Anyone who was there, or cared to keep tabs on Apple, knew what they were about to see.

They copied everything!

You heard it, I heard it, and everyone said it. The world had memes ready to go before the event began, and were ready for any news of anything even remotely suspect. We took bets on how often we’d hear “revolutionary” or “magical”. Still, we were interested in what was coming out way from Apple. Would we get true innovation, or more of the same?

The interface is new for the sake of being new.

Neither, really. What we saw was so oddly different, we we’re still not sure what to make of it. We’re still cocking our heads like so many pugs, wondering if iOS 7 is even interesting. The wholly new look suggests that they were as bored of looking at the interface as everyone else was. New icons, a new color scheme, but still no innovative features to speak of.

The commentary isn’t that Apple copied. That much is clear. The real issue is how clean a forgery this new OS is. Only time, and use, will tell. So far, it looks like a really half-hearted effort to satiate unruly users. The interface is new for the sake of being new.

ios-7

Stolen from where?

If we look further into the actual design, there is no direct lineage. We can’t rightly say they took from Android or Windows, wholly. We see some wisps of TouchWiz, and a few subtle Windows Phone touches. Android is peeking at us from iOS 7, too.

To get tucked into an argument about where these design cues came from is to open a can of worms. Software design is ripe with theft. If we’re being fair, we could make the point that just about everyone stole design cues from Apple in getting where they are now, Android included. Again, there is no point to tracing the history of design, because we’ll just get all the way back to cave drawings and unibrows.

Comments

  • MasterMuffin

    I like the new iOs, it’s the first iOs that looks ok and it is closer to Android than ever. This new design also sets pressure to Google and hopefully they’ll come up with a beautiful KLP with colors and stuff.

    BTW someone at a random iBlog wrote that iOs 7 is the best Os possible to make with the current hardware. Got my evening laugh :D

    • arle

      well, if you consider resource utilization & battery life, ios, bb, & wp probably still more efficient than android.

      • milksop held

        Lucky android phones are bigger so the software can be too

  • MasterMuffin

    I like the new iOs, it’s the first iOs that looks ok and it is closer to Android than ever. This new design also sets pressure to Google and hopefully they’ll come up with a beautiful KLP with colors and stuff.

    BTW someone at a random iBlog wrote that iOs 7 is the best Os possible to make with the current hardware. Got my evening laugh :D

  • Cosmin_SS

    I think the author of this article have a very bad Lag…like Android…

    • mrband

      calm down, iZombie. Your head could explode if you think. :p

  • Cosmin_SS

    I think the author of this article have a very bad Lag…like Android…

    • mrband

      calm down, iZombie. Your head could explode if you think. :p

      • Rahul

        By multitasking lol

        • Bogdan-Alexandru Cristian

          @Rahul: Objection! iOS users can’t multitask… their low mAh battery and barely dual core processor would fry if they even implement that shit :))

          @Apple FANs: Be serious guys, did you “iZombie” people even see the specs of apple these “high-end” products or do you just buy them because you think they’re “the best of the best of the best”?

          Newsflash! They get the LOWEST possible gear that can barely run their boring OS without lag just to maximize profits… You can pay 700 bucks for a dual core proc, an ancient gpu and a really sleek case design that just looks cool for hipsters and people with too much bloody money… Or you can pay 300 bucks for the slightly better in specs nexus 4 that even perfoms better in apps, has 0 lag and about the same crappy camera quality as the iphone 5 and the same “please drop me on the back so you can pay $200 for a new backplate glass back like the 4s: :)

          My ipad 2 has a fucking VGA camera that you can use for precisely SQUAT.. it can barely do clear shots outside with sunlight.. indoors you can put it as a digital clock or sell it for the lowest price… I’m selling it soon for a note 10.1 … it’s by far better and more interesting to use and it has fkin multi view.. you’d expect on a 10 inch tablet from apple to be able to multitask…

          You’d expect for the money you pay for these devices to at least get the latest shit, instead, you get ripped off with low end components and high as fuck prices that mostly goes to Apple “due to their OS and design”.

  • IncCo

    They can copy fine, but dont come bitching and suing everyone for making something that looks similar to your shitty products.

  • IncCo

    They can copy fine, but dont come bitching and suing everyone for making something that looks similar to your shitty products.

  • thetruthisalie

    I think its really ridiculous that you can even copyright things like UI or motion…Are you telling me in this world of billions that more than one person can’t come up with the same idea? Just think how great it would be if everyone had to compete based on who does it best without having to be worried if they will be sued.

    • Alan Shearer

      We live in a world where ideas = money, patents are there to (theoretically) protect the ideas so that they can be capitalized on, at least for a time. That is the driving force that pushes people to innovate and create their ideas. Only a few are willing to work for the greater good, the majority are willing to work for the greater payout. And so the question comes out, how do you protect your idea until you have a working example so that you can profit from it before someone else can steal your idea and create a working example quicker, even though they never had the idea themselves? If that happens to you, then why try, what do you get out of it? Why waste your time?

