Open. To most people, saying that word means an open door, an open window. I'm not going to go ahead an add open fields of grain or an open blue sky; but you get the idea.
And what do people think of when they hear or see closed? Closed in room. Inside a box. Trapped even?
Both words bring up two different connotations, but they can both work as metaphors for Google and Apple, open and closed respectively.
When you look at Google??????s Android platform, its Chrome browser, and its unveiling of Chrome OS, the new Google TV and Android Froyo; everything is open. The tools, SDKs, PDKs, and all those things related are more then welcoming to develop for as those platforms use the same APIs. Google provides the services for those platforms, most of the time free-of-charge. Google maps, navigation, search, goggles, shopping, payment, docs, etc, etc. And whatever you develop is your??????s. You make the app with the Google provided tools; the app is still your??????s.
Now, lets look at Apple and their closed system. Look through their development agreement. You make an app for an iDevice (iPhone, iPad, iPod), Apple pretty much owns it once they accept it into their store and on their devices. That's part of the agreement. You get a cut of the sales, but they control the app and how it behaves on their device.
But lets look at something a bit, shall we? Services. Apple owns most or all the hardware in an iDevice. Then there??????s the iPhone OS and its DKs that plug into the Apple created and owned hardware. Then their iTunes ecosystem itself. All Apple , all the time.
But what about all those services that the devices require to really function. Search? Maps? Those are Google??????s services. The music/movies/trailers/tv shows/books? Other creators and publishers that Apple allows in the iTunes store. Even Google had to hand over the code to Apple for search and maps and Apple did it their way to work on the iDevices. The up and coming iAd? You hand Apple your idea for the ad (and $1 million bucks per ad) and Apple designers make the ad from HTML 5 and secret Apple code to make it work on an iDevice (pending approval of your app of course).
See where I??????m going? Apple really doesn??????t create anything. Those services and apps on these iDevices? Created and maintained by someone else who then hands over control of their creation for a few bucks and a whim and a prayer. Apple suddenly doesn??????t like your App? Gone, vamoose from the store. No explanation required. App refused? Too bad, so sad. Once you signed that agreement to begin developing, Apple already owns control of your app. Apple tells you to update your App with no explanation? Again, you??????d better get it done fast and Apple??????s way, or the app is gone from the store.
Apple doesn??????t create anything. No services, content, innovation. They take other??????s people stuff that was created for the iDevices. Apple??????s agreements state that the app is now their??????s to control and manipulate as they see fit. They take other people??????s stuff and call it their??????s.
That??????s why the newspaper and print industry took a step back after the editorial cartoon flap. They said, wait a second. They were ready to hand over control of their app, their content to Apple. A company that has shown it will get rid of any app, any content and censor, censor, censor at its own whim without offering an explanation.
How can a company who has never created anything original, ever created any of its own content and services ever be expected to act responsibly and fairly with other people??????s created content, apps, and ideas?
Hope Steve Jobs was paying attention to Google I/O and taking alot of notes on his Newton.