    • Trent Richards

      I personally believe that code is the only thing that should be patented in software. If someone can provide the same feature with their own unique code then they shouldn’t be stopped from doing so. So many ideas aren’t unique at all and someone simply was the first to patent it. Why do they deserve to have that idea all to themselves?

  • thetruthisalie

    I think its really ridiculous that you can even copyright things like UI or motion…Are you telling me in this world of billions that more than one person can’t come up with the same idea? Just think how great it would be if everyone had to compete based on who does it best without having to be worried if they will be sued.

    • Alan Shearer

      We live in a world where ideas = money, patents are there to (theoretically) protect the ideas so that they can be capitalized on, at least for a time. That is the driving force that pushes people to innovate and create their ideas. Only a few are willing to work for the greater good, the majority are willing to work for the greater payout. And so the question comes out, how do you protect your idea until you have a working example so that you can profit from it before someone else can steal your idea and create a working example quicker, even though they never had the idea themselves? If that happens to you, then why try, what do you get out of it? Why waste your time?

    • Trent Richards

      I personally believe that code is the only thing that should be patented in software. If someone can provide the same feature with their own unique code then they shouldn’t be stopped from doing so. So many ideas aren’t unique at all and someone simply was the first to patent it. Why do they deserve to have that idea all to themselves?

  • Raaj

    Ok, I have a huge concern. Apple likes to patent almost anything – how to scratch your rear, included..
    Since Android is open source and is not patent specific on its features. Apple has been steadily copying Android features. So if it applies for patents, for eg, the drop down notification feature, where would Android and other OEMs using Android stand? Is this possible, at all?
    Shouldn’t the Android manufacturers form a consortium and patent all the features the way they implement it and be safe?
    I think I sound like an Apple! But please do throw light on my concern!

    • mikegonzalez2k

      I completely agree, Android needs to protect itself from Apple and maintain it’s open source freedom. It’s must do this legally so they have no leg to stand on in court if Apple does try to take it away from the world.

  • Raaj

    Ok, I have a huge concern. Apple likes to patent almost anything – how to scratch your rear, included..
    Since Android is open source and is not patent specific on its features. Apple has been steadily copying Android features. So if it applies for patents, for eg, the drop down notification feature, where would Android and other OEMs using Android stand? Is this possible, at all?
    Shouldn’t the Android manufacturers form a consortium and patent all the features the way they implement it and be safe?
    I think I sound like an Apple! But please do throw light on my concern!

    • mikegonzalez2k

      I completely agree, Android needs to protect itself from Apple and maintain it’s open source freedom. It’s must do this legally so they have no leg to stand on in court if Apple does try to take it away from the world.

  • Yet Another Introspective Guy

    what’s a “massive video game”?!?!?

    • Anonymousfella

      A mobile video game which requires 1.5gb+ of storage on your device with almost console-quality graphics, proper storyline and excellent gameplay mechanics?
      Genre is subjective..

  • Yet Another Introspective Guy

    what’s a “massive video game”?!?!?

  • MUTINOUS

    I second that, you copy, they copy, we all copy…but stop the suing it just racks up the price on consumers. Please, suing because of an icon that has a picture of similar sunflowers. Like Apple originated the color scheme of a sunflower. Don’t get me started on F*** rounded corners. My a$$ has rounded corners, do I owe Apple money too????

    http://techland.time.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-samsung-vows-to-counter-icon-fight/

    • carlisimo

      I think some of the copying early on (by Samsung) did go a bit too far. The design stuff, not the ridiculous lawsuits like searching on the device and the internet at the same time. The more recent lawsuits seem to be about the stupid stuff… I do hope it comes to an end. It might, as Apple becomes more realistic about the mobile market.

      Though one thing I’ve heard said is still true. Apple fans like to talk about Apple products… and Android fans (namely this site) like to talk about Apple products too.

    • Jusephe

      Wait for new TuchWiz, you will see why they will sue them again.

  • MUTINOUS

    I second that, you copy, they copy, we all copy…but stop the suing it just racks up the price on consumers. Please, suing because of an icon that has a picture of similar sunflowers. Like Apple originated the color scheme of a sunflower. Don’t get me started on F*** rounded corners. My a$$ has rounded corners, do I owe Apple money too????

    http://techland.time.com/2011/04/19/apple-sues-samsung-samsung-vows-to-counter-icon-fight/

    • carlisimo

      I think some of the copying early on (by Samsung) did go a bit too far. The design stuff, not the ridiculous lawsuits like searching on the device and the internet at the same time. The more recent lawsuits seem to be about the stupid stuff… I do hope it comes to an end. It might, as Apple becomes more realistic about the mobile market.

      Though one thing I’ve heard said is still true. Apple fans like to talk about Apple products… and Android fans (namely this site) like to talk about Apple products too.

  • http://petercast.net Peterson Silva

    I wish people would stop using words like “timeless”. Nothing is out of the (con)text.

  • http://petercast.net Peterson Silva

    I wish people would stop using words like “timeless”. Nothing is out of the (con)text.

  • Google3453635

    80% android 20% apple

  • Google3453635

    80% android 20% apple

  • aholsteinson

    “Google has wisely stayed out of the hardware game, even going so far as to treat Motorola as a subsidy rather than a branch of itself.”

    What about Glass, the Chromebook Pixel or the Nexus Q? I get the point you were making but I would have worded your statement differently.

    The difference is that for Apple selling the hardware is the end, it is what they turn a profit on, they improve and enhance OS X and iOS in order to add value to their hardware so as to get people to buy it. It is also why they have large profit margins on hardware but sell mayor OS X updates for 29 bucks and give iOS updates for free.

    Google on the other hand sees the hardware (and Android) as a means to an end. Their interest is in getting people using their services in order to drive and improve their search and advertising business. It doesn’t really matters to Google if you use iOS or Android or if you use an HTC or a Samsung if you are using their services such as Search, Gmail and Maps or if you are watching videos on YouTube.

    In contrast to Apple who improves their OS to add value to their hardware, Google improves their OS to add value to their services (think Google Now), in improving Android they push the platform forward and in so doing make Google’s services more desirable.

    At the end of the day, for Apple it is about how many iPads or MacBooks they’ve sold. For Google it is more about how many Android activations there are, which basically translates to people with active Google accounts.

  • aholsteinson

    “Google has wisely stayed out of the hardware game, even going so far as to treat Motorola as a subsidy rather than a branch of itself.”

    What about Glass, the Chromebook Pixel or the Nexus Q? I get the point you were making but I would have worded your statement differently.

    The difference is that for Apple selling the hardware is the end, it is what they turn a profit on, they improve and enhance OS X and iOS in order to add value to their hardware so as to get people to buy it. It is also why they have large profit margins on hardware but sell mayor OS X updates for 29 bucks and give iOS updates for free.

    Google on the other hand sees the hardware (and Android) as a means to an end. Their interest is in getting people using their services in order to drive and improve their search and advertising business. It doesn’t really matters to Google if you use iOS or Android or if you use an HTC or a Samsung if you are using their services such as Search, Gmail and Maps or if you are watching videos on YouTube.

    In contrast to Apple who improves their OS to add value to their hardware, Google improves their OS to add value to their services (think Google Now), in improving Android they push the platform forward and in so doing make Google’s services more desirable.

    At the end of the day, for Apple it is about how many iPads or MacBooks they’ve sold. For Google it is more about how many Android activations there are, which basically translates to people with active Google accounts.

    • akusuma

      >> “Google has wisely stayed out of the hardware game, even going so

      >> far as to treat Motorola as a subsidy rather than a branch of itself.”

      > What about Glass, the Chromebook Pixel or the Nexus Q? I get the point
      > you were making but I would have worded your statement differently.

      Adding to your reply, Glass, Chromebook Pixel, Nexus projects are initiators project. That guides the hardware vendor how to get it right or how google envisioned it.

      That’s why you see Nexus project partner with several hardware vendors, and can even build a good affordable tablet (N7).

      Chromebook Pixel was build because hardware vendors did not get the picture correctly, they build extremely cheap hardware on a gratis OS that resulted a bad low end products.

      Glass, well, it’s a pilot project for now. monetization is not that clear for now. especially it’s somewhat tricky for hardware vendors to put their bloatware to the tiny machine.

      TL;DR Those hardware are consumer proven guidelines for hardware vendors

      • aholsteinson

        Exactly, well put.

    • Anonymousfella

      Well said.

  • Mike Bastable

    Surprisingly Nate this is exactly what every one has been talking you in true comment sections of your gung-ho Android pieces of the last months. I myself have said this in numerous posts….nothing new. Apple just made the point very very clearly this time. So that everyone could hear it….

  • I like Pie…KLP

    Nate Swanner omg dude calm the f. down….Jesus Christ. If Apple came out with something revolutionary and Google applied it to Android would you be as but hurt as you are now? Sounds like you are jealous because some of the features on Android are now on iOS as well, so some of your bragging rights over iOS users have been reduced. What still remains is the argument of “my screen still has a billion inches over yours” and “my OS is open source, I rarely use this feature but you don’t have it so that makes it cool. I can customise my Force close windows color to read, pink, etc…it’s open source dude..so awesome” :)))) You little rebel, you! :))

  • Boo

    S.Jobs
    R.I.P

  • Max

    Apple, the greatest tech company…? Or even just a great one ?!? ROFLMAO doesn’t even BEGIN to cover that.

    …Yeah sure, mate, whatever you say.

    • APai

      actually, all of them have had their ups and downs – google/ apple/ microsoft/ ibm/ intel – all of them could create great products and have had a fantastic run as an undisputed leader in their domain. so claiming apple is the greatest EVER is a bit of a stretch.

  • APai

    apple maybe great and all of it , but they NEVER came up with a “virgin” design. everyone has copied, including apple, back when they came up with their iphone 1. it’s not about whether android copied or not, it is that apple is quite simply bullheaded and claim they invented it all – which is an utter flat out ridiculous bunch of lies